º»:
§ - º *s*…”
| ** • • • • •,,，
§ 3
ſº （， ， ; ）
șj
º ：
！ ſº， º
∞ : *
* * * * *
ºf
#*
:-）. №，}·
º

GENERAL LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN.
THE
Hagerman Collection
OF BOOK S R E LAT! NG TO
HISTORY AND POLITICAL SCIENCE
BOU Q HT WITH M O N E Y PLAC E D BY
JAMES J. HAGERMAN OF CLASS OF '61
Professor Charles Kendall Adams
I N T H E YEAR
1883.
t
i




H &
73 7
A 25°
R E P o R T
SELECT COMMITTEE
ON *º- w
ºf
f . * ** ** . . *
* &-diº . . . . . . . . .
D E c 1 M A L co IN A G E;
PROCEEDINGs of THE committee,
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE,
APPENDIX, AND INDEX.
Ordered, by The House of Commons, to be Printed,
1 August 1853. n

Martis, 12" die Aprilis, 1853.
Ordered, THAT a Select Committee’ be appointed to take into consideration, and
report to this House, the Practicability and Advantages, or otherwise, that would arise from
adopting a Decimal System of Coinage. - *
Committee nominated of:-
Mr. William Brown. Mr. Moody.
Mr. Cardwell. Mr. Hamilton. &
Mr. John Ball. Mr. John Benjamin Smith.
Mr. Tufnell. Sir William Clay.
Mr. Alderman Thompson. Marquis of Chandos.
Mr. Dunlop. Sir William Jolliffe.
Mr. Matthew Forster. Mr. Kinnaird.
Lord Stanley.
Ordered, THAT the Committee have power to send for Persons, Papers, and Records.
Ordered, That Five be the Quorum of the Committee.
Mercurii, 27° die Aprilis, 1853.
Ordered, THAT Viscount Goderich be added to the Committee.
Lunae, 1° die Augusti, 1853.
Ordered, THAT the Committee have power to Report their Observations, with the Minutes
of Evidence taken before them, to The House.
REPORT - - - - - - - - - - - p. iii
PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE - - - - p. ix
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE - - - - - - - p. 1
APPENDIX - - - - - - - - - - p. 161
INDEX - - - - - - - - - - - - p. 163
['-iii 1.
3.Sºsº,
º
R E P o R T.
THE SELECT COMMITTEE appointed to take into consideration, and
report to this House, the Practicability and Advantages, or otherwise,
that would arise from adopting a DECIMAL SYSTEM OF CoINAGE, and
to whom several Petitions were referred, and who were empowered to
Report their Observations, together with the MINUTEs of Evide NCE
taken before them, to The House; HAve considered the Matters to
them referred, and have agreed to the following REPORT:
OUR COMMITTEE, in pursuance of the duty entrusted to them of taking
into consideration, and reporting upon the practicability and advantages,
or otherwise, of adopting a Decimal system of Coinage, have proceeded to
examine such witnesses as appeared to them most capable of giving information
upon the subject of their inquiry.
The question being one which, from its peculiar character, and the importance
of the principles involved in it, required to be examined with much care, it has
been the object of Your Committee to obtain evidence of as varied a character as
possible from witnesses whose opinions may carry due weight with them, as
respects not only the theoretical but the practical bearings of the subject.
Amongst the witnesses whose evidence is appended to this Report, there will
accordingly be found the representatives of the scientific opinion of the country
in relation to a system of coinage based upon the Decimal principle, together
with others who from their social position, their business occupations, or their
interest in the question, have been led to examine into the practical inconve-
niences attaching to the existing system of coinage, and to seek for practical
means of remedying them.
It may be premised that all the witnesses examined by Your Committee
concur in the opinion that great advantages attach to a Decimal system, as
compared with the present system of calculation, and that the only points on which
any difference of opinion was expressed by them relate to the precise basis which
should be adopted, and the practical measures to be employed for introducing the
Decimal system, so as to produce the least amount of temporary inconvenience,
and the smallest extent of unwillingness to encounter the change on the part
of the classes who are the most likely to be affected by it.
With regard to the inconveniences of the existing system, the evidence is
clear and decided. That system is shown to entail a vast amount of unnecessary
labour, and great liability to error, to render accounts needlessly complicated,
to confuse questions of foreign exchanges, and to be otherwise inconvenient.
On the other hand, the concurrent testimony of the various witnesses is to the
effect that the adoption of a Decimal system would lead to greater accuracy,
would simplify accounts, would greatly diminish the labour of calculations (to
the extent of one-half, and in some cases four-fifths, according to Professor De
Morgan, who has made the question his especial study), and, by facilitating the
comparison between the coinage of this country, and other countries that have
adopted the Decimal system, would tend to the convenience of all those who are
engaged in exchange operations, of travellers and others. An important benefit
would be derived in several departments of the public service, and in every
branch of industry, from the economy of skilled labour which would result from
the proposed change; at the same time that the education of the people generally
851. a 2 - would
iv . REPORT FROM THE
would be much facilitated by the introduction into our schools of a system so
directly calculated to render easy the acquirement of arithmetic.
A further evidence of the value of a Decimal system is to be found in the
fact of its very general adoption in the different countries of the world, not only
in the case of money, but also as respects weights and measures. Your Com-
mittee are not aware of any instance in which a country, after adopting the
Decimal system, has abandoned it. The tendency, on the contrary, has invariably
been in the direction of a further adoption of the system, the most recent instance
being that of Portugal, where the mode of reckoning has long been based on
the Decimal system, and where a decree has been published within the last few
months, providing for the introduction of the French Decimal metrical system of
weights and measures. Dr. Bowring explained to Your Committee the Decimal
system that obtains in the vast empire of China, and produced an instrument,
a description of abacus, there called the “Swan Pan” (a sketch of which will be
found in the Appendix). That instrument shows the ease with which a Decimal
system may be applied, and the great advantages which it confers, as is, in fact,
practically proved by the extraordinary facility with which Chinese boys make any
arithmetical calculations.
Even in this country, where the Decimal system is not supposed to exist, Your
Committee have ascertained that is is already practically adopted to a certain
extent. The late Governor of the Bank of England has informed Your Com-
mittee that it has been found advisable in that establishment to employ a Decimal
system of weights in their purchases and sales of bullion, instead of the old
system of troy pounds, ounces, pennyweights, and grains; and that great advan-
tage has resulted from the change, and Parliament in the present Session has
passed an Act to legalise the new weights. The Master of the Mint has also
announced the intention of introducing the use of those weights at the Mint as
soon as possible. Professor De Morgan mentions that many teachers, as well as
himself, always use the 1)ecimal system in actual teaching, by giving their pupils
a short rule for transposing the common money calculations into the decimal
form, and then, when the answer is obtained, re-transferring them to pounds, shil-
lings, and pence. The great waste of time entailed by its being necessary to perform
these operations of transfer and re-transfer, in addition to the calculation itself, is
obvious; and yet the advantage of the Decimal system is found to be so great, that,
for the sake of employing it, it is worth while to incur the extra labour of those
operations. *
With regard to the other and more difficult part of the question referred to
them, namely, the practicability of introducing the Decimal system, it appears to
Your Committee that the obstacles are twofold in their nature. The first arises
from the difficulty which is always found to exist in inducing the mass of the
population to depart from standards with which they are familiar, and from modes
of calculation to the defects of which usage has reconciled them. The second
obstacle arises from the necessity of re-arranging the terms of all pecuniary obliga-
tions, depending either on legal enactment or private contract, expressed in those
coins which, in the event of a change in our monetary system, would cease to
have legal currency. This second obstacle, although apparently the most practical
and the most serious in its nature, is probably not so important in actual fact as
the other, owing to its more tangible character, and the opportunity which it
therefore presents of considering and grappling with its details. But an obstacle
of so undefined a nature as a vague popular feeling, based upon habit and associa-
tion, and not upon reason, cannot be dealt with on any general and abstract prin-
ciples, and Your Committee therefore purposely abstain from seeking to fetter the
discretion of the Executive on that part of the subject.
Your Committee have endeavoured to ascertain the probable feeling of the public,
especially of the working-classes, in reference to the proposed change; first, by
examining witnesses who may be considered to be well acquainted with their
feelings; and, secondly, by means of the analogy to be drawn from previous
changes of a somewhat similar character. As respects the first point, several wit-
messes who have very extensive dealings with the poor, and some of whom are
accustomed to take as many as 1,000 farthings per week over the counter, have
expressed their opinion that if the farthing were altered from its present value (the
with part of the pound sterling) to the rººth part of the pound, in accordance wº
... • - the
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. v
the Decimal subdivision, no prejudice would be raised against this slight decrease
of four per cent. in the value of the farthing, provided they were made to under-
stand that they could, on the other hand, get 25 of the new coin for sixpence where
they now get 24. All the traders examined also stated, as the result of their ex-
perience, that competition invariably causes the quantities of the articles sold to
adjust themselves without difficulty to the value of the money received for them.
Your Committee have also taken evidence as to the difficulty experienced on
occasions when the coinage of any country has been changed, and would especially
refer to the cases of the United States and of Ireland. In the former country the
old system of pounds, shillings, and pence has been entirely superseded by the
Decimal system of dollars and cents, and no inconvenience appears to have
attended the change. The principal difficulty with which Your Committee have
now to contend will be the substitution, in lieu of the penny, of a new copper coin,
hereafter described, of which the present shilling will contain 10 only instead
of 12. In the case of Ireland, where 13 Irish pence made an English shilling,
for which 12 English pence were substituted, a prejudice was originally felt on
the part of the poorer classes, in consequence of their believing that as they
only got 12 pence for a shilling where they formerly received 13, they sustained
a loss of a penny in every shilling. They soon found from experience, however,
that the injury was imaginary.
The other difficulties to which Your Committee have referred, viz., those of a
practical character, arising from the necessity of a re-adjustment of a large number
of existing contracts and obligations based upon the present system of coinage,
are not, in their opinion, insuperable; but the precise point of view from which
to consider them must, of course, depend in some degree on the exact system
which may be adopted.
The first question to be decided is, what shall be the unit of the new system of
coinage; and Your Committee have no hesitation in recommending the present
pound sterling. Considering that the pound is the present standard, and there-
fore associated with all our ideas of money value, and that it is the basis on which
all our exchange transactions with the whole world rest, it appears to Your Com-
mittee that any alteration of it would lead to infinite complication and embarrass-
ment in our commercial dealings; in addition to which it fortunately happens,
that its retention would afford the means of introducing the Decimal system with
the minimum of change. Its tenth part already exists in the shape of the florin
or two shilling piece, while an alteration of four per cent. in the present farthing
will serve to convert that coin into the lowest step of the Decimal scale which it
is necessary to represent by means of an actual coin, viz., the thousandth part of
a pound. To this lowest denomination Your Committee purpose, in order to
mark its relation to the unit of value, to give the name of mil. The addition of a
coin to be called a cent, of the value of 10 mils, and equal to the hundredth part
of the pound, or the tenth part of the florin, would serve to complete the list of
coins necessary to represent the monies of account, which would accordingly be
pounds, florins, cents, and mils. }
Other proposals, having in view the adoption of a different unit, have been
brought under the notice of Your Committee. Of these, the one recommending
the retention of the present farthing as the basis of a new system of coinage, leaving
its relation to the existing penny untouched, presents the greatest amount of ad-
vantage. The large number of payments which are now expressed in pence would
remain unaltered, and a great portion of those daily transactions in which the mass
of the population are engaged, would be unaffected by the change; but when it
is considered that the adoption of that alternative would, by adding 10 d. to the
value of the present pound, and a halfpenny to that of the shilling, necessitate
the withdrawal of the whole of the present gold coinage, and nearly the whole
of the silver, and involve the alteration of the terms of all contracts and
obligations expressed in coin of either of the latter metals, Your Committee
would not feel themselves warranted in recommending the adoption of such a
proposal. * *
Your Committee, therefore, are now in a position to resume the consideration
of the practical difficulties in their way, and of the means by which those diffi-
culties may be most readily overcome. The most important obstacles are those
851. a 3 connected
vi REPORT FROM THE
connected with the readjustment of obligations expressed in the penny (including
its multiples and sub-multiples), by receipts in which coin various portions of the
public revenue are in great part raised, such as postage, newspaper, and receipt
stamps, as well as many duties of customs; in addition to the class of cases in
which private interests are concerned, such as railway, bridge. ferry, and road
tolls. To take an illustration, it is obvious that if instead of charging a toll of
one penny or four farthings as at present, the nearest equivalent toll under the
Decimal system, viz., one of four mils, were substituted, the change would involve
a loss to the receiver of the toll of four per cent.; while, on the other hand, raising
the toll to five mils would involve a loss to the payer of 20 per cent. The
payment is now the sixth part of a pound, and on the first of the foregoing sup-
sitions it would be reduced to the ºth ; on the latter, it would be raised to the
gºth. In the case of all cumulative and gross payments, that difficulty will not
be felt, and may be disregarded; as the amount involved in the change, being
always less than a mil in each case, is then inappreciably small in comparison
with the total sum. -
The case of the penny newspaper stamps presents no difficulty, as they are
always sold to the newspapers in considerable quantities, and might be charged
at the rate of 12 for 50 mils (the equivalent of the shilling), instead of one penny
each as at present, the two rates of charge being identical.
The payment of the troops may be easily arranged in a similar manner, for
although they are nominally paid at the rate of so many pence per day, the full
pay of every man is drawn in advance each month, and any difference between
the sum received by him each day under the Decimal system, and that received
under the present system, could be adjusted at the monthly clearance, which
takes place even at present, for the purpose of settling any small balance.
The cases in which the payment of the penny is made in separate and isolated,
instead of cumulative sums, present greater difficulty.
The charges payable to the public revenue for duties and stamps, are very
generally expressed in pence, or fractions of a penny. Assuming that at the
period fixed for the alteration of the coinage, no grounds should exist for
an alteration of those charges, the object to be attained will be to secure the
levy of an equal amount of revenue in the aggregate, without so far altering
existing charges as to create public dissatisfaction, and without needlessly com-
plicating the proceedings of the Revenue Departments. Your Committee are
disposed to believe that these objects may be attained by such slight modifications
of existing payments as will enable the payments for duties and stamps to be
expressed by a whole number of mils, the loss upon any one head of revenue
being compensated by the gain upon some other.
The case of the penny postage is the most important, and requires a special
reference to be made to it. Various witnesses who have been examined on this
subject, including Mr. Rowland Hill, have expressed an opinion that consider-
able discontent would be occasioned by any addition to the present rate,
such as the adoption of a charge of 5 mils, whatever might be the benefit
to the Exchequer, and they have proposed that the alternative should be
adopted of substituting a rate of 4 mils. But Your Committee feel that, in
arriving at a decision on this subject, it is necessary not to forget that,
supposing the number of letters transmitted through the post to remain
unaltered, the adoption of a charge of 4 mils would involve a loss of revenue
estimated at 100,000 l. Whether such a loss would be actually sustained
must depend on whether or no the trifling diminution of charge on each
letter would lead to increased correspondence, in accordance with the law
that is found to prevail in the case of more extensive reductions. On the
other hand, it is admitted that, apart from the fiscal and other practical consi-
derations involved in the alteration of a duty which was reduced to its present
rate of one penny in compliance with a popular demand, the establishment of
a rate of 5 mils would be convenient, as representing an aliquot part of the coins
of a higher denomination in the proposed Decimal scale, and that that rate would
probably have been adopted, had a Decimal system of coinage been in existence
at the time when a uniform postage was established. Your Committee appre-
hend that it must remain with Parliament to decide, upon the consideration
of the respective advantages and disadvantages of the two rates as above indi-
cated,
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. vii
cated, whether the postage rate to be adopted under a Decimal system shall be
4 or 5 mils. *
The new penny receipt stamp is subject to the same observations. Your Com-
mittee would only observe, with reference to it, that they have no experience to
guide them as to the probable receipts under it, as compared with the receipts
under the much higher rates that have hitherto existed.
As respects those Customs and other duties which are now levied at so much
per lb., and which are the only cases of the kind that would be sensibly affected
by the change to a Decimal system, your Committee are of opinion that all
difficulty would be removed by charging those duties in future by the 100 lbs.
The chief remaining difficulty relates to charges payable to companies or private
individuals fixed by Act of Parliament at sums expressed in pence or fractions of
a penny. Of this class are mileage charges received by railway companies, and
tolls on roads, bridges and ferries. Various suggestions as to the means of regu-
lating these charges, should a Decimai system be adopted, have been made to
Your Committee, especially one whereby compensation to the owners of such
tolls for the loss they would incur by the ultimate reduction in the charges should
be provided by sanctioning a small increase in those charges for a limited period.
They refer The House to the evidence they have received on this subject.
It remains for Your Committee to consider the question of the coins to be
employed under the Decimal system of coinage, and the means of introducing
that system.
As respects the coins, it will be necessary to withdraw from circulation certain
of the coins at present in use, and to substitute in their place certain other coins,
having reference to the Decimal scale, before the Decimal system can be con-
sidered as fully developed. Your Committee contemplate the retention under
any circumstances, of the present sovereign (1,000 mils), half-sovereign (500
mils), florin (100 mils), and shilling (50 mils, or 5 cents). The present sixpence,
under the denomination of 25 mils, might be retained, and the crown, or piece of
250 mils, of which few are in circulation, need not be withdrawn. On the other
hand, it will be desirable to withdraw the half-crown, and the threepenny and
fourpenny pieces, which are inconsistent with the Decimal scale.
With regard to the coins not in actual existence at present, but which it will
be necessary eventually to introduce, Your Committee refer to the Evidence taken
by them on the subject. It appears to them that copper coins of 1, 2, and 5
mils, and silver coins of 20 and 10 mils, will be required, to which should be
added such others as experience may show to be desirable. It is important,
However, to bear in mind, that the smaller the number of the coins with which
it is practicable to effect purchases and exchanges, the better.
Your Committee feel that a certain period of preparation, destined to facilitate
the transition from the present to the new system, is indispensable. During such
a transition period, various measures should be adopted with a view to prepare
the way for ulterior changes, and to create in the public mind a desire for their
completion. Several of the proceedings on the part of Her Majesty's Mint, which
would ultimately become necessary, might be adopted at the present time without
introducing any elements inconsistent with the existing system of coinage and
accounts. Your Committee believe that no unnecessary delay should prevent the
full introduction of the Decimal system, and they recommend that the necessary
preparatory measures should be entered on at the Royal Mint as soon as possible.
As respects the means to be employed for preparing the public for the introduc-
tion of the new system, Your Committee would refer to the very valuable and
detailed evidence on the point given by the Master of the Mint, the Astronomer
Royal, Professor De Morgan, and General Pasley. Your Committee recommend
that all the silver coins hereafter coined should have their value in mils marked
upon them, in order that the public might, at the earliest possible period,
associate the idea of that system with their different pecuniary transactions. They
further recommend that all the copper coins that may be issued under the Decimal
system should also have their value in mils similarly marked upon them. They
think that it would tend to familiarise the public with the new system of account, if
851. a 4. 'SOIſle
viii * REPORT:—DECIMAL COINAGE.
some of the papers submitted to Parliament, and most generally referred to, were
exhibited in the Decimal as well as the ordinary form.
Supposing the Decimal system to be introduced into this country, the question
of its introduction into the British Colonies naturally presents itself. That no
indisposition is felt on the part of the Colonial Legislatures to entertain the
question, may be inferred by the fact, that the Legislature of Canada has just
established a Decimal currency in that country. s
The attention of Your Committee has been incidentally directed in the course
of their inquiries to the advantage of applying the Decimal system to weights
and measures as well as to coinage. This being a question not embraced in
their Order of Reference, Your Committee do not feel themselves in a position
to do more than express their sense of the importance of further inquiry into
that interesting subject. -
In conclusion, Your Committee, having well weighed the comparative merits
of the existing system of coinage and the Decimal system, and the obstacles which
must necessarily be met with in passing from one to the other, desire to repeat
their decided opinion of the superior advantages of the Decimal system, and to
record their conviction that the obstacles referred to are not of such a nature as to
create any doubt of the expediency of introducing that system, so soon as the
requisite preparation shall have been made for the purpose by means of cautious,
but decisive action on the part of the Government.
Your Committee consider the present moment especially adapted for intro-
ducing the Decimal system, in consequence of the prosperous state of the whole
community, including those classes which would be more immediately affected by
the change, and they feel the importance of not allowing such an opportunity to
be lost. -
They believe that the necessary inconvenience attending a transition state will
be far more than compensated by the great and permanent benefits which the
change will confer upon the public of this country, and of which the advantages
will be participated in to a still greater extent by future generations.
l August 1853.
=º-e
PROCEEDINGS
PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE.
Jovis, 21° die Aprilis, 1853.
MEMBERS PRIESENT :
Mr. Hamilton. Lord Stanley.
Mr. W. Brown. Sir William Jolliffe.
Mr. Tufnell. | Mr. Ball.
Mr. TUFNELL called to the Chair.
The Committee deliberated as to their course of proceedings.
[Adjourned.
Martis, 3° die Maii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRIESENT :
Mr. TUFNELL in the Chair.
Lord Stanley. Mr. Ball.
Mr. Cardwell. Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. J. B. Smith, Marquis of Chandos.
Mr. Moody. Viscount Goderich.
Sir W. Clay. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. W. Brown.
Mr. Thomson Hankey, jun., examined.
[Adjourned to Thurday next, at One.
Jovis, 5° die Maii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT :
Mr. TUFNELL in the Chair.
Mr. W. Brown. Mr. J. B. Smith.
Marquis of Chandos. Viscount Goderich.
Mr. Ball. . Mr. G. A. Hamilton.
Mr. Kinnaird. Sir. W. Clay.
Mr. Laurie and Sir Charles Pasley examined.
[Adjourned to Tuesday next, at One.
851. b.
X PROCEEDINGS OF THE
Martis, 10" die Maii, 1853.
MIEMIBERS PRIESENT :
Mr. TUFNELL in the Chair.
Mr. W. Brown. Mr. Ball.
Lord Stanley. - Mr. Cardwell.
Mr. Hamilton. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. J. B. Smith. Sir W. Clay.
Lord Goderich. - Mr. Moody.
Professor Airy examined.
[Adjourned to Tuesday, 24th May, at One o'clock.
Jovis, 26° die Maii, 1853.
MEME E RS PRESENT :
Mr. TUFNELL in the Chair.
Mr. J. B. Smith. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. W. Brown. Mr. Hamilton.
Lord Stanley. Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Ball. Sir W. Clay.
Professor Airy and Sir John Herschel examined.
[Adjourned till Tuesday, at One o'clock:
Martis, 31° die Maii, 1853.
M EMEERS PRIESENT :
Mr. W. B.RowN in the Chair.
Mr. J. B. Smith. Mr. Hamilton.
Lord Stanley. Sir W. Clay.
Mr. Kinnaird. Mr. Moody.
Mr. Dunlop.
General Pasley further examined.
Trofessor De Morgan and Mr. Headlam, M. P., examined.
[Adjourned to Thursday, at One o’clock.
Martis, 7° die Junii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT :
Mr. W. BROWN in the Chair. *
Mr. Moody. - Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Kinnaird. Sir W. Clay.
Mr. J. B. Smith. Mr. Ball. 8 *
Mr. Frederick Strugnell, Mr. R. C. L. Bevan, Mr. Samuel Lindsey, Mr. Charles Meeking,
and Mr. George Arbuthnot, examined.
[Adjourned till Thursday, at One o’clock.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. xi
Jovis, 9° die Junii, 1853.
MEMIBIERS PRESENT :
Mr. W. BROwn in the Chair.
Mr. Kinnaird. Lord Goderich.
Mr. Moody. Mr. Ball.
Mr. J. B. Smith.
The Duke of Leinster, Mr. James Laurie, Mr. William Miller, Mr. Henry Taylor,
and Mr. William Brown, M. P., examined.
[Adjourned till Tuesday, at One.
Martis, 14° die Junii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT :
Mr. W. BROWN in the Chair.
Mr. Kinnaird. Mr. Hamilton.
Sir W. Clay. Sir W. Jolliffe.
Mr. Dunlop. Mr. J. B. Smith.
Mr. Rowland Hill, Mr. William Miller, Mr. Francis Bennoch, and Mr. John Bacon
Beard, examined.
[Adjourned to One o'clock on Thursday.
Jovis, 16° die Junii, 1853.
M EMBERS PRESENT :
Mr. W. BRow N in the Chair.
Mr. J. B. Smith. - Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Kinnaird. Sir W. Clay.
Lord Goderich. º
Mr. Thomas Bazley, Mr. Kenneth Dowie, Mr. Henry Kirkham, Mr. Charles Hatton
Gregory, and Mr. Jacob A. Franklin, examined.
[Adjourned.
Jovis, 309 die Junii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT :
Mr. W. BR own in the Chair.
Mr. Cardwell. Mr. J. B. Smith.
Sir W. Clay. - Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Ball. Lord Stanley.
Mr. George Arbuthnot further examined.
[Adjourned.
xii PROCEEDINGs OF COMMITTEE: —DECIMAL COINAGE.
Martis, 12° die Julii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT :
Mr. BRowN in the Chair.
Mr. Dunlop. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. Moody. Mr. Hamilton.
Mr. J. B. Smith. Lord Stanley.
Sir William Clay.
Dr. John Bowring examined.
[Adjourned.
Martis, 19° die Julii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT :
Mr. W. Brown in the Chair.
Lord Stanley. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. Cardwell. Mr. Moody.
Mr. Ball. Sir W. Jolliffe.
The Committee deliberated as to their Report.
[Adjourned till Wednesday next, at One o'clock.
Mercurii, 27° die Julii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT :
Mr. W. BRowN in the Chair.
Lord Goderich. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. Ball. Mr. Cardwell.
Mr. J. B. Smith. Lord Stanley.
Sir W. Clay. Mr. Dunlop.
The Committee agreed to their Report.
Ordered to Report.
E X P E N S E S O F W IT N E S S E S.


Number of
By what Total Days Expenses
Member of Number under Ex- of
N A M E Committee Date Date amination Expenses TO T A L
Motion made of of by Journey Expenses
of for of is- Davs Committee, to - in
Attendance Dis w or acting allowed to
W IT N E S S. of Arrival. charge. II] specially London London. Witness.
the Witness. London. under their] and back.
• Orders.
f. s. d. fº. 3. d £. s. d.
Renneth Dowie - * - - | Chairman - | 16 June - || 17 June - 2 2 4 5 - 2 2 – 6 7 —
Henry Kirkham - gº s 22 - 15 x - || 17 2, - 3 3 4 5 - 3 3 – 7 8 —
£ 13 15 —
[ xiii J
M IN U T E S () F E V I D E N C E.

851. - H.IST
[ xiv J
LIST OF WITNESSES.
- Martis, 3° die Maii, 1853.
Thomson Hankey, jun., Esq.- - º • •
Jovis, 5° die Maii, 1853.
James Laurie, Esq. © *- * . tº tº- º
Lieutenant-General Sir Charles William Pasley, K.C.B.
- Martis, 10° die Maii, 1853. -
Professor George Biddell Airy - wº tº-2 e-
Jovis, 26° die Maii, 1853.
Professor George Biddell Airy - t- - gº
Sir John Herschel eº * º sº tº- º
Martis, 31° die Mail, 1853.
Lieutenant-General Sir Charles William Pasley, K. C. B.
Mr. Augustus De Morgan - -> tº tº- tº
Thomas Emerson Headlam, Esq., M. P. - º *
Martis, 7° die Junii, 1853.
Mr. Frederick Strugnell --> - º &- tº-
R. C. L. Bevan, Esq. - * tºº tº - º
Mr. Samuel Lindsey - º º- º - tº-
Mr. Charles Meeking - - *- & - sº
George Arbuthnot, Esq. cº- º º º º
The Duke of Leinster
Mr. James Laurie º e- - º º ſº
Mr. William Miller
Mr. Henry Taylor
William Brown, Esq., M. P. - º- sº - º
Rowland Hill, Esq.
Mr. William Miller
sº
4-
tº-e
tºº
* *
Mr. Francis Bennoch -
John Baron Beard, Esq. - ſº º {- sº-
Jovis, 16” die Junii, 1853.
Thomas Bazley, Esq. - tº-º
Kenneth Dowie, Esq. - -
Mr. Henry Kirkham - tº-
Charles Hutton Gregory, Esq.
Mr. Jacob Abraham Franklin
* Jovis, 30° die Junii, 1853.
George Arbuthnot, Esq. - - tºº - º
Martis, 12° die Julii, 1853.
Dr. John Bowring * - tº- º tº wº- º
:
:
;
f
i
14
21
27
98
1 O1
108
... I 1 I
1 14
. I 14
. 1 18
. 120
. 124
. 126
. 127
. 128
. 134
. 137
143

M IN UTES OF EV ID E N C E.
Martis, 3° die Maii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT.
Mr. Tufnell. Mr. John Benjamin Smith.
Mr. William Brown. Sir William Clay.
Mr. Cardwell. Marquis of Chandos.
Mr. John Ball. Mr. Kinnaird.
Lord Stanley. Viscount Goderich.
Mr. Moody. Mr. Dunlop.
THE RIGHT Hon. H. TUFNELL, IN THE CHAIR.
Thomson Hankey, Jun., Esq., called in ; and Examined.
1. Chairman.] I BELIEVE you lately held the office of Governor of the Bank T. Hankey, Jun.,
of England 2–I did.
2. While holding that office, did you direct your attention to the subject of
an alteration in the present system of monetary calculation in this country – 3 May 1953.
Yes, I did.
3. Can you state to the Committee what you consider to be the inconve-
nience of the present system 2–During the time I held the office of Governor
of the Bank of England my attention was particularly called to the subject, in
consequence of what appeared to me to be the extremely complicated system
of keeping accounts with respect to all transactions in the purchase or sale of
bullion at the Bank of England. I found, on examining into the system
or mode of keeping such accounts, or of making such calculations, that there
were three elements which entered into the consideration ; the first was the
weight, which was calculated into troy pounds and ounces, of which there
were 12 to the pound, pennyweights, of which there are 20 to the ounce, and
grains, of which there are 24 to the pennyweight. The second element was
the quality of the gold, which was subdivided by carats, a carat meaning the
24th part of any quality of gold; the carat was again subdivided into eight.
The third element was pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings. A more com-
plicated system, and one more fraught with incidents to error, can hardly be
conceived; it requires, in fact, an extremely expert calculator to make even
any ordinary calculations of the kind; so much so, that I do not believe that
any merchants or ordinary dealers ever make the calculations themselves; they
employ brokers who transact the business for them, and these brokers use a
voluminous series of tables by which they arrive at the results of the calcu-
lations. This appeared to me to be so extremely inconvenient a system, and
so extremely difficult for myself to learn, that I was anxious to see whether I
could not, for my own private purposes, make calculations by a system of
decimal tables, and I found that by so using the decimal ounce, and discarding .
altogether the pound troy, a very much more simple mode of calculation could
be arrived at ; and it was after much consideration on the subject that the Bank
of England determined to take advantage of the anomalous state of the law
respecting the pound troy and respecting troy weights generally (which I will
refer to hereafter), to discard altogether the use, from all their calculations, of
the pound troy. They discarded it out of the Bank altogether; they made use
Esq.
o.66. A of
2 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
I. Hankey, Jun., of the ounce troy, multiplying larger quantities by the multiples of the ounce,
Esq.
3 May 1853.
and a smaller quantity by a decimal subdivision of the ounce; and on that prin-
ciple a set of tables was framed, of which I have put a copy into the hands of the
Chairman, and which have been in use. Though I believe in the first instance
some little prejudices existed on the subject, yet those who were interested in
such calculations found that they were much more simple than any they had
hitherto used, and within almost a few months they came into such general use
that I believe all dealers in bullion in London have adopted that system. I.
should mention that dealers in bullion are a peculiar class, confined to a small
number of merchants in London and their clerks, and are of a very intelligent
character; and therefore the difficulty of persuading them to adopt a system
which seemed so evidently calculated to save trouble, and is an improvement
on the former system, was not very great. I think it has now been adopted
generally, and that nobody would think of proposing any return to the former
system.
4. Are the Committee to understand you to say, that there is a Bill now
before the House of Commons to legalise this P-I will allude to that in a
moment. Having removed, therefore, one of those conflicting elements out of
the way, the calculations now really only have reference to the fineness of
quality, and to the pounds, shillings, and pence. If we could simplify that cal-
culation by adopting decimal coinage with regard to pounds, shillings, and
pence, I have no doubt that all calculations in bullion, which called my parti-
cular attention to the subject, would be again extremely simplified. It was
with that view that I first paid attention to the subject, and I have arrived at
the conclusion that all calculations regarding bullion transactions would be
extremely simplified by an adoption of a decimal system of coinage. With
respect to the weights, the reason why Parliament was appealed to for a Bill,
was merely on account of the anomalous state of the law, which consisted of a
series of old laws upon the subject, requiring that every weight used within the
walls of the city of Londom (I am not certain whether it extended to other
parts) should be stamped by some one of the city companies as well as by the
corporation of the city of London. Having adopted this system, we applied to
have our ounce troy stamped, and it was in consequence of that application we
found that we were, after having adopted this system, using illegal weights.
Our solicitor's opinion, in the first instance, was that we might safely and pro-
perly use them ; that there was nothing in the existing Acts that prevented the
use of the decimal division; it turning, I believe, upon the word “aliquot” part,
whether a decimal was an aliquot part of an ounce. I am perhaps speaking
without due consideration, because I am not certain whether that was the
point; but he was of opinion that it was not prudent for us to continue to use
them without an Act of Parliament, and the City authorities suspended any
proceedings, on the engagement which I entered into that an application
should immediately be made to legalise the use of the new weights. This has
been done, certainly not under the idea that we were doing an illegal act, but
under the impression that we were authorised to do it, but that the existing
laws were at variance with what had been supposed to exist.
5. How long has the system to which you allude been in force at the Bank 2
—I should think about eight or nine months.
6. Lord Stanley.] Have you any means of ascertaining the actual amount of
labour saved by this new system 7 – I have no means of ascertaining this ; the
work is almost entirely clerical, and it would be extremely difficult to ascertain
that. It is at present merely the difference of the saving of labour from very
much more voluminous references to much more simple books for calculations.
7. Mr. W. Brown.] Would not the adoption of the decimal system, instead
of the present system, have the same effect upon those particular trans-
actions as that which is produced on labour by the introduction of machinery,
which everybody knows saves a good deal of labour, although you cannot
define the quantity of labour saved 2–It undoubtedly saves labour.
8. And attains greater accuracy –And it attains greater accuracy. I'should
say that there is in all the calculations a great saving of figures; but there is
also a saving in the mere recording of the weight of bullion. In recording
100 bars of gold, there would be a saving of more than 40 figures: and the
weight would be recorded to the minuteness of something less than half a grain,
whilst, by the old mode, it could only be recorded by the grain.
9. The
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL ('OINAGE. 3.
9. The saving of calculation applies only to decimal weights?—That is all.
10. If the decimal coinage were adopted, there would be a still further
saving in the calculations?—No doubt of it.
11. Sir W. Clay.] Are you aware of the relation of the weight between troy
and avoirdupois?—The grain is equally the unit for the troy weight and the
avoirdupois; the difference being, that the avoirdupois pound is 7,000 grains,
and the troy pound is 5,760. .
12. You are quite sure that the unit grain is precisely the same —The grain
is the unit of weight in both ; it is identical.
13. Do you see any reason for keeping up the difference in the two kinds of
weights, the avoirdupois and the troy —None whatever.
14. Would it not be a material advantage if there were but one system 2–
I think it would.
1.5. Viscount Goderich.] You in no way employ avoirdupois weight in weigh-
ing bullion ?–We never employ avoirdupois. weight at the Bank of England,
excepting for goods bought, paper, and things of that kind.
16. Mr. Ball.] You said that bullion dealers are a small body, which is the
fact ; did you suggest to them the employment of this system, or was there
a great amount of prejudice in their minds at first?—I think before the Bank
determined to adopt it, I had a consultation with all the principal bullion
dealers, and inquired whether there would be any practical objection, or
whether they would object to fall into the system if we adopted it, and I found
I] OI) e.
17. Your purchase of bullion is in ounces?–Yes.
18. What is the decimal to the 1,000th part of an ounce 2—I think we go
much below that; the ordinary calculations are made to the 1,000th part of an
OUII) C62.
19. You have, I suppose, a calculation, as to what the 1,000th part is, in re-
lation to the existing weights —We have, but we do not know at present any
existing weight except the decimal.
20. Since you have adopted it?—Since we adopted it. Our first necessary
duty was, to turn all our existing gold into this weight in decimal calculations,
so that in dealing with it hereafter, we should have no difficulty in making the
calculations.
21. Mr. Brown.] As you stated that you thought it would be an advantage
to abandon either the pound troy or the pound avoirdupois, would there not
be much less difficulty in abandoning the troy weight, rather than the avoir-
dupois weight, inasmuch as gold and silver and precious stones are sold by
the ounce troy, and the class of persons dealing in them are much more
intelligent than the mass of the country; and you could more easily assimilate
the pound troy to the pound avoirdupois than the reverse —No doubt, if a
change were made, it would be desirable to keep the pound avoirdupois, and
not to have any reference to troy weight.
22. Chairman.] You would not keep up the 16 ounces —That, perhaps, is
another question ; if a decimal system were adopted, there would be no such
thing as 16 ounces. -
23. Sir W. Clay.] Is it not a fact, that both these systems, avoirdupois and
troy weight, are purely artificial, and not founded upon any scientific prin-
ciple, or upon any rule of convenience —I think you will find it has reference
to the weight of water; I think you will find in the Report of the Royal
Commissioners on Weights and Measures, that it has been so ; but that is a
question which any gentleman of science will be better able to answer.
24. Sir W. Clay.] It was not, I think, that the pound avoirdupois was altered,
but that it referred to an alteration of measures; and as to the definition of
the imperial gallon, was the avoirdupois altered at that time by statute?—I am
not aware that any alteration has been made in weights, but I think the Com-
mission recommended that in any change, the pound avoirdupois should be
kept, and that alone made the standard.
25. What relation has the 1,000th part of an ounce troy to the existing grain,
which is the unit of both avoirdupois and troy weights?--I am not able to
answer that question without referring to a table, but the table will show in a
moment what the decimal part is.
20. Chairman.] You have mentioned to the Committee the change that has
been made in respect to the purchase of bullion at the Bank; have you further
T. Hankey, Jun.,
Esq.
3 May 1853
0.66. g A 2 - considered
4. MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
T. Iſaºkey, Jun., considered the nature of the change, in our monetary system, that you think
Esq.
3 May 1853.
preferable, as regards the interests of the country at large —So far as I have
been able to give the subject consideration, it appears to me that the advantages
to the country at large would be indisputably great, by the adoption of a general
system both of weights and measures and of coinage. But confining myself
especially to the coinage now, I think it would lead to an improvement in an
educational point of view in the people at large throughout the country, who
now have very little knowledge of the science, if I may use the word, of
arithmetic. They make their calculations by a variety of, perhaps I might say,
ingenious inventions, which probably enable them to arrive at their conclusions.
But there are few of them who have really any knowledge of arithmetic. In
fact, with our extremely complicated system, the sub-divisions of every weight
and measure, and the pound which must enter into almost every calculation of
everything that is bought and sold, there must be another system in operation
at the same time; one element being the division of pounds, shillings and
pence, and the other complicated systems of endless sub-divisions of weights
and measures. If one element were removed, it appears to me it would be
indisputablya great advantage to the people, and it would lead them to understand
a system which evidently might be assimilated both in weights and measures, and
in money; so that one general system or one general principle of arithmetic might
come into use, and if that were the case every child almost would learn in its infancy
the mode of making calculations, and they would understand a system which would
enable them throughout life to carry out those calculations in the purchase and
sale of every article with which they would have to deal. To the tradesman, it
appears to me, it would be a great advantage; to the poorer classes I think
no less, for they would then understand that of which they now must be per-
fectly ignorant; viz., the system in which accounts can be, or ought to be,
kept in a simple manner. It appears to me, therefore, that in a national point
of view, it is a great object for the Government to take some step which will
induce the people to learn a system of decimal calculations, which will evidently
facilitate all their transactions.
27. Does the present system lead to great errors occasionally in casting up 2
—I should think it must lead to many errors. I think there can be but very
few, if any, of us who, having any sums, even in common addition or multipli-
cation, would not find ourselves constantly making errors, which I think we
should very much avoid if we adopted a system of decimal figures.
28. And also a great saving of labour?—I think there would be a great
Saving of labour.
29. If a change to the decimal system were adopted, what coins would, in
your opinion, be the best suited to the wants of the general trading of the
country P--That I have put down upon paper, thinking the question might be
asked me by the Committee, and if you will allow me I will read it. Assuming
that the gold coinage of a sovereign remains undisturbed, I would make the
calculations so that the sovereign should be divided into a thousand parts,
those thousand parts being called mils or cents (to which I will allude in a
moment, and my reasons for the two), or farthings; but I think it more
desirable to give it an entirely new name. I would then take the half-sovereign,
to consist of 500 mils; and those are the only two coins I should adopt. The
silver coin I would have to consist of the florin, which would be 100 mils ; the
half-florin, or shilling, of 50 mils; the quarter florin (which I have called the
Victoria, merely to give it a name, if it be desirable to name it), of 25 mils;
and the doit or groat, of 10 mils. That would give four silver coins. Then
the copper coins would be a three-mils piece, a two-mils piece, and a one-mil
piece. I think that would enable every calculation and every payment to be
made without any difficulty, and would reduce the number of coins actually in
circulation. It appears to me to be desirable to abolish at once, if any change
is to be made, the name of the penny, and anything connected with it,
either as a multiple or division of a penny; for if it is kept on as an
element in our coinage, I think it is likely to lead to considerable fraud, in
which the poor will probably be the great sufferers, because it is necessary that
Some change should be made in adapting the existing system of the weights
and measures to a new system of calculating; as almost all things will be sold
with reference to an existing coin, rather than with reference to any coin of
previous existence; and if the penny is kept in use in any way, I think it will
perpetuate
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 5
perpetuate a system which will complicate very much any arrangements between T. Hankey, Jun.,
buying and selling of the poor, and I think they would probably be the sufferers Esq.
by the change, or at all events the suffering would be very much prolonged
by those who are more wary, and who would take advantage of the small dif- 3 * *53.
ference that would then exist between the old and new value of the coinage,
and so take advantage of the poorer classes; and it would be longer before the
new description of coin was adapted to the existing system of weights and mea-
sures. But if an entire change fakes place in the copper, it might perhaps take
a few years to carry out such a system effectually ; but in a few years the sys-
tem would be understood by the people, and prices would adjust themselves
according to the new state of circumstances. There is one other remark I
would make as to the word mil, whether it might not be cent. Referring only
to the florin as a supposed unit, even though the sovereign were kept in use, if
the florin eventually were to be made the sole unit of the sovereign, to be called
ten florins, then, undoubtedly, the subdivision of a cent, or hundredth part of a
florin, would be more intelligible and more suitable to all the small transactions
of trade, because there would be fewer decimal places required, and there would
not be the necessity of having a decimal place in almost all statements made of
figures in small transactions where they did not amount to one-tenth or one
unit of a decimal.
30. I suppose you would recall the half-crown pieces :
them.
31. You stated that you preposed a coin of 10 mils?—Of 10 mils.
32. Of what metal would you suggest that should be —Of silver; I think it
would be of inconvenient size if it were of copper. I think it is very unde-
sirable to extend the copper coinage of the country, and that it is better to have
it of silver; it would be somewhat smaller than the threepenny-piece, but I do
not think it would be a coin of any inconvenience, and the risk of loss would
not apply to it to as great a degree as it would in a question of gold coinage,
where a small coin of so much value might be considered a disadvantage.
33. Would you keep the fourpenny-piece in circulation ?--No, I would dis-
card every other silver coin but the subdivision of the florin, except the doit,
the 10-mil piece.
34. Do you think there would be any objection to the 4-mil copper coin :
—It appears to me that every payment could be made with perfect ease with-
out a 4-mil piece; and it is most desirable, as I am aware practically, to
those who have money passing through their hands, as I have seen at the Bank
of England, to diminish the number of coins. It is a most expensive part of
the arrangements at the Bank of England to sort the money; the subdivisions,
even at present, of the 3d. and 4 d. cause a very great deal of expense to the
Bank of England. -
35. Do you see any great objection to the three pieces being 4, 2, and 1,
instead of 3 mils, 2 mils, and 1 mil 2–It appears to me that the payments
would be more easily made by 2, 3, and l, than by 4, 2, and 1. I have
taken the various payments under 10, and I think they could be made more
simply by 3, 2, and 1, than by 4, 2, and 1.
36. The 4 mils would approximate very nearly to the penny ?—Yes, it has
that merit, certainly ; but two 2-mil pieces, or a three and a one, would
perform the same functions, and two 2-mils, which would be equal very
nearly to 1 d., would cover the debts covered by four 1-mil pieces quite
as easily as one piece of 4 mils. I think even now a penny is rather a large
and inconvenient coin to carry about ; I would rather make it smaller than
attempt to continue so large even a copper coinage.
37. Would there not be some difficulty at first with respect to payments
fixed by Parliament : for instance, the penny-postage stamp, and the tolls of
a penny ?—I do not see anything which would diminish a difficulty of that
kind by having a 4-mil piece, instead of using two 2 mils. It would equally
be called 4 mils, whether one piece or two were used for the payment ; and
a penny is a payment equally made with two halfpence.
38. Is it not more convenient to have the transaction in one coin than
in two 7–There may be some transactions in which it might be more con-
venient.
39. Marquis of Chandos.] Would not the 4-mil piece make the different
payments under 10 with fewer coins than the 3-mil piece ; for instance,
I would recall all of
o,66. A 3 eight;
6 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
** Jun., eight; if you had to pay eight mils, it would require two pieces of the 3-mils,
Esq.
3 May 1853.
and a 2-mil piece 3–1 think a payment of eight mils is more likely to be
made by giving 10 mils, and taking two back.
4). Mr. J. B. Smith..] I understand you to divide the florin into a hundred
parts 3–In the scale I made, I divided it into a hundred parts.
41. Which you call mils?–Which I call mils, they referring rather to the
sovereign than to the florin.
42. If you took the florin as your unit, would it not be necessary to keep the
accounts in florins and cents -- I do not see any necessity for keeping them
in cents.
43. Do you think it desirable to make coin of any lower denomination than
a 1-mil, which I think is about a farthing?—I think it very undesirable.
44. Are not many commodities sold at fractions of a farthing 2—I am not
aware of any ; but I am not conversant with the mode of transactions among
very small retail dealers.
45. If it were the custom in large commodities to sell them at half a
farthing per pound, would it not be a convenience to have a decimal that
would meet that calculation ?—I think it very undesirable to have a smaller
coin in existence than a farthing.
46. You are aware that the French divide their franc into a hundred parts :
—Yes. -
47. You propose that we should divide the shilling into 50 parts 2—Yes.
48. You think that would be preferable to dividing it into a hundred parts :
—I think it would. I believe there is no such coin in existence as a cent.
I believe the smallest coin in existence in France is the five-centimes piece;
certainly the smallest in common use.
40. I am not speaking so much as to the circulation of the coins, as to the
facility it would afford in calculating all those commodities which are sold for
fractional parts of a farthing P-If a decimal system were introduced, calcula-
tions could be made into an infinitesimal part, if it were so desired.
50. Are you aware that the large article of cotton, of which upwards of two
millions of bales are sold per annum, is sold at so many pence and one-eighth
per pound —I am aware of it.
51. Do you think it would facilitate the calculation, if decimal accounts
were kept in such a way as to make one hundred parts in a shilling 2—I think
in all large transactions, where it is necessary to subdivide on account of the
small weight which attaches to a certain price, such as cotton being sold by the
pound, that the calculations would be greatly facilitated by using a decimal
system, which could be subdivided almost ad infinitum, if it were considered
desirable for trade. I have never had any dealings in a commodity of that
kind, and therefore I am not able to speak practically with any degree of
accuracy.
52. The transactions of Lancashire, both in manufactured goods and also
in cotton, are carried on in fractional parts of a penny ; are you of opinion that if
it were possible to adopt a system of accounts to meet that, it would facilitate
the calculation ?—-No doubt of it.
53. Supposing, instead of adopting the sovereign as your unit, you were to
adopt the half-sovereign for your unit, and call that a pound, would not that
plan admit of dividing the pound into a thousand parts or mils?--That might
assist in that mode of making the calculation, but the same end can be arrived
at by continuing in the same figure.
54. Is it not very desirable to have the calculation of your decimal as simple
as possible – Of course it is ; the fewer the number of figures, the simpler
every calculation is.
55. Supposing you had a decimal system of this kind, that there were ten
mils in a penny, or whatever you choose to call it, ten pence in a shilling, and
ten shillings in a pound, would not that be a simple plan –Certainly it would
be a simpler plan, but it would interfere, as it appears to me, with so many of the
large transactions, for instance, the public debt of this country; and there are
so many things we are accustomed to consider in the large transactions of
monetary affairs, in pounds, shillings, and pence value, and the property value,
and the land value, that it would be a subject of greater inconvenience to alter
the pound sterling than to carry on the decimal calculations one figure further of
a decimal.
56. Supposing
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 7
56. Supposing you had a debt owing to you of 200 l. 5 s., would it very
much interfere with the existing state of things, if instead of 200 l. 5 s. it were
called 400 l. 5 s. 7–I think it would ; it would alter so many of the trans-
actions. It would interfere more with the prejudices of people in large trans-
actions, which would be more difficult to overcome than the prejudices of the
poorer classes with regard to small transactions.
57. There would be no real difference?—There would be no real difference.
58. You are aware we have to encounter a great deal of prejudice in any kind
of change that may be adopted 2–I am.
59. Is it not desirable when you make a change, to render that change as
simple as possible 7–Certainly. No doubt the more simple the change is, the
better it is, and it is with that view I have recommended as few coins as
possible.
60. Sir W. Clay.] Is it not your opinion, that the mil, being near about
the value of the farthing, is a sufficiently small denomination of coin for any
practical purpose?–-I think so. -
61. You think there is no necessity for a smaller coin -—I think not.
62. Chairman.] If you did think there was that necessity, would it be more
convenient, instead of having a half-mil piece, to have a one-and-a-half mil
piece, or two-and-a-half mil piece —I think it would be likely to render the
system more complicated than to have it only one, two, and three, or one,
two, and four.
63. Sir JP. Clay.] With reference to the question just now asked you, as to
calculations upon certain masses of goods, I believe they are now made without
reference to any existing tangible coin; for instance, when cotton is sold in
large quantities, at prices calculated by the sixteenths of a penny, those calcu-
lations pass without reference to any absolutely existing coin -—They do.
64. Might they not pass without reference to the existing coin, if there were
no smaller denomination absolutely existing than the mil of which you speak?
—I think so; I believe that a great many articles are sold by much smaller
denominations now, such as pimento, and, perhaps, articles of drugs, and many
cheap articles which are sold by the sixteenth part of a penny per pound.
65. With regard to calculations being in decimals, there will be no inconve-
niences added to what are now felt from there being no denomination of coin so
low as is used in the calculation —I think all calculations may be more simply
made with decimal coinage.
66. With no added inconvenience to what is at present felt from the want of
tangible coin, positively representing the coin used in calculation ?– I think so.
67. Mr. Brown.] With respect to the 10-mil piece, which must be very small,
would it not be desirable that there should be a hole in the centre to prevent
mistakes being made in the dark P-I do not think it would lead to any
difficulty of that kind; certainly not to so great a one as now exists, where we
have 3 d., 4 d., and 6 d. pieces.
68. Would it not be desirable to decrease that difficulty that now exists as
much as possible —I think the difference between 25 and 10 centimes will be
sufficient to obviate the necessity of resorting to the novel expedient of a ring.
69. Lord Stanley.] In reference to that coin, the tenth part of a florin, do
you see any objection to what is sometimes proposed, a mixed coin of copper
and silver?— I think it undesirable to have four metals used for coinage in
England, at least without some strong reason. The coinage of mixed metals in
use, I think, in the Swiss states, always appears to me to approximate much
more to the baser metal than the silver.
70. The proposition to which I refer does not go to the actual mixture of
metals; the proposition is, that the coin shall be of silver with a copper rim —
I have not seen that. It has always appeared to me undesirable to vary the kind
of coin from the simplicity of silver, copper, and gold.
71. Viscount Goderich..] Would such a coin, in your opinion, be liable to
break, and the silver to separate from the copper ?—That is a practical question
I am not able to give an opinion upon.
72. Mr. J. Ball.] Do you see any practical objection to having a coin to
represent one-third part, although not expressed so in figures, inasmuch as it
answers the purposes in ordinary use of dividing the small sums into three-
pences !—I think it would be much better to let those, or any arrangements in
1. Hankey, Jun.,
Esq.
3 May 1853.
O.66. A 4 which
8 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
T. Hankey, Jun., which a subdivision of coins would be necessary, adjust themselves by receiving
Esq.
3 May 1853.
back so much in exchange for a larger coin, rather than multiplying the coins.
I beg leave to say I attach great importance to having as few coins as possible.
It appears to me to be very desirable, in the event of a change in the system,
to prevent a multiplicity of coins.
73. Have you had any practical experience in countries in which there are
but very few coins –I have not.
74. There is in existence a coin that represents one-sixth part of a florin ;
that would answer the purpose of dividing all the small sums; do you recom-
mend that, having that coin, we should voluntarily give it up ; I am speaking
of the fourpenny bit, as it is called?—I have said that I think it is most desir-
able to abolish every reference, either by multiple or division, to the existing
penny.
75. Attending the change of coinage, you cannot withdraw the whole of the
existing coin, so that it would be necessary by Act of Parliament or by procla-
mation to declare that some existing coins shall be received as equivalents for
some others; and a coin described as one-sixth part of a florin, identical in
value to the fourpenny bit, would gradually replace the other ?—With regard
to the inconvenience of having an old coinage without a given ascertained value
in the new coinage, it appears to me that the expense to the Government would
be so infinitesimal of calling in and recovering all the small silver coinage,
(a mere nothing on such a question as this), that it would be better to withdraw
from circulation all existing coins that would militate against the proposed
change rather than keep them in existence, giving them a nominal value. It
must be borne in mind, after all, that it will only be a nominal value, the silver
coin being mere tokens, and not representing their real value.
76. Have you considered the process by which you would substitute one
coinage for another, recollecting that the systems must for a short time
co-exist?—I have not considered the best mode of doing it, but I should think
a simple mode might be adopted by Government recalling all the copper coinage
and giving the holders in exchange new ; and if a very small difference in
favour of the holder of the old coins were given, it would be done at an
exceedingly small expense, and it would ensure their all coming in. In con-
sequence of the mil being four per cent. different from the existing farthing,
and that being the basis on which the multiple takes place up to the sovereign,
there must be a little difference in every coin.
77. Therefore practically, in order to introduce the new system, it would be
necessary to declare that the existing coins shall be received at a slightly
different value from that at which they now pass —That appears to me to be
the most simple plan of getting in the old coins.
78. Mr. Brown.] As they were taken in, would it not answer the purpose if
the sixpences were called in and stamped with the value in mils?—I under-
stood the question lately put to me to refer to smaller coins, not to these.
There would be no practical difficulty as to the shillings and sixpences, because
they would be represented by the 50 mils and 25 mils. It would be only
the smaller denomination that would give rise to difficulty.
79. Mr. J. Ball.] What practical difficulty is there to silvering the copper
coins —I have always thought the coins I have seen made of mixed metal
were subject to the same inconveniences as copper; they get black, and are not
so easily discernible.
80. Mr. Brown..] What amount of copper is a legal tender 2–-I think 5 s. ;
1 am not quite sure of that.
81. Mr. J. Ball.] One objection you made to the multiplication of copper
coins below five mils in value was as to banking transactions; in point of
practice, do such small coins come into the bankers’ hands?—I think I was
referring to the small denominations of silver coins; the inconvenience between
the 4 d. and 6 d. has been found very great.
82. Because they are so small —Because they are so small, and so similar in
S1262.
83. You do not apprehend any inconvenience will arise either to bankers
or large mercantile houses from the multiplication of small copper coins, if the
should be found of convenience to the poorer classes!—I think all bankers
must more or less keep copper, and the more the coins are subdivided the
greater trouble would attend the banking operations. The mere effort of
counting
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 9
counting over gold, silver, and copper is very great, and those who have large T. Hankey, Jun.,
transactions are fully aware of what I state. Esq.
84. Chairman.] Your objection to the fourpenny piece is not as being incon-
venient, but because it too much resembles the threepenny piece;—That was 3 *y “53.
my reason for it.
85. Sir W. Clay.] You have already expressed an opinion as to the expe-
diency of calling in the half-crown pieces; have you thought at all whether it is
possible to continue the crown pieces?—I believe that practically the crown
piece is of very little use; there are very few people, even rich people, who like
to carry about a crown piece, and I believe practically the poor never use them.
I believe that at the Bank of England the circulation of crown pieces is ex-
tremely small. -
86. Your belief is, from the information you have at the Bank, that they are
very little used at the Bank, and are very little applied for 2–Very little
applied for.
87. Do you see any objection to making a gold piece of the value of 5 s. :
I believe, so far as the public are concerned in the more ordinary transactions
of payments, it would be a very great convenience; but there are practical
inconveniences which I will state to the Committee, having put them down
upon paper, in consequence of the statement made by the Secretary to the
Treasury, Mr. Wilson, that the reason against the issue of quarter-sovereigns
was that there was an American coin of nearly the same size and value; also,
that the coinage of them would be attended with four times the expense of
the coinage of a sovereign. In addition to those objections, there are others
which he did not state, or perhaps did not consider, of equal gravity.
These coins must circulate either for their actual value as quarter-sovereigns,
and therefore be of a specific weight and fineness, or as tokens, as the silver
coins circulate.
Supposing they were to circulate as the sovereigns do, they would be very
expensive coins, not only in the fabrication, but to the public in their circula-
tion, inasmuch as they would require, from the beginning to the end, exactly
the same treatment, and would go through the same routine as the sovereign,
although only a quarter of its value.
A sovereign, at the present time, passes out of circulation when it has lost
one and one-half per cent. of its value, or about three-quarters of a grain in
weight.
It may be said, why not allow a sovereign to pass current at a much lower
rate Why not allow a diminution of 3 d. or 4.d. within its circulating
limits P
The answer is, that in this case a fraudulent diminution of the coin would
be profitable; at present it is not. A person, skilful enough to reduce the
weight of 12 new sovereigns to a point just within their current weight, without
defacing them, by which he would gain about 1 s., would be able to earn, in
the same time, almost double the sum, and this without the 12 sovereigns, or
the delicate weighing implements and other tools required in the fraud.
The sovereign is the basis of our money, and therefore the necessity of
keeping it up to its weight. This is a great practical difficulty, even with the
sovereign, and is greater with the half-sovereign, and the cause of much trouble
and loss to the actual traders. At present the coinage is in a very good state,
and sovereigns are seldom weighed by shopkeepers; the risk of loss is so small
that they prefer it to that of losing a customer.
This good state of the gold coinage, as to weight, is to be ascribed to the
weeding it is constantly undergoing in its passage through the Bank of England.
Each piece is there weighed singly, and the light coins are cut, and returned to
the party tendering them, who has to bear whatever they have lost by abrasion
during their existence as coins.
The loss of the whole of the gold coinage of this country is about 6,000 l.
per annum.
The proportion of light coins in the present gold circulation is about three-
and-a-half per cent.
In light gold, the loss by abrasion is, for sovereigns, about one-and-a-quarter
per cent, and for half-sovereigns, about two per cent.
If quarter-sovereigns were coined, the loss to the ultimate holder would be
near four per cent. ; or else they would not remain so long in circulation. In
o.66. B each
1 O MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
T. Hankey, Jun.,
Esq.
3 May 1853.
each coin there would only be #3, of a grain for wear, and that allowance copild
not safely be increased.
It is true sovereigns do, especially in country places, circulate for a long time
after they have fallen below the current weight; but it would not be proper to
make them a legal tender in their reduced condition, for the reasons before
mentioned.
The quarter-sovereign, therefore, would not only cost more than four times
as much as a sovereign in its fabrication; but the expense also of its circulation,
and its withdrawal from circulation, and ultimate loss to some part of the public,
which loss is not borne evenly, would be quadrupled.
With regard to its circulating as a token, there is very little to be said. In
a token, the cheaper the material the better, all other points remaining the
same. The sixpence and all the other silver coins, how thin soever they may
have worn, if they carry the undeniable marks of authenticity upon them, are
accepted for their original legal value, unless they have been wilfully defaced.
It would not pay to scrape down sixpences and shillings, but small gold
coins might be “sweated,” as it is technically called, and two or three grains
might be got from each by that process without injuring their circulating
value; and that loss would fall upon the Government.
88. Chairman.] Do you happen to know whether any objections exist in the
United States to the golden dollar, either as regards the expense of circulation,
or as regards the convenience to the public –I am not practically aware of
any inconvenience with regard to the expense; but I have heard objections
raised as to the smallness of the coin, and that persons find they are exposed
to loss on that account. I made some inquiries last year of Mr. Lawrence, the
American Minister, and requested him to ascertain how far that was the case ;
and I think he confirmed that opinion, that it was considered by many an in- .
convenient coin, on account of the size. The same objection would not exist
to the same degree to the 5s. as to the dollar, which is 4 s. I beg leave to say
that these objections I have made refer rather to the objection on account of
the expense; but practically, to the public, I think the coin itself would be a
convenience, and have always thought so.
89. Mr. J. B. Smith..] The silver coins being tokens, the loss by abrasion is
borne by the Government, is it not ?—Yes. -
90. Suppose you make all the smaller denominations of gold coin merely
tokens, would the Government be liable to the loss, or would the public 2–The
Government, in that case, would be liable to the loss. If it were not neces-
sary for the protection of the taker that they should be of a certain weight,
that result would follow, as is practically the case with all our token coinages;
nobody thinks of weighing shillings or half-crowns.
91. Do you see any inconvenience in having our gold coins under the value of a
sovereign similar to our silver coins, merely passing as tokens?—I have always
thought it was a great hardship upon the public that the last holder of a gold
coin is subject to all the loss arising from the wear and tear of the coin while
passing through various hands. In France, the Government bear the loss of
the abrasion of the coin; and I have frequently discussed that subject with
gentlemen connected with the Mint in Paris, and they have always considered
it was only just to the public that the Government should bear the loss arising
from reasonable wear and tear. The objection raised by our Government has
always been that it would subject them to extensive frauds; but the reply given
to me at the Mint in Paris was, that it was the business of the Government to
prevent fraud.
92. Sir W. Clay.] Do the French Government charge a seigneurage on the
coin 4–It is the case, that a small charge is made for seigneurage.
03. If it were proposed to the Government here to bear the loss consequent
upon abrasion, you would consider it only reasonable that there should be a
seigneurage charged —The question of seigneurage is a very extensive ques-
tion, and i should, hardly like to enter into it.
94. Mir. J. Ball.] Do you not think the adoption of the suggestion would
lead to extensive frauds by what is called the artificial sweating of the coin -
I do not think it would to any material degree.
95. Do you think the ordinary law sufficient to prevent the fraudulent abra-
sion of coin ; is it not very difficult of detection — I think it would be more
just than the present mode of saddling the whole expense upon the accidental
last
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAN, COINAGE. 1. 1
last holder; for practically the public are unable to test the actual weight of a
sovereign. Though it is quite fair to saddle them with the expense of taking a
forged coin, I think it is not fair to saddle the last holder with the whole
expense of the wear and tear which may have been spread over some 20, or 25,
or 30 years, without his having any practical mode of being able to detect the
error. No one in the ordinary transactions of life can practically weigh a
Sovereign.
96. Is it not the case in the south of Europe, that the Governments have
found it practically impossible to carry out the system you suggest, and that
in some cases the Government departments have found it necessary not to re-
ceive coins that appear to have been artificially reduced, and that hence arise
continual contests as to whether such and such a coin has or has not been
improperly dealt with ?—I have never had any experience of that kind myself,
nor was I aware that such a practical difficulty existed.
97. Are you aware that in Spain, it has been found necessary to put special
marks upon the gold coins, in order to determine for what value they should
pass P-I was not aware of that fact.
98. Would not the abrasion in the small gold coin, for instance, the half-
sovereign, be greatly reduced by not milling the edge –I have thought that
the present system of milling the edge is an aggravation of the evil of abra-
sion to a great extent, and is highly objectionable. Every coin now has a file
at work, rubbing off the edges of the coin next to it, when thrown in any way
together.
99. Mr. Cardwell.] Have you any means, from your position at the Bank, or
otherwise, of judging how far a strong prejudice may be excited, in any class of
the community, by a change in the denominations of the lower copper coins;
for instance, suppose, instead of a farthing, a new coin, were issued to circulate
for four per cent. less than a farthing in value (the foundation of this decimal
system); have you any means of knowing whether that is likely to create great
sensation among the people who circulate pence and farthings —That is a
class of persons with whom I am so perfectly unacquainted as to their dealings,
that I am not able to give any opinion. So far as the question relates to the
Bank of England, I may observe, that all our subdivisions below the penny are
now kept, in our accounts, in decimals.
100. It may be that, with your extensive knowledge of larger pecuniary
transactions in the city of London, there might nevertheless be such a danger,
to a great extent, without your being aware of it 2–That it would raise a
strong prejudice I have not the smallest doubt, and particularly amongst the
dealers in transactions requiring the use of copper coin.
ol. Could you suggest to the Committee any mode by which, if the substi-
tution of a decimal coinage were contemplated by the Government, it would be
possible beforehand to disabuse the community of the tendency to such a preju-
dice 7–I think if the Government so kept their accounts, the Custom House
accounts, for instance, that the public night become accustomed to make their
calculations in decimal coinage, it would very much disabuse the public mind of
any idea of an injury being permanently sustained, although undoubtedly some
risk of injury to the public must exist during the transition state.
102. Suppose you were to issue first a coin which was valued at four per cent.
less than the farthing, and then afterwards a coin valued at four per cent, less
than the penny, do you not think there would be some danger of a considerable
prejudice being raised amongst the class whose principal circulation consists of
copper coin 2–1 do not think the system could be brought about safely to work
without great public inconvenience to the lower classes, unless it were brought
about as a whole, and the former coins taken out of circulation. So long as
they co-existed, think the public would not even commence to learn their new
system of arithmetic, and that would of course create considerable public
11] COI) V el]] (2}] C62.
103. Do you not apprehend that the calling in all the copper coin in circu-
lation within a limited time, for the purpose of issuing in lieu of it other copper
coin of a different and lower denomination, would be an operation attended
with considerable difficulty —No, I do not think it would. I think the trans-
actions and dealings would soon adjust themselves.
104. I refer entirely to the question of popular prejudice in the less educated
classes, whose calculations are principally in copper coin 2–I think the best
T. Hankey, Jum,
Esq.
3 May 1853.
0.66. B 2 IIle:Øll} 3
I 2 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
T. Hankey, Jun.
Esq. 9
3 May 1853.
means of accomplishing it would be to do it at once, by the Government taking
upon themselves the responsibility of calling in the whole of one issue, and
issuing the new coin; and the circumstances of novelty would, I think, tend
in a certain degree to reconcile persons to the little inconveniences felt during
the state of transition, until they understood the new system, and adjusted
their accounts accordingly.
1 off. Mr. Brown.] Would not sellers and purchasers very soon understand
the relative value of the farthing and the milf-I have no doubt they would.
1 off. Would it not be a convenience to have a coin of a little less value or
greater subdivision ?—I think it would.
107. Wiscount Goderich.] Would not the risk of prejudice be rather dimi-
mished by issuing a piece rather more than a penny ?—I think, as I said before,
the sooner the power was taken out of the hands of the public of using both
monies, or making any reference to the old penny, the sooner they would
become accustomed to the new coinage.
108. Mr. J. B. Smith..] You are aware that there are many Acts of Parlia-
ment in existence, fixing the penny as the rate of payment for postage-stamps,
and toll bars and so on ; how would you meet that 2—Undoubtedly all those
rates which are now fixed by Government could by the mere act of Govern-
ment be altered, such as duties, for instance, or the penny postage, all which I
consider under the power of Government to alter one way or the other. But
in cases where private interests were concerned, such as toll bars, it would
probably require adjustment. I think the whole system would probably require
looking into by a Royal Commission, or in some other way, so as to consider
the best mode to be adopted for obviating the inconveniences which might arise
in transactions where I can hardly conceive that we should be entirely without
practical means of overcoming those difficulties. As to large transactions, the
Government no doubt have the power of adjusting and altering the scale.
109. These are exactly the cases which will occur to the lower classes of
people who deal in copper coins; and would it not increase the prejudice of
those parties against the alteration when they found there was no copper coin
to meet those usual charges of a penny which they have been accustomed to ?
—That militates against any change whatever; if you will not allow changes
to be made to assist the altered state of circumstances, no possible change can
be made in the value of a penny. w
1 1 0. Supposing the present pound to be divided into 2,000 parts, then eight
parts would be nearly equal to a penny, would it not ?—That again refers to
the question whether you allow the prejudice to be kept up of carrying on
transactions in pence and multiples and subdivisions. So long as you allow
that it will prevent any adjustment of prices to the new coinage.
1 : 1. Chairman.] With regard to private dealings amongst the lower classes,
Supposing the decimal system adopted, would not the purchasers get the advan-
tage generally; would they not be able to purchase as much for four-mil as
for a penny ?—I canot conceive any system existing in which purchasers can
have the advantage over sellers for any length of time, except during the
system of transition ; the ordinary competition must, I think, at once put an
end to that.
112. I allude to the state of transition ?—I think that inconveniences might
arise ; and, therefore, I say that the sooner such a change is made the better.
It ought to be done as speedily as possible, to prevent frauds, which, I think,
might probably fall on the unwary and on the poorer classes.
l 13. Mr. Brown.] Would the poor man get as much for his mil as he does
for his farthing?--I cannot say.
I 14. Mr. Cardwell.] Is the tendency for the purchaser to take an undue
advantage of the seller, or is it not rather for the seller to take an undue advan-
tage over the purchaser 2—I do not know how to answer that question, except
by stating my impression that whichever party is the more intelligent of the
two is likely to have the advantage of the less educated and less intelligent.
1 15. Chairman.] Under the decimal monetary system, how would you pro-
pose to keep all accounts relating to money 2—I should propose to keep all
accounts in the pound sterling, in the florin, and in the decimal part of a florin.
When I use the word decimal, I consider it equally applicable whether it is
called a mil or a cent.
1 16. Sir
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL CO, IN AGE. 13
116. Sir JV. Clay.] Pounds, florins, and cents, you mean?—Pounds, florins,
and cents, or pounds, florins, and mils. At some future time it may be possible
to make the florin the unit, as suggested by Mr. Smith; but I do not think at
the present time it would be possible to make any change in keeping accounts
which would do away with or affect the pound sterling.
1 17. Chairman.] You would not have any money of account between the
the florin and mil?—I think not.
1 18. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Instead of putting down I l. 10s., for instance, you
would write it £. I'500 2–1.5 florin it would be. I think that leaving out the
florin altogether, and making it only pound sterling and decimal, would be
a change which the English public would hardly grow accustomed to in a suffi-
ciently short time for the easy adjustment of accounts; whereas it is but a
slight inconvenience using the pound, the florin, and its decimal.
; 19. You do not mean you would have three columns —I would have three
columns as now. Every book would be ruled exactly as it is now ; I l. 15 s. 0d.
would then be l l 7 fl. 50 m., the 7 florins being in the inside column, and 50
mils in the third.
120. What necessity is there for dividing it into three columns; would it
not be 1:750 – I should like that system better if I were not afraid of the pre-
judice that might exist in doing away with the intermediate coin between the
pound sterling and its subdivision. I should not object to it for any other
T628,SOIl,
121. In keeping your own private accounts, you would prefer that plan —-
I should prefer making the entry I Z50.
1 22. For 1 l. 15 s.3—For 1 l. I 5 S.
123. Mr. Brown.] If you kept your accounts all in mils, it would increase
the number of figures; it would require more figures to express a sum wholly
in mils than it would to express pounds 7–In some cases it would.
124. And probably, in your opinion, it would be a great advantage to the
public to depart from their mode of keeping accounts as little as possible, by still
keeping them in three columns?—I think so; but you must be aware that there
are a great many accounts kept, in consequence of the necessity of subdivi-
sion, in another column, in addition to the pounds, shillings, and pence ; for
instance, every account in the National Debt, at the Bank of England, is kept
in pounds, shillings, pence, and decimals, in calculating the interest; otherwise
the difference of the aggregate variation between the pence would be so great
that it would be a vast amount either of loss or gain to the Government, or of
loss or gain to the Bank of England.
125. Mr. J. B. Smith..] After all, you must have something over or something
under 2—If I remember rightly, the nicety of calculation is so great, that the
difference is not above 500 l. in the year, and that would be materially reduced,
I have no doubt, if the system of decimals were adopted generally.
126. Mr. Brown.] You are probably aware that almost all large contractors
find it necessary to keep their accounts in decimal 2–I believe that is the case;
I have understood so ; I am not aware of it practically. I believe it applies to
builders, and other such businesses.
127. You prefer the denomination of florins and mils to any other deno-
mination, not only as regards their use in accounts, but also for the names —
My only reason for adopting the florin as an intermediate coin for accounts,
would be rather to suit prejudice, than for any practical object gained by it.
I think accounts, practically, ought to be kept in pounds, and the decimals of
pounds. I see no object but that I alluded to before.
128. Chairman.] There would be less difficulty in the transition state 2–
I thought there would be, but I am not sure on that point.
29. Mr. Brown.] It would prevent errors to have the accounts kept in
three columns, instead of the one line 2 –Yes.
130. I do not know whether you are aware, that when the coinage was
changed in America from pounds shillings, and pence, the dollar was 4 s. 8d.
in one State, 6 s. in another, 7 s. 6d. in another, and 8 s. in another ; and that
a law was passed in 1792 to make them uniform. I see a remark in Jefferson,
that the only thing wanted was a sufficient number of the new coins, so great
was the satisfaction. Probably you are aware how easily the change was
effected ?—I have always understood it was brought about with great facility.
131. Mr. J. B. Smith..] You think that the adoption of a decimal system of
T. Hankey, Jun.,
Esq.
3 May 1853.
o,66. B 3 weights
14 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
T. Hankey, Jun.,
Esq.
3. May 1853.
..James Laurie, Esq.
3 May 1853.
weights and measures would be a great advantage to this country. Do you
think it would be desirable, if it were possible, to get an assimilation of weights
and measures throughout the principal nations of the world —I have not the
least doubt on that point, that it would be very desirable; and the very adoption
of a decimal system appears to me to render the turning of one money from
one country into another more easy.
132. You consider it desirable that there should be an assimilation of weights
and measures —I have no doubt that if there were an assimilation of weights
and measures and money, it would be a great advantage to the world at
large.
133. Sir W. Clay.] You have expressed a very decided opinion, Mr. Hankey,
as to the importance of retaining as our unit of calculation the Sovereign f—
Yes; it appears to me to be a very desirable thing.
134. Not that you think it the best that can be adopted, but the most
adapted to this country –I think it would facilitate the adoption of the
new system rather than by attempting such a very extensive change as altering
the pound sterling, which would lead to very great difficulty.
135. One reason being, that it is the standard by law; and secondly, that
the public are accustomed to estimate all large sums in that particular deno-
mination of coin 3-Yes, it is the basis of calculation, and has been the
measure of value of land and other property, personal property and real
property throughout the kingdom for such a number of years, that it would be
unwise to attempt to disturb it.
136. Chairman.] You think it would be unwise to introduce such an element
of difficulty —Yes.
Jovis, 5° die Maii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT.
Mr, Tufnell. Mr. John Benjamin Smith.
Mr. William Brown. Sir William Clay.
Mr. John Ball. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. Hamilton. Viscount Goderich.
Marquis of Chandos.
THE RIGHT Hon. H. TUFNELL, IN THE CHAIR.
James Laurie, Esq., called in ; and Examined.
37. Chairman.] I BELIEVE you are engaged in the wine trade 7–I am.
38. Have you turned your attention to the present monetary system of this
country P-I have.
139. Will you state to the Committee whether you consider it is an inconve-
nient system, and if so, what are the inconveniences attached to it?—The
system of dividing the pound into 20, 12, and 4, being unequal to each other,
renders money matters exceedingly complicated; and when applied to Custom
duties, is still more aggravating, and makes it difficult to ascertain the value.
of the duties in the current weights of the country; the pound avoirdupois,
for example.
140. Will you explain that still further, in detail 7–Partly upon Mr. Brown's
suggestion, and partly upon my own, I framed a table of those articles the
Custom duties of which are charged on the weight, and applied the decimal
pound of 1,000 farthings in estimating the duties all by the pound avoir-
dupois; some of them are charged by the hundredweight, others by the pound;
and in both cases they have five per cent. added, which creates a great deal of
confusion. This table is printed in the Customs Report of last Session,
Part II.
141. That refers rather to the weights than the coinage —To the coinage
too. It is explained in this way: few of the duties will reduce into farthings and
aliquo:
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAG E. 15
aliquot parts; it leaves irregular fractions; for instance, the article arrowroot
is charged from foreign places 2s. 6d. per hundredweight; but if it were charged
at 2s. 4d., it would be exactly a farthing per pound; as it is, it is a farthing of
the present money and 7-100th parts. Butter, again, from foreign places, is
charged 10s. per hundredweight; but if that were reduced to 9s. 4d., it would
be exactly 1 d., the 10 s. giving four farthings and 29-100th parts per lb.
142. That difficulty might be got over by altering the duties, and not altering
the coinage 2–Of course it could ; but still the duties could not be estimated
then without considerable difficulty, which difficulty would be greatly or alto-
gether obviated by decimal money.
143. Will you state whether you consider that there are any inconveniences
in the ordinary transactions of the country in the way of business, without
reference to the Customs, arising from the present currency 2—The inconve-
niences are manifold, since the unequal divisions of the money render all pur-
chases much more complicated than they would be if decimal money existed.
3.44. Does it give rise to a great increase of clerical labour?—It does.
145. Is it also the cause of many errors in the keeping of accounts 7–It is
impossible to keep many accounts without the greatest possible labour. Many
merchants tell me that they never look into the details of duties and other
matters, because they involve time and head work, and that they leave it to their
clerks.
146. Is it not an advantage that in the present system the shilling is divisible
into 12 parts, and that the 12 is divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6; is not 12 divisible
by more figures than any other number would be 2–I dare say it is, but it is
not a natural system ; the true system of numbers consists in the decimal rela-
tion; for instance, if an article costs four farthings, 10 times that will make 40
farthings or 9 d., 100 times 400 or 8 s. ; but you cannot do that with monies
that are not in the decimal relation.
147. Do you consider that there is any disadvantage in regard to foreign
exchanges 2–Immense.
148. State what those are 2–In a list which I have published in my “ Uni-
versal Exchange Tables,” there are 30 countries with which we transact busi-
ness; 20 of these have the exchange stated in foreign money; for instance,
France gives us 25 francs and 22} centimes, more or less, for our pound sterling.
This exchange is equivalent to 39 ºths mils per franc. If we had a decimal
money, we could probably purchase the franc at 39 mils, and have in all cases
the turn of exchange in our favour.
149. You would be able to approximate the relative value of the coins 2–
Yes, and we should be able to see what we pay for foreign money, instead of
which we have to investigate it further, unless we have an exchange book in
which the money is decimally stated of the two countries negotiating.
150. Can you give us an instance of exchange with any other country —
Holland gives us 12 of their florins, more or less, for our pound sterling. At
that exchange the yalue of their florin is 083 l., being mils=Is. 8d. ; a
decimal money would give us also a greater subdivision than the pence give,
even with the penny divided into 16ths, and thus we could have a greater
variety of exchanges.
151. Mr. Ball.] You stated that the exchange in Holland would be 12
florins to the pound ; is not that 1s. 8d. —Yes.
152. I thought you said 83 florins 2—Fighty-three decimal farthings or mils.
153. I believe you could not explain in decimal money accurately the Dutch
florin at the exchange of 12 to the pound, and that you can do it in the exist-
ing English coinage — It could be done both ways; but in a lesser exchange
it could not be stated precisely in English money.
154. In case a decimal system of coinage were adopted in England, would
you consider it desirable that a coin should be in use which should be either a
third or sixth part of one of the ordinary silver decimal coins —I think in some
cases it would be convenient to have such a coin.
155. To make my question more clear, I will put it in this way; assuming
that the florin, representing the 10th part of a pound sterling, would be the
highest silver coin in small transactions, where it was desirable to divide any
Sum amongst three persons, the present fourpenny piece would serve to carry
out that division, would it not ?—It would.
James Laurie, Esq.
5 May 1853.
0.66. B 4 156. Whereas
16 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
James Laurie, Esq.
5 May 1853.
156. Whereas if you had no such coins, you never could accurately divide
Small sums amongst three persons 3–No ; there would be a fraction left. I do
not however, think it is the custom of any country to have a coin of a third of
their money integer, or unit mils.
157. Chairman.] If the present monetary system were to be changed, what
would you recommend for adoption ? — I should recommend that the pound be
divided into 1,000 parts or mils, if you chose to alter the name. I think the
word mil is the best, and that a name which describes its numeral value is the
most useful. There would then be the decimal pound, 1,000 mils.
158. Would you have no florin?—Yes, and the florin should be marked
instead of 1-10th of a pound, 100 farthings or mils, and all the coins should
have in numbers their relation to the pound sterling. I find that is the case
in the coin of the United States of America.
159. Will you state the advantages which you consider the decimal system
would confer on the general business of the country —It would immensely
facilitate business transactions, and lead to a more accurate and clear mode
of stating accounts than exists at present.
160. Supposing the decimal system adopted, what coins would you recom-
mend to be issued 7—I should recommend the pound sterling and the half
sovereign in gold.
161. Would you recommend any smaller gold coin than the half sovereign :
—No, I should not. Then I should recommend in silver a four shilling piece
in lieu of the crown, as five to the pound would be very convenient, and that
coin would suit many purposes of exchange. Where dollars are abundant, and
four shilling pieces wanted, they might be found exceedingly useful, and pass
where Spanish dollars now do.
162. Do you not think a five shilling gold piece more convenient than a four
shilling silver coin -—No, I think a four shilling silver piece is one of the best
coins we could possibly have.
163. Have not crown pieces been considered very inconvenient —Yes, the
crown piece is too large ; that is one objection to its getting into general use.
164. What coin would you have after the four shilling piece –The florin of
two shillings, a hundred mils, one of 50, one of 25, and also one of 10, would
be very convenient too. e
165. You would have five silver coins, a two florin, a one florin, a half florin,
a quarter florin, and a one-fifth of a florin?—Yes; the 20 mil piece would be
the decimal of the double florim or dollar, as the 10 would be of the single florin.
166. What copper coins do you propose ?–I think it would be convenient
to keep up the present penny, if four farthings are to serve for postage and
other such matters; but otherwise, I think this coin is rather too bulky, and
a three farthing coin would be better.
167. Did I understand you to say that you would keep the present penny
in circulation ?—Yes; but if the postage were altered to five mils, I think there
ought to be a coin to suit that, and if the postage still remain at four mils,
it would be advisable to keep the present penny.
168. The present penny would not represent five decimal farthings —No.
169. Viscount Goderich..] If you retain the present penny, you keep up all
the inconvenience —No, instead of pounds, shillings, and pence, it would be
filling up the last column £. 004, or whatever it might be.
170. Mr. W. Brown.] You are aware that one of the great difficulties is with
respect to penny tolls and penny transactions of various kinds ; would you
think it desirable to have a new coin of 4 ºth mils, six of them to represent
6 d., dropping the name penny altogether?—No, I should rather raise the
toll.
171, Suppose a party not to consent to be paid less, and the public not
to consent to pay more?—I thought an Act of Parliament could do anything ;
the difference is a mere trifle between four farthings and four mils.
172. Chairman.] Have you any thing to add with regard to the copper coin-
age?—If the rate of postage were maintained at four farthings, or altered to
five mils, and that were adopted, it would be desirable to have a coin to represent
the postage.
173. What coin would you recommend for the general purposes of the
country – I think a three farthing and one farthing coin would be the best. A
174. Are:
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 17
174. Are these the only two you would propose ?--I think a half farthing is James Laurie, Esq.
also wanted, especially as prices would be subdivided more, and it is in use in ==º------
the colonies, where labour is cheaper than here. - 5 May 1853.
175. Mr. W. Brown.] Then your money of account would be pounds, florins,
and farthings 7–Precisely; some would prefer not to have the florin, &c., in a
distinct column. -
176. To save the stop or mark for the decimals 2—Just so.
177. With respect to the poorer classes, how do you think they would receive
the change in the copper coinage with different denominations, and somewhat
different value —So far as I can judge, I think it would be received with a
great deal of satisfaction. Every coin being marked with the number of
farthings, many persons who cannot write or read could count.
178. You think the quantity of food, or whatever it might be, sold for the
farthing or the mil, would be very soon understood by the poor 2–Yes.
179. You think they would adjust themselves to each other almost immedi-
ately 3–Precisely so.
180. Chairman.] Have not many articles sold to the poor reference to the
small coins, for instance, farthing candles?—Yes; many things are sold at a
farthing and two farthings; that would soon be adjusted.
181. Mr. Brown.] Are you of opinion that a farthing candle would soon be
sold for a mil 2–Competition would soon rectify prices; for practical purposes
the mil would answer better. A conscientious man might probably say, “I am
taking 1,000 of these mils instead of 960 farthings, and therefore I will make
the article of a better quality.”
182. Chairman.] Under the present system does a shopkeeper, for instance,
experience any difficulty in calculating interest upon any article he obtains 7–-
In many cases it is a work of the greatest possible difficulty; a grocer, for
example, finds it difficult to know what price to charge by retail and secure
a certain profit.
183. Explain that?–Sugar, coffee, and other articles, are sold in Mincing-
lane at so many shillings per cwt. In most cases the price yields an inter-
minable fraction per lb.; and also Customs' duties. A decimal system of
money would obviate this, besides affording a greater subdivision of prices.
The penny divided into 16ths gives 192 varieties to a shilling, and into 32nds,
384; but 50 mils, each divided into 4ths, gives 200 ; into 8ths, 400 ; and into
16ths, 800.
184. Give an illustration by referring to some particular article?–One
thousand pounds pimenta sold at 3}}d, or their equivalents, 133 f. per lb.,
produces the same result, and the working is as follows:–
Usual method by Pence.
1000 lbs. 1000
3 13–32 12)406 -8
12)3000 32) 13000 (406 -8 33 10;
gº 128
20)250 *E*sº
200
12 1 0 — 192
1 13 10}
* ºr 8
£. 14 3 10% the result.
Method by Farthings.
1000 lbs. at 13 farthings = 4)13000 1000 lbs. at à farthings = 8)5000
12)3250 4) 625
20270 10 12) 156 I
Ta 10 10 13 – #
13 -}
£. 14 3 104 the result.
o,66. C the
18 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
James Laurie, Esq.
- - - -ºm .
5 May 1853.
the decimal of a £. for 3; d. are £. 0141927, which being multiplied by any
required number of lbs., yards, &c., gives the result. The following examples
show decimal amounts per decimal £, and per £. sterling :
lbs. ...t. £. s. d. f.
1 - - •01 G-> -> — — 3 1
10 º - * 141 - º – 2 9 3
100 * - 1°419 º - 1 8 4 2
1000 º - 14*193 - º-> 1 4 3 1 0 1
If the pimenta was charged at 14 § decimal farthings per lb., the result would
be £. 14-125; if at 143 farthings, the result would be £. 14'250.
185. Mr. W. Brown.] Turn the pence into the nearest substitute and see
what the fraction would be of those mils, so as to make them exactly equal?—
103 d. = £. ‘042708. - •
186. Penny three farthings, or l ; d. is a very short fraction ?—Yes, but not
more accurate ; l ; d. = £. ‘00625; l ; d. = £. ‘00729.
187. If you take the four or five cent piece and the threepenny or fourpenny
piece, or whatever it may be, what is the number of cents that would come
nearest to that particular present coin, and what fraction would make it exactly
equal to the present coin'?—Threepence is 12 mils ; 3 } mils are precisely
three farthings; 4 d. = 16**, mils.
188. Supposing all the Customs' duties to be charged upon the pound, have
you any table to show at what given price those would come out, either with-
out a fraction, or with a fraction ?—In the table which I presented in the
Customs' Report, it is shown that the loss would in most cases be very small
if every article was charged by even farthings, or 1,000 parts of the pound
sterling. I ascertained what the duty was per cwt., added five per cent. when
required, and divided it by 112 to obtain the duty for 1 lb.
189. Taking the present duties —Yes.
190. And the amount collected?—No ; I had not that to guide me. Al-
monds, for instance, are charged 10s. per cwt. and five per cent. - 10 s. 6d. ;
which gives for a single pound 4 & decimal farthings; and assuming the duty
at five farthings, the Government would gain 31 farthings on every 100 lbs.,
or if charged at 9s. 4d. per cwt. = 4 farthings per pound, that would cause a
loss of 1 s. 2d. per cwt. to Government. - -
191. How would the fraction stand if you took 100 pounds net ; would it
tell against a number in the same proportion as if you took a single pound 3–
It would be the same thing as to fractions, which would occur by both modes;
but the difference would be less in proportion for 100 lbs.
192–4. Have you ascertained what the whole amount of duties is upon any
one of the articles charged at the Customs, in order to see what the gain or loss to
the Government would be, taking the nearest decimal which can represent the
present money —Mr. Hume I understand has moved for a table of the whole
tariff, with the import duties, and the amount they yielded last year. When I see
that, I can ascertain the loss or gain to the nearest fraction per pound avoir-
dupois; for instance, arrowroot is charged at 2s. 6 d. per cwt. ; if it were
reduced to 2 s. 4d. the loss would be very trifling. One of the new duties
makes this article 4 ; d. per cwt. ; if it were charged at a farthing per pound
it would occasion less trouble, in the collection. There is an entry of the
Customs, to which I may be allowed to refer. . There are many articles, the
duties of which are charged on the pound, which are set down in hundred-
weights, quarters, and pounds, such as tea, coffee, spice, and other things; the
tare is taken off in the same way, and the net weight is reduced into pounds,
in order to charge the duty. I beg to put in a Table, showing a duty paid on
entry of tea. -
[The same was delivered in, and is as follows :]
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE.
19
LONDON DOCKS.
Amy Robsart,
British Ship.
James Laurie, Esq.
5 May 1853.
HOME CONSUMPTION.
J. Niavon, from Canton.
James Laurie.

Cwt. ars. lbs. Tlbs.
Ösº º º
S 4 0 1 19 47
, 5 0 1 19 47
6 0 1 18 46
7 0 1 19 47
8 0 1 20 48
9 0 1 20 48
4,110 0 1 19 47
3 1 13 377
1 0 16 Tare, &c. 128
2 0 25 6
* 249
April 23d, 1849.
[N.B.—The above is copy of an entry
which passed through the Custom House,
London, and the improvement suggested
as to stating the weights, is given in red
ink.]
Eight half-chests, containing two
hundred and forty-nine pounds
Black Tea. Warehoused by J. Lau-
rie, March 10th, 1848.
£. s. d.
249 lbs. at 2/1 per lb. – 25 18 9
5 per cent. - 1 5 11
42. 27 4 8
[The duty of 2/1 and 5 per cent.
per lb. is + 2/24, the decimals for
which are—
£.
• 109375
249
98.4375
437.500
2187.50
27-234375
27-234 per £, of 1000 farthings.
36. 27. 4. 84 of 960 ditto.]
Memorandum.—The above Words and Figures printed between brackets [ ] were writ-
ten with Red Ink in the original.
o.66.
I put
C 2
20
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
I put in also a Table, showing my proposal for a Decimal Currency for Great Britain
and Colonies:
Pou ND STERLING. DEcIMAL Poux D. Decimals of the Pound of 1,000 Farthings
reduced into Shillings, Pence, and Far-
960 Farthings. 1,000 Farthings. things 4 g. Sterling of 960 Farthings.
Farthings. Penny. Pence. Farthings. Penny. Pence
4 - I 240 dº ſº. 5 – 1 200 d? £. • *
- f. D.F. 100 | £. D. F. 100
Pence. Shilling. Shillings. Pence. Shilling. Shillings. •00 l — | – | 96 •026 6 0 96
12 - I 20 49 £. I0 - I 20 dj' f. •002 – | 1 | 92 •027 6 1 || 92
•003 – || 2 || 88 •028 6 2 88
Shillings. Florin. Florins. Shillings, Florin. Florins. •003} |-|3| – || 028; 6 3 | -
2 - I 10 dj' f. 2 - I 10 dº ſº. *004 — | 3 | 84 •029 6 3 | 84
- • 005 1 || 0 || 80 • 030 7 0 80
Shillings. Crown. Crowns. Shillings. Dollar. Dollars. :006 || 1 || 1 || 76 || 031 7 1 || 76
5 – 1 4 d5 f. * “” ..." | 2003 ||3|_| | * | | | | | .
sº ==- •007. | 1 || 2 | 72 | *032 7 || 2 || 72
* - •008 1 || 3 | 68 •033 7 3 | 68
te º e •009 2 || 0 || 64 *034 S. 0 64
In Account – £. s. p. r £ In Account: f. •009; 2 || 1 || – || 0343 || 8 || 1 || –
2 GoLD Corns: 3 GoLD Coins : •010 || 2 || 1 || 60 •035 8 || 1 || 60
Sovereign - || 1 | – | – | – | 1°000 Double Sovereign 2°000 '911 2 2 56 •036 8 2 || 56
Half do. - - | – | 10 || – | – | "500 Sovereign - - || 1 000 •0 R2 2 || 3 || 52 •037 8 3 || 52
Half do. tº º sº- •500 •012; 3 || 0 º •037; 9 O e-
- •013 3 || 0 || 48 •038 9 0 || 48
7 SILVER Col Ns: 7 SILVER Cor Ns: •014 || 3 || 1 || 44 '039 9 1 || 44
•015 3 || 2 | 40 •040 9 2 | 40
Crown - - | – || 5 || – | – | "250 Dollar or • 200 •015; 3 || 3 | – || 0405 9 || 3 || –
Half do. - - || – || 2 || 6 || – | * 125 Double Florin ..) * •016 3 || 3 || 36 •04 I 9 3 || 36
Florin - - || – || 2 | – | – | * 100 Florin - - | * 100 •017 | 4 || 0 || 32 || 042 | 10 || 0 || 32
Shilling º-> -> º I º I amme •050 Shilling º cº- •050 • 0.18 4 l 28 •043 10 l 28
Sixpence - | – | – || 6 || – | *025 Half shilling tº •025 -0183 || 4 || 2 | – || 043% 10 || 2 || –
Fourpence - | – | – || 4 || – || “.0167 Fourpence - º •020 •019 || 4 || 2 || 24 "044 10 || 2 || 24
Threepence - |-| – || 3 |-| 0125 Twopence - wº • 0 1 0 *020 || 4 || 3 || 20 | *045 10 || 3 || 20
One penny - tº º •005 •021 || 5 || 0 | 16 || 046 || 1 1 || 0 | 16
•0214 || 5 || 1 || – || 046; 11 || 1 || –
4 CoPPER COLNS : 3 CoPPER CoINs: •022 || 5 || 1 | 12 | * 0.47 11 1 | 12
Penny - - || – | – || 1 || – || 00416 || Halfpenny - - || “.0025 •023 || 5 || 2 || 08 '048 11 || 2 || 08
Half do. • | – | – | – || 2 | *00208 One farthing gºe •001 '024 5 || 3 || 04 || “.049 I 1 3 || 04
#. . . [I] - |I|| goio. Hirºi. . . .0005 || * |0|0| – | * | * * | -
Half Farthing - |-| – |-| 3 || 00052
In the decimal £. three new coins are suggested, a double sovereign
or £. ; a double florin, or dollar, to be in sympathy with the eagle and
dollar of the U. S. of America, and the almost universal Spanish dollar.
These coins would be as welcome in every foreign country as the
sovereign, and tend to facilitate commerce. The decimal of the £.
has been appropriately named “Florin " by H. R. H. Prince Albert,
and is in harmony with the Dutch and German coins of that name.
A silver penny would be less cumbersome than the copper one, and
would resemble the beautiful 5 cent silver pieces of Holland, value
one penny. -
Each decimal coin to have its name and proportionate value of the
£. stamped upon it.
The great, or inherent defect of the £. sterling is, that it contains 960 farthings instead of 1,000.
It is placed in the first division, its coins expressed in £. s. D. and F., and also in £. and decimals. The second
contains the proposed decimal £. with its coins; and the third, decimals of this £. reduced into S. D. F. and decimals
thus showing the precise value of the decimal coins in those of the £, sterling. All the coins of both pounds, from six:
pence upwards, are decimally expressed the same, and only those of less value are affected, whether the £. contains 960
or 1,000 farthings. Five decimal farthings are equal to 4+, farthings dº fº sterling, making a difference of 4 iſ cent
If the penny were assumed at five farthings, and other coins in proportion, the £. would then be decimally complete,
without altering the name of any coin, or other change, than the mode of expressing them in account, and this being b 2
decimals, is so simple and easily understood, that he who runs may count—his fingers being a text book—5 and 5 º
10, and 10 times 10–100, and so on.
- 195. Mr.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIM AL COINAGE. 21
195. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Supposing the unit were 10s., to be called a pound,
instead of 20s, as it is now, and the 10s. were divided into 1,000 parts, could
you frame a table of decimals of the pound similar to the table you have put
in, stating the value of the pound, shillings, and pence, in relation to the sup-
posed unit of a pound —Yes, I think I could.
196. Will you make out a table and present it to the Committee at a future
meeting 7 – I will.
197. Chairman.] Have you any general observation that you wish to offer to
the Committee upon the subject upon consideration ?—I will say a word or two
on the Customs' duties. If they were levied in decimal farthings to the pound
avoirdupois, the business of the Custom-house would be immensely simplified
and facilitated, and the time now occupied in passing one duty-paid entry,
would be sufficient to pass 10 by the new system.
198. Mr. W. Brown.] How many clerks might be dispensed with ?—It
would render some unnecessary; but I think these clerks Inight be engaged
in checking stocks in the docks, a duty that is not now performed. Another
advantage of the decimal system is, that the money would prove the weights
and the weights would prove the money. -
109. I wish it to appear distinctly whether a four cent piece, or a four mil
piece, and 1-24th, would not exactly represent the present penny ?—I will con-
sider that, and inform you at your next meeting.
Lieutenant-General Sir Charles Wm. Pasley, K. C. B., called in ; and Examined.
200. Chairman.] ARE you a Lieutenant-general in the Royal Engineers ?—
I am removed from the Royal Engineers, as a general officer unemployed, but
am usually spoken of as if I still belonged to the corps.
201. I believe you have turned your attention very much to the question of
weights measures, and the money of this country —I have.
202. You have published a work on that subject, I believe 7–I have, in 1834.
203. Will you state to the Committee whether, in your opinion, there is any
inconvenience in the present monetary system, and if so, what that inconve-
nience consists of 2–The great inconvenience is, that in accounts you have
to multiply. There are many complex accounts in which you have first to
reduce pounds into shillings, pence, and farthings, and afterwards to reduce
them back again by division into pounds, which is exceedingly inconvenient.
I believe the inconvenience is acknowledged by every person except those who
are in the habit of working out accounts daily by routine.
2O4. Does it not require a great deal of clerical labour, and does it not also
render errors very probable in large accounts –Yes.
205. Is there any peculiar advantage in the present monetary system —
None whatever, that I see. I consider that the pound sterling is the most
judicious unit that we can have for our monetary system, and that any alteration
of that, such as has been suggested, would create great confusion. I think it
would be equally disadvantageous to reduce the units to half sovereigns, as
proposed, or to the four shilling or five shilling pieces, like the American dollar,
and still more to the shilling, or anything equivalent to the French franc.
206. Can you state to the Committee, supposing you should consider it desi-
rable, what changes you would recommend ?–1 should advise that pounds
sterling should be divided into 1,000 equal parts, and that the mode of reckoning
accounts should be by the pound, and tenth of a pound, cents or hundredth parts,
and by thousandth parts, which I proposed to call tithings, they being the tenth
part of a cent.
207. What would be the value of the cent 2–It would be equal to 24, d.
of the present money: The florin has lately been established, and I should
propose that accounts be kept in pounds, florins, cents, and tenth parts of a
cent. I proposed to use the word tithing, because, as a farthing is the fourth
thing or fourth part of a penny, so the tithing would have reference to the cent.
208. You would have four columns of figures?—There need not be four columns
of figures if you kept the account in pounds, cents, and tithings; but I see a
difficulty in that for common tradesmen, because those who are not accustomed
to the decimal system, might add for instance 15 cents and 5 cents in the same
column together, and obtain 65 cents through mistake; but if you put pounds,
James Laurie, Esq.
5 May 1853.
Lieut.-General
Sir C. Iy. Pasley,
K. C. B.
o.66. C 3 florins,
22 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Lieut.-General
Sir C. W. Pasley,
K. C. B.
5 May 1853.
florins, cents, and tithings, it would create no confusion with persons who have
been unaccustomed to calculate decimally.
209. Would it not be more simple to have the pound, florin, and tithing
simply?—The tithing is the tenth part of the cent, and I think, as we keep
accounts by pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings, that accounts should in
future be kept by pounds, florins, cents, and tithings. I do not think the term
farthings is applicable. *
21 O. You would wish to assimilate it as nearly as possible, as I understand, to
the present mode of keeping accounts —That is for the convenience of persons
who are not mathematicians, and are not accustomed to work out accounts
mathematically.
21 1. Would it not be easier to keep accounts by the pounds, florins, and
tithings 2–I think that the cent is so well established a term as being the hun-
dredth part of anything, that it would be more convenient than the thousandth
part. I think it would be more convenient to say pounds, florins, cents, and
tithings, than pounds, florins, and tithings, because the same difficulties before
alluded to would exist with persons not accustomed to decimal arithmetic.
212. If you had pounds, florins, and tithings only, and in the third column
you placed the hundredths of a florin and the tenths of a florin, would not that
be more simple 7–It would be understood by persons accustomed to mathe-
matical calculations; but others might make mistakes in such a sum, if tithings
only were used as the hundredth part of a florin. I think that would cause
confusion in the minds of persons not accustomed to decimal arithmetic,
because they would be very apt to misplace the numbers of tithings if entered
in one column. f
213. Would they not be apt to misplace the numbers in your system 2–They
cannot misplace the numbers if the accounts are kept in pounds, florins, cents,
and tenths of a cent or tithings. Those who are accustomed to common arith-
metic could not possibly make a mistake in compound multiplication or com-
pound division by this mode. sº.
214. Mr. J. Ball.] The difficulty you apprehend, I think, is, that if you did
not include the four denominations, there would be more than one figure neces-
sary to indicate each particular sum ?–Yes.
215. You think it desirable that one figure only should stand as indicating
each particular description of coin ; for instance, you would write 5 cents and
5 mils, instead of writing 55 mils? —I think there might be great confusion in
multiplying and dividing amongst persons who were only accustomed to com-
mon arithmetic. If the term mil be adopted, then I should certainly put down
5 cents and 5 mils, instead of 55 mils. Education is now so much advanced,
and arithmetic is so well taught amongst the lower classes, that there might,
perhaps, be a simplification of it hereafter ; but I should fear that at present it
might confuse persons who are only accustomed to the present mode of keeping
aCCOuntS. -
216. Chairman.] Either way of keeping accounts would be easier than the
present, would it not ?—Much easier.
217. Whether you take the three denominations or the four, it would be
much more simple than the present way of keeping accounts —Much more
simple by four, but not otherwise ; I did not think so at first, because I had
only been accustomed to decimal arithmetic. Professor De Morgan, of London
University, who published in the British Almanac in the same way that I did,
has given examples of the advantage of decimals; but he being a mathematician,
it did not occur to him, nor did it occur to myself, that it was necessary to have
a denomination for the pound, the tenth part of a pound, the hundredth part of
a pound, and the thousandth part of a pound. I now think there ought to be
a distinct denomination for each ; otherwise it might create difficulty and cause
mistakes amongst persons accustomed only to keep accounts by the present
system.
218. Mr. J. B. Smith..] The way of keeping accounts at present is by three
columns; pounds, shillings, and pence —But there are farthings; so that
there are four denominations.
210. Mr. W. Brown.] To express I l. 19s. 11 #d. under the present system
requires seven figures; but if you express 1 pound, 9 florins, and 99 farthings,
it would only require four figures; so that in that single entry there would
be a saving of three out of seven; is that so —I should propose 1 pound,
- 9 florins,
SELECT COMMITTEE () N DECIMA L COIN AGE. 23
9 florins, 9 cents, and 9 farthings, (if you choose to call them farthings) as a
great improvement; you have the same number of figures, but there is no risk
of confusion to persons who have learnt simple arithmetic. If you write 99 and
9 both under one denomination, it would be necessary to place a 0 before the
second 9.
220. If the account were kept in four columns instead of three, it would
obviate any mistake from the number of figures?—It would ; I consider that a
great improvement, though I did not contemplate it when I published my
book.
221. Would it create any difficulty in the payment of the troops ?—I should
think not ; I do not see that it would make any difficulty.
222. The payment of the soldiers being generally l l d, or some such sum,
there would be a fraction ; how would you get over that difficulty –In paying
the troops there are fractions at present, and very inconvenient ones; the only
difficulty would be with the pence and farthings, and I should think that might
very easily be remedied.
223. To illustrate the subject we will take the penny postage. We could
not without a new coin represent the penny, and six of those coins would
represent the 25 mils of the value of 6d. Sixpence would be equal to 2
cents., 25 mils. In regard to paying the penny postage, which is equal to
4; tithings, you could not convert that into decimal money —
224. If you were to pay four mils at the present moment for a penny stamp,
it would be a loss of 4 per cent. to the Government, and if you pay five mils it
would be a gain of about 17 per cent. to the Government. I fear the same
difficulty might arise in the payment of the troops, unless we had a coin of four
mils and ºr of a mil, that exactly representing the present penny, and six of
them representing the present sixpence 2–
225. Mr. J. Ball.] Perhaps I may explain that question by putting another;
would not the difficulty suggested be met by the payment of a small decimal
coin in compensation for any loss that might arise in the payment of the
previous week?—I should think it might be reduced to mils.
226. Even supposing it were not possible to reduce the pay now allowed to
the troops, and that the Government thought proper to keep up the existing
pay, might they not make a small decimal payment one week to compensate for
any loss the men might have sustained in the previous week 2–4 should think
that might be done, and I will give an instance of it: It has been the order for
many years to pay the troops their pay daily, and the sum due to the soldier
beyond his rations, and other articles that are to be defrayed by him, is generally
reduced into small fractions, but when I had the command of the Royal Sappers
and Miners, whose pay is rather higher than that of the troops of the line, I
never paid them any fractional sums, such as , d. A man might have to
receive less one week, and more the next, but he was always paid so as to avoid
small fractions. I do not recollect how I avoided that difficulty exactly, because
I have been long out of the habit of paying soldiers.
227. Mr. W. Brown.] Supposing that the Government were willing to give
us a coin exactly representing the present penny, would not that obviate all
the difficulty with respect to bridge tolls and the penny postage, and also the
pay of soldiers; if you had to make a payment in two coins, that is one coin
and a fraction, might it not lead to much more difficulty and inconvenience
than if it were all in one coin 2---It did not occur to me whether it would be
worth while to have a separate coin on that account ; it does not strike me
that it would be necessary.
228. Unless you had a separate coin, would you not have to encounter con-
siderable difficulty under present Acts of Parliament by which a penny is paid
for a stamp, and as a toll, and where parties would either sustain a great
loss, amounting to four per cent., if they took the four mils, or gain 17 per
cent. if they took the five mils. I am afraid the public would not be content to
pay the higher sum in the one case, nor the toll-keeper content to receive the
lower sum in the other; and with the view of obviating that difficulty, would it
not be better to substitute a coin exactly representing the penny ?—I had not
considered that question, and it is difficult to give an answer all at once upon
a question of that kind, as to which one is not prepared; but I should think
Lieut.-General
Sir C. W. Pasley,
K. C. B.
5 May 1853.
o.66. . . C 4 it
24 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Lieut.-Géneral
Sir C. W. Pasley,
K. C. B.,
5 May 1853.
it might be desirable a prevent future Acts of Parliament being made in
reference to one penny, he new decimal coinage should be established.
229. Mr. Hamilton.] Would it not, on the other hand, introduce an incon-
venience the having a new and separate coin inconsistent with the general
arrangements of a decimal system —I cannot give an answer all at once to a
subject I have not considered. -
230. Chairman.] I understand you to say, that so far as the pay of the army
is concerned, with which you are practically acquainted, you do not see any
real difficulty to the introduction of the decimal system — I do not. There
are some accounts kept in which a farthing will occur, and when it comes to
that it is either omitted or turned into a halfpenny.
23 1. The same way of paying the troops could be followed if the decimal
system were adopted?—I do not at present see any difficulty, although I have
not considered it in detail.
232. If the decimal system were adopted, have you considered what coins
it would be proper to issue?—It struck me that the sovereign, the half
sovereign, and also the 5 s, piece in gold might be desirable. I did not pro-
pose the latter at the time I wrote, but I thought afterwards that it might
be desirable. , -
233. What silver coins would you propose 2–In the silver coins the highest
denomination would be 20 cents, a 4 s. coin, or 2 florins; then 10 cents, a
florin; then the 5 cents or 1 s. might be continued ; next the 23 cents or 6 d. ;
13 cent or 3 d. ; and 1 cent, equal to 2 d. ºths. I do not think that 5 s. silver
coins would be desirable; in fact, I doubt whether even a 4 s. silver coin would
be desirable; perhaps florins might be most convenient. Every person who
has anything to do with boatmen or cabmen knows perfectly well that they
never admit that they have change for a 5 s. piece or a half-crown. If you
saved anything in weight by carrying 5 s, pieces and 2 s. 6d. pieces, it would
be desirable to keep them in circulation; but as you save nothing in weight,
I rather think that the 1 florin would be a very good point to stop at, or at
all events the 2 florin piece. I would not go higher.
34. As you have recommended a gold coin of 5 s., it would be almost super-
fluous, would it not, to have a silver coin of 4 s. 3–I think it would. I would
leave out the silver coin of 4 s., because you save nothing in weight.
235. Will you state what copper coins you recommend to be issued 7–I
would recommend a 5 tithing or 5 mil piece (if they are to be called mils), a
2 tithing piece, and a 1 tithing piece.
236. Would it not be a less degree of change if you were to have the 4 tith-
ings instead of the 5 tithings 2—I do not know but it might, because, in order
to pay 10, you must have two 4 tithing pieces and one 2 tithing piece.
237. It would approximate nearer to the present penny ?—Yes; a penny is
very little more than 4 tithings.
238. Then you would recommend 1 tithing or 1 mil, 2 tithings and 4 tith-
ings 7–Yes.
239. Would you propose to have any coin' of mixed metal 2–No, I would
not have any. I think it is particularly objectionable. I see no necessity for
it at all. -
240. Have you considered what the effect of such a change might be with
regard to the purchases and the pecuniary transactions of the lower classes in
this country; whether it might not create a prejudice in their minds to have
a denomination of coins, to which they are so much accustomed, altered?—I
do not think it would. -
241. Mr. JP'. Brown.] Supposing the poor man could exchange his 6 d., for
which he now only receives 24 farthings, for 25 mils, do you think any serious
objection could be made to it?—I do not see that any objection could be made
to it.
242. Chairman.] Do you see any objection to adopting the word mil instead
of tithing ?—None whatever.
243. It is more familiar to the English ear, I believe 2–It is ; mil is under-
stood in America as the rººth part of a dollar. I do not think it signifies
whether we say mil or tithing.
244. Mr. JW. Brown.] Do you conceive that if we were to assimilate our
coin to that of France, or the United States, or any other country, we
- should
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 25
should derive any advantage 3—I think not ; I think it would create the greatest
confusion. . . . *
245. Do you see any certainty in its permanency, inasmuch as continental
powers and despotic governments debase their coin —I see every objection to
giving up the pound sterling, and no advantage in it: the French decimal
coinage is only adopted in a very small part of the Continent, in countries
immediately in contact with France, but in no other part of Europe.
246. Mr. J. Ball.] Have you considered the matter of what was an incon-
venience arising from the different system of coinages in different countries
which do not pass coinage reciprocally 3—I have not considered that ; I have
travelled very little of late.
247. Although you see strong objections to the adoption of any existing
system of coinage, do you not conceive it would be most advantageous to
commerce and to private individuals, if international arrangements could be
made, which would admit of the standard coinage of one country passing in
another ?—Certainly it would ; but I should prefer sticking to our own unit,
the pound sterling, and its decimal parts, and admitting of no other.
248. For that purpose, would it be necessary that the unit in one country
should be identical with the unit in the other ?—I do not see the necessity
of it. -
249. Supposing, for instance, that the French Government should adopt gold
as the standard of value, and should make a piece of 20 francs the unit, or
should retain the existing franc as the unit, in either case, if by an international
arrangement the two countries agreed that the gold coins coined at the Mint
should be respectively of the value of 20 and 25, then there would be no objec-
tion to the coin of each country being made a legal tender at those respective
rates – If two countries adopted the same standard of gold, or the same assay,
I should think that might be done, and that it would be desirable, because I
believe 25 francs are considered as near as possible a pound sterling now.
250. If the two countries should agree to fix upon a uniform standard of
fineness of gold, and to adopt gold as the standard of value, there would be no
practical difficulty, so long as they adhered to the convention on the subject, in
admitting the coins to pass reciprocally in the two countries 2–I see none ;
and it would be a great advantage to both countries, at least to travellers.
251. Mr. J.W. Brown.] Assuming that the value of the sovereign and the
weight and fineness are precisely the same in France as here, when an indivi-
dual in this country has a payment to make to another in France, would it not
be much more convenient to make it in the shape of a bill of exchange rather
than to remit gold, having reference to the freights charged to transmit
specie from one country to another?— I should think it would ; but at the same
time, if the same fineness could be adopted, it would be an advantage to travel-
lers on a small scale, who do not deal in millions or thousands of francs.
252. That is, it would be an advantage to travellers on a small scale, but
would not, you think, supply the great wants of the community ?—No, I do
not think it would.
2.53. Chairman.] Would the adoption of a decimal system of coinage in
this country be followed, probably, by the adoption of a decimal system of
weights and measures?—I think it ought to be followed by a decimal system
of weights and measures. -
254. In the new denomination of money would the decimal subdivision of
the pound sterling, as combined with the same in weights and measures, be
found very advantageous 2–Very advantageous indeed.
255. Can you give the Committee an example of that?—I have given a
number of examples in my book of the difficulties that are met with in the old
system. I have there pointed out also a system of weights and measures which
might be made general for all countries. But taking our weights as we have
them now, if the pound were the unit of weight, and if the 10 pound weight,
the 100 pound weight, and the 1,000 pound weight were adopted, instead of
stones, quarters, hundredweights, and tons, and all the multiplicity of local
Lieut.-General
Sir C. W. Pasley,
K. C. B.
5 May 1853,
o,66. D weights;
26 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Lieut.-General
Sir C. W. Pasley,
K. "Cs. B.
5 May 1853.
weights; that, combined with the decimal system of money, would facilitate
calculations extremely. It would render everything easy which is now very
complex. º
256. Mr. W. Brown.] You are probably aware that the Bank of England do
buy gold and silver now decimally —I believe it buys them by the ounce.
257. By the troy ounce 2–Yes; but either troy weight or avoirdupois
weight ought to be abolished. t
258. To which do you think we should resort —I think we ought only to
have one pound weight, the avoirdupois pound. .
259. Chairman.] Probably you will give, as a comparison of the two systems,
an instance of each from your own publication ?–As an example of the cal-
culation by the present system, I beg to offer in evidence an ironmonger's bill,
which I have given at page 148 of my book. I take first, by the present
English weights and money, 215 tons, 17 cwt., 3 qrs., and 9 lbs. of cast-iron
columns, &c., at 9 l. 11 s. 63 d. per ton, and I have worked it out by the rule
of three, thus:
Ton. Tons. cwts, qrs, lbs. £. s. d.
As 1 : 215 17 3 9 : : 9 11 6 +
20 20 20
20 4317 191
4 4 12
80 1727 1 2298
28 28 4
2240 lbs. 138177 9193 farthings.
483597 lbs.
91.93
14507.91
435.2373
483597
435.2373
224,0)444570722, 1 (1984690 farthings.
224
2205
2016
1897
1792
1050
896
1547
1344
2032
2016
1621
summº
4) 1984690 farthings.
12) 496172 #
2,0) 4134,7. 8 #
Answer - £. 2067. 7s. 8 # d.
I give an example, secondly, by the new system of weights and money pro-
posed :—
Four
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COIN AGE. 27
Four hundred and eighty-three thousand Five hundred and Ninety-seven pounds of cast- Lieut.-General
iron columns, &c., at four pounds, two florins, seven cents, and five tithings per thousand Sir C. W. Pasley,
weight. K. C. B.
lbs. lbs. £, fl.
C. t.
As 1000 : 483597 : : 4 2 7 5
42.75
sº--
5 May 1853.
-
24 17985
338.5179
967 194
1934388
1000) 2067377,175
2067377 or 2067 pounds, 3 florins, 7 cents, 7 tithings.
A person accustomed to decimals would not state this question by the rule of three, but
would multiply the number of pounds weight by the sum of money, and strike off the
last three figures instead of dividing by 1,000.
260. One system would be much more simple, and could be worked out in a
much shorter time than the other ?—No doubt of it.
261. Do you wish to make any general remarks on the subject of decimal
coinage 7–I do not think that there is anything particular, except the difficulty
suggested by one of the Committee with reference to the pay of soldiers, my
remarks upon which I should prefer giving on a subsequent day, after con-
sideration. \
Martis, 10° die Maii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT.
Mr. Tufnell. Mr. Cardwell.
Lord Stanley. Viscount Goderich.
Mr. John Ball. Mr. Hamilton.
Mr. William Brown. Sir William Clay.
Mr. John Benjamin Smith. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. Moody.
THE RIGHT Hon. H. TUFNELL, IN THE CHAIR.
Professor George Biddell Airy called in ; and Examined.
262. Chairman.] I BELIEVE you hold the appointment of Astronomer Royal? Professor
—I do. George B. Airy.
263. Were you formerly Chairman of the Commission appointed in 1838 to
consider the steps to be taken for restoration of the standards of weight and
measure ?—I was.
264. Which reported in 1841 —At the end of 1841.
265. I believe you are now Chairman of the Commission for superintending
the construction of standards of weight and measure ?—Yes, which Commission
has not yet made its Report.
266. In the Report of the Commissioners appointed to consider the restora-
tion of the standards of weight and measure in 1841, you made some allusion to
the change of the present system of coinage as well as to weights and measures 2
—We made allusion to that subject, because it appeared to be so very intimately
connected with a change in the weights and measures that we could scarcely
avoid it. -
267. Since that time, have you turned your attention more particularly to the
monetary system in this country —I have frequently thought of it since that
time.
10 May 1853.
o,66. D 2 - 268. Will
28 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Professor
George B. A try.
*-*-
no May 1853.
268. Will you state, in the first place, what you consider generally to be the
convenience of the new system of coinage –The conveniences of a system
of coins are to be judged of in two ways; one is with reference to the multipli-
cation or division of numbers corresponding to the multiplication or division of
the numbers in which articles are usually packed ; and the other is with
reference to book accounts of all kinds. As an instance of what I mean by the
multiplication or division of packages, I may state this: supposing that children's
socks cost 2d. per pair, and supposing they are always sold in dozens, then such
a scale as the present, connecting the penny with the shilling, is a convenient
one ; but supposing, at the same time, men's stockings are sold at 2s. per pair,
and also by dozens, then you come into a different scale, connecting the shilling
with the pound, and in that case the step from the shilling to the pound presents
no convenience at all.
269. If the value of an individual article were a number of whole pence less
than a shilling, and such goods as you say are sold by dozens, the scale of 12
pence to the shilling would be a convenient one 2–It would.
270. If any individual article be sold for a number of shillings less than a
pound, and if goods be sold by the score, it is also a convenient system 2–In
that case the scale of 20 shillings to the pound is convenient.
271. Is it also convenient when the price of any article is expressed partly
by shillings and partly by pence —The combination of two parts of the scale
offers no convenience with any multiple whatever.
272. In the majority of commercial transactions in general, are the goods
enumerated expressed by two denominations of coin 2–A very great majority
of transactions refer to two denominations of coin, shillings and pence, or pounds,
shillings, pence, and halfpence.
273. The existing scale, in your opinion, affords no convenience whatever to
such transactions —None whatever, I think.
274. Can you state any respect in which it is a convenient scale P--It is con-
venient in this respect, that each of its steps is divisible by two twice, and I
think that is the only convenience which it offers.
275. There is also the division by four —That is by two twice, but the
division by four occurs very rarely in comparison with that by two.
276. Or the division by three ?—The division by three is of no use whatever.
I beg particularly to state that, because it might seem at first that the multiple
I2 is a convenient one, because it involves the factor 3; but it derives no con-
venience whatever from that.
277. Does the present system entail great clerical labour, and does it render
accounts of any length liable to considerable errors —There is very great
liability to error, and it costs a great deal of labour. I might say, that the
labour is doubled in all cases; by which I mean, that in multiplying there are
two mental operations to be performed where one would suffice. For instance,
suppose I multiply 9 pence by 7: 7 times 9 makes 63, that is one opera-
tion in the mind; but then there is another operation, to convert that
63 into 5 s. 3 d. ; and although in that case the numbers are related in a
simple way, yet in many they are related in such a complicated way that they
present no similar features at all. For instance, if I had to multiply 7 pence
by 5, it would be 35 ; that is one operation; but then the mind has another
operation to perform, to convert the 35 into 2 s. 11 d, without any common
figure in the calculation.
278. Mr. J. Ball.] Does it not appear to you that the advantage to be derived
from the readier divisibility of the number is far more important than the power
of multiplying 2–-I think you will find that divisions are very seldom performed
upon one denomination of money. Supposing you have to divide 3 l. 15 s. 6 d.
by four : in the first place, although the 3 l. is divisible in itself by 4, you do not
treat it in that way, for you have to convert that 3 l. into 60 S., and add that to the
15 s., making 75; and then, again, you have to multiply the remainder from the
75, and convert that into pence, before you proceed to the next division.
279. Is not the objection to the existing scale still stronger with respect to
the difficulty of dividing than with respect to the difficulty of multiplying 2–
I think it is. *s
280. You stated you think the facility of dividing by three in the existing
scale of coinage was of no value whatever ?—I think so ; I never heard of any
thing being divided by three.
281. Though
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COIN AGE. 29
281. Though in ordinary dealings amongst shop-keepers that may be the
case, is it not common in private transactions that three persons may wish to
divide their expenses, or that it becomes in other ways desirable to divide small
sums by three ?—It may occur, but very rarely.
282. Would not that advantage be attained by having a coin which should
be, we will say, one-third or one-sixth part of the silver coin, which it might not
be possible to express in figures, and yet which would answer the purpose of
carrying on Such small transactions between individuals —I do not think it
would in any case, except in those cases where that one coin alone was the sum
to be divided. Where you come to larger sums to be divided, for instance, in
the case of 1 l. 15 s. 6d., you must begin by converting the first denomination
into the Second, and by converting the remainder from the second denomina-
tion into the third, and you gain nothing by the divisibility of any one of them.
283. Allow me to put the illustration you have given, but a little altered ;
supposing three persons wished to divide 1 l. 15 s, that, under the decimal
system, would be expressed by 1-75, and would not admit of division by three;
if a coin existed which represented the sixth part of the florin, or the 60th part
of the pound, you would be enabled, by means of such a coin, to carry out
the division between three persons 2–You would effect a division without a
remainder; you would not make the division easier.
284. Not on paper; but, practically, you would effect the object which the
three persons sought to accomplish –The only advantage gained would be,
that you would effect the division without the remainder.
285. Are you aware that in some countries, which have partly adopted the
decimal system, it has been found convenient to have a coin which represented
the third or sixth part of the common silver coin of the country?—I was not
aware of that.
286. Supposing the decimal system adopted, there is already a coin in
existence which represents the sixth part of a florin?—There is the fourpenny
piece, which we should have to get rid of.
287. Do you think it desirable to get rid of it?—Certainly ; whatever coinage
we use, I conceive that the coins must represent a single multiple of some one
of the cardinal denominations.
288. You mean for the purpose of being able to write down the value of that
coin upon paper?—Yes; and of course the coinage must be carried so low, that
you can very easily give up the fraction of the last coin.
289. Would there not be this inconvenience, taking the case of persons
wishing to divide small sums into three, you would have to use a considerable
number of coins, and those of a low denomination, which in practice people do
not wish ; whereas, in the other case, by retaining the sixth part of a florin, you
would accomplish the object you sought to effect?—Supposing it were so, I do
not think it is worth the trouble, as the division by three occurs very rarely;
and the coin would be a nuisance upon all other occasions, not being expressed
by an entire multiple of mils or farthings.
290. Lord Stanley.] As I understand you, the only two factors you consider
it important to retain in the scale of coinage are 2 and 5 2–I attach no
importance whatever to the 5; but it comes in in the 10, and the importance
of the 10 rests on a totally different ground, namely, that it is accommodated
to our ordinary decimal arithmetic. -
291. Then, on its own account, the only factor you consider it necessary to
retain is 22—Yes.
292. Chairman.] Suppose, then, that a change in the monetary system were
recommended, will you state what you consider that change should be –The
change, in my opinion, ought to be, to retain the pound sterling as a basis, and
to retain, as the least coin, a coin which differs very little from the existing
farthing, and which would be the 1,000th part of a pound, and to interpolate
two coins, one of which is provided for, and another to receive a new name.
293. You would not consider it expedient to alter the unit of the pound
Sterling 2—I consider it very inexpedient.
294. Will you explain to the Committee why you think so —I have pre-
pared a statement of my reasons, which, with the permission of the Committee,
I will read :—
Professor
George B. Airy.
10 May 1853.
O.66. Aº
D 3 I can
30 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
l’rofessor
George B. Airy.
10 May 1853.
I can scarcely conceive it possible, except by the most violent and offensive measures, to
change the principal money of account from its present value of the pound sterling. Every
estimation of large, and even of very moderate sums, is formed by the pound. I do not attach
great importance to such things as the national debt, or the rental of the country; but the
price and rental of private estates, the salaries of offices, the annual wages of servants down
to those of the lowest female servant; in larger matters, the expense of constructing a rail-
way or sailing a ship; all are estimated by pounds. An alteration of the value of the
pound would unhinge every estimate and every contract in England. I say advisedly every
contract, for the shilling is inseparably connected with the pound ; and every real contract
which is not ostensibly made by the pound, is made by the shilling. To this class belong
an infinity of shop purchases, and an infinity of weekly wages of workmen, occasional ser-
vants, and the like. If pence enter into these matters, it is merely as aliquot parts of the
shilling, which can be supplied quite as well by the decimal division of the pound.
No important contract whatever, between man and man, is so made as to depend for its
amount on the exact value of the penny. It is true that a Liverpool merchant may sell
cotton per pound, or a Suffolk farmer may sell clover seed per pound, at prices below one
shilling per pound, and therefore expressed on the existing system by pence. But he sells
not a single pound, but tons, and therefore the pence serve the purpose simply of subordi-
nate parts of a shilling, and are expelled from the account before it is brought to the state
of payment. The same would be done if any other scale of copper coinage below the
shilling, as that of decimals from the pound, were in common use.
Many small articles in the retail trade are sold by the penny: balls of string, apples and
oranges, seats in an omnibus, and the like. The principle of adjustment here, is a struggle
between the desire of selling many, and the desire of making a large profit on each article.
The adjustment is a very rough one, and will be made as easily on one scale as on another.
It possesses no sort of permanence, being altered from hour to hour.
In a word, I may say that every habitual estimate, and every long, or permanent, or im-
portant contract, depends on the pound. The things which depend on the penny are
insignificant, even to the lowest classes.
There is another difficulty (of much smaller importance, yet very troublesome), in
adapting the pound to represent 1,000 existing farthings. The new shilling must, I con-
ceive, retain its name ; and it must (for decimal scale) be # of the pound; and therefore
the new shilling will be 12% of the old pence. This will be utterly incomprehensible.
As I have stated, I imagine that the voluntary transactions between man and man will
be liable to no difficulty whatever from the substitution of multiples of mils for pennies.
But the payments which are fixed by law require separate consideration. I will suppose
this principle laid down: “that payments defined by the old scale are to be discharged on
the new scale by their equivalents to the nearest mil.” Then these consequences will
follow : -
1st. In cumulative payments, the payments will be sensibly the same as before.
2d. In instances of numerous rates of tariff, though independently each is small, and is
much affected by the change, the aggregate is not sensibly affected.
Thus, as application of the 1st rule,
The Parliamentary fare on railway trains is one penny per mile. But nobody ever travels a
single mile. Very rarely, indeed, is the payment less than a shilling. Let the fares be con-
verted to the nearest mil (a clerk, in one day, will do it for every distance between stations.
on every railway in Britain), and practical justice will be done to everybody.
And, as application of the second rule, I take as example the road-tolls, and I copy the
following from the Greenwich Gate:
|
ARTICLES IIABLE TO TOLL. Present Tolls. * * Increase. Decrease.
d.
3 12 3 13 # º
6 25 25 - sº-
* - ºr a e 1 4; 4 || - - | }
Horses with different classes of
“: 2 8 * 8 -> * > #
carriages - tº-> tº tº
2 8 & 8 * = §
4 16 3 17 § tº-ººs
1 4 ; 4 º- « » #
Score of oxen - - - º 10 41 ; 42 § -->
Score of sheep, &c. - sº sº 5 20; 21 #" tº-
Single beast - --> tº- º – # 2 # | 2 *g gº #

It is impossible to say whether the gate-keeper would gain or lose.
In
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 31
In such a matter as a payment of 1 d. per diem to a soldier, the substitution of a piece
of four mils, would make him lose at the end of the year 1 s. 3 d. ; but a duplication of
his pay for the last day of each calendar month, would reduce the loss to 3 d., or if made
on the last day of each four weeks, it would reduce the loss to 2 d. in this and similar
cases, I see no difficulty in making an adjustment.
In receipt stamps, &c., the Ministry, who have resolved on the vastly more important
changes now before Parliament, can have no difficulty.
The only real difficulty is the postage stamps, and it seems to me that there is no course
but for the Government to determine whether it will be the best policy to increase or to
diminish the price of the stamps. The price must, I conceive, be such that a single staunp
can be purchased with legal coin, involving no fraction of a mil; and this limits the choice
to four mils or five mils. Unless there is strong reason for increase, I should prefer four
mils.
Any adjustment whatever will be better than permanently retaining the present 1 d., or
a coin equivalent to it. This etention would cause infinite confusion.
I see no difficulty in circulating together coins of four mils aid of five mils, if, for
the sake of any specific payments it should be thought useful.
Addendum.
In the instance of the railway trains, I should prefer paving five mils per 2,000 yards;
but that is partly for the sake of introducing the 2,000 yard measures.
Where there is a toll of 1 d. only fixed by Parliament, the toll keeper will be nearly
paid an equivalent by five mils for the first five years, and four mils in perpetuity afterwards.
295. You consider that to alter the unit of the pound, either by increasing
it or diminishing it, would create greater disturbance by any change to be
made, than an alteration in a coin of a lower denomination ?–It would create
greater disturbance than any other change that could be made.
296. Would it not necessitate the change of every other coin 3–Certainly ;
if the pound is changed, the shilling must be changed. The shilling is a coin
we cannot get rid of; and, very happily, it is included in the decimal scale.
297. Would it produce as much confusion amongst the lower classes in their
transactions —The lower classes refer, in everything important, to the pound ;
or the very lowest of them to the shilling. Even the lowest pig driver, to whom
a halfpenny or a penny is a matter of consequence, sells his beasts by pounds
and shillings.
298. Mr. W. Brown.] Could not the postage difficulty be met in this way,
that the 6 d. should buy six stamps, and 1 1. 240 stamps, until the postage
account increased by 100,000 l., which would compensate the loss provided the
stamps were sold at four mils 7–I think you must retain the power of selling
stamps separately.
299. If parties in the habit of buying single stamps found out that there was
some advantage in purchasing six stamps, they would probably do so 7–-There
is a question raised in that, different from anything else that occurs in this
inquiry, and that is, whether you shall, by the force of gain, compel persons to
buy several stamps at once.
300. Is it not very much the case in wholesale dealings, that the larger the
quantity you buy the cheaper you get it?—Yes.
301. Mr. Cardwell.] Are you aware of the large proportion of stamps bought
singly by the public: – I am not ; but many are bought singly.
302. When speaking of the derangement produced by interfering with the
value of the pound, are you not of opinion that the English pound has become
so largely the medium of commerce throughout the world, that the derange-
ment would be felt wherever British commerce is known — It would be felt in
every part of the world, certainly.
303. Mr. J. Ball.] With reference to the question just now asked of you, as
to postage stamps, does it not appear to you, that it would be felt by the poor
to be a great hardship upon them if they were not able to procure stamps as
they do now -- Yes.
304. Would it not be better to submit to a slight loss in that branch of
the revenue, increasing the fractional charge upon other duties that do not
press so much upon the public, so that in that way the amount of revenue
might be retained at its present point without any change that would be felt
disagreeably by the poorer classes 2 - I think that would be better ; but I would
observe, that although the price of the stamp is diminished by the 25th part,
Professor
George B. Airy.
1 o May 1853.
0.66. D 4 the
32 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Professor
George B. Airy.
1o May 1853.
the diminution in revenue would not be a 25th part. In that, as in everything
else, the cheaper you make a thing the more you sell of it.
305. With reference to a point of great difficulty, viz., tolls, in which private
interests are concerned, it is true that at some places a variety of tolls are
taken, but the classes of toll that most affect the poorer classes are ferries and
bridges used by foot passengers or by single passengers; have you considered
what would be the best way of meeting the difficulty as to halfpenny tolls : —
I did not consider anything so Small as a halfpenny; but I think there would
be no difficulty in doing it in the same way as is suggested for the penny (of
course the proportionate increase is larger), by raising it to three mils for a
short time. If you raise it for a single year, it would probably buy off the
excess over the two mils to all eternity.
306. You are disposed to think that the proprietors of such tolls would con-
sent to that ?—They will have no objection to ready money.
307. Mr. Cardwell.] How would you deal with reversionary interests; the
life tenant, no doubt, would be happy to get the additional payment of the first
year, but all interested in reversionary remainders would be losers ?—The per-
manent interest in the ferry is vested somewhere. It may be leased off for a
time to an occupier, and there is no difficulty whatever in regard to arranging
the conversion of the lease value.
308. You mean the surplus received in the first year, however much belonged
to the reversioner, might be funded, and the interest paid from time to time to
the reversioner ?—Yes.
309. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Are you acquainted with the dealings of the working
classes in the small articles they purchase ?—I have seen them in small country
shops, which are as Small as can be. I find that a good many things are sold
at a penny by a rough adjustment of prices.
31 O. Are you aware that farthings enter largely into their dealings?—I am.
311. Do you know that that applies to coins less than a farthing?—I think
not ; I never saw anything less than a farthing. I have always understood that
no smaller coin than a farthing is ever wanted.
312. Are you aware that the poorer classes buy their tea in as small a quan-
tity as half an ounce 2—I am.
313. Supposing the Chancellor of the Exchequer reduces the duty on tea by
4 d. per lb., what advantage does such a man get by the remission of the duty :
—He gets it in quality in some undistinguishable way. It does not come in
the first instance, perhaps, or in the second instance, but it does in the long
I’UII].
314. Are you aware that, in a case of that kind, from the want of a denomi-
nation of coin low enough to make that distinction, it is the custom of shop-
keepers to give some article with the commodity which the party purchases?—
I was not aware of that.
315. If that be the case, do you not think it a very objectionable practice 2–
Yes, I should think so. I think that we ought to have coins which are adapted
to what are really the smallest sums that may be used ; but, so far as I have
been able to judge, the smallest sum of money used is a farthing.
316. The object of money being to do away with the system of bartering one
commodity for another, it is desirable, is it not, to have a coin of a denomina-
tion that will exchange for all commodities 2–Yes.
317. If our present system of coinage does not meet that object, it is defec-
tive — It is.
318. Do you not, therefore, think it is very objectionable, as I understand is
the custom, that when a working man goes to purchase an article which is of
less value than a farthing, or purchases an article requiring change to be given
of less value than a farthing, the shopkeeper should give him, perhaps, a pipe
of tobacco or a pinch of snuff, or, as is the case in Scotland, that the poor man
should receive the difference in whiskey 3–I should think that a bad system ;
but I apprehend that such a thing is not dome for purchasers whose total amount
is less than a farthing ; it might be for a penny and a farthing.
319. Take the article of tea; a person going to buy half an ounce of tea,
the duty being reduced 4 d. per pound, he pays the same price as at present,
because there is no coin in existence sufficient to make the distinction ?—But
he will get it in some way or other ; he will get it most likely in quality. In
that,
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 33
that, as in everything else, there is a competition between the sellers; and one
seller will find it to his interest to supply tea of a better quality. -
320. You think that where a man buys an ounce of tea, the grocer will keep
a different canister for him to that which he keeps for the man who buys half
an ounce?—No ; although by this remission of 4 d. per pound it does not appa-
rently diminish the price for so. Small a quantity, yet the value of the tea will
be increased ; it will be increased in value by the competition between sellers.
321. In that case it is certain that the shopkeeper must have a separate
canister of tea to serve those customers who require small quantities?—I do
not see that that is necessary ; he will have a canister of tea, of which he will
give twice as much to a person who has 2 d. to spend, as to another who has
only 1 d. to spend. - -
322. I will take it that if I buy an ounce of tea I get a farthing remission of
duty, and if I buy half an ounce I get nothing to make up the difference 2–
There must be a little roughness in the adjustment of prices.
323. Do you think that a perfect monetary system, which compels people
when they go to buy an article they want to take also some articles that they
do not want, because there is no coin sufficiently small to pay for their wants 2
—I do not think any system can be made absolutely perfect. If you proceed
to divisions by three, or make it anything like that, you will get to interminable
fractions, and you can never express that by any system.
324. You may express it now below a farthing, may you not 7–You may if
you have coins below a farthing, and if they are wanted below a farthing.
There is a great inconvenience attending the use of small coins.
325. Do you see any inconvenience in making the 10 s. the unit, instead of
the 20s., and dividing that into a thousand parts —It could not be the
real unit.
326. Supposing you were to call the 10 s. a Victoria?—You would not
express anything in Parliament by Victoria. You would not express the charge
upon the Consolidated fund, or the salary of an office, by the term “Victoria.”
The pound would still be the real unit of account.
327. It would not be necessary to express it in Victorias, but call the coin
a pound?—There you depart from the decimal scale. $.
328. If it were found more convenient to express it in pounds, where would
be the incovenience of calling the 10 s. a pound, and directing in all contracts
that 2 l. of the new coinage should make one of the old – It would upset
everybody's motions; I cannot conceive a greater confusion than would be
caused by the alteration of the pound.
329. Will not the alteration that is now proposed upset everybody's notions :
—I think not.
330. What inconvenience would there be, instead of saying as you do now,
100 l. 5 s, in saying 200 l. 5 s. 3––You would not persuade 100 millions of
people to do it.
331. Would it not be as easy to persuade them to do that, the pound circu-
lating among the more intelligent class of the community, as to persuade
people to adopt your mils instead of farthings —I have already mentioned
that, in my opinion, even among the lowest class, there is nothing in the nature
of an important contract which depends upon farthings or pence ; the con-
tracts of any kind which possess the slightest importance are transacted through
the medium of pounds and shillings.
332. It would not alter those contracts 7–In the minds of persons it would
very much.
333. The thing itself would remain the same 2—I conceive the change is
impossible.
334. You are probably aware that although the French adopt a decimal
coinage, they reckon 20 francs in a Napoleon —But they do not express it so
in their accounts. The accounts presented to the French Chambers are always
in francs.
335. The convenience of adopting the 10 s. as your unit would be, that you
would have a small denomination of coin –It appears to me to be no con-
venience, because it is not wanted. I understand from Sir John Herschel
that there are half-farthings in existence if anybody chooses to have them, but
that no one cares about them. The peculiar advantage of using our present
system, with no further alteration than in the value of the farthing, is, that we
Professor
George B. Airy.
10 May 1853.
o.66. E take
34 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Professor
George B. Airy.
10 May 1853.
take the principal existing coins; and we find that, taking the biggest of them,
the money of account is one end of the decimal system, and that the decimal
scale by three steps carries us to the other end, with that petty alteration.
336. Would not this alteration be much more simple than yours : 10 pence
in a shilling, and 10 farthings in a penny ?—You would not have the 10 far-
things; the coin, which you denominate a coin, would be half our present
farthing. I apprehend that it is of the greatest importance that all the cardinal
coins be presented bodily before us.
337. Under your system, you would only have five farthings in a penny ?—
Only five in a five-mil coin; but I have no objection to a four-mil coin.
I should observe that, up to the time of the present Emperor, the French
coinage has not been practically a decimal coinage, and the consequence has been
that the decimal system has never been maintained there at all, as everybody
has reckoned by francs and sous, The present Emperor has coined a single
centime. & &
338. Are you aware that it is a great advantage, the having introduced the
centime !—I have no doubt of it; it presents the last unit of the scale before
people's eyes. º
339. Does not that enable persons to buy small commodities, and have the
coin to represent them 2–They are the best judges of it amongst themselves,
and we are the best judges of what is proper among us.
340. If shopkeepers give commodities instead of money, it must be because
they cannot get the half-farthing 2—Still there is the fact, I understand, that
half-farthings are in existence, and that people do not choose to take them.
Allow me to make one remark in reference to the special advantages to the
shopkeepers in this system. I do not think it possible to assert that any
system is more or less advantageous to a shopkeeper ; everything goes by com-
petition. Every shopkeeper gives the best he can, on the plan of taking into
account not what he gains on each individual article, but also how many
articles he can sell; he regulates his prices to make the best profits he can
with the complicated supposition.
341. Do you think half-farthings would very greatly assist in the calculation
of prices of commodities that are sold at less than a farthing 2—I never knew
anything less than a farthing. -
342. Are you aware that the article of cotton is sold for one-eighth part of
a penny per pound 2–Yes, but that is a totally different thing; that is a frac-
tional part of a shilling, and you may express it by as many decimals as you
please; they are merely decimals on paper, and they turn out real in the
product.
343. If the 1-8th part of the penny represented one mil, would it not facili-
tate the calculation ?—Not in the smallest degree; 1–10th proceeding from the
pound would be much better.
344. Mr. J. Ball.] Does it not appear to you that the chief practical objec-
tion that may arise in introducing the new coinage would be, that persons
would not find one single coin to carry on those transactions which ordinarily
occur in daily life, and that the use of two or more coins would be a source of
inconvenience and annoyance where persons are used to give but one 3-I do
not think that would be the case.
345. With reference to the answers you have already given, whether we
should require, in ordinary transactions, 5 mils, 4 mils, 3 mils, 2 mils, and
1 mil?–I should not use all those coins; for the 3 mils I see no purpose
whatever.
346. You referred, I think, to the half-penny tolls?—There would be a little
inconvenience of that sort in the first instance.
347. Would you advise that two coins should be used in those cases 2–Yes;
I would not perplex the whole nation with the 3 mils, in order that a few per-
sons who go over Waterloo Bridge should pay easily.
348. You think it desirable that the four mil piece should exist in the shape
of a single coin 7–I think it indispensable.
349. Mr. W. Brown.] Would it not be easy for Parliament to say, “You
shall have five mils for a certain number of years, in order that you may
raise an annuity, to compensate you for the loss of the four per cent, for
the remainder of your term " ?– Yes; I have alluded to it in the paper I have
read. I calculated that five years would give a proper compensation.
350. Mr.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COIN AG E. 35
350. Mr. J. B. Smith..] You would recommend, also, a system of decimal
weights and measures 2–Yes, to some extent.
351. Would not an alteration in the weights and measures afford great
facilities in the division of our money —Yes, it would.
352. For instance, in many cases where there is now a discrepancy between
the present pieces and the decimal system you propose, you might approximate
more nearly by the alteration in the decimal system of weights and measures 2
ºrian cases you might approach more nearly, and in others you would
I'êCêCl62. tº
353. You have suggested 2,000 yards to the mile instead of 1,760. Could
that be made to approximate more nearly to the present penny than 1,760
-—Yes.
354. In your opinion would it be desirable, before we finally decided upon
these changes, to unite with them a system of decimal weights and measures 2
—No, I think the coinage is quite enough to take by itself; and I am of
of opinion also, that it would be found to introduce very much a system of
decimals in other things. If the whole system were attempted, it could not be
carried through.
355. Might not one assist the other ?—in some measure, not much. The
important value of the decimal scale of coins is in book accounts, and in
calculations of money generally; but there will be a great number of things
in which it would be impossible to use the decimal scale ; in which you must
use the advantage which the decimal scale gives, not with reference to the
scale of the article purchased, but as a convenient scale of numerical
operation. ſº
356. You are aware, no doubt, that, if you adopt a decimal coinage, you will
have to pass an Act of Parliament, altering all the present system of duties
and payments of every kind enacted by Parliament 2–Yes.
357. When you come afterwards to adopt a system of decimal weights and
measures, will you not have to make a similar alteration ?–Perhaps in regard
to the decimal system I rather misunderstood you. I would advocate by all
means a change from the 112 lbs. to 100 lbs., and I think we ought to do
it at once in our tariff. I wish the present Chancellor of the Exchequer would
do that. When it is done, there would be not only the very great convenience
which would accrue at all the weighing offices by the use of metallic weights
rising to 100 instead of 112 lb., but there would also be, in the event of the
decimal scale being adopted, a great convenience in the calculation of duties.
I may mention, as an instance of this, that at the Custom House there is a
scale, which has been long acted upon, of decimal subdivision of the avoir-
dupois pound proceeding to the 1,000th part of the pound. In calculating the
tare, where a proportion must be used, it was found so utterly impracticable to
do it by the common subdivision of the avoirdupois pound, that the officers
were driven to decimals; but, so far as I know, the same system of calculation
is not used anywhere else.
358. Are you aware that they have adopted a decimal coinage in Canada 2–
I am not.
359. Chairman.] If that system of decimal weights be already adopted at the
Custom House, there would be very little difficulty, supposing the decimal
system should be introduced, in carrying it into effect by the present system
of weights below the pound !—I do not think it would be popular ; people like
half pounds and quarter pounds. I apprehend the change, such as would be
easy and popular, would affect the multiples of the pound up to the cwt., and
nothing else.
360. This scale at the Custom House affects only things charged by the
pound and a fraction ?—It is only used in that peculiar operation of taking the
proportional parts. There are brought in, for instance, several boxes, each of
which contains reels of ribbon, and every reel has a wooden centre, and is
wrapped up in paper; the ribbon itself is chargeable with duty, but the wooden
centre and the paper which surrounds it are not so chargeable. It would re-
quire the unfolding perhaps of many thousand yards of ribbon to compute the
duty upon it; and the process now is to take a reel here and a reel there, and
to unrol them, and weigh the reels, the wood, and the paper by decimal weights,
and those are added together in decimals. It would be impossible to effect the
process by the old divisions of a pound. Those being added together, there
Professor
George B. Airy.
10 May 1853.
0.66. E 2 is
36 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Professor
George B. Airy.
10 May 1853.
is a sum in the rule of three: whereas a certain number of reels have so much
tare, how much tare will there be in the whole number 2 It becomes a plain
operation of arithmetic; the system is not used in estimating the duty, but in
computing the amount of tare in a large quantity by the amount found to exist
in a small quantity.
361. Mr. Cardwell.] Without any change in the coin, might not a great deal
be done in bringing the public mind to an habituation of the decimal system,
by merely making, on the reverse side of such coins as conform to the decimal
scale, the exact proportion that they were of the pound?—Something would
be done, but the system would be so imperfect, having no termination, that it
would do almost nothing.
362. Supposing a certain portion of the public accounts were kept on the
decimal scale of accounts, would not that also tend to habituate the public
mind to the idea of it?—The public accounts would not effect much with
those classes of persons with whom the difficulty would rest; they are little
known to them.
363. You think that, without the substitution of the new coins, four per cent.
less in value than the present copper coins, no important effect can be pro-
duced 2–Certainly ; without the exhibition of pieces of 1 mil, 2 mil, and
4 mil, no important effect can be produced.
364. Chairman.] Would the decimal system of coinage give great facilities
in the way of calculating interest and discount?—Every calculation of that
sort would be made very much easier. But I may mention that even calcula-
tions of the smallest kind would be very much easier; for instance, a few days
ago I was looking at a gas stove, and I inquired how much it burned ; I was
told seven cubic feet in an hour ; my gas cost me 4 s. per 1,000 feet; how am
I to calculate the hourly cost? I found the easiest way was to turn it into deci-
mals, and to do it by mils; 4s. gives 200 mils, I multiply that by seven feet,
and the result is l ; mil per hour. I am not a very bad calculator, and yet it
would take me several times as long to do it by pence and farthings.
365. Can you give us any instances that have occurred in which the change
to the decimal system has been fruitful of great advantages; in astronomy for
instance?—The great centesimal change proposed by the French savans at the
end of the last century I have had occasion to use very extensively, and its
value is very great indeed, .g.
366. Mr. W. Brown.] Would it not be the means of saving labour to con-
tractors, and builders, and so on 2–It would be a very great saving.
367. Chairman.] Was it not also attempted to alter the graduation of the
circle?—It was ; and those tables to which I have referred were prepared in
concert with the attempted alteration in the graduation of the circle; but the
tables, in their application, failed entirely. &
368. Why so —Because there was no graduated circle to exhibit; and it is
analogous to what would be the case if we attempted to use the decimal scale
without having the coins to exhibit.
369. You say that the great value is, that the numbers written down on
paper are the same that present themselves to the mind?—The mind is spared
one operation out of two.
370. That would lead to greater facility of calculation ?—Yes; I think it
may fairly be taken that every calculation would be made in half the time.
37 l. Are there not some instances in which the present scale might be more
convenient in regard to accounts; for instance, a carpenter's bill?—That one
particular instance has come under my knowledge ; with carpenters the penny
is advantageous, as their measure is calculated with the duodecimal division of
the foot. It is the only instance I know of ; but the 100th part of the foot
is trenching already on the duodecimal, and will, I apprehend, soon be used
still more extensively.
372. In the event of a decimal system being adopted, will you state what
coins you would propose to retain, and what coins you would propose to intro-
duce 3–In the first place there is the sovereign, and in the next place the half-
Sovereign, but not the quarter-sovereign.
373. Will you state your reasons for objecting to the quarter-sovereign —
The reason that would influence me in excluding it is, that it is expressed in
the decimal scale by two figures, and I think that is a sufficient reason for
excluding
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 37
excluding it. That will be seen on remarking the two principal requisites
in the series of coins which are to be used upon a given scale of coinage. The
two things are these : in the first place, when you go to pay a bill, you want
to pay it in the easiest way by existing coins, and that will be done in the
easiest way if each coin is expressed by a single figure, followed by ciphers, as
may be necessary. The next condition, which is to determine the convenience
of a particular scale of coins, is, that when a great number of those coins are
presented at once, their value may be ascertained as quickly as possible.
Suppose we had a coin expressed by three figures, as I have seen suggested in
some proposals ; for example, a piece of 125 mils. Imagine the condition of a
Bank clerk when a tradesman came to pay in his day's receipts, and threw
down say 37 of those 125-mil pieces; it would almost drive him mad to write
it down. He might either multiply the 125 by 37, or he might divide the 37
by eight, because 125 is the eighth part of a pound, or he might put his coins
in piles of eight ; but in that case he would be losing the decimal system,
and using the octonary system. If, on the contrary, he had 100, or 200, or
300 mils, he would have no trouble in entering it.
374. Would he have any difficulty with a piece of 250 mils?—It could not
be done so easily. That is not so bad as 125, but it is in the next degree of
badness. I am not sure that the 300 mils would be wanted ; but if it were,
I should propose that instead of the 250 mils. I remember the seven-shilling
pieces, and that they were as small as is convenient. The 300-mil piece would
be small enough, and it would be expressed by a single figure in the way I
mention ; but still I doubt very much whether it would be wanted. In the
silver coins, I think it will be found that the 200 mils will be a convenient
coin ; it is of the same size as the French five francs, and although not used
so extensively as the florin, it would be used sometimes.
375. Equivalent to the American dollar 3–Just so ; next to that would come
the 100 mils, which would be used in great numbers I have no doubt; the
shilling or 50-mil piece we cannot dispense with, and possibly it might be
found necessary to keep the 25 mils to represent the sixpence; I would expel
it, however, as soon as possible, and instead of the 25 mil I think I should
propose 30. Then there must be a 10-mil piece, and the extent to which it
would be used would depend very much upon the convenience of size. It is a
convenient coin in the market, but is rather small for silver and large for
copper, and I think a mixed metal coin might be used for that.
376. Supposing I took 25 mils to purchase a thing which cost me 15 mils,
where would be the difficulty 2—You would receive the change in that case ;
but supposing it cost 41 mils, the 25-mil piece would be a more troublesome
one to add up than 20 or 30 would be.
377. You would give the 50-mil piece and receive the change back?—That
would depend upon the state of your purse.
378. I do not see where the practical difficulty is 2–You would have to con-
sider that 25 from 41 left 16; it leaves 10 mils, 5 mils, and 1 mil; but you
have gone through the operation of subtracting the 25.
379. Do you propose that the 10-mil piece should be of silver?—It is too
Small for silver, so that it must be a mixed metal.
380. Then there would be nothing between 30 or 25 and 10 mils 2–No ; I
do not think that it is wanted at all.
381. Mr. Cardwell.] If wanted, you would not object to have anything
which signifies its denomination with a single figure ?—I should consult the
public wants in that respect. The copper coins indispensable to introduce are
the 1 mil, 2 mils, and 4 mils, as being very nearly the same as the existing
farthing, halfpenny, and penny.
382. Chairman.] You would have no copper coins except those three ?—I
think not.
383. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Are not twice 25, or four times 25 more easy to cal-
culate than the same number of 30 —Seven times 25 would not be.
384. Is it not easier to calculate 25 and 30 3–I think not; in the case I
mention, for instance, seven times 25 is difficult.
385. Or multiply it by six 3–Thirty would be easier.
386. Sir W. Clay.] You would recommend the sovereign —Yes.
387. Secondly, the half sovereign —Yes.
388. What is the next?—A piece of 300 mils, which would be 6 s., if it were
Professor
George B. Airy.
no May 1853.
0.66. E 3 found
38 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Professor
George B. Airy.
10 May 1853.
found necessary; those three to be of gold. Then there would be the 200
mils, equivalent to 4 s. ; 100 mils, equivalent to the florin ; 50, which is the
shilling; and the 25-mil piece, if necessary, for a time; but I object to it.
389. What next 2–Instead of the 25, I should prefer 20 as a permanent one.
After the 10 mils, the indispensable coins are four mils, two mils, and one mil,
but it is not impossible that five might be more convenient ultimately than
four.
390. I would first ask what is your reason for retaining the 50 mil piece 2
—Because it is used so extensively.
301. Does not the same reason exist for the permanent retention of the
25 mil piece —No, I think not ; and there is evidence of that, from our very
extensive use of the fourpenny piece.
392. Are there not now a great many articles that are sold at the price of
6 d., and also certain services paid in the same coin, and many very convenient
calculations of account settled by a coin of that amount r—Articles will be sold,
determining the quantity of the article by the price at which it is to be sold.
That will happen with every system of coinage you adopt.
393. There is a Bill under the consideration of Parliament, for the establishing
cab fares, and the basis of all is the 6 d. 2–That would be very easily altered,
I have no doubt.
394. Has it not been found in practice, that the fourpenny piece has got
very little into circulation?—I cannot say officially, but I should think the four-
penny piece is extensively in circulation ; I receive them every day.
395. Would there not be some advantage in having a five-mil piece?—
Yes, I think there would. -
306. It would fall more readily into the decimal calculation ?—I think it
would. *
397. For a great many years after the establishment of the decimal coinage
in France, was not the five centimes piece in use —It was in use, but it was the
old sou.
398. It was equivalent to the sou?–Yes.
399. From the circumstance of its being part of a decimal scale, and also
part of the old coinage, it was found to be a very convenient division for the
ordinary purposes of payment –I suppose in some few instances there might
be a convenience, from its being included in the decimal scale, but not very
many. The decimal scale seems not to have got hold of France.
400. Will you have the kindness to state again, your objection to the quarter-
sovereign —My objection to the quarter-sovereign is, that it is represented by
two significant figures, the two and five.
401. Would not that objection apply principally to it as a money of account,
and not as a coin in daily use —No ; I think it is found in daily use, that halving
the value of the coins is not particularly convenient. I may mention a simple
instance, viz., that the 3 d. is by no means so convenient as the 4 d. There
is a positive advantage in having a coin that is not half, that it gives you change
to a smaller amount. Two 4 d. against a 6 d. make 2 d.
402. Do you think that that is equivalent to the 300 mils being the aliquot
part of the sovereign —I do not think that the being an aliquot of the sove-
reign is of any consequence whatever. I consider the principles to govern the
choice of coins to be these : what are the easiest to make up a sum that you
have to pay; and what coins are the easiest to value when presented to you in
a great number,
403. Is it not a great object in introducing this decimal coinage that, if
possible, the new coins should represent, as nearly as may be, the value of the
coins to which the public is now accustomed –As far as is fairly consistent
with the system. -
404. The 25-mil piece would exactly represent the 6 d. 2—Yes.
405. And would therefore have the advantage to which I have alluded in
some former questions?—Supposing the 6 d. to be very little better than the
4 d., which I believe is the case, I think there is no particular advantage.
406. Do you think the quantity and number of payments to the amount of
4 d. are at all equal to the payments amounting to 6 d. 2–Certainly not ; the 6 d.
had possession of the field. ~
407, Then, keeping the new coinage equivalent to the value of the old, as
11 C&l T
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COIN AGE. 30
near as possible, does it not apply equally to the 6 d. as to the 4 d. piece 7–
Certainly.
408. Which of the old coins would the 20-mil represent?—It would be
between 4 d. and 5 d.
409. Would not the objection to which I have referred apply to the intro- .
duction of the 20-mil piece —It is a new coin ; there is that objection, and
that objection there must be.
41 o. Have you considered the objections to a piece of mixed metal 2–I am
aware that there are some practical objections.
41 1. Have you been in the habit of seeing the mixed coins in the German
States ?—Yes.
412. Do you not consider them exceedingly objectionable –Plated coins
are very objectionable.
413. Is there not this objection to plated coins, that they absolutely lessen
in value as the silver surface very rapidly wears off 2–They lose in intrinsic
value. I should not think of adopting a plated coin.
414. In fact, as soon as the silver is worn off, they cease to be coins having
an intrinsic value, and become tokens only 7–Yes; but I trust we should never
have such a coin in our country.
415. Do they not become very black and dirty P--They are very ugly coins.
416. Have you turned your attention to the mode of obviating the objec-
tions which you seem to feel to having the coin you recommend of mixed
metal 2–I do not think that there is any serious objection to an alloy.
417. You think we could easily introduce, by the use of an alloyed metal,
a coin with a sufficient intrinsic value –There would be no difficulty whatever.
The only difficulty I see at present, upon which persons better acquainted with
those matters than I can pretend to be, is the introducing into common use
such a test as will discriminate between a genuine coin and a forgery.
418. You prefer the four mils, two mils, and one mil, to five, two, and one 7
—I hold it indispensable at first to have the four ; I should trust in a few years
that the four might be expelled and a five issued.
419. Mr. JW. Brown.] You have told us that in merchandise you think the
quantity sold would soon accommodate itself to the amount of money received;
would not labour do the same?--No doubt, in some cases, it would.
420. Inasmuch as copper and shillings are mere tokens coins, and legal
tender only up to a certain amount, it would be of very little importance
whether the mixed metal tokens deteriorated in weight or not, being ultimately
exchangeable for silver?—Certainly -
421. Chairman.] Do you think it desirable to have as few coins as possible 2
—Certainly ; as few as will express everything we want.
422. You think the smaller the number of coins the better 2—No doubt.
423. Does the British coinage, in your opinion, afford any particular facilities
for the introducing of the decimal system –It does in the points I have men-
tioned before. The circumstance that the great money of account and the
smallest coin can be separated by a multiple of 1,000 almost exactly, is one
consideration. In the next place, inasmuch as there are three decimal steps in
the system, which require four coins to make them complete, three of them
exist already. I should think there never was so favourable an opportunity in
the world for introducing the decimal scale.
424. Is not the i3ritish money of account larger than that used in other
countries?--It is larger than any other, and for that reason it requires the
three steps.
425. Wiscount Goderich..] You were asked a question just now about the
retention of the old sous piece in France; do you not conceive it possible that
the retention of the sous piece of 5 centimes rather tended to retard than to
advance the adoption of the decimal system —I am not able to say ; but it
has gone on in a most irregular way.
426. May it not be perhaps owing to the fact that the recollection of the
old coins was by that means kept up —No doubt the retention of the old coin
would keep up the recollection of the old system.
427. Lord Stanley.] Do you attach any importance to the circulation of the
six-shilling pieces which you propose --No, I should merely use them if the
public want them.
O.66. E 4 ...” 428. Have
Professor
George B. Airy.
10 May 1858.
40 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Professor
George B. Airy.
10 May 1853.
428. Have you any objection to the circulation of 250 mils, that is five-shil-
ling pieces, in silver ?——Yes.
429. Is it your own opinion that it would be necessary to have any coins
between the 500-mil pieces, and that of 200 mils?—Not necessarily; but I
would follow the wants of the public in that respect. As to the introduction
of coins, and their expression by one significant figure, or by two significant
figures, I think the Committee ought to be made acquainted with the present
state of the weights at the Bank of England. It has been found by degrees
that in the weighing of bullion the troy pound is of no use whatever, and it has
practically disappeared altogether. The troy ounce is the unit, but the sub-
division of the troy ounce by pennyweights and grains was found intolerably
inconvenient. The weights at the Bank are now expressed by one single
figure with ciphers, and they begin with 500 ounces, 400, 300, 200, 100, and
then 50, 40, 30, 20, 10 ; and 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 ; then decimal point 5, decimal
point 4, decimal point 3, decimal point 2, decimal point l ; decimal 04, 03, 0.2,
01 ; and decimal point 004, 003, 002, 001. This is an instance which has a
strong analogy to the decimal coinage, and it is a plan to which the practical
Sense of the officers of the Bank has driven them.
430. Mr. W. Brown.] Inasmuch as the avoirdupois pound is the general weight
used throughout Great Britain, would it not have been better, as the Bank
were making a change, to have adopted the avoirdupois pound instead of the
troy pound, so that it might be uniform throughout 2—Perhaps it would ; but it
would be easier to do that now than it was before.
431. Mr. J. Ball.] In addition to the point suggested to you with reference
to the retention of the 6d., is there not this point to be considered ; that in
dividing by two, which you say is the ordinary mode of dividing coins, persons
wanting to divide the shilling would be compelled to use copper money, to
which they have a strong objection ?—The division of the shilling by two is
not used so very extensively; if anything costs 1s. 4d. and is divided by two,
the 6d. is of no use whatever.
432. Is not your objection to the retention of the 25-mil piece rather one
that has reference to computation, than the convenience of practical use in
Small dealings —Yes, it is.
433. I presume the motive for using the alloy for the 10-mil piece would be
the small size of the coin if it were of silver ?—Yes.
434. Have you considered whether that might be obviated by coining it in
the form of a flattened ring 2—I remember it was once proposed by Sir John
Herschel; I have never thought of it sufficiently to say that I am aware of any
objection to it. -
435. Would it not obviate the other objections to the use of an alloy —It
would.
436. The practical objection to the four and five-mil piece would be that
they would approach each other in size 2—I think there would be no difficulty
in distinguishing them : you might mark the value of the four-mil pieces with
a word; you might have the five-mil piece with an enormous “V” on its
reverse side ; and on the obverse side you might have one with a legend close
to the edge, and another with a broad flat rim.
437. Have you ever considered whether in coins in which it is not important
that the intrinsic value should exactly correspond with the coin in use, it is
necessary to adhere to the round form of coins; might not plates of copper be
conveniently cut into hexagons 2—There is an old story of money burning in
the pocket; I think it would be found very destructive.
438. Mr. W. Brown.] Do you think it desirable that coins should not be
milled at the edge 2–1 remember that was considered a great improvement
when it was introduced.
439. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Practically, in counting a large number of 25-mil
pieces, could not a bank clerk with great facility take four at a time, which
would make a florin, instead of the several 30 or 40 mil pieces, where you
would have, first of all, to count them separately, and then to calculate them 2
—I think I could take them out separately with greater ease.
440. When bankers give you half-sovereigns and sixpences, they count
two together; would they not in the same way take four together, and in
a large number of coins would not that be better than having to count each
individual
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE, 41
individual coin and then to calculate them 2–Supposing there were a great
number of coins mixed together of various sums, that would be so.
441. Supposing you had a number of coins mixed together, it would be
necessary to separate them —Yes, but that would be dome by picking them
out one by one.
442. Chairman.] I collect, from your answers to Sir William Clay's questions,
that you would object to retaining a coin equivalent to the present 6 d., even in
a transition state 2—I think I would keep it as short a time as possible ; the
public having been accustomed to it, they must be humoured, but I would try
to get rid of it as soon as I could.
443. Supposing the decimal coinage to be introduced, what would you make
the money of account --The pound.
444. In what way should accounts be kept 2–In the ordinary account books
there would be four columns, each of the breadth of one figure, the first for
pounds, then florins, and then cents (if they were so called), and then mils.
445. Would it not be more convenient to have three columns only 2–I would
rather consult a clerk of the Bank of England on that point, and for this
reason: the Bank of England takes the lead in rejecting small coin, and it
might be that the Bank would reject the mils altogether ; I am not sure that
they would, but if not, it would be more convenient to have four columns; you
might have three lines in black ink and the fourth in blue ink. I should very
much prefer writing down the value of coins in the way in which a sailor writes
down the degrees and minutes; instead of writing down 25 degrees 8 minutes,
he puts down 25 08, and that would be the best way for the coinage of this
country.
446. Mr. J. Ball.] Would there not be some danger of the clerk in the
Bank of England forgetting the figure “0” and making a mistake 7–There
would be that danger sometimes; I should prefer one figure in each column.
447. Chairman.] You object to the two limes of figures being in one column?
—I should prefer a single line of figures to a single column.
448. Lord Stanley.] Would columns be necessary 7–They are ruled in the
books of the Bank of England. I think that is the only bank in which they
are ruled.
449. In the decimal system, can you not write down the amount without any
columns 2–It is simply for the purpose of setting down the figures one under
the other. *
450. Chairman.] You would have pounds, florins, cents, and mils 2–Yes.
451. Would you have the words, “ cents” and “mils" both stamped upon
the coins —I would not have both “cents” and “mils.” I think it might
be desirable to have reference to both ends of the system, the mil and the
pound.
452. Mr. J.W. Brown.] A grocer in an extensive way of business has sug-
gested that we had better call the small coins “tenths” rather than “mils"?
—The “tenth '' is not so good a term, because it does not refer to the money
of account.
453. Mr. Cardwell.] You wish every figure in the ordinary mode of keeping
accounts to refer to a coin in ordinary use 3–Certainly ; that is quite neces-
Sal V.
* If you had only three denominations instead of four, then your account
would have one figure in it when there was no corresponding coin; if you kept
your accounts in pounds, florins, and mils, there would be a place in the mode
of entering up the figures in the accounts which had no coin corresponding
with it; and that, in your opinion, would be objectionable?—I think it would.
I must state that, after all, a decimal system is something which rests in the
mind, and it is very desirable that the mind should be assisted by the material
steps of the system as much as possible.
455, Mr. J. B. Smith..] Suppose you were to keep your own accounts, and
you had to enter 8 l. 15 s. 6d., you would not have three columns to enter it
8 l. 7 fl. 75 m., but would write it 8775 –Yes.
456. In all probability, when the public get accustomed to the decimal system,
that would be the usual mode of keeping accounts – It would.
Professor
George B. Airy
10 May 1853.
o.66. F 457. Probably,
42 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Professor
George B.Airy.
10 May 1853.
457. Probably, in the first instance, it would be kept in three columns, and
you would say 8 l. 7 fl. 75 m. 2––Perhaps that would be so.
458. The other being the simplest, the public would soon fall into it?—Yes;
and being not only the simplest, but less liable to error.
459. Chairman.] Is it not much more simple to say 8 l. 7 fl. 75 m. than to
say 8 l. 7 ft. 7 c. 5 m. 2–It would be ; but it is desirable that the figures should
occupy three distinct places in the scale; then it is done best by the use of four
columns.
460. Probably people would soon learn the habit of using the figures merely
8.775, without using any names of coins at all?—I think they would.
461. Sir W. Clay.] Would there not be some convenience in retaining the
three columns, in keeping accounts, which are at present in use; that is, under
the present system the fourth column contains frequently two figures, and occa-
sionally two in addition for the expression of a farthing?—I should prefer sepa-
rate columns; a careless clerk will sometimes add the figure in the units to the
figure in the tens.
462. The third column would never contain more than two figures, whereas
at present it occasionally contains four !—It would be an improvement on the
present system ; but it might be better still, I think, by the separate columns.
463. American accounts are kept in two columns, are they not; that is, in
dollars and cents?—They use dollars and cents, I know ; but I am not
acquainted with the mode of keeping accounts.
464. In France, do they not also keep the accounts in two columns 2—In
francs and centimes; but they are seldom separated into columns.
465. Our columns would not contain more figures than either the American
or the French – No worse than theirs; but I should wish to make ours better.
466. Chairman.] You do not think it would be better than to continue the
three columns, the prejudice of the people being in favour of the three columns 2
—I do not think any rule could be laid down for the public.
467. Mr. J. Ball.] In small sums no columns at all would be necessary?—
No ; they would be set down as you do a number of figures of one kind in
which the mil is the unit.
468. Have you ever considered the nature of the difficulties in the way of
international arrangements which would make the coins of two countries
exchangeable at a fixed rate 2—It is very difficult to alter the basis of a system.
469. Assuming that the present moment were favourable to the adoption of
gold as the standard of value by countries which have not hitherto adopted it,
would it be necessary to fix upon a common basis of fineness as to the precious
metal 7–I am not competent to speak to that. - -
470. Has it occurred to you whether, supposing a standard of fineness were
agreed upon, that the coins of different countries, or at least of some, might
become mutually interchangeable at a fixed rate, not depending upon the
oscillations of commerce 7–Supposing France were to adopt gold as the exclu-
sive standard, I see no difficulty in making the coins interchangeable.
47 l. In fact, the two essential points are the establishment of the same
metal, and of a common standard of fineness for gold and silver in the two
countries —That is included in the first, in my opinion.
472. If the two countries were to agree that they would adopt a common
standard of silver, and that the amount of seigneurage charged at the Mint
should be the same, then it would be possible for the English florin to circulate
in France, and the five-franc piece to circulate in England?—If the seigneurage
on silver were the same, it being supposed there is none upon gold, I think it
would be possible in that case to make silver exchangeable for silver, and gold
exchangeable for gold.
473. Mr. W. Brown.] Suppose we had the same weight of gold in a sove-
reign as in a Napoleon, would not the temporary balance of trade cause the
gold to be sent one way or the other, even supposing they were to-day equiva-
lent?—I do not think it would, the expense of sending the gold coin from one
country to another being very small.
474. So far as that goes, it might disturb it 2–It might.
475. Mr. J. B. Smith..] It never could exceed the expense of sending it from
one country to another —No. -
476. Mr.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 43
476. Mr. JW. Brown.] In reference to the suggestion to adopt the mil
instead of the florin, do you think the people would be as well pleased to
receive 25 mils for 6 d. as to receive, as they do now, 24 farthings —They
would be a little disturbed, no doubt; their calculations tend always to the
score, and they might prefer it in the present scale; I know the working men
in Suffolk refer to the score.
477. Chairman.] Do you think a change would excite a prejudice in their
minds ;--It would, but it would be the same whatever the change might be ;
whatever is changed there will be a prejudice against it, but the inconvenience
of the change of copper will be vastly less than the change of gold.
478. Would it not be felt more by the poorer classes 2—I think not ; there
is no class so poor as to rely upon copper as the basis of money.
479. Nor in the payment of wages?—Nor in the payment of wages, which
are always paid in shillings; H refer to weekly or daily wages.
480, You see no other difficulties except those alluded to as to the payments
fixed by Act of Parliament?—I see no other real difficulties.
481. Mr. J. B. Smith..] I think you have stated that you think it very desir-
able to adopt the decimal system of weights and measures 2–-To some extent,
and probably concurrent with the binary system.
482. Do you think a uniform system throughout the world would be a great
advantage 2–Not so much as would at first sight appear; I suppose of the
20,000,000 of people in England, that not 10,000 have anything to do with the
weights of foreign countries, and it is far more important to make the relations
among themselves certain and convenient.
483. Would it not facilitate calculations of merchants, if the weights and
measures were the same —Yes; but they are, after all, a small body.
484. I believe there is no country with which we trade, except perhaps
America, which uses the same weights and measures as ourselves; and therefore,
in making your calculations, you have to convert the weights and measures
of foreign countries into the weights and measures of your own country?
—Yes.
485. Would it not be a great convenience, if all foreign countries adopted
the same weights and measures as ours ?—It would be some convenience.
486. Would it not be as great an advantage and convenience as the adoption
of a decimal coinage —No ; every person in the country has to do with adding
or subtracting sums of money, but there is not one person in a thousand
requiring an acquaintance with foreign weights and measures. -
487. We have a uniformity of weights and measures in England by law, but
not in practice?—That must be a great inconvenience.
488. Is it not a great inconvenience, to find in every town you enter,
a different standard of weights and measures P-I do not think it is the case with
the fundamental unit, I believe the avoirdupois pound is the same in one town as
in another.
489. Does that apply to measures 2—I think so.
490. Does it not require calculation ?—I think not.
491. Is not wheat sold by bags in some places, pecks in others, and strikes
in others ?—A strike is a common term in Suffolk, and it usually means a
bushel. The official unit for wheat is the quarter, but that is not the practical
unit, at least in Suffolk, the county I am best acquainted with.
492. You do not think it a matter of much importance whether weights and
measures be uniform or not *—I do not think it is, with reference to the rest of
the world, but on our own account it is of great importance.
493. In our dealings with foreign countries, you do not think it is 2—I do not
think it is.
Professor
George B. Airy.
1o May 1853.
o 66. F 2
44. MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Frofessor
G. B. Airy.
26 May 1853.
Jovis, 26° die Maii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT :
Mr. Tufnell. Mr. John Benjamin Smith.
Mr. William Brown. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. John Ball. Mr. Dunlop.
Lord Stanley. Sir W. Clay.
Mr. Hamilton.
THE RIGHT Hon. H. TUFNELL, IN THE CHAIR.
Professor George Biddell Airy called in ; and further Examined.
494, Chairman.] WOULD you wish to add anything to the evidence you gave
before the Committee at the last meeting 2—There is one addition which, with
the permission of the Committee, I will make, and which, although it did not
occur to me at the last meeting, I regard as important. In the event of adoption
of the decimal scale proceeding from the pound, it will be necessary at once to issue
florins in large numbers, marked with legible inscriptions in Arabic numerals
and Roman letters; and also, perhaps, to call in the shillings, and to issue a
new coin of the same value, but marked with the name “half florin.” Unless
some measure is adopted for making the florin very conspicuous as a cardinal
point in the coinage scale, it is much to be feared that many small shopkeepers
will keep their accounts by pounds, shillings, and mils. I see no other probable
difficulty in the introduction of the decimal scale. That is all I have to offer
to the Committee.
495. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Have you anything to add in reference to your evi-
dence on the last examination respecting the French centimes?—I have found,
since the last meeting of the Committee, that the French centime was issued
earlier and in greater numbers in France than I was aware of; but I can speak
from my own experience, having lived there for a considerable time, that it
very rarely is found in use; and judging from what I saw, I should say that the
habits of the people are not affected by a consideration of the centime as part of
decimal scale.
496. Are you aware that, since 1792, no coins have been coined at the
French Mint except upon the decimal principle ; and that all the public accounts
have been kept since that period in francs and centimes?—I am not acquainted
with the form of the public accounts, although I have always understood that
they are kept decimally. All the coins, including the sou, which is, in fact, the
fundamental coin in France, are necessarily under the decimal scale.
497. Are you aware that no sous have been coined since 1793, the sou being
a coin which was in circulation previous to that period, and still circulates at
five centimes 2—I was not aware of the date of the coinage or non-coinage of
the sou, but the sou is practically the copper coin of France; I mean it may
take the name of the five centimes piece.
498. That is to say, the old coinage of the Sou piece circulates at what is it
worth; that is, five centimes?—Yes.
499. Chairman.] Do you see any practical difficulty in the introduction of the
new system of decimal coinage 2–No, I do not, except such difficulties as will
always occur in the substitution of one coin for another. That which I have
just mentioned appears to me most likely to be the difficulty at first, that unless
the name of the shilling, and with it the idea of the shilling, be withdrawn, in a
great measure, it is likely that small shopkeepers might keep their accounts in
pounds and shillings, and that which is the next subordinate, namely, nails.
500. You consider it very essential that that should be avoided ?–I consider
it very essential that the attention of the public should be directed to the florin,
as the next step to the pound.
501. Lord
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COIN AGE. 45
501. Lord Stanley.] Would you propose to withdraw the shilling altogether
from circulation ?–To withdraw it by name, but the convenience of the coin
. be preserved. I would issue an equivalent coin bearing the name of half-
Ol"1 II. -
502. Chairman.] You stated the other day that, by way of yielding to pre-
judice, you would allow also the quarter florin 2—I would for a time, if neces-
sary, but I hope it will perish at last.
Sir John Herschel called in ; and Examined.
503. Chairman.] WE know that you hold the office of Master of the Royal
Mint 2–I do.
504. In that position, I believe, you have had many opportunities of con-
sidering the present monetary system of this country?— I have.
505. Do you consider the monetary system now in use has any particular
advantages, either with regard to the ordinary transactions of business, of book
accounts or of foreign exchanges?—I do not consider that it has any particular
advantages in any of those respects. I consider that in many of those respects it
is deficient in advantages.
506. The scale, I believe is not founded upon any scientific principle 2–Not
upon any scientific principle; on the contrary, I should say it is founded upon
what I should consider an unscientific principle. It is irregular in system.
507. Does it not give a great deal of unnecessary clerical labour, and also
render the accounts liable to error 7—I think it does. I think it involves unne-
cessary clerical labour, inasmuch as it requires a continual change of the multi-
pliers and divisors of the units of the system ; and in adding up long columns
of accounts it is necessarily liable to error, on account of the different divisors
you have to apply to the sums total.
508. Do you think it would be a great advantage if a simpler system could
be introduced 2–1 think there can be no doubt of it.
509. Supposing a change could be effected, have you considered what change
would be the most advisable 7—If any change at all take place, there can be no
doubt whatever that it must be to the decimal system. I can imagine no other
system to compete with the present, inasmuch as the present system has
the divisor 3 as a superfluous quantity; the decimal has 2 and 5 only, and the
decimal system only is in accord with our whole system of enumeration, with all
our modes of reckoning, and with the use of tables of logarithms.
510. In the principal money of account, the multipliers are always decimal 2
—I conceive they ought to be so.
51 1. Have any steps been taken by the Bank, or by the Mint, in reference to
bullion and assaying, towards introducing a decimal system of calculation and
book-keeping 2—You are perhaps aware, from the evidence already given, that
the Bank of England has lately disused the division of the troy pound into
ounces, pennyweights, and grains, and reckons its bullion now only by such
ounces and their decimals. I might observe, that the Mint proposes to follow
their example, so soon as the violent pressure under which it is at present work-
ing shall allow it a breathing time to make the change. The decimal system of
reporting the assays of bullion is fast driving out the old system of reckoning by
grains and carat-grains, that being a very puzzling and almost incomprehensible
system to those who have not made it their business to understand it. Both the
Bank and the Mint now receive decimal reports, and in a short time the whole
system of carats will, I have no doubt, disappear altogether from the bullion
market and be completely disused, and the present French system of reporting
the fineness of gold in millesimals adopted. So far as regards the difficulty of
the present system, I hold in my hand some tables by which calculations have
been carried out, which, without them, would have been intolerable to the
patience.
512. I understood you to say, Sir John, that this system has not yet been
introduced into the Mint, but it is decided that it shall be done as soon as prac-
ticable 2—As soon as practicable it will be done. -
5 13. You are so convinced of the necessity of it, from what has taken place
at the Bank, that you have determined to introduce it 2—I am convinced of the
necessity of it from abstract principle. The Bank having resolved upon it made
Professor
G. B. A iry.
-- *
26 May 1853.
Sir J. Herschel.
O.66. F 3 &l Il
40 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Sir J. Herschel.
**- : * ~ *-*--- *-a- -
26 May 1853.
an overture to myself, as master of the Mint, to ascertain whether I was willing
to introduce it, and so convinced was I of the advantage of it, that I had no
hesitation in giving in my adhesion to the system.
514. Are you of opinion that our present coinage affords peculiar facilities for
the introduction of the decimal scale —I am not aware of any very especial
facilities it affords. The pound sterling is divided into 960 farthings, which
might, by an easy transformation, be exchanged for a thousand, without much
infringing upon ordinary prices and habits. The pound is also divided into 20
shillings, and so far accommodates itself to the decimal scale.
515. Has not the introduction of the florin facilitated the introduction of the
decimal scale 2–No doubt the florin is the one essential turning point to the
introduction of a decimal scale.
516. Supposing that scale to be introduced, what would you make the prin-
ciple, the unit?—The pound sterling, beyond a doubt. Perhaps on this point I
may be allowed to read to the Committee a few observations I have committed
to paper.
“I think we must adopt the pound sterling.
“There are four other systems which have been proposed. There is, first,
the Ducat system, which takes the half pound as its unit. I call it the ducat
system ; some speak of Royls; some of Victorias; it is no matter, provided
only it is not called a pound, for if you call it a pound all manner of objections
apply to it, for which I refer to Mr. Hankey's evidence.
“This has some very taking points. It preserves the shilling as the silver
unit; the poor man’s unit, as it has been called ; it requires only doubling to
change pounds into Ducats. It would admit of a copper coin to represent its
tenth part; a copper cent, which is a real advantage.
“On the other hand it has, in my opinion, fatal objections. It would double
the numerical announcement of debts, taxes, liabilities of all kinds, rents and
rices; but what is of more real consequence, and is in my mind unanswerable,
is that the bulk of our gold circulation cannot possibly consist of 10-shilling pieces.
It is impossible to coin enough of them in a given time to meet emergencies.
Now the bulk of your gold coinage must consist of your gold unit. It would
never do to have the one great element of all our reckonings thinly scattered
among larger pieces as our half sovereigns are now among the sovereigns. It
would be, in short, a mere money of account.
“Next comes the Florin system, which would reckon all in Florins and cents
of Florins. This makes the pound a natural decimal multiple; and so far good.
But it assumes a silver monetary standard, whereas, for good or for evil, for
better for worse, we are married to a gold one. I do not mean to say a silver
standard would not be better. I believe it would, and I believe a binary
standard, half silver, half gold, at the option of either party to insist on, would
be better than either; but gold is our standard of value, and we are lashed on
to it, and must be carried along with it, toss as it may. -
“Then comes the Shilling system. It has no one point to recommend it but
its copper dime. The sovereign must be called a 20-shilling piece; the penny
must be demonetised, and we are landed in a system having no relation to any
other in Europe, or elsewhere.
“The Penny system is a little better. It would give us a franc not very far
from the French, and a pound of 200 pence, which was the old Saxon pound of
Ethelbert. I took occasion not very long ago to suggest this for a Canadian
pound, but it is quite visionary as applied to England.
“So, I conclude, we must stick to the pound. It is a national institution
ingrained into all our notions, and I hold it impossible to oust it. The true
office of the 10-shilling piece is to break the sovereign, and lessen the amount of
silver necessary to be kept up.”
517. Mr. J. B. Smith..] You state that if the ten shilling piece were adopted
as the unit, it would have the effect of doubling all debts?—It would have the
effect of doubling the nominal statement of them.
518. Supposing you adopted the ten shillings as a unit, and called it a decimal
pound, the effect would be that two decimal pounds would make one pound
sterling 2—Precisely.
519. As regards the shillings and pence, would it not be a great convenience,
as a money of account, and a greater convenience than the one you propose of
pounds,
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 47
pounds, florins, and cents?—I think I have said that it would possess that con-
venience as money of account.
520. The only objection you see is, that it does away with the prestige of the
pound sterling?—I think it would be impracticable to introduce it; if introduced,
I think it might have its advantages; but I do not see how it could be introduced ;
we must change every idea connected with our keeping of accounts, our ideas of
the larger sums, our incomes, &c., and we should have a calculation to go through
to bring our old motions to correspond with our new ones.
521. Would it be necessary to change our ideas in any other respect than by
taking a pound sterling, and converting it into two decimal pounds !—We should
have to double it in our minds, and that on every occasion. You would have to
go through a computation in your mind to convert one system into the other.
522. Would you not have to go through a process of that sort, if you adopted
the pounds, florins, and cents 7–Of course; but that would fall upon the fractions
of a pound, and mistakes would not be of such importance. The pound is not
only an English unit, but it is a commercial unit all over the world.
523. Supposing in money of account you were called upon to express 17s. 6d.
by your plan of pounds, florins, and cents; how would you write it down 2-—I
should write it 0 875.
524. Do you think that would be better understood than writing it 1,750 —
I should enter it in a line, 875.
525. As the number of transactions in this country by the working classes of
the people must be infinitely greater than those by bankers, do you not think it
would be desirable to adopt some system which would be easy to those classes 2
—It might tend to make the immediate transition a little easier. If you wish
to make a change, it is an object to make that as slight as possible, and there
would be difficulty enough in decimalising the subdivisions of the pound; and
if you superadd also the change of the pound itself, you would have two battles
to fight instead of one.
526. Would there not be more difficulty in decimalising the pound by turning
It into florins and cents, than by merely doubling the pound sterling, and leaving
the others unaltered, and dividing the shilling into a hundred parts?—I do not
think it would be more difficult in the long run, when once the habitude was
fixed. It refers chiefly to the transition state.
527. Mr. J. Ball.] The practical difficulty with the working classes is depart-
ing from the duodecimal division of the common silver coin to the decimal
gystem, and that must exist whatever system you adopt?—I consider that the
great difficulty. In the present copper coinage you have the divisor 3, and you
must get rid of that, as it is incompatible with the decimal system.
528. Mr. JW. Brown.] Would it not be a great difficulty, if we abandon the
pound, that it would create a degree of hostility, and a resistance to decimalising
the coin, that might defeat our object —That is a consideration of some import-
ance. It is desirable to shock as few prejudices, and to introduce as few changes
in habit and thoughts as possible; and to superadd the change of denomination
in the pound itself would very much increase the difficulty.
529. Chairman.] You have stated that you consider the pound sterling should
be the unit; will you inform us what you consider should be the gradations of
coin from the pound – I should say that accounts require to be kept to the
“uttermost farthing,” for the lowest retail purposes, and not beyond. As the
farthing is the 960th of a pound, the division of the pound unit into 1,000
parts is necessary and sufficient. The scale therefore must extend to the third
decimal place, and all monies must be integer multiples of this extreme. (This
excludes such coins as 2.3 millesimals, milliemes, millims, millets, or mils
of the pound). The complete decimal scale, which would best satisfy the various
conditions of exchange would, I conceive, be the following:
Copper - *- e tº {E_º - 1, 2, 3, 5.
Silver - gº tºº tºº tº º - 10, 20, 30, 50, 100.
Gold - º gº tº {-º – 500, 1,000, 2,000.
The sub-division of 5 into 3 and 2, and of 50 into 30 and 20, has a manifest
advantage over the binary sub-division (as of a shilling into two sixpences), in
that it gives the receiver of change a double chance of being able to make his
wºmen in a single coin. The copper scale, 1, 2, 3, 5, however, though
O. O. O. F 4 it
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
48 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Sir J. Herschel.
-
26 May 1853.
it ought ultimately to be that of the normal coinage, might, advantageously, in
a transition state of it, be replaced by 1, 2, 4, 5. The 5 is essential, as being
an aliquot of all the higher denominations.
530. With regard to the four and five, might not one be taken for the other 3
—I shall probably have more to say about that hereafter, but I think they ought
to be so coined, if coined afresh ; or so distinguished, if you take the present
copper coinage, that that should not be possible. It would be easy to avoid the
practicability of taking one for the other in a new coinage ; for example, if you
take the 10, 20, 30, 50 in the silver coinage, the edge of the shilling is milled,
I would have the edge of the next smooth, the edge of the next after that milled,
and the edge of the next smooth. The consequence would be, that the difference
in size would be so great, that you would know them even in the dark, as you.
now distinguish the threepenny and fourpenny pieces.
531. Mr. W. Brown.] Supposing a small hole were to be cut through the
fourpenny pieces —I do not consider it necessary; and it would be very difficult
to coin, nor would it ring.
532. Chairman.] Will you state to the Committee in what way you would intro-
duce the decimal system into practical use —The introduction of the new system
of coinage, supposing its adoption decided on, would very naturally divide itself
into three stages, each spreading over a considerable period of time; the first of
them would be simply and entirely anticipatory, and would be directed towards
familiarising the public with the ideas and denominations of the system. So
far as the operations of the Mint are concerned, it would consist in issuing,
during some considerable period of time, florins, half florins, and quarter-florins,
(not to be called sixpences) having inscribed on their reverses their values in
millesimals of the pound, gradually withdrawing meanwhile from the circula-
tion (without actually calling them in) as many of the half-crowns and of the
old sixpences as circumstances would permit, the worn shillings, &c. During
the whole of this period, every possible method should be taken to enlighten the
public mind, and to prepare it much more fully for the reception of the new
system than it can at present be supposed to be. It is true that educated men,
merchants, bankers, and thinking and reading persons throughout the com-
munity, are already quite prepared to understand the change, and to appreciate
its advantage, and that among these, it would meet little resistance, and receive
much support. But as yet to the mass it is hardly known, and it cannot be
expected that it should not present itself to the lower classes under a repulsive
aspect; and without allowing a sufficiently long interval for preparation, and duly
familiarising these classes with the expectation of a change, and giving them an
idea of what that change will consist in, it will be quite sure to encounter a very
formidable resistance. The appointment of such a Committee as the present, and
the public discussion which the subject must receive, should its report be in favour
of the measure, will do a great deal in this direction, by bringing it forward as a
matter of real practical interest. The report of the commission for the restoration
of the lost standard of weight and measure, followed up as it must necessarily be
by legislative enactments legalising their adoption, and placing our system of
weights and measures on a more advanced footing, will act in the same direction.
Another measure in aid of the proposed change, and in preparation of the public
mind for it, would be the adoption of a system of presenting the public accounts,
and of requiring all Parliamentary Returns to be made in the decimal form of
expression. The Committee of the Council on Education should, immediately
on the passing any resolution of The House in favour of the decimal system,
insist on its being taught in the national schools, and should order the prepara-
tion of elementary books for use in them illustrating it by examples, and
explaining its principles and advantages. Public encouragement should be
given to teachers and lecturers, who might be disposed to explain and illustrate
it in provincial towns, especially market towns, and at Mechanics’ Institutes, and
other similar institutions. All these steps I consider necessary to enlighten the
public mind on the point; to prepare the public mind for the practical introduc-
tion of the system. When this had gone on for some time, it might be expected
that some decisive indications would be afforded, by petitions, or otherwise, of
an impression on the mass of the population having been made, favourable to an
ulterior step ; and when this was the case, but not till then, the time would have
arrived for legislative enactment, to consist in the passing of an Act naming a
period after which the public accounts, the Bank books, and the accounts of
public.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAIL COIN AGE. 49
public bodies and institutions generally should be kept, and public contracts
entered into, on the decimal system ; prescribing the denominations to be used (in
conformity with those already inscribed on the coins), and the form ; and enacting
that after that, or some longer but definite period, no action for the recovery of
money at law should lie, unless the amount sued for be expressed in those deno-
minations.
The next step in the process would be one of action on the part of the Mint,
and would consist in the coining and issue, during the interval named in
the Act of Parliament, of a copious supply of 20-mil and 30-mil pieces, and
a moderate one of 10-mil, accompanied with the calling in and exchange of the
threepenny and fourpenny pieces now in circulation, and with the continued
withdrawal and melting down of old sixpences, and half-crowns, and shillings.
In order, moreover, that the decimal silver thus introduced (which would other-
wise have no connexion with the copper circulation) should be exchangeable into
copper, it would be necessary either to create at once, and simultaneously with
the issue of the decimal silver, an entirely new copper currency (an opera-
tion of vast magnitude), or to adopt a course which is not without precedent, and
which would allow of this operation being defined, and broken up into seve-
ral successive actions without inconvenience. This course would consist in
altering, by proclamation, the nominal values of all the existing copper coins,
so as to conform them to the decimal system, in the following manner —
The penny pieces of 16 to the pound avoirdupois, struck at Soho, by Bolton,
are larger and more valuable than those of recent date, which are, coined at the
rate of 24 to the pound. They are, moreover, perfectly distinct in aspect and
structure from the latter, so as to be quite unmistakeable, and are, for the most
part, in pretty good preservation, having worn remarkably well. These might
be raised in nominal value, by proclamation, 25 per cerit., so as to pass current
as five-mil pieces; the lesser pennies, and all the halfpennies and farthings
being, at the same time, lowered four per cent., so as to pass respectively
for 4, 2, and 1 mils. As none of these pieces, except the farthing, bears on
it any declaration of its value, and all being mere tokens, pass in value Solely
by Royal proclamation, they may quite as easily pass for one set of values as
another. By this step, as the great penny pieces inay be reckoned at one-fifth
part of the total copper circulation, the total nominal value would be augmented
by about two per cent., by which amount the holders of copper, as a body,
would be gainers. When the Irish currency was assimilated to the British by
the Act 6 Geo. 4, c. 27, the silver and gold coins of British currency were
ordained by that Act to be current in Ireland at their British rates, after a day
to be named by Royal proclamation, which was accordingly done by the procla-
mation of George the Fourth, 20th December 1825. By the same Act the Irish
copper was directed, on like proclamation, to be called in and exchanged for
British copper coin, at the rate of 12 British for 13 Irish pence, and the Irish
copper to cease to circulate. No such proclamation, however, was issued, but
in its stead two other proclamations, the one of 12 June 1826, assimilating the
Irish copper currency to the English by raising its nominal value in the ratio of
13 to 12 (and thereby benefiting the holders by 8 per cent.), assigning as a
reason, that a considerable time must elapse before it could be recoined. The
other proclamation, dated 30 June 1826, gave currency in Ireland to British
copper at British rates. In point of fact, the Irish-harp copper still remains in
circulation, and passes freely, both in Ireland and England, as British coin.
As a precedent this clearly indicates the course which might be pursued in
assigning decimal values to our actual copper. if it were held objectionable to
act in this way upon the farthings, which carry their value stamped on them,
an issue of mils, and the recal of the farthings, might accompany the issue of
the decimal silver. I consider it would be premature to issue any decimal
coin before that.
Finally, the threepenny and fourpenny pieces being withdrawn, and the
existing copper decimalised in conformity with the silver, there would remain
no piece in circulation not forming a link in the decimal chain; and the third
and final stage of the process would consist in calling in and recoinage of
the whole copper circulation into one, two, three, and five-mil pieces, and
in calling in the old sixpences still remaining in circulation, and replacing
them with 20 and 30-mil silver pieces. The recoinage of the copper might be
broken into successive steps, and distributed over time by acting in succes-
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
o.66. G sion
50 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
Sion on its several elements. After this, by degrees, as the half-crowns fell
out of circulation, the whole coinage would assume its ultimate regularity,
by the withdrawal of all the 25-mil pieces (the representative of the present
sixpence), which would be superfluous, their office of facilitating the change of
the half-crown being at an end. I should feel disposed to assign somewhere
about 20 years from its commencement as a probable term for the completion of
the process and the introduction of a totally new coinage. That is the idea I
have of the way in which the new system might be introduced.
533. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Did I understand you to say, with regard to the new
coins, the florins and half florins, that you would have marked upon them
“florin” and “half florin,” and also the number of mils?—Yes; each to bear its
numerical value in the millesimals of the pound.
534, You would have the value marked on every piece of coin that was
coined ?–Yes, of silver and copper coin.
535. Mr. W. Brown.] Do you not think that it would hasten the conversion
of the present into the decimal system, if an Act of Parliament were passed
forthwith to enact it, but leaving a discretion to the Lords of the Treasury, by
order in Council, to make it operative whenever they thought the proper time
had arrived; so turning the public attention to it, and probably inducing
masters of schools (seeing that the change must take place) to instruct their
pupils in the system of decimal coinage 2–Nothing would so greatly tend to
introduce the thing practically as to make it certain that it would take place.
536. Chairman.j You stated that the first step would be to withdraw the half-
crowns from circulation ?—No doubt.
537. Can you state to the Committee what is the number of half-crowns in
circulation now !—About 37 million pieces.
538. They are not now coined at the Mint ?--There are none coined at
present.
539. What is the number of florins in circulation now !—We are recom-
mending the coinage of florins at the present moment. I should say probably
about two millions.
540. Are you now continuing the coinage of florins —Rapidly.
541. Mr. Kinnaird..] Do you find they are taking with the public 2–They
are hardly yet fairly introduced into circulation. The new florins have disap-
peared, and it is thought that a great number of them must have been exported
to Australia.
542. Mr. W. Brown.] Without an Act of Parliament legalising and direct-
ing the number of mils to be stamped upon the coins, the conversion would
probably be protracted for a long time !—Whatever legislative steps might be
necessary for the change in the appearance of the coinage, of course the sooner
it is done the better.
543. Chairman.] What time do you consider it would take, supposing a pro-
clamation were issued now, to withdraw the half-crown pieces from circulation?
—The operation is one of great magnitude. I would call attention to the
magnitude of the operation, and to some circumstances by which the action of
the Mint might be materially fettered and impeded in carrying it out, and
which seem to indicate the necessity for spreading the operation largely over
time, were there no other reasons for so doing. The whole amount of British
silver in circulation in Britain and the colonies, may be reckoned at about
13,000,000 sterling in value, or about 236,000,000 of pieces of all denomina-
tions, of which about 3,000,000 are three-pences; 18,000,000 groats;
67,000,000 sixpences; and 37,000,000 half-crowns, making upwards of
125,000,000 of silver pieces, which will require to be withdrawn and recoined,
independent of the renewal of the shillings which form the bulk of the coinage,
and of which a large portion is greatly defaced. The total quantity of copper
in circulation, taking it as estimated by Sir J. Morrison in 1844, since which it
has not materially increased, may be about 5,000 tons, and may be reckoned at
270,000,000 of pieces. Thus the amount to be recoined will not be short of
700,000,000 of pieces. Under the present demand for silver coin, the with-
drawal of any large portion from the circulation is hardly possible: and so long
as the demand for gold continues on its present scale, it would be impracticable
to pour such a quantity of new silver coin into the circulation as to admit of an
extensive garbling and remelting of the old; and such an operation, if commenced
in quieter times, might at any moment be seriously disturbed and deranged in its
execution
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 51
execution by the arrival of a large and prolonged demand for gold, such as the
experience of the last year has shown to be possible. As it would be impossible
to commence the coinage of the smaller decimal silver until the system had
received its final legislative sanction, the interval of notice given by the
“Decimal Coinage Act,” should be long enough to allow of the circulation being
well supplied with these pieces under any circumstances which might arise, and
of the public becoming familiar with them before the keeping accounts in them
became compulsory.
544. There being no advantage to the public in bringing in the half-crowns
to be recoined, the process would be very slow 7–The Bank at present does not
send in any garbled silver. Whatever silver we are coining now is new material.
545. You have had no experience to guide you as to what time it would
require to withdraw the half-crowns from circulation ?—I should find it very
difficult to calculate the time it might take, except there were a large stock of
florins coined to replace them, and they were at once withdrawn. I am
speaking of a gradual withdrawal.
546. Independent of the decimal coinage, have you heard complaints of the
circulation of the half-crown and florin together ?—They are very similar in size,
they are less distinguishable from one another by their size than any other two
silver coins.
547. Independently of the introduction of the decimal system, even under
the present monetary system, you would almost recommend that the half-crowns
or florins should be withdrawn 7—I think they cannot both exist long together.
548. Then you consider it would be prudent, without reference to any further
proceedings, to withdraw the half-crown 2–I think so. -
549. Mr. JW. Brown.] Would it not answer every purpose that you con-
template, if you called in the present 6d. and 1s., and stamped them and reissued
them as silver tokens?—Each piece must go through a process. It would be
almost as easy to recoin them as to stamp them. To stamp them would dis-
figure them, and render them a very objectionable-looking coin. There might
be a certain saving.
550. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Do you propose that the new coinage should be
extended to all our colonies?—Of course; that is, except in colonies which have
a special circulation of their own.
551. You are aware that Canada has recently adopted dollars and cents : —
I am not aware that it has passed into an enactment. It has been proposed,
I know.
552. Do you think, if the Canadians were aware that we were about to change
our coinage, it might not induce them to delay the change of their coinage into
dollars and cents, so as to have the advantage of an uniformity of coinage with
the mother country?—I cannot say what the feeling is there in that respect.
553. Chairman.] You say that when the public mind is properly prepared,
petitions would emanate from the mass of the people for the introduction of the
system —From the enlightened portions of the people, such portions as are in
the habit of petitioning the House for changes of importance.
554, Such bodies as the Chambers of Commerce of Manchester and Liver-
pool?—Something more extensive.
555. Are you led to expect that before the change was adopted, the great
mass of the people would evince an interest in it, and petition for its introduc-
tion ?—I think you would require some indications of an interest in it from the
mass of the people. There is no doubt that the introduction of a new system
would meet with great resistance from the lower classes; and until there was
some indication of a probable diminution of that resistance, I think it would not
be prudent to force the thing on.
556. Why do you think we should meet with resistance from the lower
classes —I think the dealers over the counter, and persons who have no accounts
of any consequence to keep, possess very little general knowledge; and the whole
arithmetical knowledge they do possess is bound up with the present system.
They must lay aside all that; and we all know how very difficult it is to get
uninstructed and uneducated persons to lay aside old habits.
557. Taking the purchasers at those shops, the artisans and labourers, do you
think they would feel an interest for or against it?—The difficulty there would
be transient; at first there would be some objection, but I think it would soon
blow over.
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
o.66. G 2 558. Mr.
52 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
558. Mr. Hamilton.] Can you state whether, when the change was made in
the coinage in Ireland, there was any difficulty, or any feeling exhibited —
I think not.
559. Can you state the amount of the tokens or coins of the old system that
was in circulation at that time?—I could procure the exact information for the
Committee, but, to the best of my recollection, it was about 1,200 tons.
560. A new value in that case was given to the copper coinage in Ireland by
proclamation, and without an Act of Parliament, was it not *—The proclamation
was preceded by an Act of Parliament. The Act of Parliament stated that a day
would be named by proclamation when an exchange of coins would take place.
561. A subsequent proclamation was issued, giving a new value to the Irish
copper coin when circulating in this country, as well as in Ireland 4–It did give
a new value.
562. What was done with regard to Ireland would be a precedent, if thought
advisable, to alter the value of the farthing in England, by making 1,000 instead
of 960 farthings the value of the pound sterling?—I conceive that the farthing
exists as a fourth part of a penny; and upon that I think it is probably better not
to meddle with farthings, but to call them in, and issue millets, because they
bear the value on them.
563. Mr. J. Ball.] The change in Ireland conferred a benefit on persons
holding copper coin?—The whole value of their copper was raised about 8 per cent.
564. Unless in the change that you propose a period were allowed during
which the holders of the current pence and halfpence were permitted to receive
the equivalent of that in a new copper coinage, there would be a positive loss
to those who held the old coins –There would be a loss of four per cent.
565. Would not a large proportion of the poorer classes feel that to be a great
grievance, if a period were not allowed during which they might exchange the
existing coin for a new coin of the same value 2–It being allowed them to bring
that coin in after an interval when the new coin should have been issued, I con-
template the withdrawal of the old copper coin and the re-issue of the new as a
part of the system, but not immediately.
566. At the period when the change should take effect, would you not pro-
pose to have a reserve of new copper coin ready at the Mint to issue in exchange
for the existing one —Undoubtedly; that would be quite necessary.
567. With a view to avoid the dissatisfaction felt by the poorer classes, if they
found the copper coin in their hands ceased to bear the value at which they
received it, and also for the purposes of general convenience –That is to say,
your proposition would be to give value for value, deducting four per cent.
568. In coming to the Mint with 12 pence of the existing coinage, you would
give them 50 mils, would you not ; not 48?—I think that by the time the new
copper coinage was ready for introduction, prices and habits would have so
completely adjusted themselves to the change, that that would not be necessary.
I think the difficulty must be contended with in the first instance, when the
proclamation takes place altering the system.
569. With reference to the answer you have already given as to making the
change gradual, does it not appear to you, both d priori and with reference to
the experience of other countries, that the essential step in producing the
change in the mode of keeping accounts and in conducting transactions gene-
rally is to supply an adequate quantity of the new coin with which you desire
that the people should reckon —That is quite essential; and I should begin
with the silver coin.
570. Do you think you could induce people to keep accounts in mils, until
you had a mil coinage to issue —Of course it would be quite impossible: and
therefore it becomes necessary, with the introduction of the new silver coinage,
to be prepared with a mass of new copper coins to be exchanged with the old, or
else to give the new nominal value to the old copper coinage.
571. Have you considered the cost of preparing a reserve of the new copper
coin in the Mint, to be issued in very large quantities at the time that the Act
of Parliament should come into force altering the system 2–I should propose to
execute the coinage by contract, and not in the Mint at all. w
572. Mr. W. Brown.] Would it not follow as a natural consequence, that if
a new copper coinage and a new silver coinage were issued, with the value marked
upon them, and the present copper coinage or silver coinage were gradually with-
drawn, and one or the other became scarce, that the public would readily avail
te themselves
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 53
themselves of the new coin, and that buyers and sellers would accommodate
themselves to the value of that coin, and that commodities would be sold and
bought upon the new adjustment 2–No doubt the prices would accommodate
themselves; there would be a mutual adjustment between buyer and seller.
573. You would be rather forcing the new coinage into the minds of the
people, if there were no other coinage but that to resort to, except to a limited
extent —The introduction of the new coinage would consist in issuing a number
of pieces utterly incompatible with the old system. I would withdraw all the
old pieces from circulation that were incompatible with the new system ; the
only pieces which exist now that are so incompatible are the threepenny and four-
penny pieces, and they must be withdrawn ; there would then exist no piece in
circulation that was not in accordance with the decimal system ; and the decimal
system being legalised, it would be impossible not to adopt it in transactions
between buyer and seller.
574. The publication has no doubt found its way into your possession, by
which we learn that, after the adoption of the new system in the United States,
the only thing necessary to its success was. that the Mint should be in a position
to issue a sufficient quantity of the new coinage which entirely superseded the
other?—It was adopted very easily in the United States, and was a source of
general satisfaction.
575. Chairman.] Would it be absolutely necessary to withdraw the threepenny
and fourpenny pieces?—They are not expressed by any integer number of millets.
576. They form parts of a florin ; the 3 d. is 1-8th of a florin, and the 4 d. is
1-6th, so far, might they not circulate together?—The objections to those coins
are distinct; that to the 4d. piece is, that it is 1-6th of a florin, that it involves
the divisor three, which is adverse to the decimal system ; the 3d. piece is
1-8th of a florin, and cannot be expressed otherwise than by three figures,
which is in my opinion a decided objection.
577. There would be an objection to coining it after you have introduced the
system, but might it not continue in circulation after your system was introduced?
—-The threepenny pieces are so insignificant a portion of the coinage, that they
might be tolerated, because they are expressible in the decimal system ; there
are not above 30,000 l. or 40,000 l. worth of them in circulation ; the fourpenny
pieces are very numerous.
578. Mr. J. Ball.] Does it not appear to you that a coin may be permitted
to circulate, although it may not be possible to write it down 2–If you wish to
introduce a new system, you must do away with everything that may be con-
sidered an obstacle to it; the object will be to efface old recollections.
579. If you supplied a large quantity of 10-mil pieces in silver, at the period
of the change, would not that replace a part of the existing copper coins, and
make the supply of an equivalent amount of copper coinage unnecessary —The
main part of the system I have been suggesting would be 20-mil and 30-mil
pieces; very few of the 10-mil pieces would be essentially necessary.
580. Does not the public at the same time show a disposition to use small
silver coins —These would be very small; there is an objection to very small
pieces as forming a large part of the circulation.
581. Has it occurred to you that that objection would be in any degree
obviated by coining it in the shape of a ring !—I think there are many objec-
tions to that ; to say nothing of its being new, it is difficult of coinage, and it
would not ring.
582. You think they would be more exposed to forgery 3–I do not see why
they should.
#83. Chairman.] Would you have any coin of an alloyed metal 7–Most de-
cidedly I would not. I will state what I consider to be the objections to such a
coin. It has been proposed to have a coin of alloy or debased silver to repre-
sent the value 10, which it is alleged is too large for a copper, and too small for
a silver coin. I held this opinion myself at one period, but have seen reason to
alter it on the following grounds: 1st. It is not absolutely too small for silver
circulation. If made a trifle thinner than the present threepenny piece it would
be a very little less in diameter. It would, even if of the same thickness, be
larger than the twopenny piece, which is the size of the gold quarter sovereign,
supposing such a coin to exist. 2dly. The English public dislikes the idea of
base metal. Its appearance, if it contained copper enough to double or triple its
bulk, would be base and coppery when worn. This would facilitate counter-
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
o.66. G 3 feiting.
54 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Sir J. Herschel.
*
26 May 1853.
feiting. As the blanks must be annealed, they must also be blanched; when
issued and new, the coin would look like silver, and as it wore would become
coppery and base looking. 3dly. There would be more difficulty in standarding
it, as the copper, which would not form less than half the mass, would burn off
much more freely in melting than from standard silver. 4thly. The introduc-
tion of a new element in the calculation of bullion standards would be objection-
able. We have already too many. 5thly. Such a coin would not be needed at
all, inasmuch as the continuity of the coinage would be perfectly well kept up
by the copper piece, value five, four of which would exchange for the silver 20,
and six for the 30, just as four of our present pennies exchange for a 4 d., and
six for a 6 d. piece. 6thly. The recovery of the silver from it would be costly.
584. Mr. H. Brown.] You have been asked whether there is any probability of
the Canadians pausing in adoption of the decimal system in the event of a pro-
bability of our adopting the decimal system here; is it not much more likely that
they will adhere to what they are about to adopt, inasmuch as that rising
country, the United States, has adopted the dollars and cents, and being in
daily and hourly intercourse with them, no coinage of this country would be
wanted for Canada?—I should apprehend the tendency would be to assimilate
the coinage to that of the United States. The Canadian pound would consist of
nearly 200 English pence, and the decimal subdivision would agree perfectly
well with the American division into dollars and cents.
585. You think the Canadians would prefer the dollars and cents to what we
may adopt – I should apprehend that would probably be the natural course of
things,
586. Chairman.] Supposing the decimal system to be adopted, in what way
would you recommend that accounts should be kept 7–Pounds, florins, cents,
and mils, or pounds, florins, and any other denominations you choose to adopt.
587. Would you have four columns for figures —I should be disposed to
recommend one broad line, the pounds to be written on the left hand side of the
line, and the several digits of the three decimal denominations on the other side,
keeping them distinct from each other by lightly ruled lines.
588, Mr. Kinnaird..] That would be, in fact, four columns ?—In writing a
single amount, the columns would not be necessary, but the strong upright line
would be quite necessary to distinguish the pound from the decimals.
589. Mr. W. Brown.] You would write 11.9fl. 9 c. 9 m. in place of 1 l, 19s. 11; d.,
using four figures instead of seven 3–There would be a saving of figures. Each
column would only contain one figure. The columns would be the mere
mechanical contrivance for keeping the figures one under the other, to prevent
mistakes.
590. Chairman.] People might have cents and mils either in one column or
two 2–Different persons might have different habits, but I should suppose that
at last a habit would be fallen into.
591. Mr. J. B. Smith..] The decimal system affords a greater facility in arith-
metical reckonings; do you think it is equally convenient and useful in the ex-
change of commodities?—I see no reason why it should not be so.
592. There are 19 divisions of 960 farthings, while there are only 3 divisions
of 1,000 farthings; is it not a great convenience to have a great number of
divisors in the purchase of commodities?—That would be a great convenience,
if we had the duodecimal scale throughout. If we had a duodecimal arithmetic,
the additional divisor 3 would be a useful one ; but I think it necessary to keep
up a correspondence between the fundamental principle of decimal arithmetic
and all its applications; and generally, in our present system of weights, mea-
sures, and money, there are too many divisors already. In money we have two,
three, and five; in the system of weights, the avoirdupois weight gives us mul-
tiples of seven in our 14 lbs., and in our ton ; and in our system of grains, a
pound consisting of 7,000 grains. In our system of linear measure we have
a mile, which gives us another divisor, 11 ; in our system of weights we have a
vast complication, and, amongst others, in the wool weight, we have a multiple
of 64, which introduces the prime divisor 13. The fewer the arbitrary num-
bers you have to recollect in any system, the more scientifically correct that
system is.
593. I understand you to say that you would not consider the decimal system of
coinage complete, unless we had also a decimal system of weights and measures 2
—Although I consider the advantage of the decimal coinage is very great, I
- should
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 55
should not appreciate it with the same intensity, except upon a belief that it
would be accompanied by a decimal system of weights and measures.
594. So long as we have a variety of systems of weights and measures, the
decimal coins will never fit the fractions of a yard, and of pounds, and of
measures?—That I consider a great misfortune, and therefore I desire to see the
introduction of a system of weights and measures, as well as coins, as forming
a part of the same integral system. The facilities that would introduce it is
unnecessary to dwell upon, such as the ready estimation of prices, and avoiding
of those complicated rules of arithmetic that puzzle our school boys, and a great
many other things of the same kind.
595. Probably it is from the want of a decimal system of weights and mea-
sures, combined with the coinage, that great difficulties have been experienced
in America, where, although the coinage consists of dollars and cents, they have
been obliged for convenience to make use of a Spanish coin of 12 cents and
6 3 cents 2—The American system of weights and measures is our own.
596. Are you aware that they have in current circulation, besides their own
legal coin, the Spanish pieces of 12 cents and 6 3 cents 2—I was not aware of
that.
597. Do you think that would be in a great measure obviated by adopting a
decimal system of weights and measures —I think if the system of weights and
measures were in correspondence with the coin, every calculation would go on in
an easy and natural manner; so many pounds being divided into decimal ounces,
and the pound sterling into decimal florins, and the price being named, it would
be a simple matter of multiplication to arrive at the total value.
598. Chairman.] Would you delay the introduction of a decimal system of
coinage until you could at the same time introduce a system of weights and
measures?—I should think it very desirable that the changes should go hand-
in-hand.
599. Would it not increase the difficulty if you had to introduce both systems
at the same time —I think some legislation must speedily take place on the sub-
ject of weights and measures, when the report of the Commission for the Resto-
ration of the Lost Standard shall have been given in. Certain measures will be
recommended in that report which I hope to see acted upon, and which will get
over some of the difficulties relative to the weights and measures; for instance,
the abolition of the ton, the multiples of seven in short, and possibly also the
introduction of a millet weight.
600. Mr. W. Brown.] Do you not view the introduction of the coinage as a
wedge to introduce the weights and measures; that we might possibly accom-
plish one at present, where we should have a difficulty in accomplishing the two
together ?—It is difficult to say which should come first, if they are not to be taken
simultaneously. I should incline to the opinion that the decimalisation of the
weights and measures would be a step towards that of the coinage.
601. Are you aware that carpenters have been in the practice of decimalising
the foot measure?—Engineers and contractors, I believe, use the decimal divisions
of the foot now in their calculations; but I am not conversant with that line of
business.
602. Would it not be a great saving of labour, in fact, would it not be
a labour-saving machine, if the coinage were decimalised, and the weights
and measures were decimalised, requiring much less labour and fewer hands
to perform the same operations, doing it also with greater accuracy —I
should say that, the decimal system being once introduced, the rules of “Com-
pound Arithmetic,” “Reduction,” and “Practice,” would no longer require to
he taught in schools. The relief thus afforded both to teacher and scholar
would be immense. The four essential rules of arithmetic would be better
acquired and the drudgery spared, and the time saved for the acquisition of real
knowledge would tell upon the education of every individual in every class of
society. Even the “Ready Reckoner” would be dispensed with, or its place
supplied by a general multiplication table of comparatively sumáll extent, and
possibly a table of logarithms might occasionally be seen where now such a thing
is never dreamt of. All statistical, revenue, and general commercial computations
would be facilitated, and the acquisition of clear views of the mutual relations of
prices, imports and exports, duties, taxes, &c., very greatly so, by disencumbering
the elements of computation of the infinite complexity of denominations under
which they are now presented. The introduction of the decimal system would
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
o.66. G 4 get
56 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
get rid also of the whole of that complexity which consists in what we call rule
of three, sums of complicated denominations. In these calculations an immensity
of labour would be saved, and a great deal of clerkship in the adding up of
columns; and the quantities of mistakes that arise with those who are not from
their youth up accustomed to that work, is very great.
603. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Do you think, if it were possible to attain such an
object, that it would be desirable to adopt a universal system of weights and mea-
sures with civilised countries 7– There can be no doubt of its desirability, but I
doubt its practicability. &
604. Why do you doubt the practicability of it —Upon nearly the same
principle that I should do the introduction of a duodecimal arithmetic, or
I might almost say a universal language : the disinclination of nations to dis-
encumber themselves of their old motions would raise an insuperable difficulty.
605. Are you aware that many countries in Europe have adopted the French
system of weights and measures —It is largely adopted, but chiefly in countries
which have been at one time or other under French domination.
606. If there were no insuperable difficulties to introducing that system into
those countries, might it not be as easily introduced into other countries 2–
There would be a great difficulty in agreeing upon a principle.
607. Do you see any objection to the adoption of the French principle :
No other objection than the difficulty of laying aside old habits and notions
with the mass of the people.
608. You consider the French system a good one 2—I do.
609. Might we not adopt their system without adopting their names —
I think the French system a good one, because it is thoroughly decimal.
610. Do you think it would be an object worth striving for, to obtain in a
great country like this a universal system of weights and measures —I think it
would be accompanied by so much difficulty that it would involve a great deal
of what I should almost call hopeless labour; I should not expect it to succeed.
61 1. Chairman.] Are there any objections to having a gold coin of less deno-
mination than 10 s. 2–I will read a few remarks I have upon paper npon that
point:-“There are several objections against it, and first of all its small size. It
would be almost exactly that of a silver twopence; diameter, 0.525 in. ; thick-
ness, 0-033; weight, 30.818 gr. It would often be lost; everybody who had once
lost one would hate it, especially the labouring classes, whom its loss would
seriously injure. 2. It would not ring, and its small weight would require a
nice hand and delicate scales. Two, or at the very outside, three-tenths of a
grain would throw it out of circulation. I do not suppose such a coin would
ever be weighed, and therefore it would be at the mercy of sweaters and forgers,
3. Immense relative loss by wear and tear; I mean as compared to the sovereign,
it would be a most wasteful coin. Two causes for this: 1st. The greater ratio
of surface to solid content. 2nd. The more rapid circulation; it would be always
at work, in the purse or in the pocket; never at rest in the banker's reserve, or
in the old stocking. The surface is to that of the sovereign as I : 2°673; the
rapidity of circulation may safely be taken in the inverse ratio of the value, or
as 4 : 1. This gives the annual individual abrasion to that of the individual
sovereign, as 1.496 (1 Å) to 1, and as there are four times the number to make
up the same value, the loss by abrasion, value for value, is as 4 × 1 }, or 6 to 1.
4. If the lowest current weight is taken at 30 grains, a gold crown would go
out of circulation when it had lost 0-318; the sovereign may lose 0.774; hence
the relative duration of the two coins as legal tender may be calculated. The
crown will be shorter lived in the proportion of 1 to 3-642. I have taken the
limit of abrasion as wide as 0.318, but I perceive Mr. Hankey considers it would
not be safe to allow more than 0:19, and this would make the longevity of a gold
crown less than that of a sovereign in the ratio of 1 to 6:097; it would wear out
of tender six times as fast as a sovereign. 5. Now I come to the expense of
coining and maintaining in circulation this new coin. The expense of coinage
will be much more than four times that of the same value in sovereigns, owing
to breakage of dies and nicer limits of remedy weights. It will occupy more
than four times the time ; so that whenever it is an object to deliver gold
rapidly to the Bank that object will be defeated ; moreover, it will have to be
renewed more than six times as often ; so that the expense of coining and main-
tenance will be (value for value) more than 24 times that of sovereigns, and this
besides the loss by wear and actual loss.
612. Mr.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 57
612. Are you aware that the gold dollar circulates in the United States?—They
are gold dollars.
613. Are they in general circulation ?—I am not able to say the amount of
circulation. …”
614. When you come to coins less than a sovereign, the expense of coinage is
increased, and also the relative wear and tear?—It is ; and that in a high ratio,
in proportion to the small value of the coin, by the fact of its being constantly
Ill U1S62.
615. Do you see any advantages in issuing gold coins below the sovereign as
tokens?--That would involve a total change in our whole monetary system. In
the case of silver coinage, the Government supplies the material, and bears the
loss of wear and tear; but not so in gold.
616. If it became a token, it would cease to be exported ; would there be any
advantage in that respect 7–It would only cease to be exported by being issued
at a lower and nominal value.
617. If it were issued in the same way as silver, it would be issued with more
alloy, or below its intrinsic value 7––It would be so.
618. Do you see any advantage in it?—There would be a great disadvantage
in it, i think.
619. Mr. J. Ball.] The sovereigns and half sovereigns are coined with rough
edges; do you think it would be an advantge to coin them with smooth edges 2
—The milling of the edge is considered a great security against counterfeit.
I find it is regarded as one of the best safeguards of the coin, as a counter-
feit is more certainly detected by a defective milling in the edge than by any
other indication.
620. Is there not a great loss by abrasion ?—No doubt; and that might be
obviated to a certain extent by rounding the teeth of the edges.
621. Would there be an equal protection against forgery 3–In a counterfeit
coin, the milling does not meet, as you can generally see one place where it
over-laps.
622. You would prefer, on the whole, retaining the present plan of milled
edges in preference to smooth ones 2–-I think the balance is in favour of the
milled edges.
623. Chairman.] When the old coin is brought back to the Mint, the last
holder is to undergo the loss, whatever it may be --The last holder undergoes
the loss, undoubtedly.
624. Do you consider that just 4–I think the loss should fall upon the holder.
The loss falls upon every person in the exact proportion to the amount of his
transactions; and it may be considered as a trifling per-centage (say one 5,000th
or one 6,000th) of his gold coin transactions which he pays for the convenience
of using a gold circulation, and which he may avoid by using his scales, if he
thinks it worth his while. I assimilate it to a turnpike toll, which every man
pays in the exact proportion to his wear and tear of the road. Nobody thinks
it unjust to pay for the wear and tear of his clothes or his furniture. This is
because he himself personally consumes them. But besides his personal con-
sumption of the particular coin on which he bears the loss, he has had the using
of coins on which others have to bear it. It is a joint consumption. It has
been argued that in France the loss is borne by the Government, and that it is
the business of the Government to prevent frauds. But in France a charge is
made for coinage. In France, too, the roads are maintained by the Government
toll free, and many things done which we trust to private enterprise. And if it
be the business of Government to prevent fraud, a fortiori, it is its business to
prevent crime. But nobody contends that the government ought to bear the loss
on counterfeits; and counterfeiting and fraudulent abrasion differ only in
degree.
625. Mr. W. Brown.] You consider that the public-house keeper, or draper,
or others in the habit of taking sovereigns, calculate upon a certain loss by
light sovereigns occasionally, and are compensated for that in the price they
receive for their commodities 7–Yes, exactly so; every one who is engaged
upon a large traffic on the roads pays a large amount annually in tolls, but he
receives it back again in the profit on his transactions.
626. Mr. J. Ball.] Does it appear to you that, in a country where the bulk
Sir J. Herscheſ.
26 May 1853.
o.66. H As of
58 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Sir J. Herschei.
26 May 1853.
of the coinage is gold, we can safely adopt any other course than that adopted
here?—You must limit the abrasion, or otherwise the sweating might go on to
any extent.
627. Do you anticipate that the French Government, now that it is adopting
gold so largely, can abstain from following our example 2–They charge a per-
centage on the coining.
628. They assume a relative value of gold and silver which is not the true
one P-The relative value is constantly fluctuating. They assume 15, to 1.
629. Chairman.] What do you consider the wear and tear of the gold coinage?
—You may take it to be that 2%ths of the sovereigns presented at the Bank go
out of circulation; very nearly 3 per cent of the whole circulation goes out
annually. From the year 1844 up to the year 1850, the per-centage of coins
that went out of circulation was 2.4%ths, 2 faths, 2 oths, 2.Éoths, 24%ths, 2 ºths,
3-ºuths.
630. When is the gold coin withdrawn from circulation ?—When it is ever so
little below the current weight.
631. Mr. Kinnaird..] Do you not consider that a very large per-centage 2–It
is perhaps more than might be expected, but the wear and tear is considerable.
632. Do you consider that it is a bond fide wear and tear?—It is impossible to
say. We know that fraudulent practices do exist, and therefore it is conceivable
that it may not be all fair wear and tear ; indeed it is natural to suppose that
some portion of it may be abraded. But we can form no opinion of the extent
to which that would go.
633. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Upon what principle is that three per cent. calculated?
—I find, upon a return that I have been favoured with, of the number of sove-
reigns cut during the years as compared with the total number of sovereigns
tendered and presented at the Bank, the average being from nine to 12 millions,
that the former is between 200,000 l. and 300,000 l. per annum.
634. The per-centage is not upon the whole circulation of the country, is it?
—It is assumed that so large a quantity as 10 or 12 millions is a fair criterion
of the whole circulation.
635. Supposing the country bore that, what would be the loss to the public 3
—The quantity which will suffice to throw a sovereign out of circulation is
*śoth parts of a grain.
636. Are you able to state the loss in money upon the number of sovereigns
that have been short in weight during the year 2—It may be easily calculated;
you have a circulation of 35 millions, #8ths per cent. upon that number go out
of circulation annually, and you have 257 thousandth parts of a grain of gold
lost upon each of those, from which the result may be easily obtained.
637. Mr. J. Ball.] Are not many of those sovereigns that are withdrawn
reduced below the precise limit which would throw them out of circulation ?–In
all probability that must be so.
638. Is not the Bank of England the chief body which exercises this sort of
police over light sovereigns?—No doubt.
639. Is it right to assume that all the coinage is as faulty as that which goes
through the Bank of England?--It is in a constant process of purification.
640. Only one-third of the gold coinage is supposed to pass through the
Bank in a year 2—From the calculation to which I have referred, that would
be so.
641. You think the loss affects the whole gold coinage?--It seems reasonable
to suppose so.
642. And the accidental holder who pays the light sovereign into the Bank
suffers the loss?—What their system is in that respect I do not know.
643. Chairman.] Supposing a decimal system to be adopted, has it occurred
to you that there might be considerable difficulty in adjusting certain fixed pay-
ments directed under Act of Parliament; for instance, the penny postage, and
the tolls of bridges and ferries?—In the case of the penny postage there must be
a loss of four per cent. upon the stamps, but it does not follow that there must
be a loss of four per cent. on the revenue. If we were sure that the 1 d. was
the lowest possible postage that would give the maximum revenue, that the
maximum revenue would be threatened by going lower in the scale, it would
be
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COIN AGE. 59
be legitimate to suppose that a diminution in the postage would also diminish
the revenue; but it does not appear that the lowest point is yet attained.
644. You mean that the payment must be 4 mils instead of 52—An increase
of 25 per cent. would be a violent proceeding.
645. You would not recommend that ?–I should not like it myself.
646. With regard to tolls enjoyed by private individuals under Act of Parlia-
ment, does any way suggest itself to you in which that matter could be adjusted?
—I have hardly considered that sufficiently. I have no doubt that means of
adjustment might be found as to that, and in a variety of other cases. In the
case of the Post-office, we are not at all sure that a loss would be sustained by
the revenue; if it were so, the loss might be compensated in other points: for
example, the payment of the income tax could no longer be collected at 7 d.
in the pound; it would probably be collected at 3 per cent., and the Government
would gain more than an equivalent for the diminution at the Post-office.
647. You think it would create great prejudice against the system of the I d.
postage were it in any degree raised ?—I do not think it would be liked.
648. As regards the tolls, would you recommend some arrangement consistent
with the decimal system ; would you not, for instance, recommend that the
present coins should be kept in circulation, to pay for those tolls that are now
usually demanded ?–I by no means recommend that the present 1.d. should be
retained in circulation under the name of the I d. for any insignificant purpose
of that kind; it would, I think, defeat the whole system. I would contend with
the difficulty, as it arose, and in the best manner in which it could be done.
649. Mr. W. Brown.] Would you object to allow the toll-keeper to take five
mils for a 1 d. toll for the first two or three years, on condition that he took four
mils for the remainder of the term, so that by a calculation he should neither
gain nor lose 2–So far as I have thought of that suggestion, it appears to be
practicable. I do not see any objection to it.
650. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Might not an alteration of the measures, and an
adoption of the decimal system of measures, enable you to adjust the tolls to the
new decimal coinage, by altering the miles 7–That is another possible way of
meeting the difficulty.
651. You could not decide upon that until you had adopted some system of
decimal measures —That would not meet the case of the ferry.
652. So far as regards mileage by railway, an alteration in the decimal mea-
sure might enable you to adopt the the decimal coinage to meet something like
the present charge?—With regard to the railway mileage, it does not appear to
me that there is any difficulty at all.
653. Mr. J. Ball.] Is it not your opinion that the adoption of the decimal
system of coinage in England might facilitate hereafter the making of the coins
of other countries, which are also on the decimal system, interchangeable?—[t
would have a tendency in that direction.
654. Provided that such countries thought proper to adopt the same standard
of value, viz. gold, or that we thought proper to alter our standard of value, and
that a common standard of fineness of the precious metals were agreed upon,
would it, in your opinion, become possible to permit the coinage of each
country to circulate as legal tender My question applies to the circulability
of foreign coins, not equal in value to our own, but of the same fineness, and
bearing some simple proportion to the value of our common coins 3–The objec-
tion to that would be, of course, the great variety of values you would have cir-
culating as a tender in the same country.
655. The gold coinage of France approaches very nearly to the ratio of four
to five, does it not?—At the present rate of exchange it is very nearly that ; the
difference being something under one per cent.
656. What is the proportion of fine gold in the standard coinage of England:
—Eleven-twelfths.
657. What is the proportion used in France?–Nine-tenths.
658. And what is it in America?—Nine-tenths.
659. Have you considered whether the present proportion adopted in
England presents any peculiar advantages –In the presence of the French
system, and generally of the system of 9-10ths, it presents a disadvantage,
because our coin, being finer, is useful to melt into foreign coin, with the
addition of alloy, without the necessity of the addition of gold.
Sir J. Herschel.
• ****
26 May 1853.
0.66. H 2 660. Does
60 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
660. Does it not appear to you desirable that the alloy should be as hard as
possible, without materially debasing the gold 7–No doubt it is desirable.
661. Have you considered whether an alloy, depending upon the propor-
tion of the atomic weights of gold and copper, might not present advantages
which might induce other countries to adopt it as well as ourselves?—There
have been no very consecutive series of experiments upon that point, but what
have been made go to show that our system of 1-12th gives upon the whole the
greatest degree of hardness; that is admitted by the French while adopting their
system of 9-10th. It is stated that that comes so near to the system which
gives the greatest hardness, that the difference in point of hardness is inappre-
ciable, and it is considered as a recognised fact that H is the hardest com-
position. An alloy of part silver and part copper is regarded as somewhat better
than copper alone.
662. No complete experiments have been made on alloys containing the precise
porportions of the atomic weights of gold and copper ?—They come very near.
663. Do not the experiments of Lord Rosse tend to show that there is a
remarkable difference when you have the precise proportion of atomic weights?
—In gold and copper the changes are not so remarkable ; and I am not aware
of any experiments that would lead me to suppose that the exact atomic propor-
tions would produce any change whatever; the atom of gold may be taken
as 122.80, that of copper 39°56 ; those would give you for 2 atoms of gold, and
one atom of copper, 8613 as the decimal expressing the fineness, which is lower
than could be conveniently adopted as a standard ; the atom of one gold and
one copper would give '7563, two of copper and one gold, 6082. There is a
composition called red gold, which is nearly five atoms of gold and three atoms
of copper; its fineness would be '8381: there is also a mixture about of four
parts gold, one copper, and one silver, which, I believe, is used as red gold in
jewellery, but I am not aware of any advantages that it has in point of hardness;
it is simply the colour that is spoken of -
664. In point of fact, there is no practical difficulty affecting the value of the
coin attending a change in the standard of fineness —The value of copper is
not included in a sovereign ; the change in the total weight would be about
2} grains, if you adopt the French standard ; it would be inappreciable under
any circumstances; it would not be perceived as increasing the bulk of the
coin in any sensible proportion.
665. To what do you attribute the fact that there is a difference in the colour
of the gold circulating in this country 2––The yellow coins contain silver, and
the others contain copper.
666. That is not intentional in the Mint, is it – By no means; it would be
desirable to avoid it.
667. Is it found very difficult to extract the silver from the gold that is in
circulation ?—It is a recognised process and a profitable process; and it is done
very largely.
668. Is that done by the Mint previous to permitting the gold to be coined :
—It is not adopted at present; we could not coin the quantity of gold we have
to coin in the time; the time occupied in extracting the silver would be greater
than could be bestowed upon it.
600. Does the existence of silver in the coinage, of this and other countries,
create a practical difficulty in testing the fineness of the gold 2—There is no prac-
tical difficulty in testing the fineness of the gold; it is done to an extraordinary
precision, and very readily. -
670. If the French government should think proper to alter, by a very slight
amount, the assumed relative value of gold and silver, so as to bring it nearer to
the commercial relation between those two metals, the French napoleon might
be brought to be precisely 4-5ths of an English sovereign. The French napo-
leon being defined at 20 francs, and gold being taken at 15 times the value of
silver, if the French ſix upon 15 ºths as the relative proportion, would not a
napoleon of 20 francs then be equal to 4-5ths of the English sovereign —If it
were olice adjusted so it would not remain so.
671. Is it on that account that the French Government assume a fixed relation
between gold and silver, although that in point of fact cannot exist 2—The
French system used to be that of a silver tender; they now allow gold and silver
£O.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 61
o be a legal tender; and the consequence is, that so long as the relative value
of gold and silver remains as it is, neither of them will powerfully tend to throw
the other out of circulation; but in case of any change in the relative value of
gold and silver, one of them must go out.
672. Has not the substitution of gold for silver in the coinage of France and
America mainly contributed to prevent any considerable alteration in the rela-
tive value of the two metals, in spite of the large influx of gold —The silver
circulation of France is enormous, and the introduction of a great quantity of
gold, as the more convenient metal, must of necessity displace silver; but as to
how far that has altered the relative value of gold and silver will depend upon
a great many other circumstances, and, among others, the supply of silver from
the Mexican mines, and other sources.
573. For the purpose of permitting the French gold to circulate in England
at the relative value of four sovereigns to five napoleons, would it not be neces-
sary that the two countries should agree as to a common rule to be adopted with
regard to the limit at which a coin should go out of circulation for lightness of
weight 2–It is quite necessary that that should be the case, otherwise their light
napoleons might come over here for circulation. -
674. You think that, upon other grounds, the French Government will pro-
bably be tempted to fix a very narrow limit for the debasing of weight of gold 2
—I cannot of course say what the French Government might be willing to do
in any case of the kind.
75. Are you aware whether English gold coin is to any considerable extent
exported in ordinary years?—It is very difficult to obtain any exact knowledge
of the quantity of gold exported. There is a certain declaration of gold at the
Custom-house; but as it is not necessary to declare the quantity that goes abroad,
a vast deal of gold is exported that we know nothing of.
676. Would the adoption of a common standard of fineness, by an inter-
mational arrangement to make coin interchangeable, tend very much to check
speculation in the exchanges 2–I should apprehend not. The exchanges depend
upon the exports, and matters of commodity and commercial transactions, quite
independent of the internal circulation of the country.
677. Although it is true that in general the rate of exchange for any long
period must depend upon the balance of trade, is there not an oscillation created
by the dealers in coin, which would be checked if the coin were interchangeable 2
—The intrinsic par of exchange, the theoretical par of exchange, is different
from the practical par of exchange, which depends upon wear and tear of the
coin. That enters as one element of uncertainty into all calculations of
exchange.
678. With that common standard I suggested, that element of confusion in
the exchange would be excluded ?–Tf you were sure the rules would be adhered
to. Supposing the French Bank adopted the same system as the English Bank,
if they did that upon an established principle, and kept it up constantly, no doubt
the coins in circulation would approach much more nearly than they do at
present to their exact value ; and therefore in the proportion that that was done,
it would tend to diminish that element of uncertainty in the exchanges.
679. Do you not believe that if we altered our system, the loss would be very
much heavier than it is now 7–I have no doubt that the charging the loss upon
the holder is one powerful means of keeping the coin at its legal weight. With
reference to the question asked just now as to the quantity of gold exported,
I have here a statement which may be found useful, so far as the returns from
the Custom-house are concerned, of the quantity of gold exported from the
year 1842 to the year 1852, and which, with the permission of the Committee,
I will put in :—
Sir J. Herschel.
º'-
a6 May 1853.
0.66. H 3 AN ACCOUNT
62 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Sir J. Herschel.
26 May 1853.
AN ACCOUNT of the Number of Ounces of BRITISH GoLD Coin Exported from the United
Kingdom, in each Year, from 1842 to 1852.
Y E. A. R. S. British Gold Coin
h Exported from the United Kingdom.
Ounces. f. S. d.
1842 - - - - - - - - - 107,829 419,859 3 4
1843 - - - - - - - - - 564,509 2,198,056 18 4
1844 - - - - - - - - - 23,979 93,368 4 7
1845 - - - - - - - - - 11,728 45,665 18 –
1846 - - - - - - - - - 99,527 387,538 5 1
I847 - - - - - - - - - 1,005,651 3,915,753 II 7
1848 - - - - - - - - - 227,577 886,127 18 10
1849 - - - - - - - - - 210,426 819,346 4 9
1850 - - - - - - - - - 229,431 893,346 19 1
1851 - - - - - - - - - 481,838 1,876,156 14 3
1852 - - - - - - - - - 590,767 2,300,299 – 1
680. What is at present the value of silver as exchanged for gold 2—The last
purchase on the part of the Mint was 5s. 1d. per ounce standard.
681. That is, standard silver and standard gold 7–It refers to our legal
standard of value, the pound sterling and its subdivisions, as used in the English
market.
682. That is, the price of standard silver ?—Yes.
683. I forgot to ask you what copper that standard silver has 8––Three-
fortieths; different from the gold.
684. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Would you think it expedient to allow any foreign
coin to pass in this country as a legal tender 2—I think the thing would be
altogether objectionable. What might be done in the event of a general con-
gress of mations, and an adoption of a totally new system, I cannot say; but at
present, situated as we are, I think it would be an objectionable thing.
685. It would, nevertheless, be a great convenience, if we could all agree upon
having coins containing the same amount of fineness?—The thing would be
desirable in itself. All assimilations of that kind I hold to be desirable, the
only question being as to the possibility of inducing the masses to adopt the
improvement.
686. Is there not a great difficulty in some countries adopting gold and some
silver as their standard —That of course is a difficulty.
687. Mr. W. Brown.] You are probably aware that in other countries, although
gold and silver may be the legal tender, if the exchange fluctuates very much
you have to give a premium of one, two, three, and four per cent. to get coin
from the brokers to collect it, in order to meet the difference in the exchange?—
That has been the case in France in respect to gold.
688. Are you aware that, in America, silver has borne a premium of one,
two, three, and four per cent. 7—I was not aware of that fact.
689. Chairman.] Have you any general remarks to make upon the question
of the decimal coinage 7–Nothing occurs to me at present.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 63
Martis, 31° die Maii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT.
Mr. W. Brown. Sir William Clay.
Mr. J. B. Smith. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. Hamilton. Mr. Moody.
Lord Stanley. Mr. Dunlop.
WILLIAM BROWN, Esq., IN THE CHAIR.
Lieut.-General Sir Charles Wm. Pasley, K. c. B., called in ; and further
Examined.
690. Chairman.] WHEN you were here on the last occasion, we asked you
whether any, and what, inconveniences would arise, in the event of our coinage
being changed, in the payment of soldiers; you said you thought none would
arise, but that you would look into it; will you have the goodness to tell us what
has been the result of your inquiry 2–-Soldiers have always been paid in the cur-
rency of the country in which they were making war or in which they were
quartered. In Spain, in Portugal, and with the army of occupation in France,
and in short in every country in which they made war or were quartered, they
were always paid in the currency of the country, which never agreed with the
Sterling coin, and yet no difficulty was experienced.
691. With whom was the arrangement of the sum of money to be paid —With
the Government, which pays soldiers in the silver currency of the country, at its
full value in sterling money. At Gibraltar the payment is by the dollar, which is
divided into 12 reals and 192 quartos, one real being equal to 16 quartos : the
dollar being always paid at 4s. 2 d. by order of the British Government. It is
the same in all the British colonies, in which dollars are used, and if they are
paid in American dollars, as in Canada, they bear the same value. The real at
Gibraltar being the 12th part of the dollar, is equal to 4 d. and I-6th of 1 d.
Hence it comes exactly under the same difficulty as would be experienced if the
decimal coinage were introduced in England, and yet no practical difficulty has
been felt in paying the troops at Gibraltar. The quarto is a small fraction more
than a farthing, and yet no difficulty is found, though the troops are paid in
dollars, reals, and quartos. In India the troops are paid in rupees; each rupee is
2 s. O} d. ; the rupee is divided into 16 anas, and the ana is a fraction more than
d. ; the ana is divided into 12 pice, the pice is rather more than 1-8th of 1 d.
Therefore those coins ought to be much more troublesome than the decimal coin-
age would be in England, if established by law. In the payment of the troops,
there is a clearance at the end of every month, in which the soldiers receive the
full balance of their pay, but the full pay of the whole is drawn in advance every
month, and therefore when the captains of companies and their pay-serjeants
settle with the soldiers, by paying the balance due to them over and above their
usually daily payments and their weekly mess-bills, there can only be the difference
between one farthing and one of the proposed mils, that is to say, the 24th part
of a farthing, and whether the soldier gains or loses that, is a matter of moot-
Shine.
692. Is there anything else that occurs to you of which you would wish to
inform the Committee 2–I beg to observe that, in my opinion, it will be necessary
to have tables of sterling money and of the proposed decimal coinage, compared
together, from a farthing to 2s. of the former, and from 1 mil to 10 cents, or
1 florin of the latter. By way of explanation, I beg to hand in the following
table:
Lieut.-General
Sir C. W. Pasley,
K. C. B.
31 May 1853.
0.66. H 4 TABLE
64 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Lieut.-General
Sir C. W. Pasley, TA B L E of STERLING Money and of the proposed DECIMAL Corn Age compared, from One
K. C. B.
31 May 1853.
Farthing to Two Shillings of the former, and from One Mil to Ten Cents, or One Florin,
of the latter.



. Sum Value Sum Value Sum Value Sum Value
in Sterling in Decimal in Sterling in Decimal in Sterling in Decimal in Sterling in Decimal
Money. Coinage. Money. Coinage. Money. Coinage. Money. Coinage.
D. F. L. F. C. M. D. F. L. F. C. M. S. D. F. L. F. C. M. S. D. F. L. F. C. M.
0 1 0-001 6 I 0.026 I 0 1 0-05] 1 6 1 0.076
0 2 0-002 6 2 0.027 1 0 2 0-052 I 6 2 0.077
0 3 0.003 6 3 0.028 I 0 3 0.053 I 6 3 0.078
I () 0-004 7 0 0.029 I 1 0 0.054 I 7 0. 0.079
1 I 0-005 7 1 0-030 I l 1 0-055 1 7 1 0.080
1 2 0-006 7 2 0.031 l 1 2 0.056 I 7 2 0-081
1 3 0.007 7 3 0-032 I 1 3 0.057 1 7 3 0-082
2 0 0-008 8 0 0-033 I 2 0 0.058 I 8 0 0.083
2 1 0.009 8 1 0-034 I 2 1 0-059 I 8 I 0.084
2 2 0-010 8 2 0-035 I 2 2 0-060 I 8 2 0.085
2 3 0.011 8 3 0.036 1 2 3 0.061 I 8 3 0.086.
3 0 0-012 9 0 0.037 I 3 0 0.062 1 9 0 0.087
3 I 0-014 9 I 0.039 I 3 1 0.064 1 9 1 0.089
3 2 1 0015 0 2 0-040 I 3 2 0.065 1 9 2 0-090
3 3 0.016 9 .3 0-041 I 3 3 0-066 I 9 3 0-091
4 0 0-017 10 0 0.042 1 4 0 0.067 1 10 0 0.092
4 l 0-0I8 10 I 0.043 1 4 1 0-068 I 10 1 0.093 .
4 2 0-019 10 2 0-044 1 4 2 0-069 1 10 2 0-094
4 3 0-020 10 3 0.045 1 4 3 0-070 1 10 3 0.095
5 0 0.02I ll 0 0-046 1 5 0 0.071 1 II 0 0.096
5 l 0.022 ll 1 0.047 1 5 1 0.072 1 11 1 0-097
5 2 0.023 II 2 0-048 I 5 2 0.073 1 11 2 0.098
5 3 0.024 ll 3 O-049 1 5 3 0.074 1 11 3 • 0-099
6 0 0.025 12 0 0.050 I 6 0 0.075 2 0 0 0.100
I have not carried the table higher than 1 florin, but for general use it would
be necessary to have tables of that sort carried up to as far as 1 l. sterling.
693. Parties would soon find that it was necessary to make use of the tables,
and booksellers, finding that there was a demand for them, would furnish them 2.
-—Yes.
694. We will suppose people coming over from France, and having a sum to
pay at the Custom-house, could their coin be reduced as nearly as possible, by a
table of that sort, to decimal money 2—When it is established, it can make no
difference whatever beyond the 24th part of a farthing in the total annount of
the bill.
695. Have you anything further to state to us?–In regard to the coinage,
I should think that the new copper coinage should consist of a 1-mil piece, a 2-mil
piece, a 3-mil piece, and a 4-mil piece; and that the new silver coinage should
consist of a 1-cent piece, a 2-cent piece, a 3-cent piece, a 5-cent piece, which would
correspond with our present shilling, and a 1-florin piece. I think those are all
the coins we ought to issue. The cent piece will be very near to the smallest
American silver coin and the smallest French silver coin, and between this, as
well as the 2-cent piece and the 3-cent piece, there will be a marked distinction in
size, so that no mistake can take place, and I think they will be very convenient
coins.
696. Lord Stanley.] Of what metal do you propose that the cent piece should
be composed ?–Of silver. It will be very nearly as large as the threepenny-pieces.
Il OW II] l] Se.
697. Chairman.] Would you have the coins marked with the value 2–Yes ;.
all the copper coins.
698. Would you not also mark upon the silver coins the number of mils?—
Yes; 1 cent or 10 mils, 2 cents or 20 mils, 3 cents or 30 mils, 5 cents or 50.
mils, but not the florins, upon which I would mark 10 cents or 1 florin.
699. Lord Stanley.] Would you carry that on to the highest denomination, and
mark the 1 l. Sterling 1,000 mils?—That is not necessary, because the only deno-
minations that will be changed in accounts are shillings, pence and farthings, into
florins, cents and mils. .
700. I understand you to say that you do not think it important that every coin,
without exception, should bear upon it its value in mils?–1 do not see the neces-
sity of it; the cents only, if under one florin, ought to have upon them their value
in mils.
Mr.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 65
Mr. Augustus De Morgan, called in ; and Examined.
701. Chairman.] YOU are Professor of Mathematics in University College?—
I am.
702. We are aware that you have paid much attention to the subject of
decimal coins, and decimal weights and measures; have the goodness to state to
the Committee what you consider to be the advantage of abandoning the present
system, and adopting a decimal system 3–I consider there would be a threefold
advantage. First in actual business, next in education, and next in the prepa-
ration for a decimal system altogether. The advantage in business is the actual
saving of trouble in calculation, which would be a very material advantage, and
would be, in fact, the great advantage. I might give some details of the manner
in which calculations would be more easy; but I will merely mention one thing: a
common rule for dividing one sum of money by another never appears in our books
of arithmetic at all under the name of division, for instance, how many times does
16 l. 17 s. 23 d. contain 13 s. 74 d. Such a question as that, obviously a question
of division, is referred to another branch of arithmetic by the difficulties of our
coinage, and if ever such a thing occur, it is manufactured into a question of the
Rule of Three.
703. Can you form any opinion of the per-centage of labour that would be
saved —Of the per-centage of labour in calculation saved, I can form no very
adequate idea; but I believe that in the more complicated parts of ordinary
business calculations considerably more than half the labour would be saved, and
in many questions more than four-fifths of the labour.
704. You consider that, the adoption of the decimal coinage instead of our pre-
sent mode of keeping accounts, would be a very important labour-saving machine
to the country —I am certain of it. I will go on, with the permission of the Com-
mittee, with what I was saying on the question of business. I spoke of the
trouble that would be saved in what actually is done, and must be done, but I
did not speak of what might be done, but is not, in consequence of the complica-
tion of our present system. In the first place, the money which changes hands is
not that which would change hands if we had a more simple system, and I will
take as an instance the income-tax. It must have been the idea in the mind of the
Minister that it should be three per cent., and the nearest calculation in round
numbers to that is 7d. in the pound; so that the Government abandoned about
30,000 i. in every million of taxes, by taking 7 d. in the pound instead of taking
three per cent. It may be stated in this way, that the Government abandoned
income-tax on the income-tax ; that is, they abandoned 7d. in the pound on
what they were to receive. Another case is this : every one knows that dis-
count on a bill that has some time to run is not the interest on the present
value until the time it becomes due, but owing to the difficulty of calculating
the discount, it has gradually become charged as interest on all small bills with no
long time to run ; for instance, a bill for 100/. due a year hence at five per cent.,
would be discounted at 95 l., instead of 95/. 4s. 9d. ; that is a difference of 4s. 9d.,
which would not be submitted to by an individual in an individual case, but the
action of our complicated system on the general public, and on the general system
of business, has been to cause what is really discount to be abandoned in favour
of what should be called interest.
705. I believe that engineers, builders and contractors, who have large and
complicated calculations to make, almost always use decimals instead of pounds,
shillings and pence?—I know that the engineers use decimals of a foot on the
levelling staves. I know also that the Bank of England has adopted the deci-
mals of an ounce as to bullion ; and that actuaries have always used decimals of
money, never using the shillings and pence.
706. In business transactions, what saving of figures would there be by this
simpler mode of keeping accounts 2—The mere keeping of accounts consists
in writing down figures and adding them up ; and it is obvious that, although we
say we have three columns, we really have five, because the shillings want two
columns, and the perce require two columns to meet the case of 10 d. or 1 I d.,
and then there is the column, so called, of farthings, which requires the writing
down of two figures. The new system would require strictly three columns of a
single figure in each, and nothing beyond that.
707. How would you express 1 l. 19 s. 1 , , d. 2–That would be, as nearly as
possible, £. I'999.
Mr. A. De Morgan.
31 May 1853.
0.66. I 708. In
66 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
M. A. De Morgan.
31 May 1853.
708. In point of fact, you use five figures instead of seven 7–Four ; there are
not only seven used, but the line that separates the three and four, and some
marks of separation between the shillings and pounds. In writing down
1 l. 19s. 1 1 # d. I have to make lo marks.
709. Have you anything further to add as regards business?—I should say
that there are one or two aids to business that have never been used in con-
sequence of the complication of our system; for instance, the table of logarithms
is never known in business. Now that, as a means of calculation or check, is a
matter of great importance, and will no doubt be introduced in a few years, with
a complete establishment of the decimal coinage. Let me notice one class of
questions in particular, which is known in arithmetic as the arbitration of ex-
changes, the finding out what is the best way of transmitting money from one
country to another, whether directly, or through a third country or through a third
and fourth country. That is really a question of such complicated calculation that
it is not done, I am sure, in a great many instances in which it ought to be done;
and, in particular, it is not done with the rapidity which ought to be used. In a
great many instances, when a post comes in from one country, and a post goes
out to another country the same evening, it ought to be a matter of considerable
consequence to a man of business to be able to state two or three questions of
exchange. The arbitration of exchanges is a very complicated consideration
with the present system. In 1802 a book was published by a gentleman of
the name of Teschemacher, for the arbitration of exchanges by the use of
logarithms. It did not mention the word logarithms, because that would have
frightened the mercantile men. It did not come into use, because it was not
properly introduced, and was sold at a very high price ; and I only mention
it as showing my own knowledge that a system of logarithms would be a very
material aid in the question of the arbitration of exchanges. I will mention
another instance, and that is the sliding rule which the carpenters and engineers
use, which is the logarithmic rule, very easy to understand, and easy to
apply to any decimal system. It is not impossible to apply a siding rule of
calculation to our system as it is, but though it is not impossible it is practi-
cally impossible ; it is impracticable, as the difficulty of using it with pounds,
shillings and pence, would be too great. Brokers, for instance, and persons
who have to make calculations and adaptations very quickly to find out the
proper price of one stock according to the price of another stock, might use the
sliding rule to very great advantage. I will now come to the subject of educa-
tion, in which I will first speak of the time I believe to be lost. I think that,
taking all the schools in the country, commercial as well as classical, and consi-
dering in how many of them reading, writing and arithmetic form the great mass
of what is taught, I am not putting it too high when I say that arithmetic forms
the fifth part, in time, of all the primary education given in the country, that is,
20 per cent. of all the primary education. I think that is under the mark. I am
sure I am putting the evils of the present system rather low, when I say that they
cause one-fourth of that time to be uselessly employed, that is to say, 1-20th part
of all the time spent in primary education in this country I consider to be thrown
away by the present system of coinage, weights and measures.
7 lo. That is one-fifth or the 20th part?—Yes.
7 11. What portion of the whole education ? - Five per cent. of the whole time
spent in primary education ; by that I mean of the education before proceeding
to college or into business. That great loss of time is the first disadvantage. The
next is, that as soon as the student has mastered the great principle of decimal
arithmetic, as soon as he has got through his primary rules of addition, subtraction,
multiplication, and division, his attention is called off to another system, and
not merely to another systein, but to a complication of different systems. I say
nothing about the complication of the different systems further than to give that
hint, because we are now upon the coinage, and not upon the weights and thea-
sures. But by far the greater part of calculation upon concrete quantity is made
upon the money; for one question of calculation that occurs in real business upon
the divisions of the pound avoirdupois, or the divisions of the acre, there are twenty
that occur upon money. And therefore, just when the student should begin to
apply the principles of decimal calculation which are the basis of arithmetic, he is
forced in a great measure to abandon them, and to proceed to another system,
which creates confusion, causes him to forget what he has learnt, and makes the
subsequent use of arithmetic much more difficult than is necessary.
712. What
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 67
7 12. What means would you adopt in order to introduce the decimal coinage
into schools as soon as possible; what primary steps would you think it advisable
for the Government to pursue – I very much doubt whether it is necessary for
the Government to take any particular pains, except in the Government schools,
and in those matters to which the Government has to apply its national system of
education. I think schools in general may be left to competition, to private
writers, and to the feeling which every one will have of the necessity of preparing
for the change. It will be borne in mind that this is not from the more easy to
the more difficult, but from the more difficult to the more easy. I should say
that some teachers (and I can speak for myself) always use decimal coinage
in actual teaching, by teaching a shorter rule for transferring our common coinage
into decimal coinage, working the question in that decimal coinage, and then
transferring that back again to pounds, shillings and pence, when the answer is
given. I never myself teach the actual coinage, except that I teach the head
rule for transferring it into decimals, which is very easy. -
713. Mr. Kinnaird.] Do you know of any very good book existing at present
for introduction into schools —Not that has particular reference to decimal
coinage. There are some books of arithmetic that teach the short rule of con-
version. -
714. You know of none referring entirely to the decimal coinage 7–I know of
no book in English fashioned entirely upon decimal coinage. -
715. Chairman.] What steps would you take to introduce the coinage; would
you do it at once – I do not think it will take much time. As to the modes of
introduction, there is a question in my mind as to which of two plans should be
taken, a gradual introduction, or an introduction at one step. If the new system
be introduced gradually, the process would be, without saying a word about new
coinage or the decimal system, merely to call in the hall-crowns and issue the
florins. When that is done, the process would be to coin a coin of 2 d., that is,
of the present coinage, without any reference to decimal coinage, or to any altera-
tion of our system. If a coin of 2 d. were brought into use, supposing that such
a coin could be easily brought into use, of which I am no judge, with the same
advantage as the 3d. and 4d., the first thing that would strike the people would
be that five of those would make 1 s. and , d., and that I O of them would make a
florin and I d. They would soon learn how to give and take change, because
nothing is easier than to remember that five of the new coins make 1s. O d.
People would soon come to the idea that this odd , d. in the 1s., and odd 1 d.
in the florin, was a nuisance, and it might then be abolished as a nuisance, and
the s. brought to the five new coins and the florins to the 10 new coins; and
that would be the gradual way of introducing the system, never mentioning
the decimal system, nor giving the people a motion of a change, nintil a procla-
mation should be issued to strike off the d. on the shilling and the d. on the
florin. That would be a gradual introduction into legal use of the florin,
cent, mil, or any other terms that night be chosen.
716. Are you aware of the gradual mode in which the currency was changed
in the United States, and of Jefferson’s sentiments on the subject?—I am not
aware of it.
717. Look at the statements made by him which are here pointed out, and say
whether you think that the new coins would gradually displace the old coinage,
as Jefferson seems to think in that book 2–1 n our case the old coinage would
immediately become part and parcel of the new coinage ; because we have no
coin to abolish except the half-crown, and that not necessarily, but merely as a
convenience. -
7 18. Mr. J. B. Smith..] When you speak of a coin of the value of 2; d., do
you mean of the present coinage, or do you mean 1-8th part of a florin?–1
mean 2; d. of our present coinage, so that five should be a legal tender for 1 s. o d.,
and 10 a legal tender for a florin and 1 d. -
7 10. Chairman.] Would you not apprehend some difficulty with that fraction
of 1 s. 7–I do ; but that difficulty is precisely the difficulty of the decimal coinage
which I want to introduce, in what I think would be a less frightful form ; of
course I see a difficulty, and it is precisely to bring on that difficulty that I propose
a coin of 2; d., or five to 1s. O d.
720. Assuming that the Government were to recall the 1s., retaining its value
in a new coin, do you think that would answer 2—I do not say that my mind is
entirely made up upon these two plans, and I put them before the Committee as
Mr. A De Mogai
... --- - - - - - - - - - -- *-**
31 May 1833.
0.66. I 2 Illättel'S
68 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. A. De Morgar. matters which will no doubt receive attention. There will be a difficulty any
---, -------------- - -
31 May 1853.
way, and it will lie in that alteration of the 1s. from 48 farthings to 50 farthings;
whether that difficulty can be best met by accustoming people first of all to a new
coin, and an awkward coin, it being remembered that in that awkwardness they
encounter the difficulty ; whether the best system will be to let that awkwardness be
felt first, is a question upon which my mind is not made up. I for a long time
thought that the best plan would be the gradual plan, but I think the general
feeling is against it ; though, for myself, I still incline towards it.
721. Lord Stanley.] Would not the new coin require to be called in again when
a further adoption of the decimal system took place 2—No ; it would become the
tenth part of the florin as soon as the proclamation issued which established the
decimal system.
722. You propose that it should be a silver coiu ?—Yes.
723, You would alter the arbitrary value of that silver coin -—I should do so,
as it would not be of the actual value ; in fact, the silver coins have so little refer-
ence to their value, that there is no difficulty in that point of view.
724. Mr. Kinnaird.] Your observation about the 2, d. piece is rather with
reference to the working classes than as to commercial transactions ?—Certainly.
725. Do you not think that the holders of those would have a very just right
to complain if we were to issue a coin quite recently with a positive view of mulct-
ing them in the florin of 1 d., or in the shilling of d. 2–You are already going to
do that with the copper, for when the change is made by which 50 farthings
become a legal tender for 1s., that deduction is made, which I contemplate making
with this 2, d. coin, the only difference being that it would exist in one bit, whereas
it would otherwise be in several bits.
726. Mr. J. B. Smith..] When you change the system into the decimal system,
the new coin would become 2 d. 4.--It would become one-tenth part of a florin, or
what is called the cent in this discussion. -
727. The florin would be divided into 100 mils, and each cent into lo mils?
—This would be lo mils.
728. Chairman.] Probably you would take the pound for your integer ?—Yes;
I consider that a matter of the utmost necessity. Arithmetically speaking, it does
not matter at all. It would be perfectly easy, in the calculations of bankers and mer-
chants, to start any day with a new name, for instance, to call a pound two eagles.
To the banker's clerk or to the broker, the trouble would not be worth mentioning;
but the pound is more than a mere matter of arithmetic. There is a great deal of
political and moral association connected with it. Under the phrases “500 l.
a year,” or “1,000 l. a year,” we think of states of society. To make a violent
alteration would be such a nuisance and mischief as should only be encountered
for some very great benefit, and I see no benefit at all in the change.
729. You would not make the 10 s. the unit, and call it 1,000 2–No ; I
would keep up the pound sterling, both for our own associations, and because it
is so well known all over the world.
730. Another suggestion has been to keep the farthings, but to change the
other coins 7–That I think would give more trouble altogether than the other
change; it would give a great deal of trouble in large commercial transactions.
731. Would it effect a complete change of the ideas of money —Yes; it would
alter the exchanges, that is, the names under which exchanges are expressed. It
would give the commercial world a great deal of trouble, and I do not see that it
would be compensated by any advantages. There was a proposal made, when
this present silver coinage was introduced, I think in 1816, for a decimal coinage,
that we should take the guinea at 252 pence, and convert that into 1,000 mils ;
that is to say, the 252 pence into 250 pence, which was advocated as the least
violent change in the copper ; but it found no acceptance, and of late years it has
never been revived.
732. With respect to the names of the coins, what would you call them 2–It
is proposed to term them pounds, florins, cents and mils. To the pound and
florin I have no objection ; there never was a coin near the 2s. which had a name
in England ; and therefore for the 2s, coin we must either invent a name or adopt
a name, and I think the word “florin would do as well as any. But to the
words “cent” and “mil,” I have decided objection. It must be remembered
that the change of the coinage must be viewed as a preparation for a complete
decimal system. When that complete decimal system is introduced, we shall
Wall Ł
$
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 69
want the words “cent” and “mil,” together with the word “dime,” to express Mr. A. De Morgan.
the oth, looth, and 1,000th of any unit; for in a complete decimal system every- *E======s**E=sºme
thing must have its 1 oths, and looths, and 1,000ths. The words “tenths,” “hun- 31 May 1853.
dredths,” and “thousandths,” are difficult to pronounce, and moreover they
should be monosyllables; the words “dime,” “cent,” and “mil,” would do very
well. If we take up the words “cent " and “mil’ to signify coins, we abolish
the etymological connexion with the word “dime,” and we deprive ourselves of
the power of having these general words to run over the whole system. More than
that, if the words “dime,” and “cent,” and “mil,” were introduced at last, as
they will be, to denote the oth, looth, or 1,000th of any measure, the confusion
that will take place on account of having the words “cent” and “mil" appro-
priated to coins will probably lead to a great deal of disagreement and litigation
and fraud. The confusion, for instance, between the cent of a mile and cent of
a pound would lead to misunderstanding of bargains, if the word “cent " were un-
alterably attached to the coin, so that it could not be easily transferred in thought.
I can conceive a number of cases in which contracts would be misunderstood, and
in which frauds could be practised, by the confusion that would attach to the use
of words, as soon as they become moveable words, if they had been previously
fixed words and attached to coins. It would be very easy to get other names.
733. What other names do you propose ?—So long as they are mono-
syllables, it matters nothing, as to convenience; and antiquity should be con-
sidered a little, I think. I find that among the nations of German blood the very
Small money was anciently marked with a cross, and to this day in Germany
there is the kreutzer. The farthing at the time of the Reformation was marked
with a cross, and when James I. recoined the farthing coinage, he marked the
farthings with a cross, only crossing the sceptres of England and Scotland. I con-
sider then that the term “cross” has something of a classical claim to be the name
of some money of very low denomination, and we all know that the proverb “He
has not a cross to bless himself with,” meant that a man had not one of the
smallest coins, for the cross was then on the farthing.
734. As those names are perfectly arbitrary, it would be very soon understood
that the florin was the 1 oth part of a pound, and the cent the 1 oth part of a
florin, and the dime the 10th part of a cent?—No doubt; but when we want a
short term for 1 oths, 1 Ooths, or 1,000ths of anything, it is not so soon understood
that we have transferred our names from the coin. The yard and the pound
avoirdupois would each have its cent.
735. Lord Stanley.] Do you imagine that there is any practical confusion from
the pound being at once a coin and a weight 7–No doubt of it.
736. And that inconveniences arise 7–I have no doubt that inconveniences do
arise.
737. What have you to say of the pound sterling, the pound avoirdupois and
the pound troy –They lead to some amount of confusion in teaching arithmetic.
738. You know the pound troy and pound avoirdupois are both weights 2—No
doubt.
739. Do you imagine that any confusion exists between the pound sterling and
the pound avoirdupois?—I think So, occasionally, in doing business, and occa-
sionally in teaching.
740. Chairman.] Would it be a great advantage if we adopted the pound
avoirdupois universally 2—It would be some advantage, but not perhaps so
much as is supposed ; the pound troy is restricted to a special profession, and none
but gold and silver Smiths know anything about it.
741. Lord Stanley.] Do you see any objection to retaining the name “farthing,”
considering that the alteration is only 1-25th part 2—I think it will be retained by
the people, let the Legislature do what it may.
742. Mr. Kinnaird.] Would not that be a good reason for retaining it !—
I would rather that the Act of Parliament gave the option.
743. You see no objection to keeping the farthing?—Though the Legislature
should give it a new name to avoid confusion, my own opinion is, that the people
will term it “farthing.” I think they will not be driven out of the name of “farthing”
of “ shilling.”
744. Chairman.] Is it desirable to abandon names which the community are
familiar with ?—It is desirable to give a new name to a new thing; that is not
changing the name of anything.
o.66. I 3 745. The
70 MiNUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. A. De Morgan.
31 May 1853.
745. The habits of people being fixed, and their notions of the value of the 6 d.
and the farthing being fixed, would not great difficulty be found in bringing them to
fix the value of a new coin relatively to the old coin they are parting with —They
will know the name which the Legislature gives it, and if they find it convenient,
they will use it. I think the Legislature ought to give the option. Then I would
call the cent a groat; the term groat has not always meant 4d. At one time
there were groats of 3d. Its general meaning has been some copper above 1 d.
and below 6 d. Crosses, groats, and florins would do as well as mils, cents, and
florins, and would, what in my opinion is a very great advantage, preserve
the generic terms dime, cent, and mil, to stand for 10th, 100th, and 1,000th,
when the full decimal system comes to be established.
746. Mr. Kinnaird..] Is there any other name you can suggest ?—I know of
no other name of antiquity. They might be called stars. I think it matters
very little what monosyllables are used.
747. Chairman.] What number of coins do you think necessary 2—I think
the mil piece, the 2-mil piece, and the 4-mil piece are indispensable. We must
have the correlatives of our farthing, halfpenny and penny. The 5-mil must
come in as half the cent, as we cannot well avoid dividing the cent into two
equal parts. The copper coins might be the 1-mil, 2-mil, 4-mil, and 5-mil
pieces ; and the silver coins the 1-cent, 2-cent, 4-cent, and 5-cent pieces, because
it is desirable to preserve the relation of 10 as much as possible. If you have a
2-mil piece you should have a 2-cent piece, that being ten times as much, and
the 5-cent piece would be the shilling unaltered. I of course include also the
florin.
748. Would you have distinctly marked upon those coins the number of cents
and mils?—I would have them marked in mils, or whatever other term you adopt,
up to the florin at least.
749. Would you have the gold coin marked 2–I do not know that it would
much matter whether it were marked or not. I think the half-florin should be
marked “one shilling ” as well as “half-florin,” and also “50 mils;” in all,
three marks.
750. Mr. Kinnaird.] Would not the retention of the 4-mil piece, equivalent
to the present penny, impede in the public mind the change towards the decimal
system —I think not. The great point of the decimal system is its use in respect
of the money of account. That use must come downwards ; the merchants and
bankers will seize it immediately, and it will gradually come down to the lower
tradespeople, who will gradually learn to keep their accounts in three columns
besides the pounds. As to the coins which pass from hand to hand, we can no
more be always reminded of the decimal system by all of them than we are always
reminded of pounds, shillings, and pence, by all the present coins. I think that in
the coins that pass from hand to hand, it is rather desirable that the lower orders
of people should be reminded of their likeness to the old coins.
751. Chairman.] Will there be any difficulty where articles are sold for such a
coin as d., or will the 4 per cent. be abandoned by the seller 7—The compe-
tition amongst tradesmen will soon regulate the quantity sold by the money paid
for it.
752. Without any injury to buyers 2–I think so.
753. One difficulty that strikes us is, the number of Acts of Parliament
fixing tolls at ; d. and 1 d. 2–I think that matter might be very easily arranged.
In the first place, a great many toll-keepers will give up the 4 per cent., by
which they will gain popularity and increased custom ; but, as of course no
Act of Parliament must oblige them to give up the 4 per cent, the matter may be
easily managed by allowing them an additional farthing for a certain term of the
lease, and I have prepared a Paper which will show how easily that may be done.
When I say “easily,” I do not of course mean that such a measure will pass
without annoyance. People will not like to pay five farthings instead of four at
the toll-bar. But speaking of it as a legislative enactment, I think the change
might be made with very great facility, and would easily be understood. I will
put in the paper I have prepared.
RULE.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 7 I
RULE for the Determination of the TERM during which a Toll should be, in new
Farthings, One more than now in old ones, in order to compensate the Owner of the Tolls
for the reduction of the Farthing to the 1,000th of a pound.
[Take from a common Table of Annuities, at the rate of interest prescribed, the
years' purchase of the term which the tolls have to run. Take as many 24ths of this as
there are old farthings in the toll. This is the purchase of the term required. Find it,
or the next underneath, in the table; the number of years in the term is then found.
For the fraction of a year, multiply the overplus by the amount of one pound at the
end of one year more (or divide by the corresponding present value), and allow a week
for every Tägths in the answer.]
ExAMPLE.
Term 30 years.--Toll, One Penny.—-Rate, 4 per Cent.
30 years' annuity -e e- º º & tº 17.292 years' purchase.
#ths or 4th of this - - - - - 2.882 purchase of the term.
In table, purchase of three years - - & º 2.775
Overplus gºs - - • 107
Amount of £. 1 in four years - - - } - 170
• 107
| 8 || 90
1170
• 125 190
Or, +$nths more than six times; say seven weeks.
Answer.—Three years and seven weeks.
In this rule the toll-owner has an advantage on every point on which a question can be
raised. First. It is presumed that he has no opportunity of investing money till the end of
the year in which it is received. Secondly. He is allowed a week for every 50th of a year
in the broken year, and a week for any fraction of a 50th over.
When the Toll is in perpetuity the terms are as follows, at 4 per cent.
[N. B.--The lower the rate of interest taken, the better for the toll-owner.]
-*
to LL | *.*.*.* | To LL | "...”
Pence. Years. Weeks. Pence. Pears. Weeks.
# - - l 5 3 } - gºe 19 45
# - - | 2 12 3 # e- - 22 17
# wº- tº 3 21 3 # * * 25 l
1 - º- 4 33 4 g- * I 28 l
1 # -* .* 5 * 48 4 + º º 31 22
1 # º- tº 7 || 17 4 : - - 35 18
l # - - 8 40 4 : - - 40 0
2 - - || 10 18 5 — — 45 35
2 # - * 11 50 5 * 4- = 53 I
2 3 - º 13 38 5 § - - 63 18
2 # - - 15 32 5 # - - 81 2
3 º º 17 34 6 tº- ºn I - Perpetual.
|
Where the toll is above an exact number of sixpences or shillings, only the excess is to be
taken. Thus a toll of 1 s. 4d. has the allowance made on the 4 d. only, since there will be a
Mr. A. De Morgas.
• *-
31 May 1853.
O.66. I 4 coit;
72 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. A. De Morgan.
31 May 1853.
coin exactly equal to one shilling. Accordingly, the new toll of 50 + 17, or 67 new farthings
or mils will be due for 28 years one week.
And a table might easily be arranged which would show a toll to any number of farthings,
under 6 d., for any number of years, as far as it is worth while to carry it.
754. So that toll-keepers would be neither gainers nor losers?—If that system
were adopted, the toll-keeper would be rather a gainer than a loser.
754.” Suppose he were to take 5 mils for a given period to produce him 100 l.,
that, invested in an annuity, would produce 4 per cent. for ever, and then he could
afford to take 4 mils 7–He might take an additional mil for the time marked
out, which additional mil would be equivalent to the alteration of 4 per cent. in
the copper for ever.
755. Do you apprehend that there would be any great difficulty with the
humbler classes in falling into this system, provided that they found they were to
receive 25 farthings for 6d. instead of 24 2–-I do not think there would be
any very great difficulty.
756. You would be giving them what would be called five pence for 6 d. 2–
No ; five coins with a new name; they would get into the habit of reducing every
thing to farthings, which is just what we want. The rule would be, that as the
mil is as near as possible to the farthing, the 6d., which is 24 farthings, would
be 25 mils. They are much more accustomed to reckon in farthings than the
class of people above them.
757. Do you think that we give the lower class sufficient credit for sagacity to
find that out?—I do not think that sufficient credit is given to them by men of
science. The English have always shown a greater aptitude for arithmetic than
our neighbours the French. I can, from considerable examination of the works on
arithmetic, running over the last three centuries, state that the English have
generally more capacity for commercial arithmetic than their neighbours.
75 S. Mr. Kinnaird..] Are those works of modern date --Works from the 6th
century downwards.
759. Do you consider that cqually applicable to modern times —I think it is
as applicable to our own as to any time. I think the English have seized the
decimal notion better than their neighbours. In our country the reckoning has
always been by a per-centage, but the French first expressed interest as denier
cinq, denier quinze, &c., and that is a mode of reckoning which has never gained
ground in England.
760. Chairman.] What do you think would be the gain in labour, upon the
whole system of our accounts and transactions, balancing the gain against the
inconvenience –I am of opinion that considerably more than half the trouble of
money calculations would be saved. An advantage connected with that would
be, that the school arithmetic would make boys ready in business, which they are
not now ; for with their imperfect learning of the decimal system, and their
halting between two systems, most men of business will tell you that boys do not
come from school very well prepared in business arithmetic. I have heard of a
banker who, when asked what a boy who was to enter his bank should do at
school to prepare himself in arithmetic, answered, “For goodness sake let him do
nothing, don’t trouble yourself about him, and when he comes to us we will teach
him what he has to do. If he can add up pounds, shillings, and pence, that is the
only thing we can hope for from School-teaching.”
761. Assuming that without any great difficulty on the part of the Govern-
ment they could make their calculations for Custom-house duties in 100 lbs.
instead of 1 12 lbs. weight, would not that facilitate very much the collection of
the revenue 2–It would facilitate very much the calculations connected with the
revenue, and it would facilitate the means of people to ascertain that they were
accurately done. At present persons who ought not to be obliged to rely on
others are compelled to do so; and I suspect that a great many of the highest
merchants of London are driven to a total reliance on their clerks in most matters
passing through the Custom-house.
762. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Do you think it would be desirable to adopt a decimal
system of weights and measures?—I think it would be desirable to complete the
system; and I say that, because I am aware that it is the opinion of many men
that the decimal system should only be introduced combined with a system of
binary division. Although I admit that binary division is more easy, I think that
the supposition that that binary division is always to last presumes an amount of
ignorance that is not to last. I think that education within the next dozen years
will
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINA.G.E. 73
will put people in a position to use a perfect decimal system, so as to avail them- Mr. A. De Morgan.
selves of all its advantages. -
763. You would consider a system of decimal coinage very incomplete without 3 May 1863.
the adoption of a system of decimal weights and measures?—It would be incom-
plete; not very incomplete, because a great majority of calculations in which
concrete quantities are used relate to money; so that the decimal coinage would be
a much larger proportion of a complete decimal system than any one would suppose.
764. Would you recommend the adoption of a decimal system of weights and
measures simultaneously with the adoption of the decimal coinage 2–Certainly
not ; I would recommend that the system should be learnt upon the coinage, and
I should hope that in a few years the advantages resulting from the one would
lead to an outcry on the part of the people for the adoption of the other.
765, You would adopt the system of decimal coinage first 2—I certainly
would, leaving the other for a future period.
766. Do you think it would be desirable, if it were possible to accomplish it,
that an universal system of weights and measures should be adopted by the civilised
countries of the world — It would of course have its advantages, but I doubt
whether they would balance in the different countries the disadvantages that
would arise from an alteration in the great units of account; such as an altera-
tion in the pound Sterling, or the pound avoirdupois, or the yard, or the foot.
Matters of business which take place between one country and another are
generally managed by very few people, and those of the better order of arithmeti-
cians. It would matter very little, if our pound avoirdupois were decimally
divided, and the French kilogramme were decimally divided. There would be
an advantage in a perfectly common system of weights and measures, but I very
much doubt whether the convenience of the change as between the several
countries would balance the internal inconvenience that would arise.
767. At present, when a merchant receives a price current of foreign commodi-
ties, he has first of all to convert the foreign weights and measures into English
weights and measures 2–-Yes.
768. And then to convert the foreign money into English, before he can ascer-
tain the costs of those commodities in England ; now suppose that a universal
system of weights and measures were adopted, would not that process be very
considerably shortened?—No doubt it would ; and you have named the great
advantage of the use of a common system between all countries. But in the first
piace, if both countries had decimal subdivisions, the merchant might avail himself
of tables by which that could be done with great rapidity. It would cost him
very little time or trouble.
769. If it were possible to dispense with the tables, would it not be an advan-
tage 2—I have said that there is no doubt it would.
770. Do you know anything about the French system of decimal weights and
measures?—The system now is purely decimal.
771. Is it a good system 7–No doubt; there are not two pure decimal systems.
772. Are you aware that the French system is now adopted by many countries
in Europe 7—I am aware of it.
773. If it were practicable, do you think it desirable to induce the different
nations of the world to adopt the French system of weights and measures 2—I think
it desirable to induce them to adopt the decimal system, that is, the division
of everything into 1 oths, looths, and 1,000ths; but I am not so clear about
inducing them to adopt the French weights and measures. That must depend
upon circumstances. t
774. Do you suppose that we should find greater difficulty in adopting the
French system in our country than has been found in those countries which already
make use of it?—On that I am not prepared to speak, but l do know that it would
be a very great trouble in our country, and I think not balanced by sufficient
advantages.
775. All changes of this kind must, I presume, be attended with considerable
trouble 7—Yes.
776. Must we not anticipate, in any system we may adopt, temporary incon-
venience?—Yes; I have my doubts whether such a system would last, because
the coinage and matters of account vary a little with time. As to the coinage, I
think the deteriorations which have taken place may go on. Supposing we
were to adopt the French coinage, a deterioration in the French coinage would
put us all out again.
o.66. K 777. Is
74 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. A. De Morgan.
31 May 1853.
777. Is there not more difficulty in a universal system of coinage than a
universal systein of weights and measures; inasmuch as in some countries they
measure the value of commodities by gold and in others by silver ?—That makes
an additional difficulty with regard to the coinage. With regard to weights and
measures, there is no permanent difficulty in introducing a new system. But
though the system be introduced, this disadvantage remains. We put ourselves
out of connexion with the whole of our history, and we alter the foot, the mile,
and the acre. I perfectly agree with the Commissioners, who reported that it
would be a matter of absolute impracticability to alter the land-chain, in which
all calculations have been made, the adjustment of tithes and land-tax, and so on.
778, Are you not aware that the acre differs in different counties —Yes; but
the legal acre is one and the same, and all acres are measured in chains. Sur-
veyors make all their calculations in the same acre, and all results are so arrived
at. The Commissioners went fully into that, and were unanimously of opinion
that it should not be altered.
779. Chairman.] Do all deeds express the legal acre –I understand they do.
780. Mr. Hamilton.] Are you aware, that not many years ago a change was
made by Act of Parliament with regard to the Irish acre 2—I know that a
change was made, but of the effects of it I am not aware.
781. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Have you ever turned your attention to a different use of
the pound sterling — I have heard of it, and I am decidedly against altering it.
782. If a unit could be devised, which would render the keeping of accounts
more easy than the adoption of the pound sterling, would you think that desirable r
—I cannot imagine a unit instead of the pound which would make accounts more
easy.
783. Supposing you were to adopt the unit of 10 s., and divide it into 1,000
parts, would that afford a greater facility in keeping accounts —Neither more nor
less. Arithmetically speaking, it is a matter of no consequence.
784. Our present accounts being kept in pounds, shillings, pence and farthings,
would it not be an advantage if we could still keep our accounts in pounds, shil-
lings, pence and niils 7–The suggestion being to retain the 10 s. as our principal
coin of account, to be divided into 1,000 parts, the 10th part being 1 S., the advan-
tage is, that we keep a well-known coin, the shilling, as one of our great coins of
account, but the disadvantage I have spoken of before, viz., the destruction of all
our associations connected with the pound, and the alteration in a coin which is
known all over the world.
785. The adoption of the unit of 10 s. would make that the money of account P
—Yes.
786. The pound was only a money of account, I believe, till recently P-The
pound was only a money of account. Coins of 20 s. bave circulated from time
immemorial. It is true that with the exception of the I l. note, there was for a
long time nothing to represent the pound; but still the pound sterling has been
the money of account for a long time, and all our associations with reference to
the magnitude of sums are connected with the pound sterling.
787. You have no other objection but the prestige which you think sticks to
the pound sterling 7–-That prestige I described as containing moral, political and
Social associations. I think it of some importance to preserve those, and also to
keep up our connexion with all our old historical writings. If we were to call
the 10s. by the name of 1 l., we should have to learn to think of 200 l. in the
manner we now think of 100 l. That is a disadvantage that I would not face,
unless I saw some great countervailing advantages. -
788. How would you write 13s. 6d. according to the system you adopt?—
Six hundred and seventy-five mils, or 6 florins, 7 cents, 5 mils.
789. How would you write it, supposing you adopted the los. as the unit 2–
If you adopt that as the principal money of account, you must make it twice as
much, or £. 1:35.
790. Is it not more easy to say 1,350 for 13 s. and 6 d. 2–It is just as easy to
say '075.
701. Would not 6.7. 5. involve a calculation in the mind as to what it had to
do with 13s. 6d. – There would be coins to represent every one of these ; the
connexion between the old and new system is but transitory, except for historical
matters. It is supposed, when we introduce a new decimal system, as now pro-
posed, that we introduce as coins the florin, the cent, and the mil ; so that with
the figures 6.7. 5. people will learn to associate 6 florins, 7 cents, and 5 mils.
792. The bulk of the transactions of this country taking place between the
- - lower
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 75
lower classes of society, would it not be more easy for them to retain the pounds,
shillings, and pence, than to adopt the system of pounds, florins, cents, and
mils?—It would be a little more casy for the reasons you have given : but there
are two things to be balanced, the convenience of the higher commercial classes,
and the convenience of the lower classes.
793. What inconvenience would it be to the higher classes —I think that the
alteration of the pound throughout the world would be a very inconvenient thing
in commerce.
794. Supposing you had to express 200 l. 5.S. od. of our present money !—That
would be 400 of the nos. coins and 5s.
795. That is 400 decimal pounds and 5s. making 200 l. Sterling and 5s. 2–-
Yes; arithmetically speaking I have said, again and again, that I think it is of no
consequence to the higher classes. I think it of consequence to them in their
commercial relations with foreign countries, but I think it of more consequence to
preserve those associations of which I have spoken.
796. The only change being that you would have to double it 2—Yes.
797. Do you think that the disadvantages of dispensing with the pound sterling
would more than counterbalance the advantage of retaining the present shillings
and pence 7–Decidedly; moreover, the present system of shillings and pence could
not be retained, because the penny would become one-tenth part of one shilling.
798. Would this not be another advantage; we will suppose that a working
man goes to a shop to buy a quarter of a pound of an article sold at 1s. per lb.,
what would he have to pay for it on your plan 3–The 1s. is 50 mils, and there-
fore he would have to pay 12% mils; but prices would adjust themselves in such
a way that the half mil would not be wanted, and it must be noticed that it is rather
an objection to the use of the 10s. as a principal coin, that it would bring into use
the half farthing, which is found to be practically useless. The public has always
had half farthings to make use of, but people do not avail themselves of that coin.
A very small coin that is not wanted would be a great disadvantage.
799. You propose to issue a coin of the value of half a florin 7–Yes.
800. In that case, if a person bought a quarter of a pound of an article, of the
value of half florin, he would have to pay 12% mils?—Yes.
801. But inasmuch as there is no coin representing 12; mils, he would have to
pay in reality 13 mils?—He would have to pay 12 or 13, as he and the seller
should agree.
802. Would the seller be likely to take half a mil less than the value of the
article, or to charge the party half a mil more ?—That would depend upon whether
he wanted to keep the custom of the particular purchaser or not.
803. What is the usual practice with the shopkeeper when an article comes to
the fraction of a farthing; does he take the farthing, or charge a halfpenny ?
I am not conversant with that.
804. Are you aware that where a shopkeeper sells an article which comes to
less than a farthing, he charges a farthing?—I have no doubt that he often does.
805. Taking the case of a person spending 1s. in purchasing at four different
times, he would in reality have to pay 52 mils?—Yes.
806. In that case, in spending 1s., he loses d. 2–Yes.
807. Supposing you were to adopt the 10 s. as a unit, what would be his loss
then 2–His loss then would of course be smaller.
808. It would be nothing at all, would it —That is because the 1 S. happens
to be divisible. That difficulty will arise as long as the coinage continues decimal,
and other things are not decimal. But then we are looking forward in a little
while to a more complete introduction of the decimal system, in which I s. per lb.
will be 1 d., or some new coin for 1-1 oth lb.
809. Chairman.] Would not that be remedied by the quantity of goods sold
being adjusted to the money received 2–No doubt that would be so.
810. Are you aware that within our recollection the United States have changed
the gold coinage three times; that in the first instance they called the pound sterling
4 dollars 44 cents; at a subsequent period, raised it to 4 dollars and I think
about 67 cents, and that it is now received at the banks as 4 dollars 84 cents; that
at this moment they are deteriorating the silver 7 per cent. ; and that, consequently,
if we were to adjust the coins of the world to the same quantity of fine gold or
silver, there would be no certainty of their remaining so adjusted for any length of
time 2—I think there would not be any very great security for it. Weights and
measures might afford rather more security, but I am not sure that the security,
Mr. A. de Morgne.
31 May 1853.
0.66. K 2 CV ( 1)
76 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. A. de Morgan, even as to their continuing so, is perfect; we know they have varied. We know
31 May 1853.
the foot was originally the Roman foot; look at what the foot is now over all the
nations of Europe. -
811. With a view of facilitating the introduction of the decimal system, are
you of opinion, that if the Parliament passed an Act declaring the intention to
adopt it as soon as Her Majesty was pleased to issue the new coins, it would
have the effect of inducing teachers to instruct the rising generation in what was
about to take place —No doubt; there is not a single arithmetical book now pub-
lished but would have a supplement added to it containing the decimal system.
812. Mr. Hamilton.] At present the instruction in decimals at schools is
merely theoretical, I believe 7—At present the instruction given in decimals at
schools hardly deserves the name of theoretical. It is hardly of sufficient appli-
cation to enable the student to see the bearing of it, so that he does not get
theoretical or practical instruction.
813. It is an abstract study ?—It is ; and is not sufficiently understood.
814. It would become better understood probably *-No doubt.
815. So far as regards the instruction to young people, it might be expected,
if the decimal system were introduced, that it would soon become a known
Study in schools?—Undoubtedly.
816. Mr. J. B. Smith..] I presume it would not be possible to introduce an
universal coinage, unless you also adopt an universal standard of value?—
Nations must take the same standard of gold or silver, for it is impossible, with
the mutations of the relative prices of the two metals, that any double standard can
remain fixed.
$17. I believe that the circumstance of the United States having altered their
standard arises from the fact of their having adopted two standards, silver and
gold'—They have had two standards. But the same thing is taking place now in
other countries, owing to the increased quantity of gold, that took place in
America. Gold is much more introduced in France and other countries than it
was 10 years ago.
818. The standard of France is silver ?—It is.
819. In the United States it is both silver and gold 7–Yes.
820. Does it not follow, therefore, that whenever gold is cheaper than silver,
there is an incouvenience felt from the exportation of silver ?—Unquestionably.
821. And that that inconvenience having been felt in the United States by the
depreciation in value of gold, they have been obliged, in order to retain their
silver, to coin their small pieces of silver into coins of a nominal value –Yes.
1 understand that to have been the case; and, undoubtedly, where there are two
standards in a country there would be a constant fluctuation. There can be no
universal coinage, unless there is a universal standard; there cannot be two
Standards.
822. Chairman.] Have you anything further to remark —I have two or three
observations to make. I should say that the present system prevents people from
learning the common decimal arithmetic, their attention being too early called off
to the subdivisions of the pound, or the acre, or the yard. I have seen a man of
business, acute enough and of good understanding, multiply by 10, not by affixing
a cipher, but using the multiplication table with each figure, and carrying
in the usual way. I have no doubt that many persons are no better acquainted
with decimal arithmetic. I will speak now of another advantage of decimal
coinage in a matter relating to mental arithmetic. We have two different systems
of estimating proportions in business, per-centage and poundage. A bankrupt’s
dividend is always reckoned by so much in the pound sterling ; for instance,
5 s. 7 # d. in the pound. Profits in general are reckoned by per-centage. Now it
is a matter of great obstruction to business that it is not very easy to reduce one
of those into the other. Ask any one to tell you how much 5 s. 7 #d. is per cent.,
and he will content himself with a rough estimate that 5 s. is 25 per cent., and
that 6d. is 2 per cent. There he will stop, not able to reckon the odd l ; d.
The present system makes a great many of the rules in books useless to most of
those who learn them. Every trade has its own system of arithmetic ; and there
are tricks of arithmetic in all trades that are not known in other trades, and which
they are obliged to invent for themselves. If a butcher's boy is calculating the price
of a pound of meat, with the division of farthings and ounces, you will find him do
that which a banker's clerk could not do, if his life depended upon it. This makes a
difference
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 77
difference of system and arithmetic between different classes of the community.
Most persons are not quick at arithmetic, in business, in any but their own particular
matters. With regard to the difficulty of introducing new coins, I will merely
state what was the fact in England at the time of the Restoration : the number
of gold and silver coins actually in the country, and passing from hand to hand,
was very considerable. There were 59 gold coins of different value, which were
not related to one another, but passing at various values, from 2s. 9d. to
I l. 16s. 4d.
823. Were they all English coins —They were nearly all English, but were
passing from hand to hand, and were all, by proclamation, raised in value at one
time; the 2s. 9d. was raised to 2s. 1 d. It is not recorded that there was any
very great inconvenience arising from it.
824. Mr. Hamilton.] Then our coinage for many years has been in a state of
transition from time to time 2—For the last half century it has been tolerably
well fixed. The Spanish dollar, I think, was current at one time during the
war. I have heard old people speak of the Spanish dollars, and say they found
no inconvenience in reckoning with them.
825. Chairman.] Did it not pass as a 5s. token 2–I am not sure as to all
time. At one time it did not pass for the full 5 s.
826. Mr. Hamilton.] Do you infer from that that the transition to a decimal
system might take place without much inconvenience?—I think so.
S27. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Are you aware that in France they have divided the
coin into centimes?–Yes.
S28. Less than our farthings?– Yes.
829. Do you think there would be any advantage in coining anything less than
a farthing F–I think not; the half-farthing is coined and ready for use, but is
not applied for.
830. Are you aware that it is very much to the interest of grocers, and other
shop-keepers who deal in small fractions, not to introduce half-farthings, inasmuch
as they give persons, instead of the half-farthing, some commodity ?–I am aware
of that.
831. So long as that is the case, do you think that half-farthings are likely to
come into use 7–That will be an obstacle to their coming into use; but I think
that if there were a general demand for them they would be applied for.
832. Where are they ready 7–At the Mint. They have existed in this
country for the last 20 years.
833. Inasmuch as it is not the interest of anybody but the working classes to
get them into circulation, are they not likely to remain at the Mint?— It appears
that they do remain at the Mint. If the half-mil were coined, there would pro-
bably be the same disposition among the small shopkeepers.
834. Are you aware that centimes are very scarce —I think they were only
coined for special occasions. I have paid the centime as a toll at a bridge, but it
was suggested to me by a friend of mine, that probably the Mint was at one end
of the bridge, and the Bank at the other.
835. You are probably aware that in France it is equally the interest of shop-
keepers to abolish the small coins 2–It is, or they think so.
836. Are you aware that where the working classes have small fractions to
receive, it is the custom to give them pipes of tobacco 2–I am aware that such is
the practice. -
s37. Do you think that a good practice?—I do not; but if the Mint coins
the small pieces, and people will not take them, that cannot be remedied by any
legislative enactment; it must be done in some other way.
Thomas Emerson Headlam, Esq., M. P., Examined.
838. Chairman.] I BELIEVE you are desirous of stating to us the view you
take of the advantages and disadvantages of decimalising our coinage, and the
mode in which you think it can best be carried out?—I have taken an interest
in this subject for some time; more perhaps formerly, when I was in the habit of
attending to mathematical questions, than recently. When the report of the Com-
missioners was made upon weights and measures, I considered the subject. Before
Dr. Bowring persuaded the Government to coin the 2s. pieces, although I was not
then a Member of the House, I expressed to him my opinion that the introduction
of that coin would be rather an inconvenience than the contrary, in the introduction
Mr. A. de Morgan
31 May 1853.
T. E. Headlam,
Esq., M. P.
Q.66. K 3 of
78 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
T. E. Headlam,
Esq., M. P.
-*
31 May 1853.
of the decimal system. I am aware that I differ in opinion with several gentlemen
of high character and of scientific attainments who have given evidence before
this Committee, and therefore I state my own opinion with diffidence; but entertain-
ing a decided objection to the scheme they propose, I wish to state clearly to the
Committee the ground upon which 1 entertain that opinion. In the first place,
I may state that I feel as strongly as any gentleman can do the great
advantages to the country that would result from the introduction of a
decimal coinage. With respect to the carrying on of accounts, I do not think
it possible to exaggerate the additional facilities that would be given; the
additional clearness that would be obtained ; the saving of labour that would
necessarily follow from the change. I may also mention that I think it quite clear
that the decimal system will be more and more adopted in other countries, both
with respect to coinage, and also with respect to weights and measures. When
it is once adopted in any country, it seems to me certain that it will always
remain in use in that country. As the decimal system is more and more adopted
in the world, it will be more and more desirable that this country should have
the same system as that which will prevail elsewhere. This reasoning applies
both to coinage, and also to weights and measures. If the decimal system were
used with respect to our coinage, I believe the coinage of England would be
known and used very generally throughout Europe, in America, and in all our
colonies.
Entertaining this strong opinion in favour of a decimal coinage, I regret to say
that my clear conviction is, that the proposed scheme is impracticable.
In the first instance, I will explain why it could not be adopted. To state it.
abstractedly, the reason why this scheme could not be carried into effect is this :
that the new small coins proposed to be introduced are not commensurable with
the existing small coins; that is to say, the smaller coins which it is proposed to
circulate could not be used for the payment of any contract or any engagement
entered into in the existing coinage. I consider it perfectly essential that any
new coins to be issued in this country should be interchangeable with those now
in circulation, and in which our contracts have been made. That is stating the
objection perhaps rather in an abstract form. I will now put instances to show the
mode in which the difficulty would apply. At the present moment the sum paid
for a Post-office stamp is 1 d. ; that is to say, it is 1-240th part of a sovereign. The
proposed scheme is, that the sovereign should be divided into 1,000 parts. No num-
ber of those 1,000th parts would pay for a Post-office stamp : five of those 1,000th
parts would be 1–200th part of a sovereign; that would be clearly too much: four of
those 1,000th parts would be 1–25oth part of a sovereign; that would be too little.
lf, therefore, the new plan were in force, there would be no coin in existence by
which you could pay for a d. stamp. It is perfectly true that you might alter
the sum charged for Post-office stamps; you might diminish the amount, that is
to say, you might sell 250 stamps for the sovereign instead of 240. If you did
that, you would diminish the gross revenue to the extent of 4 per cent. If you
increased the price, and sold 200 for a sovereign, then undoubtedly you would
increase the revenue of the Post-office, but you would charge a higher sum to
individuals, who might, of course, make objections upon that ground. But what
I wish to make clear to the Committee is, that the introduction of such a system
would render it absolutely necessary that you should make some alteration in the
rate now charged for the stamp.
Now, we will go on to the other sources of revenue. The income tax is 7 d. in
the pound. The same reasoning exactly would apply to the income tax. There
would be no coin in existence by wilich you could pay, or in which you could
calculate, the 7–240th parts of a pound. The same principle would apply to
every one of the Customs’ revenues, as they are almost all calculated in pence.
The consequence would be, that if you circulated coins of a description that could
not be applied in payment of the customs imposed by existing Acts of Parliament,
you would be compelled to alter every one of the Acts by which the duties upon
customs are imposed. All this reasoning applies to the revenue of the Govern-
ment. The same principle applies to all contracts of a more private description.
We will take, first, contracts on a very large scale; for instance, the terms
which are imposed upon railway companies. At this present moment most rail-
way companies are compelled to charge not more than 1 d. per mile upon certain
of their trains: of course if the 1 d. were reduced 4 per cent. there would be a
loss to the railway companies of 4 per cent. upon their returns. If, again, it were
increased, then it would be an alteration as to the privileges conferred upon the
public ;
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COIN AGE. 79
public ; but in either point of view, it would be perfectly essential that the coin
in accordance with which the railway companies were limited, should be one
which was in circulation. The practical result, therefore, would be that it would
be incumbent upon Parliament to alter every one of the Acts, in accordance with
which the railway companies now carry on their traffic.
The same reasoning applies to tolls upon bridges. At this present moment the
toll upon Waterloo Bridge, for instance, for a foot-passenger, is ; d., or 1-48oth
part of a sovereign. In the new scale there would be no coin in existence by which
it would be possible to pay the 1–4Soth part of a sovereign. One mil would be
1–1,000th part; two mils would be 1–500th part; but the 1–500th part would
not be sufficient to pay the toll; and the three mils would be too much. You
would, therefore, be compelled either to diminish the toll, in which case there would
be a loss to the proprietors of the bridge of 4 per cent. upon their revenue, or you
would have to increase the toll; and in that case you would cast an additional burden
upon the public. The result would be, that in order to adopt this scheme, you
would be compelled to alter the Act of Parliament imposing tolls upon that
bridge. The same reasoning would apply to every Turnpike Act in the country.
There is not any Turnpike Act which could continue unchanged. The existing
rates could not be enforced when you had in circulation coins not capable of
paying the rates imposed. Without giving any opinion as to the propriety of
making such changes, any person who knows the difficulty of legislating upon
subjects of this description, must feel that it would be quite bopeless to expect
any Government to undertake to introduce changes so generally throughout our
whole social system. The same reasoning would apply still stronger with respect
to private engagements. Every contract for the sale of articles of general con-
sumption, for the sale, for instance, of beer, candles, and all articles concerning
which contracts are made by shopkeepers, would require to be altered. In short,
it would be found, upon investigation, that the number of contracts made with
reference to the smaller coins are greater in number than those made with refer-
ence to the larger coins; and with respect to every contract made with reference
to the smaller coins, it would be absolutely necessary that, upon the introduction
of a new coinage, consisting of coins not interchangeable with the existing coins,
some change should be made in the contract.
I may say further, that no time for carrying this scheme into operation would
materially facilitate its introduction; because, up to the moment when the new
coins were introduced, contracts would continue to be made in the terms of the
existing coinage, and the day would at length come when some new coin, not
commensurable with the existing coin, would come into circulation. For instance,
according to the proposed scheme, the 1-1 oth part of a 2s. piece would be one of
the coins in the new scale, that is to say, 2d. and 2-5ths of 1 d.; when such a
oin was issued, it would not be found applicable to pay anything for which the
smaller coins are now used. There would be no even numbers of such a coin in
1s. or 6d., or any of the smaller silver coins ; and however long the public might
have been prepared by theory for the introduction of coins of that description,
whenever they were first issued the inconvenience of them would be such that no
Government would venture to coin them. -
839. Would not all those difficulties be obviated, taking the bridge tolls as an
example, by assuming that the Legislature would authorise them to take five
mils for a certain number of years, to compensate thein for any loss by the adop-
tion of the decimal coinage?—An arrangement such as that suggested might pos-
sibly be fair with respect to the tolls of any particular bridge. I do not know
any reason against it; but on the other hand 1 do not know whether it would be
accepted. But what I wish to put to the Committee is, not whether such an
arrangement would or would not be fair in any particular case, but that it would
be incumbent upon the Government to make an arrangement of this description.
or one of a more complicated nature, with respect to every bridge in the kingdom,
and with every set of turnpike trustees upon every road.
840. Could not an explanatory table be made, stating that where the toll was
A d., so many mils should be taken for a period to compensate the parties for any
loss that might arise afterwards by less being taken, and in the same way with the
1 d. up to the 6d. 2–If such a system as that were introduced, the practical effect
would be that the tolls would be raised for a certain period, of five years or so,
higher than they are at present, and after that would be reduced lower than they
are now. That might be a good arrangement in one particular case, and it might
T. E. Headlam,
Esq., M. P.
31 May 1853.
o.66. K 4 be
8O MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
T. E. Headlam,
Esq., M.P.
31 May 1853.
be a very bad arrangement in other cases. I do not think that any general rule
could be adopted which would be applicable to all contracts, by which one member
of the contract should have an advantage for a period of five years, and the other
member to the contract should have an advantage for ever afterwards. But even
in those cases where such an arrangement might be made, complicated provisions
would have to be enacted in order to carry it out; for instance, where there were
mortgages upon tolls, the consent of all the mortgagees to the new arrangement
would have to be obtained. Their security would be diminished at the end of
five years, and it is not likely that they would give their consent, unless com-
licated provisions were enacted to make the extra payment in the first five years
applicable to the payment off of their encumbrances during that time. But whether
it would be a good or a bad arrangement, the real difficulty exists in this, that the
change in the coinage would render such changes necessary throughout the whole
country, that no Government would venture to introduce a system which
depended upon such changes.
841. With respect to the postage stamps, might not the increased consump-
tion of them meet any loss sustained – I am not prepared to say whether,
if the price of the stamps were reduced 4 per cent., there is reason to suppose
that the increased consumption would make up the loss of the 4 per cent. upon
the gross revenue; probably it might in the course of time; but the immediate
diminution in the price of such stamps would be a very material loss to the
revenue. With reference to the postage stamps, as with respect to the tolls upon
bridges, I do not wish to express any opinion as to the propriety of reducing the
value of such stamps. All I wish to impress upon the Committee is, that the pro-
posed change in the coinage would involve a change in the sum paid for postage
stamps.
842. With respect to the Customs; you are aware that they are paid generally
in large sums, that the fraction of any payment is generally very suiall, and that
consequently there would be no great difficulty with the Government, where it
was a fraction under half a cent, or a fraction above half a cent, or farthing, drop-
ping it in one case, and taking it up in the other ?—I believe that upon altering
generally the whole Customs, and making them fit with the new coinage, the buſ-
den might probably be left pretty much the same upon the public, and the same
amount of revenue be received by the State, so that there might be no great
difference in the broad result; but in order to carry that into effect, I think it
would be necessary to alter every single Customs duty, not leaving one of them as
it is at the present moment. -
843. You are probably not aware that a good many of them would be left pre-
cisely as they are, and that the difference in any case would be very small, and in
very few of them 2–I think that in every Customs duty, where any calculation is
made with reference to pence, it would be necessary to make a change; the 1 d. is
1-240th part of a sovereign, and that not being paid in the new coinage, it would
not be possible to keep up any payment of that sort.
844. Are you not of opinion that in every case private individuals must submit to
inconvenience for the public good 2–I am ; but in this case, whether it be desirable
or not, I am satisfied that the difficulties which a Government would have to
contend with, both from private and public interests, are such, that no Govern-
ment would venture to undertake to carry the changes into operation.
845. With respect to the income tax, which is now 7d. in the pound, if the number
of sevenpences were added together, and turned into the new coins, would not the
fraction be very small —The income tax, like every other tax, might be slightly
lowered or might be slightly raised, and in that manner it might be made payable
in the new coinage, but in the present system it is 7-240th parts of the pound
sterling ; you might increase that, making the tax heavier upon the public, if it.
were to be 7-200th parts of the pound, in which it would be payable in the new
coinage ; or you might reduce it and make it 7-250th parts, in which case it
would be payable also in the new coinage, but objections of different kinds are
applicable to one or other of those changes. It would impose upon Parliament
the necessity of making an alteration in the law.
846. With respect to railways, where the calculation is not by pence, they could
easily be adjusted to the new coinage 2–Where any sum is calculated not in
pence but in sovereigns, the objection would not apply.
847. Would the objection apply to any sums above 6d. 2–I think the difficulty
would
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COIN AGE. 81
would prevail with respect to sums larger than 6d. ; but when it comes to sums
materially larger than 6d. the objection would not apply.
848. If the toll were 6d., it would be neither more nor less than it is now —
Probably that may be so; at this moment I am not prepared to Say, but the objec-
tion applies undoubtedly with respect to the lower coins, and to sums intermediate
between sixpence and a shilling.
849. Mr. J. B. Smith..] You are aware that an alteration was made in the
Irish coinage, by adapting it to the English coinage, some years ago?—Yes.
850. Did not all the difficulties you anticipate, in an alteration of our coinage,
occur when the alteration took place in the Irish currency 1–I think not, but i
will not speak positively as to that. -
851. Must it not necessarily have happened that considerable difficulties must
have occurred in all those cases where parties had entered into contracts 2—I do
rot think that any difficulties would occur in the alteration of the coinage, unless
the new coins were non-interchangeable with the existing coins.
852. Mr. Hamilton.j The silver shiliing in Ireland being 12 pence in Irish,
and the silver shilling in England being 13 d. of Irish money, in your opinion
would the objection referred to apply to that case ?—I do not think it would ;
none of the difficulties of a new coinage apply, as I conceive, to a change in the
Irish coins. My objection is illustrated best by the Post-office stamp, or the toll
for a foot-passenger over Waterloo Bridge; supposing the proposed new coinage
were in force, there is no combination of the new coins by which you could pay
for a postage stamp, or the toll over the bridge.
853. Could you not get rid of the difficulty, in the same way as with the bridge
toll, by giving them 5 years, 5 mils, and afterwards 4?–No doubt you may alter
the price of the postage stamp, and then the objection ceases; but I put it inerely
as an illustration, to show the impracticability of the new coinage to pay any sum
of that description, calculated according to the existing coinage.
854. Mr. Hamilton.] Balancing the great advantages which you say would
arise by the adoption with the inconveniences of the alteration, do you think the
inconvenience predominates so much over the convenience as to render the change
impracticable 2–I think if the adoption of the decimal system rested upon this
scheme, however much it might be desired, the difficulty could not be overcome;
but I intend to place before the Committee certain means by which I think the
decimal system might be introduced. Before doing so, I wished to explain the
reasons which led me to the conclusion that the proposed plan is perfectly impos-
sible. It was from this view of the subject that I was induced to write to Dr.
Bowring before he issued his 2s. pieces, because I felt satisfied that the decimal
system never could be carried out on a scale of which the 2s. pieces constituted
one of the coins. -
855. Chairman.] Are you aware that if you retain the present penny, in
order to make the other coins act decimally with it, you must make the pound
sterling 1 l. os. 10 d. 7—I am. With respect to the introduction of a decimal system,
there is no doubt that a change of any sort must be productive of some incon-
venience ; but I think that a change might easily be made, such that at no period
of its introduction would there be any very material or insuperable difficulty.
I think also that when the scheme was complete, it might be in such a form as
that nobody should be compelled to adopt it unless he wished. I think, lastly,
that every coin now in existence might be unade changeable for coins on the new
scale, and that every coin introduced on the new scale might be changeable into
coins on the existing scale. I will now state the steps by which I should recom-
mend such a change to be carried out : the first thing I should recommend the
Government to do, would be to impress upon every existing coin its value in
existing farthings; that is to say, to stamp upon a sovereign “960," to stamp upon
a shilling “48,” to stamp upon a sixpence “24,” upon a fourpenny-piece “ 16,”
upon a half-penny “2,” and upon the farthing “ i.” I may say further, that if
this were done and nothing else were done, I think that a great advantage would
be gained by it. -
856. Would you have the 1 d. stamped —If the penny piece were circulated it
should be stamped with 4; but I do not think that the penny piece would be a
very convenient coin after the change is made. I would say further, that there
are some existing coins which I should not continue any longer to circulate. I
should certainly call in the 2 s. piece at once, and it would also, perhaps, be as
well to call in the 3d, piece. After a short time, by means of the stamps upon
T. E. Headlam,
Esq., M. P.
*
31 May 1853.
Q.66. L the
82 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
F. E. Headlam,
Esq., M. P.
31 May 1853.
the coins, every person would become familiar with the number of mils or farthings
contained in every one of the existing coins.
857. To enable persons to become familiar with that, would you stamp upon the
coin, both mils and farthings?—By the mil, I now mean the same thing as the
existing farthing. The first new coin which I think ought to be circulated would
be of the value of 24 d5 and it is with a view of introducing that coin that I say it
would be convenient to call in the existing 3d piece. There would be no great
difficulty in circulating a coin of that amount, and it would probably be found as
convenient, without reference to the introduction of a decimal system, as the 3d.
piece at present. Upon this new coin would be stamped “10 mils,” or “10 M.,”
and there would also be printed upon it “2% d.,” so as to make it quite clear that
its value was 2; d. in the existing coinage, and 10 mils or farthings according to
the new coinage. The new coins by degrees to be introduced would, all of them,
be multiples by 10 of the mil or farthing, and ultimately the coins to be adopted
would be 100 mil pieces, which would be worth 2 s. I d., and the gold coin,
which would be worth 1 l. O s. 10 d. It would probably not be convenient at
once to circulate those coins, but a few might be coined for the purpose of
making the public familiar with their value and appearance. One of the first
steps would be to place upon the bank-notes their value in the new coinage, as
well as their value in the existing coinage. Supposing that a name were given
to the new gold coin worth 1 l. O s. 10 d., calling it, by way of example, a
Victoria, then it would be convenient, for the purpose of enabling the public to
become acquainted with the relative value of the sovereign and the Victoria,
that a 100 l. bank-note, for instance, should have printed upon it these words,
“I promise to pay 1ool. or 96 Victorias;” the 50 l. note would have in like
manner upon it the words, “I promise to pay 50 l. or 48 Victorias;” the 25 l., if
such a note were issued, would have the words upon it, “I promise to pay 25 l.
or 24 Victorias.” The 5 l. note would bear upon the face of it, “I promise to
pay 5 l., or 4 Victorias, 8 florins.” When this was done, every bank-note and
every coin would express upon its surface its value in both systems; for instance,
the sovereign would have impressed upon it the figures “960," which would mean
that it contained 960 mils, or that it contained 9 florins and 6 of the 10-mil
pieces; and the shilling would have upon it impressed the figures “48,” which
would show that it was worth 4 of the 10-mil pieces, and 8 of the mils. The
Victoria would have upon it the figures “1,000,” which would show that it was
worth 1,000 mils, or 100 of the 10-mil pieces, or 10 of the florins. The existing
4d. piece would have upon it the figures “ 16,” which would show that it is worth
1 of the 10-mil pieces, and 6 mils. The result would be that no coins, either
in the new or in the present system, would be difficult to exchange from one
system to another. I should recommend that a new gold coin should be issued
which would be found very convenient in the introduction of the new system,
its value to be 12s. 6d., according to the present money. The convenience of
this coin exists in this, that 12s. 6d. is a sum not by any means unadapted
to the existing coinage, and that 12s. 6d. makes exactly 600 of the existing
farthings, so that such a coin would be changeable without any difficulty either
into 12s. 6d. in the existing coinage, or into six florins of the new coinage. I think
if the decimal system were introduced by these coins, that at no period would any
inconvenience be felt by the public. When it was completed, it would still be
open to any person who was familiar with the existing system, and not inclined to
learn a new one, to keep his accounts entirely according to the present coinage.
It would be open to any one who had learnt the decimal system to use all the
coins which should be in circulation with reference to that system. By degrees,
as the public became better and better acquainted with the advantages of the
decimal system, the inconvenient coins might gradually be supplauted by the
easiest coins in use in the decimal system; for instance, instead of a shilling, a
piece of the value of 10d. might be coined, which would be worth 40 mils, or four
10-mil pieces. Instead of sixpence, fivepence might be coined; but those changes
are not essential, and need only be introduced according to the demand and
convenience of the public; for there is nothing inconsistent with the system
in the circulation of the shilling or of the sixpenny pieces, other than the
fact that they would not be convenient coins when the decimal system was in
operation. .
858. To meet the view you take, would it not necessarily involve the altera
tion of 12 or 13 gold and silver coins, instead of four of copper ?—I do not know
- - precisely
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 83
precisely how many coins it would be convenient ultimately to adopt, as it would
depend upon what new coins were found convenient.
859. Mr. Hamilton.] Am I correct in understanding you, that you begin by
building your system on the existing farthing, calling it a mil?—Yes.
860. And that your decimal system is, of course, a multiple of the existing
farthing 2—Yes. -
861. If the existing coins be multiples in another sense of the farthing, you
consider they might exist together?—I propose that they should exist together;
but I think it of the greatest importance that the existing coins should have
stamped upon them their value in farthings.
862. You would commence by adopting the farthing as your unit, and build up
upon it?—I adopt the farthing as my unit, and build up upon that. I suppose the
sovereign to continue in circulation as long as convenient. It would be perfectly
capable of circulating with the new coinage. If people choose to call the sovereign
20 shillings, and to call a shilling 12 pence, they would be at liberty so to do, and
it would not produce any inconvenience or confusion. If they adopted the decimal
system, they would call the sovereign nine florins and six 10-mil pieces. The existing
sovereign would circulate with perfect facility after the change was made, and
would bear upon its surface its value in the new coinage.
863. Mr. J. B. Smith..] In what way would you propose to keep accounts 2–
On the decimal system ; but I should not propose to make it compulsory upon any
person to whom the existing system was familiar, and who would desire to keep his
accounts in the existing system. The several coins on the new scale would be a
Victoria, I l, os. 10d.; the florin, 2s. 1 d. of the existing money; a 10-mil piece, or
2} d. of the existing coinage; and the mil or farthing of the existing coinage.
864. Your system of accounts would be pounds, and what other denominations :
—The decimal system would not contain pounds; that coin would not be an ele-
ment in it; but the Victoria would be the largest coin. It would be Victorias,
florins, 10-mil pieces, and 1-mil pieces; that is, 1 Oooths, looths, 1 oths, and units.
Martis, 7° die Junii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT.
Mr. William Brown. - Sir William Clay.
Mr. John Ball. Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. Moody. Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. J. B. Smith.
WILLIAM BROWN, Esq., IN THE CHAIR.
Mr. Frederick Strugnell, called in ; and Examined.
805. Chairman.] WHAT are you ?—A Grocer and Tea Dealer.
866. Where do you reside?–In the Edgeware-road.
867. I believe you are extensively engaged in transactions with the humbler
classes of people, as well as with others, and we are desirous of knowing from
You. What you think of the advantages or disadvantages that would arise from
decimalising our coinage, assuming that no deterioration takes place —I think
there would be no difficulty in carrying it out.
868. In your business, do you think that any difficulty would arise with the
poorer description of people?—None whatever.
809. Have you turned your attention at all to the advantages that might arise
in the education of the people, and in schools, where a great deal of time is now
*PPosºd to be occupied in learning what might be dispensed with if decimals
generally were substituted 2–I have not directed my attention to that.
870. Assuming that a decimal system were determined on, would you think it
*Pedient to adopt it at once, or to endeavour to introduce it gradually —At
once, I think.
T. E. Headlam,
Esq., M. P.
31 May 1853.
Mr. F. Strugnell.
7 June 1853.
0.66. L 2 - 871. That
84 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. F. Strugnell.
7 June 1853.
871. That is, to have a sufficient number of the new coins ready, and then to
withdraw the old 2–Decidedly.
872. How would you designate the copper coins, taking the sovereign for the
integer, or starting point, divided into 1,000 mils, and the florin of 100 mils;
and then the copper coins, would you make the copper coin the tenths of the
florin?—Most decidedly.
873. You would divide the coins completely decimally 2–Quite so.
874. Would you retain the name of the 6 d. or 1 s. 2—I think in so great a
change it would be expedient to change the names altogether.
875. How many Copper coins would you think it necessary to introduce, in
order to facilitate the change; would you think a 1-mil piece, a 3-mil piece, and
a 5-mil piece sufficient, or would you coin a 4-mil piece, or any other coins ?—
I should say a 1-mil piece, 3-mil piece, and 5-mil piece; and a 2 –mil piece
you would require ; but I do not know how far that could be carried out.
876. Supposing that the coins issued were the sovereign, the florin, the cent,
and the mil, would you make the cent, or the 10-mil piece, of silver or copper ?
-—Of silver, I think.
$77. Would it not be a very small coin 3–It would; but still you want an
intermediate coin, if you withdraw the 3 d. and 4 d. pieces. - CŞ
878. Would you retain the 6 d. and 1 s. in circulation, or would you issue a
20-mil piece —I should withdraw the 6 d. -
879. Would you for a time allow the old silver coin and the new silver coin to
circulate together ?—I think it would be better to withdraw it altogether.
880. Have you ever thought of the manner in which the 1 d. postage and the
tolls of bridges, &c., regulated by Act of Parliament, could be dealt with ?—I
have never given that any consideration.
881. Do you think that the humbler classes would raise any objection if the
6 d. were divided into 25 mils instead of 24 farthings P Would they consider
themselves injured by such a change 2–I think not, after a little explanation. I
think, as regards the working classes, that there would be no difficulty in carrying
it out.
882. Have you thought of any convenience that would result in the keeping of
accounts 2—It would cause a little confusion at first, but eventually it would work
out much more simple.
883. You are aware that the accounts might be kept in three columns, pounds,
florins, and mils?—Yes.
884. Have you ever considered that it would be a great saving of labour –I
think it would simplify accounts altogether.
885. Would it render mistakes less frequent 7–-I think so, most decidedly.
886. Do you fancy that the contemplated change would afford any advantage
in simplifying the mode of calculating interest, and in exchanges, and in multipli-
cation?—I have not given the subject sufficient consideration to enable me to
give an opinion.
887. Are you aware that engineers generally make all their calculations in
decimals, from the great inconvenience of the present system 7–1 was not aware
of it.
888. Were you aware that the Bank of England now buy and sell gold deci-
mally *—I was not.
889. With respect to parties dealing in retail trades of every description, would
the quantity sold soon adjust itself to the value of the money received —Very
SOOI). &
890. Would you approve of the value, that is, the number of mils, being marked
on each piece —Most decidedly.
891. Do you think that half-farthings or half-mils would be wanted 3–I never
heard on the part of the working classes a desire for a smaller coin than a
farthing; the mil would be a trifle less in value.
892. Are you aware that at the Mint, at this moment, there is a large amount
of half-farthings that have never been called for 7—I was not aware that there
were any in the Mint; but we find with the lower classes, that if they have
occasion for a smaller coin, they purchase an article at a higher or lower price ;
it is only in times of very great distress that we find the slightest desire on their
part for a smaller coin.
893. It would be impossible, I presume, to make any coin that would enable
you
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL CO INA.G.E. 85
you always to purchase the same quantity of food 2–It would be difficult when
you came to divide it and subdivide it. -
894. It would be impossible to provide any coin to meet it 2–Quite so.
895. What do you think of the size of the 10-mil piece in copper ?—It
would be inconveniently large. I should prefer it in silver, but as large as it could
be made.
896. Not in mixed metal 2–Yes, in mixed metal.
897. Would not the poor think the coin deteriorated, and that it was a fraud
upon them 2–No, I think not. If they found it circulate freely enough, they
would have no objection to it, unless it had a strong likeness to base coin. g
898. Mr. J. B. Smith..] What is the coin by which the working classes gene-
rally measure their wages, and measure the price of commodities —By the
Sovereign and by the shilling generally ; so much per day, or so much per week.
899. Do they reckon their wages at so many shillings per week, or so many
sovereigns —More frequently shillings; it is only recently that they have had so
much better pay.
900. Are the prices of commodities generally calculated in shillings and
pence 7–Just so, depending upon the article ; tea is so much per pound.
901. In the course of your business, there is scarcely an article that you
reckon by the pound sterling?—Scarcely anything.
902. All articles are reckoned by shillings and pence?
pence.
903. Do you apprehend that there would be any inconvenience if, instead of
reckoning articles by shillings, as the poorer classes are now accustomed to do,
they made their calculations in florins —None whatever; of course the working
classes would take some time before they adopted that expression.
904. Is it your opinion, if any system of decimal coinage could be adopted
which should retain the name and use of the shilling as at present, that that
would be an advantage —I do not well see how any change can take place without
altering the value of the coin, and then I think it would make the working classes
a little suspicious; but if you have a change of name altogether, they would be
more reconciled to it.
905. Supposing you were to adopt this system, that 10 mils should be 1 d.,
that 10 d. should be 1 s., and that los. should be one decimal pound; in that case
the value of the shilling would remain as at present 2—Just so.
906. Would there not be an advantage if such a system were adopted, re-
taining the name of the shilling, with which the working classes are at present so
familiar, and by which they measure the rate of their wages and the value of
commodities 2–I think it would be an advantage to retain the name of the shilling
provided it underwent no change, which, in that case you have mentioned, it
would not. /
907. Do you see any inconvenience to arise from having two decimal pounds
for one pound sterling?—I should have no objection whatever to that.
908. So far as it relates to accounts, supposing we adopted the system of
pounds, florins, and mils, how would you write down 14 s. 6d. of the present
money; would it not involve a calculation, when you came to turn 14 s. 6d. into
725, that would be very puzzling 2—Only for a short time.
909. Supposing the unit of 10 s. were adopted, and that then you called
14 s. 6d. in the new system 1,450, would not that be an easier mode 3–I think
it would be easier.
910. Do you think it would be better understood by the working classes 7
—Yes.
911. Chairman.] Would there be any advantage in going to much lower
decimals?—I do not wish anything lower than a farthing.
912. The unode just suggested would carry us down to a lower figure in
decimals 2—I think that is not at all called for.
913. Would it not be much more inconvenient to write 16 l. decimal than to
write 8 l. 2–Yes.
914. Would it not unhinge all our ideas of contracts in pounds 2—We have
been more used to that system, and it would take some time to fall into the other,
nor do I see any advantages gained by it.
915. Mr. Moody..] The confusion between the pound decimal and the pound
sterling would continue for a long time 2—I think it would.
916. Supposing you were asked the price of a pound of tea, how would you
All by shillings and
Mr. F. Strugnell,
7 June 1853.
O.00. L 3 all SWCT
86 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. F. Strugnell.
7 June 1853.
what advantage does a person reap who buys half an ounce of tea :
036. You use farthings, I suppose, to a great extent 7–To some extent; there
g x - 5 5 1. 2 b
answer in florins, 2-— If the price were 4 s, we should describe it in florins, and
whatever other coins may be used.
917. Without reference to an even sum, how would you explain it then 3–In
the same way as we have now odd money in copper coinage.
918. With what coins would you explain 3 s. 8 d. 2–I do not see any difficulty
the price as at present might not agree with the subdivisions, but that might
soon be remedied. -
919. Do you think that the poor people would soon get into the habit of
reckoning by florins instead of by shillings 7–Yes.
920. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Are the working classes much in the habit or buying
commodities in small quantities —Yes.
921. Such as a quarter of a pound of tea :
outlay.
922. If a person were to go to purchase a quarter of a pound of an article at
1 s. per pound, how much would that come to in the new coinage 2–It would be
1 2 3 mils.
923. There is no coin of 1 2 3 mils, and therefore what would you charge a
person for that quarter of a pound !—I think that would very soon adapt itself, for
we should purchase in the same way that we sell ; at first it would cause some
slight confusion, but where at the present moment an article is sold at a shilling
we should alter the price of that, and adapt it to the new coin.
924. You are aware that decimals cannot be divided by so many parts as a
shilling?—No, but we should adapt our prices to the new coin. Assuming, for
instance, that an even price would entail upon us a trifling loss per pound of tea,
we should sacrifice that in order to make an even price to the public.
925. When it came to half a mil, and there was no coin to represent it, what
would you do then –In very small quantities we should take that as we do now
with respect to the farthing; when we cannot divide the farthing there is an
advantage in favour of or against the purchaser.
926. In all cases where a fraction comes to half a farthing, you charge a far-
thing 2—We do; but it is rarely done, as the poorer classes are keen calculators,
and they avoid the fraction. Formerly when tea was 5 s, per pound it was 2 d.
per half ounce, but the moment the price was reduced the fraction was avoided.
927. Is there not a great disadvantage in buying small quantities, because it
may involve fractions 2–Very rarely; the price of tea is 4s. per pound, and we
do not make up less quantities than three farthings’ worth, which is a quarter of
aIl OUIIT Ce.
928. Chairman.] Would not the constant fluctuation in the price of tea and
Sugar, no matter what the coinage was, continually involve fractions –
Undoubtedly, but we endeavour to avoid that, and the poorer classes take an
article of a higher or lower price; there is no disadvantage arising to them.
929. It would be perfectly impossible for any coinage to meet the constant
fluctuations in the prices?—Perfectly so.
930. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Is it not desirable that you should adopt the system
of coinage which should involve as few fractions as possible 2–Undoubtedly.
931. Do you ever sell so small a quantity as half an ounce of tea 2–Yes.
932. Parliament having recently reduced the duty on tea by 4d. per pound,
At present
none, in consequence of the advances in the market; but what he will ultimately
obtain, will depend upon the consumption.
933. Assuming that there is no advance in the price of tea, and that you remit
That is generally the Saturday’s
on a pound of tea the whole amount of the 4 d. taken off, what advantage would
result to the buyer of half an once 2—About a farthing, or scarcely that.
934. If he bought an ounce, he would only gain the advantage of a farthing?
The poorer classes would avoid those prices, or would go to the lower price; the
working man would gain a farthing upon the ounce, or if he found himself a
loser by purchasing half an ounce, he would take the 4S. or 3 s. 4d. tea. The
poor are always sufficiently good calculators for that.
935. Is it ever your custom, when parties purchase an article which comes to a
fraction less than a farthing, to give something else to make up the difference –
We do not, but we avoid those fractions; for instance, we do not sell a quarter of
a pound of sugar at 53 d. ; we sell the 6d., or 5.d. sugar. If we sold part of a
pound of sugar at 5 ; d., the purchaser would be the loser.
3 T€
-SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 87
are smaller shops which use them more extensively than we do, such as chandlers’
shops, where the articles sold to the poor are more subdivided.
937. Do you know whether the practice in any case is to give a portion of
some other commodity to make up the fractions !—That is not the practice, as
the same rule applies to them as to ourselves; the working classes go either to a
higher or a lower price for the article, so that they might not be defrauded, as
they term it, of the fractional part. In almost all articles that are sold there is
such a range of price that they can do so.
R. C. L. Bevan, Esq., called in ; and Examined.
938. Chairman.] YOU are a Banker?– I am.
939. And must, from the nature of your business, have very large transactions ?
—Yes.
940. Have you formed any opinion of the advantages or disadvantages of
decimalizing our coinage?—I have, and 1 think the balance is very largely upon
the side of the advantages; the advantages are obvious, the great facilities and
the avoiding of mistakes. On the other hand, the only two disadvantages, as I
apprehend, are, first, the difficulty of the transition, which I think would soon be
got over, and the accommodating the new system to tolls and imposts fixed by
law. I think that as regards trade, no difficulty would be felt, but that it would
speedily find its level. The difficulty, too, with regard to tolls, and also with
reference to the penny postage, might, I think, be also very easily overcome.
941. Assuming the toll of a bridge, fixed by Act of Parliament to be a penny,
and that the owner taking four mils would lose four per cent. ; if he were allowed
for the first five years to take five mils to enable him to buy an annuity to
indemnify him for the loss of the four per cent., would there then be any diffi-
culty 2–That is not the way I should get over it. -
942. Mr. Moody..] That would be mulcting one generation to pay for another ?
—It does not appear to me that would be a satisfactory plan to adopt. I think
the only way would be to revise the table of tolls, and to give and take ; that is,
that the toll-keeper should be allowed to take a little more upon one toll, and
less upon another; so that on the balance, whatever the tolls might be, the table
should be brought to produce much the same as at present.
943. Chairman.] Would not some difficulty arise, assuming the sixpenny tolls
to produce 500 l., and the penny tolls to produce 100 l., to ascertain exactly what
you should allow upon each item 2–I think you must take that into consideration;
I think that in each case the magistrates, or the road surveyors, whoever the
party may be, should arrange that with the proprietors of the tolls.
944. Would it not be almost impossible to ascertain that fact, the toll-keepers
receiving tolls of various denominations?—It would be easy to try it for a week
or two. I have taken a list of tolls, commencing with a halfpenny up to a
shilling; the sixpenny is the same as 25 mils, and the shilling the same as 50 mils,
and giving and taking upon the intermediate tolls, I have roughly calculated that
314 farthings will give 321 mils, which is about two per cent. in favour of the
toll-keeper, which is no object. I think that where the balance must be one way
or other, it should be in favour of the receiver, as it is a public advantage, and the
public should pay that very trifling sum, if needful, for the advantage. -
945. Assuming the sovereign to be divided into 1,000 mils, and the florin into
100 mils, and the sixpence and shilling to be used probably at their present value,
to give change, but not as money of account, how would you divide the coinage 2
—l should endeavour to keep it as much as possible decimal, and to remove all
those coins which could have the effect of retaining the old system in the
minds of the people. I should withdraw the five-shilling pieces, and the half-
crown pieces, and the sixpenny pieces, and the fourpenny pieces, and the three-
penny pieces. I would have the one-mil piece, the two-mil piece, not the three-
mill piece, because you cannot convert any number of three-mil pieces into a
decimal; a five-mil piece; a 20-mil piece, which should be in silver, and a
50-mil piece, which would be a shilling, and 100-mil piece a florin, and then, of
course, a gold sovereign and half sovereign. º
946. I suppose you would impress on each of these coins the exact number of
mils it represents -—Certainly. - - t
Mr. F. Strugnell.
*=====
7 June 1853.
R. C. L. Bevan,
Esq.
o.66. L 4 947. Mt.
88 MINUTES OF EVADENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
R. C. L. Bevan,
Esq.
7 June 1853.
instead of pounds, shillings, and pence.
947. Mr. Kinnaird..] You ground your evidence on the practical inconvenience
you find between the threepenny and fourpenny pieces —A very great incon-
Ver] 162 In Ce.
948. Perhaps you will explain how bankers count silver, and the excessive in-
convenience the threepenny and fourpenny pieces are 2—In the present pieces, if
a banker's clerk has a quantity of mixed silver before him, he takes care to keep it
in even shillings ; if he takes 2 s. 6d., he takes sixpence with it, or 3s., always
keeping it in shillings, and whenever he comes to threepenny or fourpenny pieces
he throws them out ; and when he has done counting the shillings and the six-
pences and half-crowns, he then divides the fourpenny from the threepenny pieces,
which there is always great difficulty in doing; in fact the clerk has to take up
every piece, and to examine whether it has a milled edge or not. This process in
a large quantity of silver is exceedingly inconvenient, and therefore we ask our
customers to keep separate the threepenny and fourpenny pieces, and for this
reason I think that it would be exceedingly inconvenient to have coins with only a
penny difference between them, and that the simultaneous circulation of two pieces,
one of them four to the florin, and the other five to the florin, would occasion the
same inconverience, and be very undesirable.
949. Chairman.] If I understand you, you would like to carry on the business
of the country with the fewest number of coins that would enable you to give
the necessary change —Yes; I do not say that as a banker only, but I feel con-
vinced that it would puzzle the people much less to have few coins.
950. If you divided the copper coins into one mil, three mils, and five mils,
do you think that the use of the coins would soon be understood 2–I would
much rather have one mil, two mils, and five mils. I do not like introducing
the three mils; I would rather have two-and-a-half mils ; but I think with
three coins, one mil, two mils, and five mils, there would be no difficulty in
changing. The introduction of a 3, 30, or 300-mil piece, as has been proposed,
would occasion much inconvenience, because no less number of each than 10
would form an even amount of the superior coin ; even a coin of 25 would be
much less inconvenient, four making 100; for this reason, I have no doubt
a banker’s clerk would find it easier to arrive at the amount of a number of 25
than of 30-mil pieces; he would have nothing to do but to tell up four of each
as one florin, and those over as 25-mils ; for instance, he would at once make 37
25-mils into 9:25, more readily than 37 30-miis into 1.1.10.
951. Mr. Moody.] In copper, the approximation in size would not apply as it
does in silver ?—Not between one mil and two mils, but between two mils and
two-and-a-half mils it would.
952. Chairman.] How do you propose to rule your books, in four columns
or in three ?—In three columns, the same as now ; I think probably in practice,
where there was any such decimal, we should avoid putting in the 0; supposing
it were 5,085 mils, I should write five pounds eight florins, and instead of
putting 0, merely say five mils, saving the trouble of writing the 0 if the lines
were ruled. *
953. Supposing you had 10 mils above it, would you not require great care in
not putting the five under the 0 –So it does now ; if you place ll or /1 in the
wrong place, it may be added up as 10 instead of 1.
954. It would save you making a decimal point 7–Yes.
955. Custom would soon bring people to follow that plan, with respect to
ruling their books, which would be most convenient to them — I have no doubt
they would all adopt the same plan as they do now.
956. You are probably aware that the Bank of England buys and sells gold
decimally –-I do not know much about that.
957. You have no doubt in your mind that a decimal coinage would simplify
all the more difficult calculations to a very great extent 2—Extremely.
958. Have you any idea what per-centage in the saving of labour there would
be upon the larger operations —That I could not state ; but as regards the quan-
tity of mistakes which now arise in first dividing by 4, then by 12, and then
dividing by 20, and then again by 10, I can only say that, in my own experi-
ence, having a good deal to do with figures, and not being so au fait at them as
many of our clerks, I am led into continual errors, which occasion a good deal of
loss of time. I should save many an hour by keeping my accounts in decimals,
959. Mr.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 89
959. Mr. Kinnaird.] You are speaking of your own experience as a partner *
—I am ; it would be much the case with the junior clerk, who takes some time
before he can cast quickly and correctly. When clerks have perfectly learned it,
they do not care so much, as it becomes a second nature to them. The change
would not be so great an advantage to experienced arithmeticians as it would
to inexperienced arithmeticians. As regards contractors, and those who have the
most difficult works to do, they already use decimal calculations.
960. Would it be a great convenience, for instance, if you lost experienced
clerks, and had to take on a number of young hands?—It would be a great
advantage to a great many rough men who are about the country; clever men
8- ~. º
who have not had school learning, having good heads, they would be able to
keep their accounts in their heads in a way that they cannot do now.
961. Chairman.] Would it also be exceedingly advantageous in schools, by
diminishing the labour of education ?—Immense; I suppose we all have a lively
recollection of the troubles cf reduction.
962. And would enable boys, instead of making those difficult calculations, to
appropriate their time to something that would be more useful to them through
life?—No doubt; they could go into much more difficult rules of arithmetic than
they do now ; in fact, the main difficulty in arithmetic is felt to be the division and
multiplication of pounds, shillings, and pence.
963. I think you have expressed your opinion that the names should be
changed 7–I think it would be desirable to change the names, to prevent confu-
SIOI).
964. Do you think it desirable that, in the first instance, the new coinage and
the old coinage should circulate together, or would you call in the old coins, send-
ing into circulation the new ones at once 2—I am not quite aware of the difficulty
of calling in coins, but it certainly would be desirable, if it could be done without
much dfficulty.
965. I believe the usual course is, that by an Order in Council certain coins
are declared to be not a legal tender after a certain period, but they are afterwards
exchangeable at the banks 7–I think it would be desirable. I think that when
it is determined to effect the change, and the day is determined on which it will
be done, that we had better use every possible means of getting rid of the old
system altogether.
966. Assuming that Parliament should entertain the view of this Committee,
that decimalizing our coinage would be advantageous, would you not think it
desirable, in order to prepare the public mind for the change, at once to pass an
Act for carrying it into effect, leaving it to the discretion of the Government, by
Order in Council, to say when the change should take place —I cannot tell
whether that would be desirable, or that a certain time should be fixed from which
it should take effect. If it were decided upon at this moment, I do not think it
should commence earlier than January 1855.
967. Would not an Act of Parliament prepare the minds of the public, and
direct their attention to a matter which they were certain would take place at no
distant period?—Yes, that is very desirable.
968. Mr. Kinnaird.] Have you turned over in your own mind any mode that
you could recommend to the Committee for facilitating the transition ?—Some of
our clerks, to whom I mentioned the matter, raised an objection that we should
have to deal with farthings again, which would be very inconvenient, the mils
being in fact worse than farthings. I think it would be exceedingly inconvenient
in large transactions to force farthings or mils into the calculations that we should
have to deal with. I think, therefore, that as we have hitherto excluded all parts
of a penny, consisting of four farthings, from our calculations, so I should in
public accounts, and in mercantile as well as in banking accounts, exclude all frac-
tions of the five-mil piece; that is to say, that the last column should contain
only the figure 5; it should be 5, or 10, or 15, or 23, or 25 mils, and it would
be as much recognised in the public accounts as in commercial accounts, as it is
now recognised that we exclude farthings.
969. Chairman.] Could not that difficulty be met in this way; that if the
fraction of account was over 23d., we should consider it as one more, namely, six,
instead of five mils, and if under 23 d., that we should reckon it as four instead of
five mils?—I think it would be much less troublesome, if it were six, to call it five ;
and if it were eight or nine, to call it five ; and if it were only one, two, three, or
R. C. L. Betan,
Esq.
7 June 1853.
o.66. M four
90 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
R. C. L. Bevan,
Esq.
7 June 1853.
four mils, that we should not take it into account at all. Then of course we
should receive and pay bills or money in the same way, and it would be as
generally recognised as it is now recognised that we have nothing to do with
farthings. -
970. Mr. Kinnaird.] Have you ever met with any complaint from customers
for not including farthings?—I never heard of it; if a halfpenny by any chance
finds its way into the cash, we throw it on one side, and take care not to mix it
with the pence, and perhaps they add it to the next halfpenny they find, but it
very rarely occurs that a halfpenny is paid in.
971. Chairman.] You see no objection to accounts being kept in the manner
referred to ?—I see no objection to keeping them always in five-mils, it would
facilitate calculations exceedingly.
972. In the transition state from pounds, shillings, and pence, to pounds,
florins, and mils, would it very much facilitate the change if, whenever a bill
was accepted in pounds, shillings, and pence, it stated also on the face of it how
many mils it was, as we do with francs 2—But then it is so taken by the party
here. If I have a bill brought to me drawn in roubles or in francs, I give pounds,
shillings, and pence for the bill, and when I receive the amount I receive pounds,
shillings, and pence. In this case we should have to take the bill in pounds,
shillings, and pence, and should not receive it in pounds, shillings, and pence,
but in pounds, florins, and mils.
973. Supposing you made it a condition before you took the bill that the
number of mils should be stated upon the face of it?—The two sides of the
ledger would not agree, because you would have it entered on one side of the
ledger in pounds, shillings, and pence, and on the other side in pounds, florins,
and mils. I would suggest that the difficulty would be surmounted by a strong
recommendation or a positive Act on the part of Parliament, that bills drawn
previously to the date of the alteration, but falling due subsequent to the altera-
tion, should be drawn without shillings or pence at all ; I believe there would be
no difficulty with mercantile bills, or with traders', in arranging the shillings and
pence either in cash, or by carrying them into the next account.
974. Mr. Kinnaird..] You would of course adopt the same mode with regard to
carrying over the pence at the end of the year?—I think we should probably
request our customers at the end of the year, that is, on the 31st December 1854,
supposing the change to take effect on the 1st January 1855, to close with an
even balance. Public attention would be so drawn to the thing, that if a recon-
mendation of the sort were made, persons would in their cash transactions
endeavour to meet that difficulty, which would fall as much upon them as
upon us.
975. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Supposing a bill from a foreign country were drawn
for 400 l. 5 s. 6d., and when it arrived at maturity the new system of coinage
were adopted, where would be the difficulty in receiving 400 l. 2 florins and 75
mils?—There would be no more difficulty than if the bill were drawn in francs;
I have no doubt that the plan I suggest of drawing in even amounts would be
adopted abroad as well as at home, because merchants here would tell their cor-
respondents to draw upon them in even amounts. -
976. Would not parties soon learn the habit, as soon as the new plan was
adopted, of putting over the figures pounds, florins, and mils 2–Yes, but while
the pounds, shillings, and pence prevailed you must enter an account in your
discount ledger in pounds, shillings, and pence.
977. Chairman.] Is there any further information that you can give us?—A great
objection is felt by many gentlemen with respect to anything like an increase in the
price of postage stamps, but it appears to me that in practice nobody would feel such
an increase as would be involved in an advance from four farthings to five mils; the
poor would not feel that, because the number of letters written by them is so
small that even with their means it would be imperceptible ; take a labouring
man at 15 S. a week; I should think if you were to assume that he wrote 50
letters in the year, that would be much beyond the mark; if he were to pay five
mils for each stamp, that being 250 mils, we have no difficulty in reducing that
into 2 | florins, or 5 s, but he pays now 50 pence, or 4 s. 2 d., and therefore in
the course of the year he would pay I od. more for his postage; I think that could
hardly be considered an hardship. Take the other extreme ; persons in the habit
of using a large quantity ; we use a considerable number; the bulk we charge to
OU T
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 91
our country correspondents; therefore I am not speaking of those, but in respect
of our own private letters, including those written by five partners, the stamps
we use come to about 100 l. a year, being about 24,000 stamps, or something
like 76 per day; what difference would it make to us if, instead of paying 1 ool.
a year, we paid 120 l. a year; I do not think anybody could complain of so
small an alteration as that, while it would put several hundred thousand pounds
into the Exchequer, which we should get in some other way; for instance, when
the income tax or property tax is reduced to 5 d. it will be very little above two
per cent., but supposing it were made two per cent., and we were made to pay
five mils for a stamp, it would not be a loss to the Exchequer, and the public
would not regret the exchange.
978. Mr. J. B. Smith..] The plan you propose would be an increase of 20 per
º upon the postage stamp 3–That is, you would get 10 for a shilling instead
Of 1 2.
979. In your opinion, supposing the excess of receipts over and above the
present receipts from the penny postage would enable Parliament to take off
the duties on butter and cheese, or articles of that kind, the working classes in
particular would receive the full equivalent?—Yes, I think much more than an
equivalent; because I do not think that the lower classes pay for the postage
stamps, but they are paid for by people engaged in commerce.
980. Mr. Moody..] Any increase in the amount of ferry tolls, where people
are going backwards and forwards to their work, would make a considerable
difference to them —That is a difficult question, of course; but I think that some
arrangement might be made which would be fair for both parties.
981. Where tolls are fixed by Act of Parliament, it would involve a change of
the Act 2–You must not inflict any injury on parties who possess a right under
an Act of Parliament. -
982. Chairman.] Where workmen are passing daily, there might be an arrange-
ment for their buying tickets at a certain price r—Just so ; they might buy six
for 25 mils.
983. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Your transactions are generally in large sums ?–I am
sorry to say that we have a good many small ones.
984. You never pay anything less than one penny ?—We have nothing to do
with anything less than a penny.
985. What is the smallest cheque you have paid 3–I cannot say what is the
smallest cheque I ever saw. It is very seldom that a cheque is drawn for less
than 2 l. or 3 l.
986. When you calculate interest, do you calculate farthings –We always
use tables for the calculation of interest.
- 87. When the interest comes to the fraction of a penny, do you abate it 3–
If a farthing or halfpenny, we always abate it.
988. On both sides of a long interest account, you take no notice of the fraction
of a penny ?—We give and take, and bring it as near as we can.
989. Is it not the custom, when the fraction comes to the halfpenny, to charge
nothing, and when it comes to three farthings, to charge 1 d. 2–It is.
go. Dealing as you do in large sums, you cannot give the Committee an idea of
the effect that these changes would have on parties who deal in small sums ?–
I cannot.
Mr. Samuel Lindsey, called in ; and Examined.
ggi. Chairman.] WHERE do you reside 7–68, Lower Marsh, Lambeth.
992. What are you ?—Grocer and Tea Dealer.
993. The Board of Trade wrote you a letter, to ask your views as to the effect
which the change in the currency would have upon the lower classes of the com-
munity, with whom it is understood you are extensively engaged, receiving as
many as a thousand farthings in the week?—I believe that is the case.
994. Do you think that if the poor man received 25 farthings for the 6d., where
he now receives 24 farthings, there would be any difficulty in his readily adopting
the change?--No, I think not at all.
995. Do you think there would be any unpleasant feeling on the part of the
poor —No ; I think no dissatisfaction at all would be felt.
396. From what I have heard, probably no house in London has more extensive
R. C. L. Bevan,
Esq.
7 June 1853.
Mr. S. Lindsey.
o.66. MI 2 dealings
92 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. S. Lindsey.
7 June 1853.
dealings with those classes, or receives a larger number of farthings in the week
than yourself?–I should think there are a great many farthings in our neighbour-
hood; it is a very low one.
997. Have you any opinion to express as to what the names of the new coins
should be 2–I have not. -
998. Do you think we should continue to call this lower denomination farthings 2
—I think the lower classes would like it better.
999. Would they not continue to call them so 2–I think they would for a
tl me.
1000. Do you think it desirable that it should be stated on each piece the
number of farthings or mils that it represents —I do.
1001. As regards the mil being of somewhat less value than the present
farthing, would not the trade soon accommodate itself to giving a quantity of tea
or sugar, or anything else, to correspond with the value of the money received ?--
It would soon find its level.
1002. Competition would soon bring it down 2–No doubt of it.
1003. You buy, of course, to a considerable extent —Yes.
1004. Would it be a great convenience in your accounts if they were arranged
in tenths, or decimally —I should think it would, but it would require practice
to learn the system.
1005. Instead of having to carry 1 at 20 when you deal with shillings, and 1 at
10 when you get to pounds, you would have a calcólation of 10 throughout 7–
No doubt that would simplify it.
1006. What, in your opinion, would be the effect of the change in the system
of copper coinage upon those with whom you are engaged in your transactions –
I think the lower classes at first would feel a great dissatisfaction in the change of
. copper coinage, as they would probably think they were not getting their full
Val U16.
1007. Would it be a sufficient explanation to them, that for the sixpence they
had only received 24 farthings, but that now they had 25 mils?—When they
understood that, they would be perfectly satisfied; but the lower classes are apt to
fancy everything is against them.
1008. Mr. J. B. Smith..] You have heard my questions to the former witnesses
as regards the plan of adopting a different unit, so as to retain the present shilling
as a common coin; which would you prefer, the shilling or the florin —I should
prefer the shilling.
1009. You think that the working classes would understand better putting
down 1,700 as 17 s., than to put it down as 850 2—I think so, decidedly.
1o 10. If that plan were adopted, you would see but little inconvenience in
adopting the copper coins 2—I see but very little inconvenience as regards the
copper coins, but very great inconvenience if you do away with the shilling.
101 1...Do you not reckon the price of most of your articles in shillings 2––Yes;
everything is bought in shillings.
1012. The shilling is a much more important coin to the working man than the
pound 7––Yes; in our business we pay 37 s., or 38 s., or 50 S. for sugar; we never
introduce the pound at all.
1013. And you buy coffee at so many shillings per hundredweight?--We do.
1014. Are the working classes in the habit of buying articles in small quantities 2
——Yes. I get all sorts of customers, because I am near the railway station ; but
we have some customers who come for quarter of an ounce of tea, and in one shop
I had, we used to sell in the course of the week, 1,300 quarter pounds of Sugar,
and very nearly as many quarter ounces of tea.
1015. In those cases where the fraction of a penny is below the farthing, how
do you manage it?--The public always manage that, because they would not buy
half an ounce of tea at 3 s. 8d., but half an ounce of tea at 3 s. 4d., or 48.
1016. Does it not often happen that you have a fraction of half a farthing 2–
That could only be in the sale of half an ounce of 1 S. coffee.
1017. Suppose a person bought a quarter of a pound of a 1 s. article, which
would cost 1 2 3 mils under the new coinage, would you not, in that case, charge
13 nuils 7–We must either take the advantage or give it.
1018. You would not be likely to give the public the advantage —We are very
liberal; I do not know how that would be.
1 on 9. Supposing the coinage could be so adapted as that a quarter of a toº,
O
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 93
of a 1 s. article could be bought without any fractions, so that the public might
lose nothing, would not that be a great advantage –No doubt. º
1020. Is a shilling a very common price for articles?—Not in our business.
1 oz 1. You are of opinion that it would be very desirable to keep the shilling 2
—I think the shilling would be desirable.
1022. Chairman.] Is it possible to issue any coin, be it what it might, which
will meet the constant fluctuations in tea, sugar, coffee, and other articles —No.
1 oz3. If it were right to-day, it would be wrong to-morrow 2–Yes.
1024. Would not the buyer soon understand that one florin was precisely the
value of 2 s. 2–Yes. -
1025. Sir W. Clay.] You are aware that the shilling would still remain as a
coin 2–Yes, it would represent 50 mils, and the public would soon learn that.
1026. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Do you ever make use of half-farthings —No.
1027. Have you ever seen them ?—I have ; they were introduced into our
neighbourhood, but the public would not have them.
1028. Is it a custom with you, when you meet with fractions less than a
farthing, to give some article in exchange 3–Our goods never come to less than
a farthing in any way.
1029. You think that a half-farthing would be of no use ?—No use at all.
Mr. Charles Meeking, called in ; and Examined.
1030. Chairman.] YOU are a Draper, I believe, on Holborn-hill?—I am.
1031. Are you in the habit of selling both large and small quantities in a very
extensive way ?—I am.
1032. You have heard the evidence given by the last witnesses with respect to
what they consider to be the advantages of a decimal coinage; do you take the
same view as they do?—A decimal coinage would, in my opinion, facilitate every
transaction of business, and the transition would be practicable in books of
account, even if the new denomination as well as the old denomination of coins
were in circulation at the same time, if that were necessary, by keeping separate
columns in the ledgers, just as we do now in our French bought ledger, where we
put all our transactions in francs, and then in English money, by which means we
can always balance our accounts. It facilitates the transaction very much, and as
a proof of the decimal coinage being very easy, I may state that in France women
keep a great portion of the books.
1033. Are you of opinion that the present coins and the new coins circulating
simultaneously would instruct the people sooner in the comparative value of the
new coins —I think they would, judging from my own experience in travelling. I
think that, in journeying up the Rhine, you find that people very readily under-
stand the various coins, and soon become intimately acquainted with the respective
values of the coins. I think the people would soon become intimately acquainted
with the coins if they were circulated together; and I think that if a day were
fixed, say at the expiration of three or six months, for the withdrawal of the old
coin and the exclusive use of the new, and all persons arranged their books
by that time, a little determination and resolution would soon complete the
matter,
1034. You have heard what has been suggested as to dividing the pound into
1,000 parts, and the florin into 100 parts, and that those coins should be marked
with the number of mils they represent; would not that very soon familiarize
every class of the people with the coins, and teach them that 25 mils were of the
same value as 6 d., and 50 mils of the same value as I S. 2–Yes, if pounds and
florins are to be retained in deeds and accounts. We know, just after the French
revolution, they altered their coinage, and the people soon became acquainted with
it when everything was reduced into practice.
1035. Sir W. Clay.] Do you think, with reference to some objections that
have been stated as to the inconvenience to the lower classes in making pur-
chases to a very small amount, that they would soon learn that the five-mil piece
was of more value than a penny, and that therefore they would only deal with those
shopkeepers who gave them an equivalent in the value of the goods?—I think
there would be no practical injury done to the poor.
1036. Chairman.] If the four-mil piece were issued, six of those and one
mil making 6 d., and the coins were permitted to circulate together, would
Mr. S. Lindsey.
7 June 1853.
Mr. C. Meeking.
o.66. M 3 InOt
94 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. C. Meeking.
7 June 1853.
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
not the poor more readily associate their ideas with the four-mil piece than the
five-mil piece 2–I think they would.
1037. Would you have a one-mil piece, a two-mil piece, a three-mil piece or
four-mil piece, and a five-mil piece; or one-mil piece, three-mil piece, and five-
mil piece; or one-mil piece, two-mil piece, and four-mil piece; which do you
think would be most convenient to the public service —I would have one, two,
three, four, and five-mil pieces.
1038–40. You would have one-mil piece and five-mil piece —Yes, and two,
three, four-mil pieces.
1041. Chairman.] Would you prefer a one-mil piece, three-mil piece, and
five-mil piece 7–My business does not give me an opportunity of answering that
question, quite decidedly.
1042. Have you thought what would be the effect of changing the name from
a farthing to a mil –I have not thought of it, but I should suppose that any
term would be adopted with great facility as long as it was not a foreign term.
1043. We have had some evidence which induces us to suppose that it would
very much facilitate education in schools 3–I am so much engaged in my
business, that I am sorry to say I have not given that subject much attention; but
I should think the more simple you make arithmetical calculations, the better it
would be.
1044. Mr. J. B. Smith..] You have heard the examination of different persons
as to retaining the shilling in preference to the florin, as the coin most adapted to
the working classes; what is your opinion on that point?—I would abolish the
name of pound, florin, pence, and farthings, and use shillings and mils only,
whether in books of account or legal instruments, using the shilling as a unit,
and mils for the fractional parts of that coin; or, instead of writing 1 l. 10s. 6d.,
say 15s. 25 m., using two columns for money in lieu of three, making the florin
the unit, and stamping it the shilling-piece or 100 mils.
1045. Do you think it would be better to retain the pound sterling, and to divide
it into 1,000 parts, florins, cents, and mils —No ; I would name the pound,
“Ten-shilling piece,” and decimate the shilling into mils.
1046. Would you prefer that a unit of 10 s. should be taken to admit of 1s.
being the coin most adapted to common uses; for instance, 10 mils, one penny;
10 d., one shilling; los., one pound?—I do not comprehend the question.
1047. If you had to express 15s. 6d. of the present money, you would write it
1,550 %–Yes ; or more simply, for books of account, 15 s. 25 m., if the single
shilling and not the two-shilling piece be the unit.
1048. Would that be easier than having to write it ,775?–No ; I do not think
it would be easier to write it, but it would be more suitably expressed by
15 S. 25 m. -
1049. Would it not be better understood by the working classes?—It might at
first, but after a month or so '775 would be quite as intelligible to them.
1050. Are you of opinion that it would be more desirable to retain the pound
sterling as at present, and keep the florins as shillings, in preference to the unit
of 10 s. ?—I do not think I could give any definite opinion, as perhaps experience
only could determine accurately whether the shilling should be the unit. (See
Answer 1044.) In reference to the foregoing, if three columns should be deter-
mined upon, perhaps pounds, florins or 2 S., and mils, would be the best.
1051. You are in the habit of buying French goods, I believe?—Yes.
1052. You are aware that their measurements are on a decimal system 2–Yes.
1053. Do you think it desirable to adopt a decimal measurement in Eng-
land 7–Very much so; and at the same time, if possible, that you alter the
coinage ; and also in weights.
1054. Do you think they should be simultaneous !—Yes.
George Arbuthnot, Esq., called in ; and Examined.
1055. Chairman.] ARE you Chief Clerk in the Treasury Ż—I am Auditor of
the Civil List, a Treasury office, with duties assigned to it analogous to those of
an Assistant Secretary.
1056. You are conversant, I believe, with what took place when the change
was made in Ireland in altering the 13 d. for 12 d ?–I have looked through
the proceedings of the Treasury on the subject. An entire change had
been effected in that case of the system of the currency of Ireland, and there
Were
* SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAP, COINAGE. 95
were a great many points to arrange by the Treasury; but the only point which G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
seems to apply particularly to the proposed alteration of the coinage here, is that —
which relates to the conversion of the Irish penny into the denomination of the 7 June 1853.
British penny.
1057. Tell us under what Act of Parliament and under what regulations the
first transaction took place —The Irish currency was one-thirteenth more than
the English, or rather, the value of the pound Irish was one-thirteenth less than
the English. The difference arose in the time of the rebellion, when James was
in Ireland opposing the Crown, and being short of funds, in order to find the
means of paying his troops, he depreciated the currency, and it remained in that
state up to the time of passing the Act of 6 Geo. 4, c. 79. g
1 off 8. Mr. Ball.] The actual difference was, I believe, 13 d. Irish made 1 s.
English —As regards the shilling, that was the precise difference. The effect
was, that the silver coin, then the current money, became overvalued by the addi-
tion of one-twelfth to its nominal value ; the same overvaluation would extend to
the gold coin, when that became the current money of the country, and the pound
sterling would represent the value of 1 l. 1 s. 8d. Irish currency. Regarding the
proceedings of the Treasury in the matter of the copper coin of Ireland, I will, as
the best information I can give to the Committee, read a memorandum I have
made upon looking over the Treasury Minutes.
[The JWitness read the same, as follows :]
By the Act 6 Geo. 4, c. 79, for the assimilation of the currency and monies of account
throughout the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, it was provided (sec. 11),
that, after a day to be named by proclamation (by his Majesty and the Lord Lieutenant of
Ireland), the silver and gold coins of Great Britain should be current in Ireland at the
same rate of pence as in Great Britain, and not as heretofore in Ireland, viz., the silver 6 d.
at 6 d. instead of 6 d., and so on.
By the following section (12) it was enacted that, on like proclamation, Irish copper
money might be brought into the Bank of Ireland and exchanged there for British copper
coin, at the rate of 12 pence British for 13 pence Irish, and that thereafter the Irish copper
coin should cease to circulate. .
After the passing of this Act, proclamations were passed regarding the gold and silver
coins, in pursuance of the 11th section.
A new copper coinage had at the time been ordered, but as it was not ready for issue,
proceedings under the 12th section were suspended. This copper money, when com-
pleted, was ordained, by proclamation, to be current and lawful money of the United King-
dom of Great Britain and Ireland, with a limitation of the tender at 12 d.
No steps were however taken for withdrawing the Irish copper money from circulation.
It was probably felt that, as there was no inducement to people to bring in 13 Irish pence
for the purpose of getting them exchanged for 12 pence of the currency of the United
Kingdom, any proclamation for that purpose would be nugatory. The two descriptions of
coin remained in consequence for some months in concurrent circulation; representations
were then made to Government by trading bodies and others, of the great inconvenience
to commerce which resulted from this state of things, and it was decided to adopt the
course of making the copper money, formerly coined expressly for Ireland, current in the
United Kingdom at the same rates as the copper money of England, and that recently
coined for the United Kingdom.
The Treasury submitted a case for the opinion of the Attorney and Solicitor-general,
whether the King could legally be advised to issue a proclamation for this purpose. Their
opinion was to the following effect:—
“We think the King by his proclamation may give a new value to the Irish copper coin,
and render it current throughout the United Kingdom; but as the Act 6 Geo. 4, c. 79,
s. 12, has expressly provided that there shall be delivered, at the said Bank of Ireland, to
every person bringing in and delivering such copper coin of the currency of Ireland a sum
in the current copper coin of Great Britain, after the rate of 12 pence of such British
copper coin for every 13 pence, or 26 halfpence, of such copper coin of the currency of
Ireland, so to be brought in and delivered at the said Bank of Ireland, we think, when the
coin is called in, it in ust be exchanged at the rate fixed in the Act, unless another Act
should in the meantime pass, introducing a new regulation upon the point, in conformity
to the new nominal value of the coin.
- s (signed) J. S. Copley.
Serjeants' Inn, 22 June 1826. Chs. Wetherell.
In pursuance of this opinion, proclamations were issued in England and Ireland,
declaring the copper coin of the latter country to be current coin of the United Kingdom,
at the rate of 12 pence to the shilling.
0.66. M 4 The
96 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
7 June 1853.
The 12th section of the Act fell to the ground, as no proclamation was issued in Ireland
for calling in that coin, and no further enactment was passed by Parliament on the
subject.
1059. Chairman.] Were there any disturbances in Ireland owing to that change?
—None at ali.
1060. Notwithstanding the peasantry might suppose that they were losing a penny ?
—I never heard that there was any difficulty; but they had the two coins in con-
current circulation, and very probably the inconvenience of having two pennies of
different value was so great, that they were prepared to have it adjusted. A
similar measure of late years was introduced into the Isle of Man, and was the
cause of riots and great discontent.
1061. The holder of 13 Irish pence could go to the Bank of Ireland and receive
an English shilling —It required a proclamation to be issued, which never was
issued.
1062. Mr. Ball.] It was declared that after a certain day the Irish copper
coins, which previously had been at the rate of 13 pence to the shilling, should
pass at the rate of 12 pence to the shilling?—Yes.
1063. So that every person holding Irish pence gained in proportion of 13
to 12 —Yes, but he lost in purchasing power.
1064. Chairman.] He neither gained nor lost 3–Theoretically he neither gained
nor lost; but practically I think the change involved some grievance upon the
receiver of pence. Take any small article, such as two eggs sold for a penny,
it is clear that a person would get only 24 instead of 26 for the shilling.
1065. Mr. Ball.] In that illustration the small dealer would gain?—Yes; but
the buyer would lose. I think that in all cases you will find depreciation of a
coin more popular than appreciation.
1066. Let us put the case of a person having Irish copper coin in his hand at
the time of the change, that person who, before the change, received for 13 pence
Irish a shilling, would, on the day following, receive a shilling for only 12
pence Irish, and would therefore gain a penny ?–If that transaction took place.
1067. Did it not, in fact, take place?—It is but very rarely that a poor person
wants to get a shilling for 12 pence; the usual course is to get change for a
shilling.
1068. In the case of a person receiving wages of 10 d. per day, he would,
after the change, in 12 days receive 120 pence, or 10 s., whereas, before the
change, he would receive less than 10 s. ?–Reasoning it in that point of view, the
holder of a penny would be a gainer if he continued to receive 1 o d. a day;
but the practical question, I fancy, depends upon the purchasing power of the
penny, which would not be altered immediately on the change.
1069. Chairman.] In point of fact, the individual holding 13 pence was,
practically, neither a gainer nor loser in exchanging them for a shilling, but if
he went to market he would find 13 pence were better than 12 pence 7–Yes; and
for that reason, probably, it was not necessary to issue a proclamation, and the
coins remain in circulation to this day. In the case of Ireland, from the con-
current circulation of two coins of the same name, but of different values,
I apprehend there was great difficulty in ascertaining what the penny really was ;
it created great confusion in all transactions, and I have no doubt that the con-
fusion that existed facilitated the change very much.
1070. Mr. Ball.] Is it your opinion that, by creating difficulties, an uneasiness
would be felt which would lead to the change 2—I think so, if it were not so
great as to cause serious inconvenience.
1071. Chairman.] Were any steps taken by Government to prevent miscon-
ception on the part of the holders of Irish pence —Nothing was done but to
issue a proclamation; authorized tables were, however, published, showing the
rate at which Irish money was to be converted into English money.
1072. Nothing like riots took place 2–No ; I believe the change gave general
satisfaction in the country, so much inconvenience having been experienced in
transactions carried on between Ireland and England.
1073. Mr. Ball.] Can you state whether any reports were received by the
Treasury or the Home Office at that period from the public departments in Ireland
with reference to the cause for making the change, and the results of it?—It
originated in representations from commercial bodies, I believe ; the Chamber of
Commerce at Belfast, for instance, made representations, and Mr. Hill, who was
then
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 97
then Assistant Secretary to the Treasury, was sent to Ireland to obtain informa-
tion on the spot.
1074. This was before the change?—Before the change ; a great deal passed in
personal communication, which is not on record.
1 o'75. You are not able to state whether there were any written reports made
on the change —There were no written reports made.
1076. Was the change in Ireland effected peaceably, and without any demon-
stration on the part of the populace, under any notion that an injustice was done
to them —Yes. I wrote the memorandum to which I have referred whilst I was
in Ireland, and I made inquiries there on the subject, and was told that there was
no difficulty on the subject. I asked among my friends who recollected the change,
whether any inconvenience arose, and they all said they did not recollect that the
people complained.
1077. Mr. Ball.] The suggestion you have made with reference to fractions
is based upon the assumption that half mils would be coined 2–I presume you
refer to a paper of mine, in the hands of the Chairman, in which I proposed that,
in case it should be determined to decimalise our currency by rating the farthing
at the looth of a florin or the 1,000th of a pound, it would be necessary to lay
down some plain rule (as was done in the case of the Irish currency) for dealing
with fractions which will arise in the conversion of payments from the present to
the new denominaticn. I suggested that all fractions of three-fourths and upwards
of a mil should be counted as a mil; fractions of one-fourth to three-fourths, as
half a mil; and that all fractions below one-fourth should be excluded. By this
scheme the difference would never exceed one-fourth of a mil. I assumed half
mils, because half farthings exist as a legal coin, though they are not used in
England at present. w
1078. Does it appear to you, following the experience of Ireland, that any
serious inconvenience in effecting the contemplated change would be found, if a
proclamation were issued declaring that the existing farthing-should henceforth
pass as one mil or 1,000th part of a pound sterling, other coins filling the links
in the chain of decimal coinage being issued at the same time !--It must be
borne in mind that the change proposed now is in the opposite direction of that
effected in Ireland; there the copper money was appreciated; and even if that
change had been attended with difficulty, it would not follow that a similar diffi-
culty would arise from a depreciation, as is now proposed, of our present copper
money. As regards the transactions of the common people, I do not think any
serious difficulty would occur; I think it would be rather desirable to retain the
penny.
1079. By name do you mean 2–If it were retained in fact, it would never alter
its name in common usage.
1080. Do you mean, while retaining the penny, to fix its value at 13, th
instead of its present rate of the rinth part of a pound —Exactly. I think people
are so much habituated to the use of pence, and the equal division : our currency
has so long proceeded upon the system of equal division, that is, division by two,
that it would be particularly inconvenient to the lower classes to deprive them of
it. To divide by two is the most simple process of calculation ; you have
farthing, halfpenny, and penny.
1081. Chairman.] That would defeat the object of decimalising 7–No, it
would leave the lower denominations of coin, for practical purposes, in their
present state, but they might be adapted to a decinial system by a slight alteration
of the value for which they pass current.
1082. Mr. Ball.] Have you applied your mind to a consideration of the best
mode of meeting the difficulty as to the price of the postage stamp, and especially
as regards the tolls of bridges and ferries?—I think there would be great difficulty
as to the tolls; for instance, when I was walking over Hungerford Bridge the
other day, having paid the halfpenny toll, it occurred to me that if the proprietors
received only two mils, they would lose four per cent.
1083. Chairman.] If you were to allow them to take three mils for two years,
and two mils thenceforward, they would probably he neither gainers nor losers?
—I do not know how the public would be satisfied with that.
1084. Mr. Ball.] A suggestion has been made that the loss for the future might
be bought off by a small increased toll for the present 2–That would materially
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
7 June 1853.
0.66. N affect
98 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
7 June 1853.
The Duke of
Leinster.
9 June 1853.
affect persons constantly using the bridge. I do not see how any change of
system can be effected without giving and taking. I should think that, in the case
of tolls that vary up to higher sums, they might be equalised very well. . . .
1085. Chairman.] Would there not be a practical difficulty in ascertaining, in
the case of a sixpenny toll and a penny toll, how much you are to add to the one
and deduct from the other?—In my last answer, I had in mind such cases as con-
veyance by railway, where the charges involve an aggregate of simall rates. In
the case of small individual tolls, there would no doubt be difficulty. None would
attend the adjustment of a sixpenny toll, a sixpenny piece being the quarter of a
florin; but it would not be easy to adjust a penny toll equitably and at the same
time conveniently. It is very troublesome when the toll is not an even coin ; in
the neighbourhood of Dublin there is a toll of, I think, 3 } d., and it is a perpetual
grievance constantly to have to look for a farthing. * sº
1086. Might that difficulty be obviated by selling for instance six tickets for
25 mils?—I do not think that that would suit the common people; they may
have a halfpenny ready, but may not be prepared to invest 6d. in tickets. Even
in other classes, it would only suit persons in the frequent habit of using the
bridge. It would deter casual passers.
Jovis, 9° die Junii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT.
Mr. Brown. , Mr. Kinnaird.
Mr. J. B. Smith. Wiscount Goderich.
Mr. Moody. | . Mr. Ball.
WILLIAM BROWN, Esq., IN THE CHAIR.
The Duke of Leinster, Examined.
1987. Chairman.] WE are informed that your Grace has paid some attention
to the subject of the introduction of a decimal coinage?—I have.
1088. And that you can also give us some information as to the effect of a
change that took place some years ago in the currency in Ireland 7–Yes.
1089. Will you have the goodness to state what took place on that occasion 3
-I think it was in the year 1826 that the currency was changed from Irish into
English.
1990. Did any difficulty arise, or was any objection made on the part of the
humbler classes!—There was a little difficulty at first, until the matter was per-
fectly understood ; but tables were published, and every explanation given, which
removed all difficulty.
1991. I believe an English 1 s. and an Irish 1s. were concurrently in circulation?
-There was an Irish is. ; but the coinage was so very bad that the Bank of
Ireland at one time issued a 10 d. token instead of having a new coinage.
1992. Do you recollect how long those 10 d. tokens continued to circulate:
Until the new currency came in.
1093. Was any objection made to the 19 d. token on the part of the peasantry
or other parties accustomed to the shilling —No ; I believe they were very glad
to get them, because the Irish shillings were dreadful; in getting change for a
sovereign you would probably receive three or four bad shillings. The Irish cur-
rency in 1804 and 1805 was in a dreadful state.
1094. Mr. Kinnaird..] Did that continue for some time?
the currency, which was somewhere about the year 1826.
Until the change in
1995. Mr. Ball.j Do you conceive that the change in Ireland was greatly
facilitated
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. '99
facilitated by the fact that the copper coinage was increased in value; that is,
was made equal in value, by the proclamation that was issued, to the English —
I do not think that it had any effect. -
io96. Do you conceive that it would have been as easily carried out if it had
been the other way ?–Just the same ; we used to have English pence passing
current at the same time.
1097. Were they received as of a different value?—The English pence were
not ; the shilling was. º
1098. You could only obtain the English shilling in exchange for 13 pence
Irish 2–Just so. .
1099. Chairman.] I understand your Grace to say, that after the change took
place the Irish money was turned into English money, and was received without
difficulty by the peasantry throughout the country P--Certainly.
1 loo. Did no feeling exist on their part, that as 13 pence had passed for a shil-
ling, and only 12 pence afterwards, they were sustaining the loss of a penny ?
—At first they did think so, but after a short time they found out that it made no
difference.
1 101. Mr. Kinnaird..] May I ask what steps were taken to facilitate the
change by making it intelligible to the lower orders?—Tables were published in
sheets by the Government, which gave every explanation.
1 102. Chairman.] In the event of a change taking place from pounds, shillings,
and pence, to decinnals, how do you consider that the decimals should be divided :
our attention having hitherto been confined to pounds, florins, cents, and mils?
—I would rather divide them into pounds, florins, and mils.
1 103. That is only three denominations ?–Only three denominations.
1 104. Inasmuch as 6d. and 1 s. are in circulation, one being of the relative
value to the florin of 25 mils for 6d. and the other 50 mils for 1s., do you con-
sider it desirable to withdraw them at an early period, or to allow them concur-
rently to circulate – I would allow them to circulate as change.
1 105. How many coins below the 6d. would you think necessary to answer
the convenience of trade; would you recommend the 1-mil piece, the 3-mil
piece, the 5-mil piece; or 1-mil piece, 2-mil piece, 3-mil piece, 4-mil piece,
and in addition, a 10-mil piece 2–I think the 1-mil piece, 5-mil piece, and 10-
mil piece would be sufficient for the purpose.
1 106. Would not some difficulty arise between a 5-mil piece and a 10-mil
piece, for this reason, that you could neither make three nor two 2–I would give
in exchange three 1-mil pieces. I think it desirable not to have too many coins,
three copper coins being, in my opinion, sufficient.
1 107. Do you propose that the 10-mil piece, being twice the size of the pre-
sent penny, should be of silver or copper ?—I think it would be most convenient
in silver.
1 1 08. Have you thought of the advantages that might arise, not only at
present in the system of counting, but in the education of the rising generation,
by the adoption of a decimal coinage –I have no doubt but that it would give
great facilities.
1 log. Is it your opinion that many gentlemen, who now are obliged to employ
stewards or accountants to settle their accounts, from the difficulties existing
under the present system, might without too much trouble attend to those matters
themselves —I have no doubt of it.
11:10. Mr. Kinnaird.] I believe you are in the habit of loo ing very much to
your own accounts?—Yes; and I should find it a very great assistance.
I I I I. Chairman.] Can you form any opinion of the per-centage of abour
that it would save in the schools 2—I am afraid I cannot.
12. Would it create any inconvenience with the public generally if we
adopted the decimal coinage altogether?—I believe that after 12 months it would
be brought into general use.
1 13. If book accounts were kept in pounds, florins and mils, would that be
a more convenient mode of keeping them than the present?—Yes.
1 114. Calculations of interest, and other matters of that kind, might be made
more easily 2–Yes.
1 115. Mr. Kinnaird.] I think you are in the habit of superintending the pay
ment of wages; do you take pains to give to your labourers particular change –
Yes, I am very particular in giving them convenient change.
o.66. N 2 1 1 16. Mr
The Duke of
Leinster.
9 June 1853.
:
:
.
º
:
:
Q
:
.
:
:
1 OO MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
The Duke of
Leinster.
**-**as
9 June 1853.
1 116. Mr. J. B. Smith..] As regards the change in the Irish currency, are
you aware whether the articles of 1 s. value of the old coinage were sold at 1 s.
under the new coinage 7—I believe they were reduced, in conformity with the
new coinage.
1 17. And of course the working classes found that they could purchase the
same amount of commodity as they did with the old coin 7—Certainly.
1 118. When they found that, of course they were satisfied with the change 2–
Certainly.
1 119. Chairman.] The quantities sold accommodated themselves, in that case,
to the value of the money received ?–Just so.
1 120. Are you aware that engineers and men who have to make difficult calcu-
lations generally, even now adopt decimals in preference to any other system 2–
I believe so. I remember that Mr. Oldham of the Bank of Ireland told me that
the 5 l. notes, 10 l. notes, and 100 l. notes, used to be put up in packages of dozens,
but that he directed the clerks to put them up in tens, and that the greatest con-
venience resulted from that.
1121. Have you any knowledge of the great facility with which the habits of
the people in the north of Ireland were changed at one period, the linen merchants
having up to that time usually carried about a large amount of gold and silver,
when it was suggested that an attempt should be made to induce the weavers to
take bank notes; and that the parties were soon so reconciled to the change, that
although they knew that gold and silver was at hand, they never applied for it?
—I know they would rather have the one pound note that is now in circulation in
Ireland than the sovereign.
1 22. Mr. J. B. Smith. Has not that confidence in the one pound note arisen
from the establishment of joint-stock banks in Ireland 2–No.
1123. Had they, previously to that, sufficient confidence in the notes of private
bankers?—They would rather have the 1 l, note of the Bank of Ireland than a
sovereign.
1124. Did that arise from the facility of carrying it about?—Just so.
1125. Chairman.] We have hitherto spoken of sovereigns, florins and mils ;
do you think that those would be the best names to adopt, substituting mils for
farthings?—I think it would be better to adopt new names.
I 126. Two modes have been suggested of meeting the difficulties which present
themselves as regards the tolls on bridges, &c.; one is, that the toll-keeper should
be authorised to take a little more on one class of toll, and a little less on
another, so that he might be neither a gainer nor a loser. Another was, that
he should be permitted to receive five mils, the present toll being 1 d., for five
years, which would be 20 per cent. addition, and would furnish him with an
annuity to compensate him for a loss of four per cent. by taking four mils after-
wards; would you be kind enough to state which of the two plans you consider
most practicable 2—I think the latter would be the fairest and simplest.
127. A difficulty is felt by some, because it would be saddling the present
generation with a higher charge to benefit posterity ; do you think that the public
would feel aggrieved by that?—It is so very trifling, that the benefit to result from
it would, in my opinion, be a sufficient compensation.
128. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Your Grace has informed us that you take some pains
in paying your labourers their wages in convenient coins; do you make use of
farthings in the payment of their wages : —They are not much in circulation in
Ireland. -
1129. Are farthings much used by the working classes in the purchase of small
articles?—I do not think that they are.
1130. Mr. Moody..] Does your Grace recollect whether the farthing was in
circulation under the old coinage 7—Yes, I think it was.
I 131. Practically, you have not made much use of it?—I have not made much
use of it. It may be in circulation.
1132. Chairman.] As your Grace is perfectly aware that the object we have in
view is to facilitate the transactions of the country, without injuring any interest,
I will ask whether you have any further information to give, which may assist
us in arriving at such a conclusion ?—I have not ; I think that the change, if
adopted, would be a very great benefit to the community.
1133. Mr.
:
:
:
:
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 1 0 1
1133. Mr. Kinnaird..] Do you think that the adoption of a decimal coinage
first, to be followed by decimal weights and measures, would be a great improve-
ment 2—A very great improvement.
Mr. James Laurie called in ; and further Examined.
1134. Mr. J. B. Smith..] HAVE you any further explanations to give, or any
tables to submit to the consideration of the Committee, in addition to your former
evidence?—I have.
(The Witness read the following statement :)
“IN accordance with the request of an honourable Member of the Committee
(William Brown, Esq.), that I should prepare a table for adjusting the postage stamp,
tolls, &c., I beg to present Table 8, which shows that 4 farthings, or 1 penny, are
=4; mils of a decimal £.; and Table 9, showing that 4 mils are=3; farthings;
5 mils=4}, farthings, or 1 #d. Hence no adjustment can be effected between these
coins. Therefore, if the postage stamp is to be 4 mils in future, the Government will
lose 4 per cent. by the change; or, in other words, would have to carry 250 letters
instead of 240, as is now the case. If 5 mils be charged, the Government will
gain 20 per cent., as 200 letters would then only be carried instead of 240.
“Toll BARs, &c.
“As the penny cannot be represented under a decimal coinage, the question
arises, how provision is to be made for those local tolls throughout the kingdom
where the charge is one penny and its aliquot parts.
“If the toll-keeper receives but four mils he is a loser to the extent of four per
cent., and if he receives five mils, he gains 20 per cent.
“I apprehend this difficulty may be met by compounding with the toll-keeper,
either in money or time. In money by a present payment, which shall be an
equivalent to the four per cent. loss he would sustain by taking four mils instead
of four farthings; or in time, by allowing him to exact five mils for a given
period, as an equitable compensation for a reduction to four mils for all future
tline.
“In one case (present money payment as a compensation) unless an Act of
Parliament made it specific on the locality where the toll is situate, the nation
would be taxed to meet a local burden, which is objectionable.
“In the other case, the locality would have to submit to an increased charge
for a given period, in order to secure a reduction or advantage, after this period,
which seems equitable.
“The questions therefore are:—
“1. What compensation ought to be made to the toll-keeper by a present
money payment, as an equivalent to him for reducing his toll from four farthings
to four mils.
“2. What time ought the toll-keeper to be allowed to charge five mils, instead
of four farthings, to enable him to reduce his toll to four mils in all time to
COIſle.
“In answer to the first question, it is submitted, that if the penny toll produced
an annual income of 100 l., the toll-keeper would consequently lose 4!. per
annum; and that if the annual income of the toll were to be considered as worth
20 years' purchase compensation for the loss sustained by depreciation of the
coinage would be as stated in Table 10, which I beg to present, and which shows
the present value, from 1 l. to 100 l., at and from two to five per cent. compound
interest, on a perpetuity to continue for 20 years.
“On a loss of 4 l. per annum, at £. s. d. J.
3 per cent., the value is £. 59'510; 59 10 2 2
3% 2 3 ditto 56.850; 56 17 – —
4 » ditto 54.361 ; 54 7 2 3
and so a single payment of one of these sums would be an equivalent for the pur-
The Duke of
Leinster.
9 June 1853.
Mr. J. Laurie.
o.66. N 3 chase
I (42 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. J. Laurie.
9 June 1853.
chase of every 100 l. of the average yearly income of the toll, to secure its reduc-
tion to four mils for all time to come.
“If the continuation of the toll be limited, and not perpetual, the per-centage
should be reduced in proportion.
“In answer to the second question, it is submitted that as the toll-keeper would
be receiving 20 per cent. more than he was entitled to by law (being paid five
mils instead of four farthings), he would, at the end of five years, have received
an additional sum for tolls equivalent to 20 years' purchase of the fee. simple, and
that therefore the toll would have to be reduced to four mils at the end of five
years.
“In accordance, also, with the request of another honourable Member of your
Committee (J. B. Smith, Esq.), that I should prepare a table, showing the
poundsterling reduced into the half-pound sterling of 10 S., I beg to present it.
“I beg to state that, after the most mature consideration and reflection how the
change can be made from the pound sterling to a decimal currency, I am of
opinion that this can best be effected by making the florin the unit of mercantile
accounts; and being the decimal of the pound sterling, it would readily be under-
stood in all business relations, whether legal, fiscal, commercial, or social, and meet
every requirement, without any inconvenience or derangeulent of present money
operations:
100 cents= 1 florin; 10 florins = 1 pound.
which is the same as if the pound sterling were divided into 1,000 mils, one cent
being of the same value as one mil, and both being of greater value by 4 per cent.
than the farthing, or in the ratio of 1,000 to 960 of the pound sterling.
“The florin being thus divided into 100 cents, would afford a gradual rise from
1 to 100 cents., and so meet wholesale and retail prices, small wares and groce-
ries, &c., in a series of figures of the same denomination and value, and then by
florins and cents up to any amount. A sum of 379 florins 25 cents, would be
paid by £.37. 9 florins and 25 cents. Two columns or divisions in merchants’
accounts and books would only be necessary, and there would only be two deci-
mals to the florin, whereas the pound sterling requires three and often five figures
to express S. D. and F., but if divided into 1000 mils, there would still be three.
“Prices of goods and produce would cease to be given in farthings, pence, and
shillings, and be stated in cents, and florins and cents. Rice, and other produce
sold in bond, say at 10 s. 3d. per cwt., would be stated as 5 florins 12 cents.
Coffee at 56.s. per cwt., would be 28 florins, &c., and so would prices in the
decimal coinage readily adjust themselves to present rates. Produce would no
doubt be sold by cents per the single pound ; and the rise or fall by ºth of a
cent, or 12; cents per 100 lbs. = 1 + per cent. on the value.
100 lbs. coffee, at 25 cents = 25 florins, or 56 S. per cwt.
100 lbs. > 5 25 , = 25 florins, 12 cents, or 56 s. 3; d. per cent.
“The division of the florin into 1 oo cents would meet business transactions
precisely. The present money does not; and from the great sub-division of prices,
owing to the extension of business and new productions of the country, &c., a more
minute arrangement of money account is imperatively called for. The fractions of
a penny in many mercantile transactions, customs and excise duties, &c., are at
present not expressed. Hence this great defect in public and in private accounts
would be obviated, and lead to other advantages which cannot but prove most
important and signal to individuals, the nation, and the commercial world.”
[The JWitness handed in the subjoined Tables :]
TABLE
SELECT COMMITTEE. ON:
103
DiBCIMAL COINAGE.
* * * * * **, **A*
Showing the Decimal £. of 10 Florins of 100 Cents, with their Equivalents in the £. Sterling.
Decimal £.
Equivalents per £. Sterling.
Equivalents per £. Sterling.
Flrns. Cents.
0 04
0°
I
º
§
#
i
O-27
0.28
0.284
0.29
0-30
0'31
0.31%
O-32
0-33
0-34
0.84;
0-35
0.36
O-37
0-374
O-38
O-39
0.40
0.404
0-4 R
()' 42
(): 43
0.43%
()'44
0°45
O' 46
0.46;
()-47
(): 48
•49
(). 50
0. 51
() 52
0°53
0.53,
0. 54
()' 55
(): 56
0.56%
(): 57
0°58
8.
-
d. 100
O' 12
()“24
0°48
0-72
0-75
()'96
1°20
1°44
1°50
I '68
1-92
2° 16
2-25
2°40
2°64
2.88
3•
3. 12
3°36
3°60
672,
6'75
696
7:20
7:44
7-50
7-68
7 92
8- 16
8 25
S-40
8-64
S-88
9°
9°12'
9-36
9-60
9.75
9-84
IO-08
1O-32
I O'50
I (;"56
} 0-80
I l '04
II 25
I 1.28
| 1 |
I 1 -
;
:
Far. 100.
56*64
57.
57-60
58-56
59°52'
60°
60°48'
61'44
62°40
63'
63-36
64'32 -
65°28
66-
66°24'. '
67-20.
68-16
69°
69-12 .
70-08.'
71 ° 04
72.
72°96
73-92
74°88
75°
75'84
76'80
Decimal £.
Far. 100.
0°48
0-96
1-92
2°88
3.
3-84
4'80
5-76
6°
6'72
7868
8:64
9.
9-60
10:56
12452
12%
12°48
13°44
14°40
I 5*
15°36
I 6°32
17-28
18"
18°24
19°20
20*16,
21.
21 - 12.
22°08
23° 04
24°
24°96
25'92
26°88
27.
27.84
28:80
29-76
30°
30-72
31°68
32°64
33°
33°60
34' 56
35' 52
36°
36-48
37°44
38-40
39.
39°36.
40°32
4 1' 28
42'
42°24
43°20
44' 16
45°
45° 12
4 (5° 08
47 '04
48°
48'96
49.92
50 88
0-24
(): 48
0.72
()*75
()'96
| 20
I "44
I '50
I '68.
I '92
Flrns. Cents.
()'59
0.59;
()'60
0-61
()-62
0.624
O'63.
O'64
O'65
0.65%
O'66.
0-67
0-68-
0.68%
0-69.
0-70.
0.71
0.71%
O'79
0 73.
0-74.
O'75
0-76
O-77
O'78
0.784
O'79
0-80
O‘SI
0.81%
0 82
0-83
0 °84
0.84;
0°85
O 86
0.87
0.87%
0-88
0°89
0-90
0.90;
O 9 I
() 92
0-93
0.93%
() 94.
0°95
().96
0.96%
O'97
0°98.
() 99
1°00'
$2:00
3:00
4' 00
5* ()0
6' 0()
7:00
8°00
9:00)
I ()-00
20:00
30' 00
40' 00
50° ()0
60-00
70’ ()0
80'00
90 00
I ()0. () ()
200 ()()
500'00
1000" ()0
77.876
78-
78-72
79.68
8()'64
8 I -
81°60
82°56
83°52
84."
84°48
S5'44
86°40
S7.
87° 36
S8°32
89°28
9() •
90° 24
91-20
92° 16
93.
93- 12
94'08
95'04
96.
192.
288-
38.4°
480°
576.
672"
7.68:
864.
960°
£.
I
º
º
100
8,
d. 100.
2° 16
2°25
2°40
2°64
2°88
3.
3' 12
3-36
3:60
3-75
3-84
4-08
4'32
- 4°50
4°56
4'80
* 5-04
5°25
5°28
5°52
5-76
6"
6°24
6°48
6-72
6°75
6'96
7-20.
7°44
7°59.
7-68
7-92
, 8° 16
8°25
8’40
8*64
8°88
9°
9" 12
9°36
9-60
9°75
9°84
I 0-08
10°32
I 0-50
10°56
I 0 80
I l'04
I l'95
II “28
1 1 °52
1 1 76
º
•e
Mr. J. Lawrie.
9 June 1853.
0.66.
104 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Showing from 1 to 96 Farthings, and their equivalents in Mils, or 1000th parts of the Decimal £.
Farthings. Mils, 1 00 0. Farthings. Mils, 1000. Farthings. Mils, 1 00 0. Farthings. Mils, 10 00.
l I”04 1 25 26°041 49 51*041 73 76°04 I
2 2:083. 26 27-083 50 52' 083 74 77°083
3 3° 125 27 28° 125 , 51 53° 125 75 78° 125
4 4°166 28 29' 166 52 54°166 76 79°166
5 5°208 29 30°208 53 55°208 77 80°208
6 6°250 30 31-25 54 56°25 78 81°25
7 7'291 31 32-29 I 55 57-291 79 82°291
t 8 8°333 32 33°333 56 58°333 80 S3°333
9 9°375 33 34°375 57 59°375 81 84° 375
10 10°4 16 34 35-416 58 60° 416 82 85-416
l 1 I 1'458 35 36°458 59 61°458 S3 86°458
12 12°50 36 37-5 60 62°5 84 87.5
13 13°54 I 37 38°54′ 1 6l 63°541 85 88°54 I
14 14°583 38 39'583 62 64°583 86 89° 583
15 15°625 39 40°625 63 65°625 87 90°625
I 6 16*666 40 41-666 64 66-666 88 91'666
17 17°708 41 42*708 65 67.708 89 92.7 OS
18 I8°750 42 43°75 66 68°75 90 93-75
19 19°791 43 44*79] 67 69-791 91 94'79 I
20 20°833 44 45°833 68 70-833 92 95°833
21 21°875 45 46'875 69 71°875 93 96'875
22 22°916 46 47 916 70 72-916 94 97.9 16
23 23°958 47 48°958 71 73°95S 95 98-958
24 25° | 48 | 50° 72 75- 96 100-
POSTAGE STAMPS.
Showing from 4 to 5 Mils, or 1000th parts of the Decimalf., and their equivalents in Farthings, the Number of Postage Stamps which £.l
will purchase at each rate, and the Loss or Gain per cent. to Government.

Number of g
Loss Gain
Mils. Farthings. Postage Stamps per Cent. per Cent.
per £. 1.
7 O () 11.
*º- 4° 240° *mº enºmº
4 3°84 250° 4 tºº
1–8 3°96 242°42 I gº tºº
1-4 4°08 235°29 tº- 2
3-8 4°20 228'57 sºme 5
1–2 4°32 222-22 * - sº 8
5–8 4°44 216-22 &=ºs 1 1
3–4 4°56 210-53 tº º 14
7–8 4°68 205° 13 tºº 17
5 - 4°80 200° sº 20
TOLL BARS, &c.
Showing the present Value of a Perpetuity of from £. I to £. 100 per Annum, at 20 Years’ Purchase, at each of the
following Rates per Cent.

Perpetuity. 2 per Cent. 2% per Cent. 3 per Cent. 3% per Cent. 4 per Cent. 4% per Cent. 5 per Cent.
fº, f. f. f. f'. £. f. £.
I 16°35 I 4 I 5°5892 14°8775 14°2124 13°5903 13°0079 12' 4622
2 32°7029 31' 1783 29 (75.50 28° 4248 27, 1807 26' 01:59 24-924.4
3 49'0543 46°7675 44' 6324 42' 6372 40°7710 39°0238 37'3866
4 65-4.057 62°3567 59° 5099 56*S496 54°36 13 52-0318 49'84SS
5 81-7572 77-945S 74° 387.4 71°0620 67-95 16 65°0397 62°3] 1 }
6 98’ 1086 93’5350 89°2649 85°2744 81°54′20 78'0476 74°7733
7 I 14°4600 l 09" 1241 104° 1423 99°4868 95° 1323 91*0556 87°23:55,
8 130°8] 15 124*7133 I 19° 0198 I 13°6992 108°7226 104°0635 99°6977
9 147° 1629 140°3025 133° S973 127 91 16 122°3129 I 17°07 14 1 12" | 599
10 163’5143 155'8916 148 7748 142° 1240 I 35°9033 130 0794 124' 6221
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE.
r
Jº
I O

Showing the £ sterling
reduced into
the Half £ of 103.
Showing the £ sterling
reduced
into Decimals.
1,000 Parts.
if sterlg.
F.
I
2
3
:
.
.
100
Half £. 109
•002 08
•004 16
•00625
•00833
•016 66
•025
•033 33
•04166
'050
•05883
•06666
•075
•083 33
•091 G6
• 100
• 200
•300
•400
•500
• 600
•700
•800
•900
1.000
I 100
1-200
I'300
1' 400
1°500
1:600
I-700
1-800
1900
2°000
4'000
6'000
8-000
10-000
12'000
14,000
16.000
18.000
20-000
40’000
60'000
80' 000
J.00-000
120,000
I 40' 000
I60-000
180.000
200 000
Showing the Half £ of
10 Farthings=1 Penny.
10 Pence=l Shilling.
10 Shillings=l Pound.
Showing the £ Sterling .
reduced
into Dollars of 48.
Showing Dollars of
100 Cents reduced into
the £ sterling.
Cents.
I
.
I
0
|
|
.:
:
.
.
.
.
:
i
.
:
.
.
90
Dollars.
l
.
10.)
& Reduced into the £sterling.
f sterlg. 100 -- f sterlg.
F. f. Half £, £ sterling. F. Dolls. Cent:
100
l •001" | F. 1 •000 5 I •00 52
2 •00208 2 ...}. 2 •0104
3 •003 125 3 º • ſh I 56
4 002 3 01
5 •002 5
6 •003
D. 7 •003 5 D.
l •004 16 8 #. l •0208
2 •008 33 9 2 •04 16
D. 1 •005
3 •012.5 2 •010 3 •0625
4 •01696 3 •015 4 •08 32
4 •020
5 •02083 5 •025 5 • 10 41
6 •025 6 •030 •1250
7 •035
7 • 02916 8 * 0.40 7 • 1458
8 •03383 9 •045 8 • 1666
9 •0375 S. 1 •050 9 • 1873.
2 • 100
10 •041 06 3 • 150 10 .2083
11 •04583 4 • 200 II • O O 91
4 5 • 250 22
6 •300
S. 7 •350 S.
8 •400
l •050 9 •450 l • 25
2 • 100 fº. 1 • 500 2 •50
3 * 2 1 - 000 3 &
150 3 1°500 75
4 • 200 4 2 : 000 4 •100
5 • 9 º' 5 2-500 5 • O 5
250 6 3.000 1°25
6 * - 7 3°500 6 50
300 8 4'000 A. l * *
7 •350 9 4' 500 / I-75
8 *400 10 5' 000 8 2:00
9 •450 9 2.25
10 500. Showing the £ of 1,000 10 2.50
Parts.
11 "500 10 Farthings=Penny. 11 2.75
12 •600 10 Pence=l Shilliing. 12 3:00
illings= d.
13 *650 10 Shillings=1 Poun 13 3:25
14 •700 Decimally expressed. 14 3-50 -
15 •750 F. l £. ‘001 15 3.75
16 •800 : º: 16 4'00
17 •850 4 004 17 4:25
18 •900 ; }; 18 4'50
19 •950 7 •007 19 4' 75
8 •008
^ 9 •009
£. D. 1 • 010 £.
l I •000 2 •020 I 5:00
2 2°000 ; º 2 10°00
3 3'000 5 •050 3 15'00
4 4'000 ; º 4 20:00
5 5'000 8 •080 . 5 25'00
6 6.000 9 •090 6 30-00
7 7.000 |* . º 7 35' 00
8 8'000 3 *300 8 40’00
9 9-000 : | º 9 45' 00
10 10°000 6 • 600 10 50-00
20 20.000 : | º 20 100-00
30 30'000 9 •900 30 150-00
40 40' 000 £. 1 1.000 40 200-00
50 50'000 # #. 50 250-00
60 60'000 4 4000 60 300-00
70 70-000 § §. 70 350° 00
80 80-000 7 7.000 80 400'00
90 90'000 ; i. 90 450 °00
100 100'000 10 10-000 | 00 500' 00
£.
•002
•004
•006
•008
•010
•012
*014
•016
•018
*020
•022
*024,
•200
•400
• 600
800
1 - 000
I 200
l'400
1:600
I '800
2°000
4'000
6' 000
8' 000
10 : 000
l 2'000
1 4 000
16.000
IS 000
20 000
Mr. J. Laurie.
9 June 1853.
o.66.
Toé
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
ShowING the £. Sterling reduced into Florins of 2s.
SHowING Florins of 100 Cents, reduced into the £. Sterling.
F.
;
J.D.
i
$
:
:
:
T
5
:
º
Flor. Cents.
•019.4
•0208
*03 1 2 5
•041 5
•0833
• 1250
• 1666
*208 3
*25
•291 6
"333 3
• 375 0
*416 6
•458 3
*50
I "00
I "50
2°00
2°50
3°00
3°50
4°00
4°50
5'00
5'50
18
20
2I
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
3]
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
5.I
52
53
54
56
57
58
59
60
Floring.
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
310
320
330
340
350
360
370
380
390
400
410
420
430
440
450
460
470
480
490
500
610
570
590
640
650
670
i
Cents.
i
•001
•002
•003
*004
*005
*006
•007
*008
*009
•010
*0 1 1
"012
*013
* 0 || 4
*0 15
* 016
•017
"018
*019
*020
*021
*022
*023
*024
*025
•026
•027
• 028
•029
*030
*031
*032
*033
*034
*035
•036
•037
•038
•039
•040
* 04 I
° 042
* 0.43
'044
* 0.45
*046
•047
•048
* 0.49
*050
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
9 I
92
*05 I
*052
*053
•054
*055
*056
•057
*058
*059
•060
*061
•062
•063
*064
*065
Florins.
:
£.
• 100
• 200
• 300
*400
"500
'600
• 700
‘800
•900
I 000
I 100
1:200
1°300
1° 400
1'500
I'600
1:700
I "S00
1°900
2°000
2*] 00
2°200
2°300
2°400
2°500
2' 600
2-700
2'800
2'900
3'000
3' 100
3°200
3'300
3°400
3'50ſ)
3*60()
3°7 ()()
3'800
3'900
4' ()() ()
4 * 100
4'20ſ)
4'3()()
4' 400
4' 500
4°600
4*7 ()0
4°800
4 '90()
5'000
5' 100
Florins.
52
rºy ºr
79
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
Florins.
680
690
700
710
720
730
740
750
760
770
780
790
800
810
820
830
840
850
860
870
880
890
900
910
920
930
940
950
960
970
980
990
l,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
I 9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Cents.
51
52
53
'066
•067
'06S
*069
•070
•07 I
•072
-073
*074
•075
• O76
•077
•078
•079
•080
*081
•082
'083
'084
•085
•086
'087
•088
'089
•090
•09 I
•092
•093
'094
*095
•096
•097
• 098
•099
85
86
87
SS
89
9()
9 I
92
93
94
95
96
97
0S
99
100
Showing Exchanges between Foreign Countries and Great Britain, according to the present
Showing Exchanges between Foreign Countries and Great Britain per single Coin of their
Money, by Florins and Cents of the Decimal £, which renders the Purchase of Foreign
Money uniform, consistent and intelligible. Also, the Value from 1 to 1,000 Foreign
Coins, in Decimals of the Decimal £, and 1,000 Coins in £., Florins and Cents.
Fo R E I a N Co UN TR 1 Es.
complex and inconsistent system. Also, the Value of from 1 to 1,000 Foreign Coins, in
Decimals of the £. Sterling, and 1,000 Coins in £. s. d. and f.
F O R. E. I. G. N C O U N T R I E S 1 Coin
te ºmmºnsº to 1,000 Coins.
1,000 Coins.
Great Britain receives more or less for £. 1 from— $º. #: ſ f. s. d. J.
France - - º - - Francs and Centimes - º - 25.22% •039643 39 12 10 1
Holland - - - Florins and Cents - º - 11.97% •083507 83 10 1 3
Hamburg - - - - Marcs Banco and Schillings - 13° 10 •073394 73 7 10 2
Erankfort º * * - - Florins and Kreuzers - º t- 11.48% •084656 84 13 l 2
Austria - - - - - Florins and Kreuzers - • - 9.51 .101523 101 10 5 2
Prussia - - - - - Thalers and S. Groschen - º 6-24 • 147059 147 1 2 1
Sicily - - - - - Tari and Grani - - º - 58. 10 •512821 512 16 5 —
Turkey - * = - - Piastres and Paras - tº- - 110} •009070 9 1 4 3
Egypt - - t- - - Piastres and Paras - gº - 97% •010256 10 5 1 2
Bremen - * tº- - - Riaz Dollars and Grotes º - 6-10 • 163934 163 18 8 1
Denmark * * * - Rigsbankdalers and Schillings - 9-12 .109589 109 11 9 |
Sweden - - - - - Riksdalers Banco and Schillings - 12" | •083189 83 3 9 1
Norway - - - - - Specie Dollars and Schilling 4'59 *222635 222 12 8 2
United States, America - - Dollars and Cents - * - 4.86% •205550 205 ll — —
Switzerland - gº - - Francs and Centimes - º 25.27% •039565 39 11 3 2
Greece - - mº - - Drachmi and Lepta - gº e- 28° 15 •035524 35 10 5 3
Tuscany - - - - - Lire T., and Centisimi - - 30.68% •032587 32 11 9 –
Lombardo-Veneto - *s - Lire A, and Centisimi º - 29-50 •033898 33 17 11 2
Rome - - - - - Scudi and Bajocchi – º - 4.753 •210471 210 9 5 —
Genoa - - - * - Lire and Centisimi - s - 25°25 •039604 39 12 1 –
Bavaria - º- º - - Florins and Kreuzers - tºº - 9.51% • 101.437 101 8 9 –
Saxony - - - - - Thalers and S. Groschen - - 6-24+ • 146879 146 17 7 –
Belgium - - - - - Francs and Centimes - - - 25-22} •039643 39 12 10 1
Naples - - - - - Ducats and Grani - * * 6:03; •] 65631 165 12 7 2
Gives more or less for 1 Foreign Coin to— S. d.
Russia - tº- - tº- - Silver Rouble - º Eº tº- 3 l; *155990 155 19 9 2
Portugal - - ſº º - Milreis - º - gº - 4 83. •236.458 236 9 2 –
Spain - * tº t- - Dollar º º - º g- 4 2 *20.8333 208 6 8 -
Gibraltar º tº- - - Dollar -> tº- - º -> 4 2% *208854 208 17 1 –
Malta - tº º tº- - Pezza tº- †- tº- tº - 4 23 •2098.96 209 17 11 —
Sicily - º º - - Oncia º - - tºº tº- 10 34 •51302I 513 – 5 —
East Indies - - - - Rupee tº ma º me me 1 10} •094271 94 5 5 —
Naples - * º - - Ducat º º- - - 3 3; •l 66146 166 2 11 -
China - - -> - - Dollar t- - * - 4 93, •2385.42 238 10 10 –
}%lsinore - º - ºm - Specie Dollar - - º - 4 6; • 228646 228 12 11 -
United States, America - - Dollar º º - º - 4 l; •205729 205 14 7 –
(£.1093 per cent, premium) Dollar º wº ge tº ºn g •205479 205 9 7 —
Great Britain will give more or less for 1 Foreign Coin to—
France -
Holland
Hamburg
Frankfort
Austria
Prussia -
Sicily -
Turkey -
Egypt -
Bremen
Denmark
Sweden
Norway
United States, America
Switzerland -
Greece -
Tuscany
Lombardo-Veneto
Rome -
Genoa -
Bavaria
Saxony
Belgium
Naples -
Russia -
Portugal
Spain -
Gibraltar
Malta -
Sicily –
East Indies
Naples -
China -
Elsinore
United States, America -
- Franc
- Florin
- Marc Banco
- Florim,
- Florin
- Thaler
- Oncia
- Piastre
- Piastre
- Riaz Dollar
- Rigsbankdaler
- Riksdaler Banco
- Specie Dollar
- Dollar
- Franc
- Drachmi
- Lire T.
- Lire A.
- Scudi
- Lire -
Florim,
Thaler
Franc
Ducat
- Silver Rouble
- Milreis
- Dollar
- Dollar
- Pezza
- Oncia
- Rupee
- Ducat
- Dollar
- Specie Dollar
- Dollar
1 Coin
to
1,000 Coins.
1,000 Coins.
Course of
Earchange.
Fls. Cts.
•39;
•83%
•73;
‘84;
1.01%
1°47
5-123
•9
*10+
1.63%
1.09%
•83
gº; -
2.05%
‘394
‘35}
'32}
“33;
2:10;
'39%
1.01%
1.46%
•39;
1.65;
1-55;
2-36;
2°08
2°08
2.09%
5'13
•94
1466
2.38%
2:28:
2.05;
Decimals of the
Decimal £.
•0396.25
•083500
•073375
•0846.25
• 101500
• 147000
•512750
•009000
•010250
• 163875
• 109500
•083.125
•222625
•205500
•0395.00
•035500
•032500
•033875
•210375
•039500
• 101375
•146875
•0396.25
• 165625
• 155875
•236375
•208250
•208750
•209875
•513000
•094250
• 166125
•238500
• 228625
•205625
3. Fl. Cents.
39 6 25
83 5 00
73 3 75
84 6 25
101 5 00
147 0 00
512 7 50
9 0 00
10 2 50
163 8 75
109 5 00
83 l 25
222 6 25
205 5 00
39 5 00
35 5 00
32 5 00
33 8 75
210 3 75
39 5 00
101 3 75
146 8 75
39 6 $25
165 6 25
155 8 75
236 3 75
208 2 50
208 7 50
209 8 75
513 0 00
94 2 50
166 1 25
238 5 00
228 6 25
205 6 25
§

OY
CŞ)
º
1 O8 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. W. Miller.
9 June 1853.
Mr. William Miller, called in ; and Examined.
{}
1135. Chairman.] ARE you one of the Officers in the Bank of England 2—I
am one of the Cashiers.
1136. Have you paid considerable attention to the currency of the country,
and also to the question of decimalising weights and measures?—I have.
1 137. Our present object being to ascertain how the currency may be deci-
malised with advantage to the public, will you state whether it is your opinion
that, from the adoption of a decimal coinage, great advantages would arise to the
country by reason of its being a labour-saving machine 7–It is my opinion.
1138. Have you any idea how many clerks it would save in the Bank of
England 2–I have not; but I may state that, in the stock department of the
Bank of England, the number of accounts amounts to upwards of 300,000, and
calculations have to be made on each of these accounts every half year for the
payinent of the dividends.
I 139. Have you any idea what per-centage of the number of those clerks
might be dispensed with if all the accounts were kept decimally 7–I have not.
Although the calculation appears very simple, it is a complicated one, because of
the Income-tax.
1140. Mr. Kinnaird.] What number of clerks are employed in the stock
department P—About 300. *
1 141. Mr. J. B. Smith..] What time is necessarily occupied by those 300
clerks in making up the dividends upon the stock every half year 7—It is not in
my department, and I am not competent to answer the question.
1 142. Do your clerks calculate interest by a set of printed tables?—They do ;
I have a copy of them in my hand.
1 143. If you adopted a decimal system of calculation, would it be then
necessary to use tables?—I think not; the calculations would be so simple that
the tables would be more in the way than an assistance.
1144. Chairman.] Having stated to us the simplicity of the decimal system
over the system of pounds, shillings and pence, will you have the kindness to pre-
pare a statement and submit it to us on a subsequent occasion, showing distinctly
the number of figures used, and the difficulties that present themselves in the
pounds, shillings and pence system as compared with the simplicity of the
decimal system 2–I will do so.
1145. Mr. Kinnaird.] Will you also consider how much time would be saved
by the adoption of the decimal system in the calculation of the dividends, so as to
shorten the period of closing the books?—I will.
1146. Chairman.] What coins in your opinion ought to be issued 2–I have
thought of that matter, and have had some correspondence with Sir John Herschel
and several other persons on the subject, as to which would be the best coinage,
supposing any country were about to start afresh with a system of coinage. But
how to deal with it at present is another question, and that is the one to which
I have principally turned my attention. I have had a great deal to do in making
changes in accounts affecting a great number of persons in the Bank, and I have
always found it best to determine at the beginning what it is we wish to do, and
then to ascertain by what easy mode we can introduce the new plan. It has
always appeared to me that the best mode of introducing the decimal system of
coinage would be in the same way; first, to consider what mode could be best
introduced ; and then what easy steps would lead to it. The plan of the decimal
coinage which I think would be most easily introduced, and which would work
best, is one which would not necessarily involve a change in the mode of keeping
accounts, but such a system that the two systems might work together if need be.
I should propose to retain the Sovereign, to consist of 1,000 parts; and I would
not alter the momenclature of the present coins, with the exception of the
6 d., which would require a new name. I would divide the sovereign into 1,000
farthings, the half-sovereign into 500 farthings, the crown into 250 farthings, the
half-crown into 125 farthings, the florin into 100 farthings, the shilling into 50
farthings, and the half-shilling into 25. After that the pence are to be considered,
and that is the most difficult part of the subject.
| 1.47. Would you recommend the withdrawal of the threepenny and fourpenny
pieces –I should ultimately ; but I think a long time must elapse before it would
he effected, and they must pass for something in the meanwhile. I should
preserve the momenclature of the pence as at present, simply reducing the value
of
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 109
of the penny by four per cent., and you would then have the one farthing, two
farthing, or halfpenny, and the four farthing, or the ordinary penny; the effect
of that would be, that the half-shilling would pass for 6 d. and 1 farthing, and
the shilling would pass for 12 pence and 2 farthings. There would be an
objection and a strong feeling against the introduction of farthings into mercan-
tile matters; but if the old rimmed penny, which is very distinct, both in shape
and appearance from all other pence, and is so much heavier that the weight
alone would be sufficient to distinguish it from all the other pence, were declared
to be raised in value 25 per cent, and declared to be equal to five farthings, all
the difficulty would be obviated; because with that penny, without the introduction
of a single farthing, all payments might be made; for instance, a farthing might be
paid by giving the old rimmed penny, and receiving back an ordinary penny, so
that two farthings would be represented by the present halfpenny, four by the pre-
sent penny, and five by the piece itself. With the present coins, you might in that
manner have a perfect decimal system ; there would be no new coin of necessity
introduced, and accounts might be kept decimally and paid by the present coinage.
The copper coinage in circulation at present cannot be much more than 1,000,000l.,
and between 1797 and 1807 there was coined 830,000 l. worth. A great portion
of that was coined by Messrs. Bolton and Watt, and the penny weighed an ounce.
It is said that some portion of that coinage was melted down during a temporary
high price of copper. I do not think that a large portion of it could have been so
melted down, in consequence of the large number of those rimmed pence which
remain at present in circulation. You can hardly take three-pence but that you
will receive one rimmed penny; the penny is very much lighter under the
present mint regulations, and the raising the value of the rimmed penny
25 per cent., which is a large amount to increase the value of a coin, would not
be of any great moment, simply because every person holds as few copper coins as
possible, and the advantage to a person would only be an advantage to the extent
of the copper he has in his pocket. It is true that it would be an advantage
upon the whole amount in circulation, but that would be insignificant, as it is so
much divided, and would be almost compensated by the depreciation of the
remainder of the copper pence, as the farthing is the 960th part of the pound,
and by making it the 1,000th part perhaps it would be neither a gain nor a
loss to the holders of the pence. The great objection to a depreciation in the
value of the penny would be with reference to tolls on bridges, turnpike trusts,
and in cases where the penny is particularly mentioned as the sum to be received,
or wherever revenue is derived from aggregate pence.
1148. Mr. Kinnaird..] Is the plan you have given entirely your own 2–It is.
1 149. Have you communicated it to any one – I have communicated it to no
one. I wish further to state, that with that declaration as to the altered value of
the coins, which would be readily understood by all classes, the two systems would
work very well together, without any alteration in the nomenclature of the coins
themselves; nor would the present nomenclature have any anomalies, because four
farthings would still exist and be called one penny, and the alteration of 4 per
cent. is so slight that it is not worth mentioning; the halfpenny would still remain
a halfpenny, but there must be a new name for the five farthing piece. It might
be desirable to issue a new coin of ten farthings which should be a silver coin, and
might be made, by depreciating the quality of the metal, of the size of the three-
penny or fourpenny piece, and the two latter might be gradually withdrawn, as
might also the crown and half crowns, and so lessen the number of coins in circula-
tion ; for I conceive it be an advantage, if all our payments can be as easily made,
to make them with as few coins as possible.
1 150. Mr. Kinnaird..] You would retain the florin 2–Yes. We should then
have the sovereign, half sovereign, the florin, the shilling, half shilling, the to-
farthing piece, 5-farthing piece, 4-farthing piece, 2-farthing piece, and 1-farthing
piece; the 4-farthing piece to be called a penny, and the 2-farthing piece a half-
penny.
1151. Chairman.] It has been suggested, that in order to average bridge
and similar tolls, it might be desirable to allow the toll-keeper to take five mils
for a certain period, by which he would gain 163 per cent. to compensate
him for the loss of 4 per cent. by taking four after a certain period; do you
think the difficulty might be met in that way ?–I think it a very good plan, if
the turnpike trustees would put by the surplus to provide for the perpetual loss.
1 152. Another mode has been suggested ; namely, that the toll-keeper should
Mr. W. Miller.
9 June 1853.
0.66. O 3 be
1 1 O MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. W. Miller.
9 June 1853.
be allowed to take a higher toll on one article, and compelled to take less on
another, so that he might neither gain nor lose in the ultimate result 3–I am not
prepared to give an answer upon so difficult a point.
i 153. Do you think it desirable to mark upon all coins the number of cents or
mils they represent 2—I think that all silver coins should bear reference to
the pound ; but that, as to the copper coins, the number of farthings would be
sufficient.
1154. Mr. Kinnaird..] You would not mark upon each coin the number of
mils 2–If you retained the old name of farthing, I should mark that upon it.
Millet, in my opinion, is the best name that has been mentioned yet.
1155. Chairman.] Do you think it desirable to issue a silver 20-farthing piece
to supersede the 6d. 2–I would preserve the half shilling. The scale I have just
referred to, is capable of binary division all the way down ; and, in small pur-
chases, common people understand best a constant division by 2.
i 156. Your idea is, that it would not prevent in any degree books and accounts
being kept decimally, and that it is merely for the convenience of change 2–Just
so ; and if the declaration I have suggested were made to-morrow, any person
might keep his accounts by the decimal system, and receive or pay money in
reference to it.
1 157. Mr. Kinnaird.] I understand you to say, that although you retain the
existing name, you would propose that the customers of the Bank should keep
their accounts with you in decimals —Certainly ; or else there would be no
advantage in altering the coinage.
1158. Do you think that the change of the system would cause any very great
inconvenience at the Bank of England?—I do not think it would ; I think the
convenience would over-balance the inconvenience, at least, after a week. It
must be considered, that at the Bank we have to deal with comparatively
educated persons.
1159. Would you in the mode of keeping your accounts retain three columns,
as at present, instead of four 2—I think three, or two, if possible. The question
is, whether one could adopt some name for the money of account which should
embrace both the florin and the penny.
1 160. Chairman.] Do you not think that fewer mistakes would be made with
four columns; for instance, it expressing £. i., 9 florins, 9 cents., and 9 mils, mis.
take might be made in entering it £. I., 9 florins, 99 mils?—Money makes people
very cautious, and I do not think that many errors of the kind would occur.
1161. Do you see any objection to four columns 2–I should prefer only two,
if it were possible.
1162. How would you enter it; £. I., 999 mils?—I would.
1163. Mr. Kinnaird..] Does the Bank, in its transactions with customers,
recognise the farthing now 2–It is not the custom among bankers to do so.
1164. Would you propo, e to alter that in the decimal system –I should ;
but a single farthing would seldom pass if you had three or five-farthing pieces.
Why I think it would be better to issue a five-farthing piece, and to deal with
the old penny in the way I suggest, is, that the latter are already distributed
as they are wanted all over the kingdom.
1 165. Chairman.] As bankers have an objection to the farthing, although it is
necessary in the retail trade of the country, how would you deal with nine
farthings under the new system 7–We must come as near to it in the decimal
equivalent as possible; at present we cannot pay all we are required to pay, but
we pay as near as we can.
1 166. If you were expressing £. 1., 999 mils, you would make the last figure
8 instead of 97—Very likely. Our operations in regard to the purchase of bul-
lion would probably, upon that part of the case, guide us in ordinary money
transactions; for when the odd fractions in the weight of bullion do not amount
to six, they are thrown on one side altogether; if they amount to six and
upwards, they are considered as one, and dealt with accordingly; but in pur-
chasing bullion we do not pay odd half-pence. If it be three farthings, it would
be called a penny.
1167. You would have nothing between the four farthings and the eight far-
things 2–Yes, we should pay the nine farthings by the 5-farthing and the
4-farthing pieces. If this plan were adopted, everything expressed and written
in both systems could be paid by the coins; with this exception, that the four
farthings
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 1 | 1
farthings would be four per cent. less in value than the present penny. There
would be no conſusion in the two systems working together.
1168. Mr. Kinnaird.] Have you thought how it would work in reference to
the Post-office penny stamp —It would show a considerable loss to the Govern-
ment ; 4 per cent. on upwards of 2,000,000 l.
1169. Chairman.] Might not that be made up by continuing the present
charge until the revenue increased to the extent of 100,000 l. above what it is at
present, and then reducing it to four mils instead of five P-I dare say Govern-
ment would find some means of overcoming that difficulty, and the advantage to
the nation would be so great, in the adoption of the decimal system of accounts,
that it would be worth the difference of the 80,000/.
1170. I need hardly ask whether, in your opinion, a great saving of labour
would be effected in schools in the teaching of the multiplication table, and other
arithmetical tasks, by the introduction of the decimal system 2–-I have no doubt
about it; the pupil begins with the decimal system, and afterwards learns a mode
of ready reckoning, in order to surmount the difficulties which our complicated
system of weights and measures and coinage throw in his way.
1171. Mr. Kinnaird.] Have you considered the possibility of applying a decimal
system to anything but our monetary transactions 2—I have considered it on read-
ing over the various reports of commissions on the subject of weights and mea-
sures; but the subject is so difficult, that it is almost impossible for me to give any
opinion upon it. I know that in most professions, where calculation is required, a
decimal system is adopted, and that they go to the trouble of reducing the results
according to the scale of either the weight or measure that they may be engaged
on. For instance, land surveyors reckon everything by links; their chain is divided
into 100 links, their poles into 25 links, and their little rod they carry about them,
into 1 O links, and all their offsets made with that little rod are made in so many
links; and when the whole thing is complete, it is then reduced into acres, roods,
and perches. There is no doubt that in a great deal of measuring, and a great
number of calculations, the sliding rule would be used ; in calculating interest,
per-centages, and in almost every calculation, it would be a ready mode of reck-
oning, supposing there were a complete decimal system.
1172. Chairman.] Supposing the Customs were to weigh all articles by the 100
instead of the 112 lbs., would it not give great facility in their calculation ?—
Certainly.
1173. Does anything else occur to you, which you can suggest to us to facilitate
the object which we have in view —Nothing occurs to me at the present moment.
Mr. Henry Taylor called in ; and Examined.
i 174. Chairman.] YOU are a Clerk in the establishment of Messrs. Whitbread
& Co., the brewers ?—I am.
1175. Have you published a book on the decimal system 2–I have, sir.
1176. What advantages do you consider the nation would derive from the
adoption of a decimal system in lieu of our present system of pounds, shillings,
and pence 2—I think that great facilities would be afforded in the keeping of
accounts, and in calculations, and also in the saving of labour in the tuition of
youth, who would be relieved from a great deal of trouble and drudgery that is
perfectly useless, except under the present system.
1177. Can you give us an example or two from your own publication of the
saving of figures by the substitution of the decimal for the present complicated
system 2–I will give two instances from page 38 of my book : —
£. s. d. £.
Multiply 58 17 13 by 35 Multiply 58 856
11 by 35
647 8 4, 294 - 280
3 1,765 68
1,942 5 1 # -
117 14 3
£2,059 19 4, * £. 2,059 960
[38 figures.] [26 figures.]
Mr. W. Miller.
9 June 1853.
Mr. H. Taylor.
0.66. O 4 Multiply
I 1.2 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. H. Taylor.
9 June 1853.
Multiply Multiply
£. s. d. 4.
562 10 4 by 125 562 516
10 by 125
5,625 3 4 2,812 580
10 11,250 32
56,25l 6
56,251 13 4 100 times
2,812 11 8 5 times
I 1,250 6 8 20 times
£. 70,314 11 8 36.70,314 500
[49 figures.] [37 figures.]
1178. We have had some discussion about the coins that it would be most.
advisable to adopt. Will you give us your opinion upon that point, and also as
to the number of them —I do not know that I can do better than refer the Com-
mittee to what I have stated in my book, and in which, at page 28, I have given a
table, which I should wish to appear upon the Minutes. I should introduce no
new coins except in the copper. I retain the sovereign as the unit, and its half.
The silver coins would be the florin of 100 cents, the half-florin of 50 cents, and
the quarter-florin of 25 cents. I should also retain the one-eighth florin, equivalent
to the present threepenny piece, which I consider a most useful coin, and it is
becoming more so; for instance, the fares of the metropolitan omnibuses com-
monly are now 3.d., and it is evident that the public opinion is changed with
reference to the 4d. bit, which I should withdraw. I should also withdraw crowns
and half-crowns. With these exceptions, the silver money would remain as it is,
unless as to names. The old names would often be continued in conversation,
but that might be unimportant.
[The Witness handed in the following Table.]
Old Coins of Circulation. New Coins of Circulation.
ld: S. d.
gº Gold :
ãº. e Sovereign pm - 10 Florins 20 —
all-Sovereign. Half-Sovereign - - 5 , 10 –
Silver: - Silver :
Crown. Florin wº º - 100 Cents 2 –
Half-Crown. Half-Florin – - 50 º • -
Shilling. Quarter-Florin - - 25 , – 6
Sixpence. Eighth-Florin - - 123 , — 3
Fourpence.
C Copper:
opper : Cent - - tºº tºº - — — — .
Benny. 2 Cent º- - º- - — — — .
Halfpenny. 3 Cent - tº- tº- - — — — ?
Farthing. 5 Cent º - - - - - 1 +
Old Coins of Account. New Coins of Account.
Farthing. Cent. º
l Penny. 1 Florin.
4 1 Shilling. - 100 l Pound.
48 12 1 Pound. 1,000 10 l
960 240 20 1
1179. Would you adopt any coin that is not a decimal part of the sovereign :
—The tendency in the public mind is to divide by halves, and I should continue
the binary system in dividing the coins.
1 180. Why is it necessary to alter them ; if they had coins of different value,
the fares would soon regulate themselves to those coins 7–No doubt they would,
but the 3 d. falls in with the other coins as one-eighth of the florin, and I would
preserve it, especially as a 10-cent coin presents some difficulties.
1181. Do we not propose to calculate every thing by one-tenth ?—I apprehend
you cannot do that in ordinary business without great innovation, and an un-
desirable multiplication of coins,
1 182. You would keep it in a certain number of mils?—Of course accounts
would
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. I 13
would be kept decimally, whatever might be the circulating coins. ... I have, in my
scheme of accounts and reckoning, divided the florin centesimally, abandoming
all mention of the penny. I prefer the term cent, in designating the hundredth
of a florin, as being one universally known throughout the world, and at the same
time short and expressive. The term mil was tried in America, and it was not
continued there.
1 183. Was not the cause of its being rejected in America this, that it was one-
thousandth part of the dollar, which is their starting point?—I believe that is correct.
With reference to the division by halves, I have made an extract from Mr. John
Quincey Adams' Report to the American Congress on Weights and Measures, in
1821. He says: “We have the halves, quarters, and twentieths, and might have
the fifths. The eighth, dividing the cent only into halves, adapts itself without
inconvenience.” I would ask permission of the Committee to read another extract
from Mr. Adams' report, with regard to the original division of the dollar. He
says: “We took a dollar, and introducing the principle of decimal divisions, we
said a tenth part of it shall be called a dime, a hundredth part a cent, and a
thousandth part a mille. It is now nearly 30 years since our mew moneys of
account have been established. The dollar and the cent have become familiarised
to the tongue; but the dime and the mille are so utterly unknown, that now, when
the recent coinage of dimes is alluded to, it is always necessary to inform the reader
that they are 10-cent pieces. Ask a tradesman in any of our cities what is a dime
or a mille, and the chances are four in five that he will not understand your
question.” Judging by analogy, my idea is, that three denominations of account
are sufficient, and that more would lead to complication.
1 i 84. You probably think it would be necessary to mark upon each coin the
number of cents or mils to designate its value 7—I do. My scale is not strictly
decimal throughout, as was proposed in America, and which, as we have seen, was
abandoned there for the greater brevity of centesimal division. If we begin with
four terms of account, I think we should in practice reduce them to three, by
passing over the 10-cent denomination.
1185. You would write, for instance, £, I., 9 florins, and 99 cents —Just so. I
should have three columns in account-books, as at present ; the last denomination
would be a centesimal one, just as the Russian rouble is divided into 100 copecks;
the French decime is not used in practice as a denomination of account: they
reckon by francs and centimes, eking out with the sou.
1186. Mr. J. B. Smith..] You are probably not aware that the centime is not
only a money of account, but a real coin 2–1 have understood that it is a real
coin.
1 187. Are you aware that, since 1793, when the decimal coinage was first
established in France, the public accounts have all been kept in francs and centimes?
—l have always heard so.
1188. And that the coinage has been of the same denomination ?—Yes, I am
aware. What I meant to say was, that the sou is in very general use.
1189. The sou is five centimes?—It is.
1190. Washerwomen, for instance, in their accounts never make a less charge
than a sou?—I have understood the sou is chiefly used in small reckonings.
1191. At the same time that the centime is a coin 2—It is.
1192. Chairman.] Irrespective of the names by which these coins may ulti-
mately be called, in the event of the decimal system being adopted, does there
exist any doubt on your mind that it would be a great Saving of labour, both
to the community at large, and to young persons in their education, and that it
will enable all parties to keep their accounts with more correctness and with
greater facility ?—I have no doubt of it; nor do I think that the very small
amount of alteration that need be introduced in the coins would give occasion to
any important misapprehension or dissatisfaction in the public mind.
1193. Have you any further information to give us, with a view of throwing
light on the subject of our inquiry 2—None occurs to me at the present moment.
The book to which I have already referred in the course of my evidence was
published by me some time ago, and will be found to contain fully my ideas upon
the subject.
Mr. II. Taylor,
9 June 1853,
O.66. IP C. A. MOODY,
114 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
W. Brown, Esq.
Me Ps
9 June 1853.
R. Hill, Esq.
34 June 1853.
C. A. MOODY, Esq., IN THE CHAIR.
William Brown, Esq., a Member of the Committee, Examined.
1 194. Chairman.] Do you wish to give a statement of certain facts within
your own knowledge, bearing upon the subject under our consideration ?—I do ;
and my wish is to show the ease with which in Ireland a change was made from
one mode of payment to another. I was on a visit to some friends in the north of
Ireland, in 1809, at Ballymena, a large linen market, where and in the neigh-
bouring markets they had always been in the practice of paying the weavers in
old and silver. This was found extremely inconvenient, and induced my relative,
Mr. W. Gihon, to try the experiment of bringing a large amount of gold and
silver from Belfast, and establishing a temporary exchange office at his house,
in which, being an idle man at the time, I acted, and where notes could be
exchanged for cash. The linen merchants, as far as they could, paid for their
purchases with Belfast bank notes. The weavers were, at first, unwilling to
receive such payment; but were assured, that if they disliked to carry the notes
home, they would be at once exchanged for gold and silver at Mr. Gihon's. I
well recollect that, the first day of the experiment, a large number of them
came to exchange their notes; but these calls fell off every market-day, as
confidence in the notes increased; and in a short time the demand for specie ceased
altogether. The weavers had acquired full confidence in the notes, finding that
when no longer exchanged at Mr. Gihon's, they were instantly exchangeable at
the Northern Bank of Belfast; and thus saved the burthen and risk to the linen
merchants of carrying large amounts of gold to market to make their purchases.
I think, therefore, it is only to make parties clearly understand the nature of the
change from one currency to another to obviate all dislike and difficulty. Being
in the United States in 1800, when the transition was going on, from the pound,
shillings, and pence system of accounts to the decimal dollars and cents, as the
dollar and cent currency was issued from the Mint it gradually superseded and
supplanted the pounds, shillings, and pence, so that you were hardly aware of a
change taking place.
Martis, 14° die Junii, 1853.
MEMBERS. PRESENT.
Mr. W. Brown. Marquis of Chandos.
Mr. Hamilton. Sir William Jolliffe.
Mr. J. B. Smith. Mr. Kinnaird.
Sir William Clay.
WILLIAM BROWN, ESQ., IN THE CHAIR.
Rowland Hill, Esq., called; in and Examined.
1195. Chairman.] YOU are Secretary to the Postmaster-general?--I am.
1196. You are aware that we have under discussion the advantages or dis-
advantages which might attend the introduction of a decimal system of coinage ;
but one impediment is, that we cannot find a decimal exactly answering the
1 d., so that if you adopt four mils or four farthings, a loss would be
incurred by the Post-office; and if five mils were substituted for the present 1 d.,
the charge to the public would be increased. Can you suggest any plan of
meeting this difficulty, whilst you inform us of the extent of the loss to the
revenue by reducing the payment to four mils?—Considering the question as
having regard to a permanent arrangement, I can see no alternative but to adopt
one or other of the two sums you nanie, either four or five mils; and as the
change to four mils would be very much less violent than the change to five mils,
I should
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 115
I should hope that the Committee would prefer the four to the five mils as
a substitute for the 1 d. -
1197. Can you state what the probable loss or gain would be in adopting the
four mils, bearing in mind that a large portion of the total revenue of the Post-
office arises from ship letters, which this alteration would not affect 7–I think the
change would affect all the postage. I do not see any way by which it could be
confined to the inland rates, if you lower the value of the d. Seeing that most
of the rates are expressed in pence, I presume that the reduction would extend to
all; and as four mils are about 4 per cent. less than 1 d., the amount of revenue
risked would, of course, be about 4 per cent. upon the gross revenue of the
department, which would amount to about 100,000 l.
1198. Sir JV. Clay.] It would be a loss of 100,000 l. 2–It would be a risk
of 100,000 l. I cannot view this as a loss, because I conceive that such a reduc-
tion would tend to increase the number of letters, and by that means gradually
to make up the loss.
1199. Chairman.] I need not ask you as to the advantages that would
result from introducing a general system of decimals throughout the nation —
J conceive that the advantages would be very great indeed.
1200. Probably more than to compensate for any supposed loss to the Post-
office — In my opinion, certainly ; but I have confined my attention mainly to
the question as connected with the Post-office revenue. I need not point out to
the Committee that any loss that the Post-office revenue might sustain, would be
to the same extent a saving on the part of the public.
1201. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Would you propose to make any alteration in those
postage stamps which are now sold at 1s., for instance: would you reduce them
below, the half-florin?—That would not be absolutely necessary, as I, of course,
presume that the 1s. would still be retained as a coin. But this difficulty would
arise, viz. that if the higher rates of postage were maintained at their full amount,
and the lower rates reduced, then 12 of the penny, or rather four-mil stamps
used for the inland letters would no longer be equivalent to the 1 s. stamp, and
could not be used as substitutes for the 1 s. stamp. That would, to a certain ex-
tent, cause some inconvenience to the public.
1202. Sir W. Clay.] Do you know what proportion of the money received
for stamps is received for the different classes of stamps; for instance, how much
is received for the 1 d. stamps, and how much is received for the 2d. stamp, and
so on ?—I do not bear it in mind. I could supply any information upon that
point, and I can at once say that by far the largest proportion is collected by the
sale of 1 d, stamps.
1203. So large a proportion probably, that the diminution of loss to the revenue
by retaining the present prices for the higher class of stamps would not be a con-
sideration sufficiently important to set against the inconvenience of having two
different values?—I think not, decidedly.
1204. Chairman.] I think that some estimate was made of the number of 1 d.
stamps sold at the receiving-houses, but is it not the case that a very large pro-
portion of the stamps are sold to merchants by booksellers and stationers, by one
or more pound’s worth at a time?—No doubt that is the case, to some extent.
1205. I think we had something like an estimate that out of 100 stamps sold,
62 would be single 1 d. stamps, but that would be no per-centage of the whole
quantity sold, I presume —I think that the information we obtained for the
Committee indicates pretty accurately the general proportions of the sales. We
find that about 78 per cent. of the customers who purchase stamps at the
receiving-houses, purchase a number less than six.
1206. Sir W. Clay.] Will you be good enough to furnish the Committee
with a statement of the proportions in which the revenue of the Post-office is
received upon the 1 d. stamps, or upon stamps of a higher denomination ?–I will
do so. So much of the revenue as is derived from stamps is collected in the
following proportions; viz.
By 1 d. Stamps - tºp gº •º - 89.4 per cent.
By 2 d. ditto - - -> - – 6.5 ditto.
By 1o d, ditto - &- -> tº- - 1:3 ditto.
By 1 s. ditto - - -> - tº- 2' S, ditto,
1 OO" ()
R. Hill, Esq.
14 June 1853.
0.66. - P 2 1207. Would
1 16 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
R. Hill, Esq.
14 June 1853.
1207. Would you think it necessary, if a reduction be made from the present
1 d. to four mils for a 1 d. stamp, to make a corresponding reduction in foreign
and colonial postage 2–1 think it would be the most convenient arrangement,
otherwise, as I pointed out, the stamps of a lower denomination could not be used
in paying the postage of the higher rated letters.
1208. Would that consideration extend to both foreign and colonial postage 2
—It would.
* 1209. Are the stamps in the British Post-office used to any considerable extent
in the prepayment of foreign letters?—Yes, as regards letters going out of the
country. All letters going out of the country can be paid either in money or in
stamps. . Whatever postage on foreign letters can be prepaid in money can also be
prepaid by means of stamps.
1210. Mr. Hamilton.] Would an alteration in the value of the postage stamps
involve any change in the conventions by which the postage with foreign countries
is regulated ?–It would.
121 1. Are there not some instances in which the proportion of postage charged
by a foreign country under convention has a ratio to the amount of the postage
charged by ourselves 7–ln many cases that ratio is carefully observed, but a change
so small as 4 per cent, would not, I think, present any practical difficulty; because
even at present it rarely happens that the British coin is an exact equivalent to the
foreign coin.
1212. Practically, do you think that those conventions would present any
difficulty in the way of the change that is suggested ?–I think not.
1213. Sir H. Clay.] Your answer to me with regard to the foreign postage
would apply even more generally with regard to the colonies, would it not ?–It
applies equally, I think, to all. There are certain letters to the colonies even
which must be prepaid, and with regard to all, a large proportion may or inay not
be prepaid.
1214. The Committee are to understand, as the result of your opinion, first,
that the proportion of the higher class of stamps is so small as compared with the
I d. stamps, that there would be no saving of importance in the non-extension to
them of the proposed diminution ?—I concur in that view.
1215. Do you think, also, that there would be a great convenience in uniformity
of charge in the stamps in order that a number of the 1 d, stamps might, as at pre-
sent, be of equivalent value with stamps of a higher denomination ?—Certainly.
1216. Sir W. Jolliffe.] I think you are of opinion that a reduction rather than
an increase would be a desirable mode of dealing with this alteration ?—
Certainly.
1217. Have you considered that in reference to the mode by which you take
the tax upon letters; that is, by doubling the amount, as you proceed, with the
weight of the letters, and with reference also to the unit of circulation being of
the value of 1,000 mils 7––I have.
1218. Do you not then think that there would be a great disadvantage in taking
a 4-mil piece as the lowest postage stamp, and continuing to double that rather
than taking a 5-mil piece and doubling that, inasmuch as the increase would be
from 4 mils to 8 mils, from 8 mils to 16 mils, from 16 mils to 32 mils, from
32 mils to 64 mils, from 64 mils to 128 mils, and from 128 mils to 256 mils,
and so on ; and that there would be great difficulty in finding a coinage which
should be applicable to the payment of those sums?—The progression is not
exactly as stated in the question. It is in the first instance doubled and again
doubled, and then it advances by equal steps—one rate, two rates, four rates, and
then six rates, eight rates, ten rates, and so on. At the same time I must admit
that there would be a convenience in making the single rate 5 mils instead of
four, but I think that the inconvenience of so considerable an advance as 20 per
cent. upon the rate of postage would far more than counterbalance it.
1219. If I am correct in my view, while you are arriving at a decimal circulating
medium, you would be departing from a decimal calculation of postage 2–No ; I
think the convenience of a decimal notation would enable us to escape the incon-
veniences that you point out. It would be very easy to calculate the gross charge
upon any number of letters, whichever sum be taken as the single rate of charge.
If you take four mils you multiply the number of letters by four, and you have
the total postage in mils, which is at once convertible into pounds: if you make
the single charge 5 mils, then you multiply by 5; and you would with equal
facility--possibly with slightly greater facility—convert the total into pounds.
1220. Would
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 117
1220. Would not inconvenience also arise in the sale of stamps from the same
cause !—I think not.
1221. Mr. J. B. Smith..] What stamps have you at present 2—A 1 d, stamp,
.2 d. stamp, a 6 d. stamp (in preparation), a 10 d. stamp, and a 1 s. stamp.
1222. Sir W. Jolliffe.] Supposing I wanted either a 24-mil stamp or a 48-mil
stamp, should I not in one case have the inconvenience, which I have not under
the present rate of postage, of receiving one mil in exchange for the coin which
probably be in use, the 25-mil piece, and in the other case two mils in exchange
for the coin which I should tender for the payment of the postage, the 50-mil
piece 2–You would if you bought a single stamp.
1223. But it is a very common thing, is it not, to buy a single 1 s. stamp —
*It is.
1 224. Chairman.] I presume that you would not be much troubled with that
in the management of the Post-office, the stamps being generally sold at sta-
tioners’?— They are chiefly bought at the Post-office, and therefore the incon-
venience would devolve upon us; but ſ think that it would be a less
inconvenience than the other; viz., that the low priced stamps could not be
substituted for the higher priced stamps in paying for letters. If the postage be
raised from 1 d. to five mils, unquestionably the whole inconvenience that we have
been speaking of vanishes; but I think that you would encounter a still greater
InCOn Vél) 1611 (26.
1225. Sir W. Jolliffe.] That is, you would create discontent, and perhaps a
reduction of revenue 2—You would, unquestionably, create discontent, and to a
certain extent, ao doubt reduce the number of letters.
1226. Mr. Hamilton.] When you spoke of the extreme loss to arise from the
change being 100,000 l., did you include the loss that would follow a change in
the foreign and colonial postage 2–I took into calculation our whole revenue.
I consider our gross revenue to be about two millions and a half, and 4 per cent.
upon that would be 100,000 l.
1227. Chairman.] Is it not increasing every year?—It is.
1228. Have you any apprehension but that the 4 per cent. would soon be
Arestored to the Post-office P-I think it would.
1229. Sir W. Clay.] Do you think that the reduction in the price of stamps
would tend to increase the number of letters sent, and thereby compensate the
present loss of revenue 2–I think it would increase the number of letters.
1230. Would the saving of time in the calculations by the adoption of the
decimal system of notation be important in transacting the business of the Post-
office —I think it would ; perhaps more in the money-order department than in
the letter department.
1231. Chairman.] Weighing all the advantages and disadvantages of the
reduction from the present 1 d. to four mils as the price of the stamp, would the
balance be in favour of a general benefit to the country and to the Post-office?—
I think a system of decimal coinage would be highly beneficial to the department
and the country generally.
1232. Taking everything into consideration, do you think the change would be
advantageous !—I do.
1233. Sir W. Jolliffe.] Do you not think it would be almost an equivalent
to any advantage to be gained by the reduction of the postage by one mil, rather
than the increase by one mil, to adhere strictly both with regard to postage and
with regard to the circulating medium, to a decimal system 2–I do not think
that it would be an equivalent. I admit that there would be some advantage in
adopting five mils as the single rate, rather than four, but I think that it would
be far more than counterbalanced by the disadvantage of raising the rate of
postage 20 per cent.
1234. Sir W. Clay.] Has the money-order business of the Post-office become
very extensive —Very much so indeed.
1235. Can you tell the Committee the extent of your establishment for that
particular branch 2–In the London Post-office about 150 clerks are engaged in
that branch of the business alone.
1236. How many clerks are employed in the country?—I think in Liverpool
there are about ten or twelve. There is a far greater proportion in London, from
the circumstance that the Metropolitan Office is a sort of cheque upon the others;
it keep the accounts of all.
R. Hill, Esq.-
14 June 1853.
0.66. P 3 1237. In
1 18 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
R. Hill, Esq.
14 June 1853.
Mr. W. Miller.
*-i-º-º-º-º-º-º-º:
1237. In that particular department do you think that the saving of time, by
the adoption of a decimal notation, would be of importance?—I think it would.
1238. Could you tell the Committee what proportion of single 1.d. stamps are
bought 2—So far as we can judge from accounts kept at twelve receiving-houses
in London and the environs, out of every 100 persons who come to purchase
stamps, 61 purchase a single stamp at a time. It should be borne in mind that
there is no motive operating upon the purchasers of stamps to buy them in large
numbers, as they can buy a single stamp at precisely the same rate as they buy
1oo stamps. The average number of stamps sold is about five to each person.
1239. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Is it your opinion that the majority of the 1 d. postage
stamps which are used are used by the working classes 2–No, it is not.
1240. Have you any means of forming an idea as to the proportion used by
the working classes —No very satisfactory means.
Mr. William Miller, called in ; and further Examined.
1241. Chairman.] IN your former evidence, you did not speak of the half-
penny being two mils, although you mentioned the 1 d. as four mils; it was pro-
bably your intention to do so 7–Yes.
1242. It was the wish of the Committee that you should prepare some tables 2
—I was requested to show the mode by which the dividends are at present
calculated upon the 3 per cents. I have a statement and a comparative statement
of the mode by which they would be calculated, supposing the decimal system of
notation were observed, and which, with the permission of the Committee, I will
read:—
The number of accounts in the bank books into which the national debt is divided, and
upon each of which a dividend has to be paid twice a year, is about 300,000. . These differ
in number every day, in consequence of the purchases and sales, although the aggregate
amount of the stock remains the same.
About 100,000 of these accounts alter in the amount of stock during the half year, and
upon each of the altered accounts a new calculation has to be made for the dividend. These
calculations are not deferred till the stocks are shut, but are made at three periods during
the half year, at which periods the accounts undergo a particular examination to prove
them.
Should an account alter between the periods, the dividend has to be calculated again;
, but in the last period there remain comparatively few calculations to make.
These dividends are not calculated arithmetically, but are computed by means of tables.
The following are the Tables in use at the Bank.
(A.) Tº for ºmputing the interest at 3 per cent. for half a year, upon any sum
under 5 l. -
(B.) Another for the same purpose, under 10 l.
(C.) Table for computing the interest at 33 per cent., for half a year, upon any
sum up to 10,000,000 l. .
(D.) Table for computing the Income-tax.
The following is the mode of working with them:
It is required to find the interest upon 2,728 l. 11 s. 5d., at 3 per cent. for half a year.
Begin with the odd annount of pounds, above or below 5 l.
£. s. d. £. s. d. Frc.
3 11 5 In the table - tº º tºº º tº wº tºº - || = - 1 - “855
5 — — Is known to be gº $ºg tº º $º º sº - || = - 1 6
20 — — -- Multiply the figure standing in the place of tens by — 6 -
3, which will give the answer in shillings – * --> gº
-- If the figure standing in the hundreds' place be odd," 1 () —
put 10s. for it º “º. * = º tºº º _ ſ] —
-- To the figures in the place of the thousands
2,700 – – and upwards º º gº gºe º — = 27
- - Add on half, omitting the fractions gene- = 40 - —
rated by the odd hundred, which had been ) = 13
previously reckoned – sº tº º º - J
2,728 11 5 || Interest - º gº tº tº sº gº º tº 40 18 6 "855
Deduct
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 1 19
Deduct Income-tax, which is computed from Table (D.)
£. s. d. £. s. d. frc.
40 — — = 1 3 4 -
- 18 6 = - – 6 ### = 475 - - - - - - 1 3 10 .475
f. 40 18 6 Nett dividend - -> - – f. 39 14 8:38
In this working there are two kinds of fractions used ; for the Income-tax in Table (D.),
the fractions are 240ths of a penny; for the gross dividend in Table (A.) the fractions are
decimals of 1d.
The following is the same question, calculated as it would be, supposing it were
treated decimally:—
£. Doits.
Principal - - gº - tº- - 2,728'571
Half ditto - º º tºe - gº - 1,364°285
4,092-856 Gross Dividend.
I 0.2°321
17' 054 119°375 Income-tax.
* *-mºs
£. 39'73481 Nett Dividend.
#
º
–
Or in present money - º - - – f. 39. 14. 8'354.
In the former computation there are necessarily 45 figures, and in the full statement
there are 77; in the latter, the decimal mode, there are the same number and the whole
of the working is set down.
It is to be observed also, that the decimal result is different from the tabular in the
fractions, as the Government Income-tax tables make no charge upon the fractions. The
decimal mode is therefore more correct as well as more expeditious.
The decimalisation of the accounts would not have much effect in shortening the time of
the shutting. The agreement of the accounts, and the making of the warrants, take up
most of the time between the shutting and the payment of the dividend. The stocks
remain closed for a fortnight after the first day of payment, for two reasons: first, the clerks
of the closed offices are engaged in delivering the dividend warrants to the stockholders, or
in paying the dividends; and, secondly, the crowding, which is already very great, would
be very much increased.
The saving of a few days in this way does not appear to me of very great consequence, as
purchases and sales for the opening are easily effected.
1243. Would it not save a great deal of time, as regards the opening of the
Bank sooner for the payment of the dividends; do you apprehend that it would very
much decrease the labour of the clerks, and very considerably decrease the chances
of mistake 2–Very much so ; it would shorten the labour, and I must, there-
fore, infer that it would shorten the time.
1244. If tables were made for the decimal system, as you now have them,
would not your labours be assisted ?–I think we could work out our calculations
more quickly without tables, owing to the simplicity of the decimal system. I
should wish to add one or two statements to my former evidence. I mentioned
that the business of the Bank, as regards the Stock department, would be facili-
tated, but I omitted to state that in the discounting of bills the whole of the work
at present is done by tables. In number there are at least 100,000 bills of
exchange discounted during the year, upon each of which a computation has to
be made. Since giving my reasons why some system of decimal coinage should
be adopted, which would co-exist with the present, another reason has occurred
to me, viz., that it would be some time before all bills would be drawn, although
they must be paid, according to the new arrangement. One of the greatest evils
of the present system is that it reduces the clerks to the condition of mere
machines after they have been a very long time in an office; because, to over-
come the hindrances which our complicated system of weights and measures and
money occasions, in almost every trade or profession, tables are used. In the
Bank, it is found to be the case, that when a clerk has worked for some years in
one office, where a certain set of tables is used, he is inefficient in any other.
To this truth experience has led former chief cashiers, and no tables are allowed
in the chief cashier’s office, except in certain cases, but all calculations are worked
arithmetically. Where tables are used, when an extraordinary occasion arises to
which they are not adapted, the clerks are found to be unready and unequal to the
Mr. W. Miller.
14 June 1853.
o,66. P 4 occasion.
| 20 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mir. W. Mºller.
14 June 1853.
Mr. F. Bennoch.
occasion. It has often been a question with me whether the acknowledged smartness.
of the American traders is not sounewhat due to their decimal system of compu-
tation. Clerks having no mode of arithmetic ready to their hands, without their
tables are comparatively useless; as a proof of that I would instance, that before
the alteration of the troy weight, a question being to be worked out arithmetically,
I sent for five superior clerks, who had been accustomed to work always by the
tables, and worked correctly, and I had five different results, and only one of
them correct. The calculation was a very simple one, but they were unused to
calculations, and when the occasion arose, they were not equal to it. The
question to be worked out was 15 lbs. 1 1 oz. 18 dwts. and 12 grains of gold in
the gross, to 2 carats 34th grains worse.
1245, What was the number of figures used ?–By the decimal mode it required
71 figures, and 123 by the old mode.
1246. Have you been able to form any opinion as to the number of clerks that
would probably be saved t—I have not. It would dispense, doubtless, with a
great number; I am afraid to say how many, but I should think it might save one
in a dozen.
1247. Sir JW. Clay.] Have you considered whether it would be any con-
venience to have a gold coin of the value of 58.7—I.think that a gold coin of the
value of 5s. would be inconveniently small. There is an objection with the
public to small coins; that is the case at present with the 3d piece; many people
refuse them, and they principally circulate among omnibus passengers. There is
also an objection in the additional loss by abrasion, which would arise from the
smallness of the coin in weight in proportion to its surface; the amount allowed
for that loss between the Mint weight and the current weight is so small that the
coins would soon fall below the legal weight, and therefore pass out of circulation;
nor could that amount be safely increased, as any considerable increase would
lead to a fraudulent diminution of the weight. At present so to contrive to
reduce the weight of the sovereign as that it may still be a legal tender, is too
great an expense of time and labour.
1248. Are you not aware that there is a great disinclination on the part of the
public to make use of the 5s. silver coin 7–Yes, they remain in bankers' tills in
large quantities.
i249. Is it not, therefore, desirable to substitute a coin in circulation of the
value of 5s. 2—I do not think that it is wanted; and that the sovereign, half-
sovereign, florin, shilling, and half-shilling would answer all purposes.
Mr. Francis Bennoch, called in ; and Examined.
1250. WHAT is the nature of your business?—I am a Commission Warehouse-
man, at 77, Wood-street, Cheapside.
1251. Do you carry on extensive transactions not only in this country but in
France 2–-Not so much with France as with America; unfortunately, in our class
of business, in consequence of the French tariff, many of our goods are excluded ;.
we purchase from France, but we sell very little to France.
1252. Have you considered the advantages that might arise from adopting a
system of decimal coinage —I apprehend that scarcely any person connected
with trade and commerce has not turned his attention to the fact, and found how
exceedingly inconvenient everything at present is in regard to what we call a
system of currency.
1253. What is your opinion of the evils of the present system 2–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 a cost calculated
of a manufactured article, requiring four different calculations and four different
values to make out one simple cost of 3s. 2; d.; 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.
1254. Docs the present coinage involve a consumption of more time than if it
was arranged decimally —Infinitely ; this cost would occupy five minutes, while
in a decimal system it might be done in the fraction of a minute.
1255. 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 was its intrinsic value, expresses
its.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 1 2 1
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 relative value contemplated. There would be the same quantity of copper
given in exchange for a florin, and the same quantity of silver given for a sove-
reign, that there is now. The alteration desired is only one of arrangement, to
facilitate calculations and exchanges.
1256. What are the real and nominal values of silver and copper ?—The value
of copper is, I find, to-day, 1 s. -} d. per pound, while it circulates at I S. 4d. to
1 s. 6d. per pound; silver is 5 s. to 5s. I d. per ounce, while it circulates at 5 s. 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 20 s., without the
trouble of assaying it; and I have been informed that several thousands are so
consumed as bullion weekly in the district of Clerkenwell. *
1257. Do you consider that pence are mere tokens up to a shilling, and shillings
mere tokens up to 40s. F-Just so.
1258. What are the changes that would be required to make a decimal system
work properly 3–They are very few. One of the difficulties is, in having out
unit of account fixed so high that it requires more coins than under other circum-
stances 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.
1259. What do you mean by another coin P-I mean a coin of the value of
1 o mils, or tenth of a florin ; we should then have the pound, florin, cent, and
mii. These four standard coins of account would, I think, be sufficient ; to facili-
tate exchanges it would be indispensable to have these divided into parts.
1260. How would you divide them 2–I would divide, first, the gold into three
coins ; ; e., the sovereign or 1,000 mils, the half sovereign or 500 mils, and the
quarter sovereign or 250 mils; the silver coins I would divide into the florin or
1 oo mils, half florin or 50 mils, and quarter florin or 25 mils; and the cent,
or whatever name you adopt, of 10 mils ; for copper, I would have a two-mil
piece and a one-mil piece; giving line coins in all.
1261. 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, and I think a smaller quantity of
metal would be required ; and another thing is, that it would be more easily
counted, there being less labour in division.
1262. What would be the size of the smallest gold coin 7–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. -
1263. 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 that might be so at
first, but the prejudice would be soon overcome, and the quarter sovereign would
become a favourite ; it is now current in America. They have their goid 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 Tbird, in
the year 1257, we had a gold penny, which weighed 45 grains.
1264. 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 any
metallic system, and it might as reasonably be assigned as an objection to our
present coinage, that the sovereign is sometimes passed for a shilling, and the
half sovereign for sixpence. *
1265. Are you of opinion that our gold coinage requires no amendment, beyond
the introduction of 250-mil pieces : —None, with the exception that I would
advise that every gold coin should have stamped upon it the number of mils it
Mr. F. Bennoch.
14 June 1853.
o.66. Q represents
1 22 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. F. Bennoch.
14 June 1853.
represents, so as to familiarise the public with the two most important parts of
our system, and ultimately lead them to look upon mils as the principle of our
currency, while pounds should remain as our unit; and it would be a vast im-
provement could it be arranged to make our sovereign 120 grains instead of 123
grains; it would then be a quarter of an ounce, which would render bullion cal-
culations very easy.
1266. Would you not adopt the mil as the unit 7–There are several objec-
tions to that ; first, the Sovereign or pound is our standard measure of value, and
now that gold is abundant it ought not to be changed ; secondly, all our debt is
reckoned in pounds sterling ; and, thirdly, all the salaries and estimates of income
are based upon that unit, which has one advantage, it expresses a great sum in few
figures.
1267. What would you recommend as regards the silver coinage 7–First, I
should recommend that an abundance of 10-mil or cent pieces and florin pieces
should be circulated, and that all half-crowns and crowns should be withdrawn as
speedily as possible, and that no more threepenny and fourpenny pieces should be
issued, nor indeed sixpences or shillings.
1268. How would you deal with sixpences and shillings -—Sixpences and shil-
lings I prefer to the crowns and half-crowns; they are of very little inconvenience,
because they express fractional and even decimal parts of a pound, and therefore
would easily harmonize with any system that might be introduced.
1269. You do not see any objection merely because they are not divisible by
102–Not at all; and instead of being called shillings and sixpences I should hope
they would be called half florins and quarter florins.
1270. You suggest 1-mill pieces and 2-mil pieces only; would not that be
attended with very considerable inconvenience in the payment of tolls and
of penny stamps, inasmuch as you would have to carry about so many single-mil-
pieces —The penny is an unfortunate coin ; it is neither the one thing nor the other,
because you cannot make it harmonize with any system that has convenience for
its object, and is one of the chief difficulties in the change proposed. If the
penny were only thought of as the 240th part of a pound, all difficulty would
vanish. During the last three months I have paid considerable attention to
this matter, and have taken pains to ascertain, from all classes of people, what
their opinions are with regard to a copper coinage, and I am satisfied that in 99
cases out of 100 two halfpence would be preferred to a penny-piece. People prefer
a single coin when it saves weight or trouble; but if neither object is attained,
they prefer the smaller coin, because a halfpenny will often serve the purpose of a
penny.
1271. How would you like a 5-mil piece 2–1 think 5-mil pieces would be
very objectionable, as they would be very clumsy; and as they would be the same
weight as two 2-mil pieces and one 1-mil piece, therefore there is no advantage
gained.
1272. When you speak of economising labour in the small coins, do you mean
in the counting of them 2–I do ; to the merchant, and all others engaged in
trade and commerce where book-keeping is necessary, a decimal system is of
high utility, for a simple process of multiplication and addition produces the result
desired, while fewer figures are used.
1273. Have you any calculations to show to the Committee explanatory of your
views 2–I have taken two or three easy calculations; for instance, if I wish to
enter and carry out 799 yards, at one farthing or one mil per yard, the figures
799 embrace the fact decimally without calculation ; but if I have to reduce it
into pence and shillings, I have first to divide by four, and then by 12, making
15 figures and five lines to produce the result, 16s. 7; d. If I am quick in
mental arithmetic, and do not require to put my pen to paper, I have still the
same mental working, which is so much time wasted. I may also refer to
another fact, that if I wish to express 19s. 11; d., or to enter it in columns of my
book, I use six figures and three lines, where three figures, 999, are enough, and
instead of three columns in our ledgers and day-books, we need only two, a
simple line to divide the pound sterling from its decimal parts; or we may have
three columns, as now, one for pounds, one for florins, and one for mils, which
would have this one advantage, all our present books would be ruled correctly.
1274. In
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 1 23
1274. In either paying or receiving accounts, do you consider the decimal
system the most convenient!—Decidedly, and for this reason : if I have to pay
ggg mils, I might pay it in one half sovereign, one quarter sovereign, two florin
pieces, one quarter florin piece, two cent pieces, and two 2-mil pieces, making
nine coins in all. In our present coinage it would require, to pay the same amount,
one half-sovereign, one crown, one half-crown, one florin, one fourpenny piece, one
penny, one halfpenny, and one farthing, also making nine coins; but that arises
from the fact of our having in circulation a florin. In an ordinary case, instead of
paying the whole money we should probably pay a sovereign and receive back one
mil or a farthing in exchange.
1275. Have you considered any plan by which the objection to the small silver
and gold coins might be overcome 2—I have ; one by having a perforated coin like
the Chinese, where they can be strung like beads and suspended round the body.
There is indeed some reason for believing that among the earliest coins of the
world the perforated system prevailed; pockets not being used the money or
property so carried gave distinction to the owner, and this was doubtless the origin
of bracelets and neck ornaments of precious stones, and also of chains of gold.
1276. Mr. Kinnaird...] As a means of carrying money —As a means of
carrying money. As a sort of support of the theory I have just mentioned, I
may state that there is abundance of inferential proof of the probability that such
was the case; and the fact will be found very interesting. It is recorded that
one of our Ambassadors or Ministers of State, on visiting Antwerp, wrote that
he had purchased a painting by Rubens, with so many links of his gold chain,
from which we may reasonably conclude that the links were of a certain weight
and fineness, and perhaps stamped by the goldsmiths, who at any time might be
called to lend their notes on the deposit of the chain; and the stamp would save
the trouble of re-assaying, self-protection being the cause of the introduction of
the hall-mark of the goldsmiths.
1277. Chairman.] Have you any objection to the perforated coin —I have,
especially of the more valuable metals; it would give a tempting facility to the
dishonest to scrape metal from the inner edge, and thus the coin might get
rapidly reduced in weight, and of course decreased in value. *
1278. How would you overcome the objection ?— I should prefer a solid coin,
and when I know that the dollar gold coin is becoming popular in America,
where the people are quite as alive to a true system as we are, and when I
remember that a coin of similar character was common in England 600 years
ago, when hands were as hard and horny as they are now-a-days, the advantages
weighed against the disadvantages are vastly superior. The small silver coin might
have inore...alloy than the other coins, as in the case of the 3-cent piece in the
United States, where the alloy is, I believe, seven per cent. more than in the
other silver coins.
1279. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the large and small coins 7
—The advantages of the large coins, or coins of considerable amount, are that a large
sum is more easily counted; the disadvantage is to the poorer classes, who fre-
quently have some difficulty to get them changed. The advantage of the smail
coin is to all who have to pay wages, the result of piece-work, where fractional
payments are to be made, and to all the poor who have to buy their articles in
small quantities. -
1280. Can you show what are the evils resulting from an abundance of large
coins, whilst there is a scarcity of coins of smaller value – Every manufacturer
in the kingdom is cognizant of much mischief, inconvenience, and even of vice,
resulting from the difficulty of obtaining an abundance of small coins.
1281. How is that 2–I have known, when silver was scarce, several workpeople
collect together into the pay-office, each received a slip of paper, with the amount
due, and one of them (nominated by themselves) received a round sum in gold,
and as little silver as possible, and were dismissed to divide it among them. They
might not all deal with the same grocer, or baker, or butcher, but there was one
with whom they all dealt, I mean the publican, where change could be obtained ;
and I need hardly add, that frequently the division of their wages by this method
led to the diminution of their wages and the debasement of their minds.
1282. Have any other inconveniences resulted from it 2—Where goods are
Mr. F. Bennach.
14 June 1853.
o.66 - Q 2 manufactured
I 24 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. F. Bennoch.
14 June 1853.
J. B. Beard, Esq.
manufactured at the houses of the workpeople, the manufacturer finds it easier to
treat with one than a number, and this has led to the introduction of a class called
undertakers or middlemen, who come between the master and the workpeople,
undertake all the responsibility, and receive and pay all the money.
1283. Might not the well-being and convenience of the working classes be
promoted by the middlemen —Undoubtedly ; one man could perform the details
for 20, so that 20 might be kept at work while one was doing a duty which
otherwise each must do for himself; nevertheless, I consider the other to be the
primary cause of the system.
1284. Do you apprehend any difficulties in carrying out a system of decimal
coinage?—Of course there are great difficulties, and doubtless there will be objec-
lions innumerable, but a little firmness will overcome all obstacles. A little
enlightened despotism, or the mild exercise of arbitrary power, would, in such
cases, be a national good. We are so much the slaves of custom, that we cling
with tenacity to acknowledged evil, because we are either too timid or too idle to
adopt a wiser course.
1285. Who, in your judgment, would be the chief objectors; merchants and
traders, or the general public *—I cannot conceive it possible for any one pre-
tending to the character of a banker or a merchant objecting to a system which
would save him 20 per cent. in clerks, whose aim is to do the largest possible
amount with the least possible labour. I should naturally expect that great pre-
judice would exist among the ignorant, and all that extensive class who sell
butter 17, ounces instead of 16 ounces to the pound, corn by the old instead of by
the imperial bushel, and reckon by bolls instead of quarters. Government, how-
ever, is to blame here for levying the duty on the cwt. of 112 lbs. instead of by
the pound ; sometimes by shillings and pence, instead of on some principle which
should be a certain part of a pound sterling. From this defect nearly 5,000 l.
per annum is lost by the Income Tax, being the difference 3 per cent. and 7 d. in
the pound. In the silk trade, a contract for so many cwt. means so many 100 lbs.
Inet. -
1286. Would not the quantity sold very much adjust itself to the amount
received, after a little experience 2–No doubt it would.
1287. Do you think a half farthing would be of any use –I think they would
be of no use whatever. I think it would be given in the same way as people now
give in the farthings. There is one point I should like to name to the Committee
in regard to the name of our new coins. I have said I consider there need be
only four; the present florin, and the cent and mil as coins of account. I think
it is very important also that we should establish the principle of heading our
ledger columns with the initial letters of our simple English terms ; and it is very
important that, whatever names you adopt, they should be as far as possible
removed from those we now have in use, in order to prevent confusion.
1288. Mr. J. B. Smith..] As you have dealings in French goods you may pro-
bably be able to inform us whether it would be any convenience if we were to
accept a decimal system of weights and measures, as well as a decimal system
of coinage —There can be no doubt whatever that it would greatly facilitate
commercial transactions.
1289. Do you think it would be attended with more public difficulty than the
adoption of a decimal system of coinage 2—I think it would, because the chances
are you would have a greater variety of articles to measure than merely in
money.
1290. If both systems were adopted, do you think it should be done at the
'same time 2—I think it would be well if we could manage it; but it is not
essential ; our present weights and measures could be calculated in decimal
money very easily; but I think it would be very convenient that they should bear
a relationship to the money calculations, and be regulated by the same principle.
John Baron Beard, Esq., called in ; and Examined.
1291. Chairman.] WHERE do you reside 2–No. 12, Egremont-place, King's
Cross.
1292. What profession are you?—I am an architect and engineer.
1293. Do you consider that the adoption of the decimal system of coinage
would
sELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 1 25
would be an advantage to the country, by simplifying accounts, and that it would
enable architects and engineers and others to perform their work with more cer-
tainty, and in less time –Certainly.
1294. Do you consider that it would be a labour-saving machine P-Certainly.
1295. Have you any idea what per-centage of labour would be saved in com-
plicated calculations usually made by engineers and architects 2—I should say it
would save a great deal of labour ; but, at present, I calculate nearly everything
by decimals, and therefore I should not save so much time and labour as many
others, and particularly in what they call cross-multiplication, and which occupies
a great deal of time, although it is surprising what habit will do in such cases.
If you ask such a person to multiply 6 feet 8 inches by 5 feet 6 inches, habit will
enable him to give you the answers almost before you have finished speaking.
1296. Sir W. Clay.] By cross-multiplication you mean duodecimal multipli-
cation ?—Yes.
1297. Chairman.] In order to facilitate education in schools, do you think
it desirable that the inspectors of schools should be instructed by Government to
inform the masters that an essential part of the education of the rising genera-
tion must of necessity be in decimal calculation, assuming that it is contem-
plated by Parliament to adopt a decimal system –No doubt of it; but I would
add that, in almost every trade and profession they have a kind of arithmetic
of their own, which they will carry dut, independently of all schools. Whether it
be the fault of the present system, and that it would be altered by the adoption of
the decimal system, I know not; but I know that at present, if you take a school-
boy who is considered the best arithmetician, he is not competent for months,
until he acquires your ways and habits.
1298. If it were insisted upon that it was an essential part of education, and
the inspectors refused to certify that the boys were properly taught unless they
had acquired a knowledge of decimal calculations, would not that in a certain
measure compel the teaching of decimals —Not the least doubt of it.
1299. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Do you at present calculate for measurements by
decimals?— By duodecimals. If, as a surveyor, I meet another gentleman upon
the subject of dilapidations, or anything of that sort, I am obliged to concur in
his mode of calculation, which is by duodecimals.
1300. Those calculations would be much more easily made by a decimal sys-
tem 2–I think they would.
1301. Supposing the systems of weights and measures were also decimalized,
would the system be more easy by decimals than by duodecimals?—I have a
doubt about it; the rapidity with which duodecimal calculations are made from
the effect of habit is astonishing; but still I admire the decimal system very much
indeed. -
1302. Chairman.] Would it not enable many gentlemen, who have been taught
the duodecimal systern, to adopt it, and to examine their own accounts rather
than trust to accountants 2—I think there is not the slightest doubt about it; all
gentlemen have learned decimals at School.
1303. Sir W. Clay.] Do you think that any particular inconvenience would be
felt in the adoption of the decimal system, as regards the relation of employers
and workmen, or in the transactions of the poor –I think there would not be
any very great difference.
1304. Do you think that artisans and labourers would readily accustom them-
selves to the calculation of their wages in the new system of decimal coinage 2–
Certainly. C
1305. Chairman.] Is it your opinion that the new coins and the present coins
might circulate concurrently, without inconvenience to the public 2–Certainly ;
º may be upon a system which I am prepared to suggest, but upon no
Other.
J. B. Beard, Esq.
14 June 1853.
o.66. Q 3
126 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
T. Bazley, Esq.
16 June 1853.
Jovis, 16° die Junii, 1853.
MEMBERS PRESENT.
Mr. William Brown. - Viscount Goderich.
Mr. J. B. Smith. - Mr. Dunlop.
Mr. Kinnaird. Sir William Clay.
WILLIAM BROWN, Esq., IN THE CHAIR.
Thomas Bazley, Esq., called in ; and Examined.
1306. Chairman.] I BELIEVE you are Président of the Chamber of Commerce
at Manchester 2–I am.
1307. On the 25th March 1852, that Chamber preferred a petition to the
Government in favour of decimal coinage, weights, and measures?--It did.
1308. Was there a general feeling among the members of the Chamber that
the adoption of it would be a boon to the country —There was an unanimous
feeling to that effect.
1309. You must frequently come into contact with foreigners and others dealing
in countries where the currency is decimalized ; do they calculate in our figures or
their own –I apprehend that they calculate in their own.
1310. And then convert those calculations into British money?—Precisely.
1311. You are conversant in Manchester with the advantages of new and
perfect machinery in enabling us to compete with other nations of the world; do
you not think that if our currency were decimalized it would act in the same way
as a labour-saving machine, and put us on a footing in that respect with France
and the United States?—I do. -
1312. Have you turned your attention at all to the advantages that would result
from the adoption of the decimal system by the saving of time in educating the
humbler classes 2–I apprehend that the simplicity of the decimal system would
give great advantages to young people in acquiring the rudiments of calculation.
1313. Have you considered what coins would be most convenient, or do you
merely take the broad view that the decimal system would be the best ?—I take
the broad view, and should be glad to see some simple system adopted.
1314. In the event of a change, such as I hope the Government contemplate,
do you apprehend that, in paying workmen, there would be any objection on their
part, when they once understood it —Not the least. In many cases, even at pre-
sent, we make our ordinary calculations upon decimal principles, and then have to
revert to the ordinary current system.
1315. I apprehend that many of our machine makers, and such as have to
make nice calculations, are compelled to resort to the decimal system —They do
So, principally ; in all our own estimates of costs our calculations are entirely
made upon the decimal system, and we convert them then into the ordinary
figures. -
1316. Have you any doubt, that if we adopt a decimal system it would not only
abridge labour, but diminish the chances of mistakes 7–I think so, decidedly; it
would be doubly beneficial.
1317. Do you consider that those you constantly associate with in Manchester
are favourable to the change 2–As a rule, certainly.
Kenneth
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 127
Renneth Dowie, Esq., was called in ; and Examined.
1318. Chairman.] ARE you a member of the Liverpool Chamber of Com-
merce?—I am.
1319. I believe that they have sent in a memorial recommending the adoption
of the decimal system 7–They have ; they addressed one to the President of the
Board of Trade.
1320. I believe that, in consequence of some directions you received from the
Chairman of this Committee, to make inquiries throughout Liverpool as to the
feelings, upon this subject, of parties in the habit of dealing in small sums, you,
with Mr. Heath, called upon several gentlemen with that view 2–Yes.
1321. Have the goodness to state the result of your inquiries 7–The question
we generally put to those upon whom we called, was with reference to the effect on
the poor by the alteration of the small coins, and the universal opinion appeared
to be, that owing to the competition, the value of the new coins would speedily
adjust itself to the quantity sold, and without loss to the purchaser.
1322. That is, that the quantity sold would be proportioned to the amount of
money received 2––Yes.
1323. What is your opinion of the decimal system generally 7—I think that it
would be a great boon to merchants, and to all people keeping accounts, and, in
fact, to every one who has occasion to reckon,
1324. Have you considered how the coins might be divided with the greatest
convenience to the public 2–My idea is that we should keep all the silver coins,
for the present at any rate, except the 4 d., and perhaps the 3 d. ; all the others
have a decimal relation to one another.
1325. Do you think that any dissatisfaction would be evinced or any great
inconvenience felt if the Government, by an Order in Council, directed the
present “farthing” to be called a “mil,” and the present “penny” “four mils,”
and that the old rimmed “penny” should be considered “five mils " ?—I have no
doubt that the lower orders might be a little annoyed at it at first, as they do
not like the introduction of new coins and foreign names.
1326. Supposing they chose to retain those names for their own arrangement,
inasmuch as it would be a loss of four per cent. on the small penny, if I may so
call it, but a gain of 20 per cent. upon the large penny, would they not so nearly
compensate each other as to prevent any great loss or gain to the public —I
think that the poorer classes would be gainers by it.
1327. You do not apprehend that any serious difficulty would arise if Govern-
ment chose to adopt that system instead of issuing new coins ?—I think not, if
we were to have a one-mil piece, a two-mil piece, a four-mil piece, and five-mil
piece, withdrawing the 3 d. and 4 d.
1328. You would probably think it advisable that the Government should mark
the number of mills upon each of the new coins P-Certainly.
1329. The public would probably soon discern that 25 mils were equivalent
to 6 d., and 50 mils to 1 S., and that they would pass for the same amounts P-
Just so. -
1330. How would you keep your books, in pounds, florins, and mils, or in
four columns 2–I would keep them in three columns, pounds, florins, and mils.
1331. Are you of opinion that the adopting the decimal systein would be almost
as valuable to us, and probably more so, as unany of our labour-saving machines 2
—I think that it would be very valuable in that point of view.
1332. If the poor man found that he received six four-mil pieces and a farthing
for 6 d. do you think he would be better Satisfied with it than with the five-mil
pieces —I think the tendency would be to please him.
1333. Do you think that half-farthings are wanted at all in Liverpool P-I think
not, from what I heard.
1334. Did you call on a great number of persons'--The number was not very
great, but some of them were extensively connected with retail shops. I under-
stood that one gentleman upon whom we called had 17 retail shops.
1335. Have you considered the effect that it would have upon the education of
K. Dowie, Esq.
16 June 1853.
o,66. Q 4 the
128 - MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
R. Dowie, Esq.
16 June 1853.
Mr. H. Kirkhum.
the rising generation ?–It certainly would make a knowledge of arithmetic by the
poorer classes more easily attainable, and they would become more numerously
acquainted with it, I should think.
1336. Do you think that it would be readily adopted by those who have been
educated in the pounds, shillings and pence system 2–I think that they would in
general be glad to do it.
1337. Would you change the names of the coins 2—I should prefer the use of
the term “mil’’ as helping to introduce the system, but four mils might be called
1 d., to distinguish them from the five mils. -
1338. I think you have already stated to us that the members of the Chamber
of Commerce were unanimous in considering the system beneficial 7–The special
committee was ; I was not present at the passing of the report.
1339. Those not present acquiesced in it, I presume 2—Yes.
1340. You heard of no objection to it?—I have no doubt that they were
unanimous. - .
1341. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Have you ever considered the desirability of adopting
the decimal system of weights and measures?—I have not given it any particular
consideration beyond the general one, that it must be an immense saving of labour
if introduced. *
1342. Do you think that the decimal system would be complete if we strictly
confined it to money?—Certainly not ; it would be desirable to go on and deci-
malize the weights and measures.
1343. Are you at all acquainted with the French system of weights and
measures 2—Not thoroughly.
1344. Do you think that it would be a great advantage to a town like Liverpool
if the weights and measures of all civilised nations were alike?—Certainly, it
would be a great advantage.
O
1345. If such an object could be accomplished, you think it would be a great
advantage 7–I do. g
1346. Do you think that there would be any insuperable objections with foreign
countries to the adoption of such a plan P-I fear the difficulties are very great.
1347. Are you aware that the French system obtains in four or five other coun-
tries 7–I am not aware of that.
1348. Chairman.] Do we understand you to say that, in your judgment, a
decimal system, if carried out, would be of great national importance, although
we might not all agree as to the exact mode of carrying it out 2—I think it would
be of very great advantage. -
Mr. Henry Kirkham, called in ; and Examined.
1349. Chairman.] WHAT are you ?—I am clerk and principal manager in
a tea and grocery establisliment at 23, Mathew-street, Liverpool, and reside at
No. 9, Roe-street, being one of the branch shops.
1350. We understand that you are extensively engaged in several shops in
Liverpool, some of them dealing with the more opulent class of people, and others
with the poorer classes; how many of each have you ?—About an equal number
of each. There are 14 shops altogether in Liverpool which are branches of the
establishment that I am connected with. ..
1351. Have you prepared tables showing the very small sums that are paid for
a given number of articles 7–I have.
[The Witness handed in the suljoined Tables.]
STATEMENT
‘Iauousno Moea Ioy 'p g Jo aſſeraae up uo “p #9 's g| '1% ulouſ, Ioy pied pub ‘saLogru 889 quanoq SIauloºsno 998
È z
e+→
№ • №
©
Q}， } } } （）№ B
OO I C \，) ：-） &O &C OD OD# 5
Ç9 | <\ N）) <\ Q3 CN) OO <>Co ºſ
S2, o
№， №8
O
►►
gº z
©§ 5
©$ $ $ $ $ $ $Q
C> | }}> | <\ <\ OC © }）Ē §
(t) =3
►
ºp
O
►+»
± | 1 ~ ı ı ı ı ı ſº9 >
}）;} →}， }）ță. Eſ
© | -.. | <\ <\ &o Oo <> º= g
! 4ºd E
© | | − | <wi | ► © §.È. ~
\！\，\>'， ºſº•{•«»
ÇÃO CO NO NO →
© ® <\ NO Q， ČO CO CO
© 22 № © © ®© © ©
è + c+ e+ e+ e+ e+ e+ e+
º cº • • ► vì cº º º ş.
\<!«！3!！！NÇſº
X &I W WI WI ſl S
3AOQū OI
"SøIoIQ.IV 989
40 S
| || — — — no S.
��* Nºſ， ſºº！}~ N（\|-�
~~ ~ ~ *}= +:- Nà•ș>}-- ~ ~ ~ ~ £ko~~ +- +）~ ~|~ sº ºsjø sº s}~Nþ• Nº!，Nº， Nº， №ſº ſº'º Nº №ſºſºkº ºſº ºº &= &- & + & - № sº ºſº
700d.,204T Jo aled Aoi e uſ ‘apel L. Kloooſé) Id.loud9 pub to Lou, up dous c 39 suogousual L s,ſooſ ouo Jo J.N.IWGILWLS
OO- |-��
Q& * Nº ºº º ſº º NO NO NO H + Nº 89 89 ſº º № NO CO NO - NO → → → → → → → No ！- co - ſ- ſo ſº co ſ- ， ） – ）Articles.
}}> |
©-Customers.
©| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | || ~ | ¡ 1 I ı ı ı ı ı ı ı ı ı ı ı ı i º
Tōſè Ņ25， №25， Sº Hº Gº № !！ !... ! ！ ！! !！ Cº № No !！ !！ NO NO NO → → CO → → → → No wo <ą – I cº oo → NO – ） – IPrice Paid.
*** ** ** ** ** ** ， № №łº ºkº （*• ► ► ► T & T ， ºko （， „S） （6 " Nº-|Nºſ- ºkº wºłº Nºł• Niº ſºț， №， №łº§§: "J. R.
©-�
OOº Nº № Cº CO NO + Hº N9 N9 ſ-º !！! Nº №. !！ NO → CO CO NO +→. +→ \S) – H → NO → → → → → → → → → → NO +→. +→. +→. +→.Articles.
rº-
! 4Customers.
OO *| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | − − | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ޺
~）.}）;�id
}}>| }， NO}）}）| | | }， }）| 4\， Q（x) }）ſ）ſ-4► ► ► NO ，Price Paid.
ſºkº ºkº Nºļ，ºŞÈŞ2;: $2°šº.k.k. 5:4-ſºſ，ºſºg: $2,$3）cº;– ！cºaecºş-cºšºcº:ººaeg）！!！nºg§.
QC)�
Q*** ** * * * * * Nº º. Nº ºn º Nº H - - No ~ Go No cº co → H- No - No - No co ND -- → → → No No ~ ~ No – cº No ~ - N9 - No © ® -- No - No ~ ~ − →Articles.
QUU
Q-Customers.
©| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | − − | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | − | | | | | | | | | | | | | | || º
~#~!, ºº, L.L.E.Rº º.º.ººº -- - - ſº so ſº º ~ - ſo º cº — no • <a oo º ſº ſo - - cº no cº cº no cº I - - cº cº vi ſº 5 cº ~ ~ + – – cº | ►Price Paid.
��*** ** ** ** ** * * *， *ſ， si- ſ- ºko （ ~ &- **）， §.- **）SE （SĘ №， ºº，Nºłº ºkº ºſº ->}= &{}= №ſ= Nºſº （ !！!！！№j，\，\！�ķo„Ļ ŠĶ $*
©•
º | ** ºº ^ ſº º ſº ſº º ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ No No - No ~ Nò ： ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ – wo ſº – ſo os – – – no no ſo ºo → N0 - - wo – wo – – – – wo – →Articles.
QUR
QOCustomers.
5| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | || | | | | | | − | | | | | − − | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | I º
~）.©�
ºs || 5: $2 $2 Cº 5： № № Nº ©. № № - ） ! I co so co ）Price Paid.
Nºſ- ºc{- \~\~ º） {-}~ eſco5:35-32.）, „Lºº º º; º ſº sº or o'， º.J.， J. i sº sº & • • • §§2 sºļi nº º so ºſº se cº ſº so sº:№ ºsº – º aesc ș.
|-
<]ºººººººººººººººººººº - º cº cº ſº to º cº – to ſo no − → N2 + no - - wo – wo – co ſº ſo ſo ſo ſo º co ſº wo – wo – º co — — \^ — — ^9 – cºArticles.
QJU
<!Customers.
5| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | || | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | − | | | | | | − − | | | | | | | | %
~）.
！ № № № No !！ !！ No to ſo oo < 1Ç9 № ND ：）•Price Paid.
NGķ- №!，NO!）.*>|<o ：>}çò№łº ºkºN9|ק§§§2$2$2'）;$2$3'） - º ºſº J.J. *） №ſſº º'; "-"） ſº ºſºg:º）- º cº ſo ºſº se do no cº º №ſſº ș.
Ē
\N')°°° °” º “º” º º ſº º co so ſº no cº ſº to º no cº ſo º ſº ſº ſo - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ co - wo – – – + cº no co – – – ſo no - ſº ſo no — no — noArticles.
QDU
<ųCustomers.
|-
ŠI ] © | | | | | | | | | | | | || | | | | | | © | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - ſº
} →�
* $2 tº $2 $2 √° √∞ $2 NO N9 No co <} no ，-Price Paid
}）;�， ，!• Nºl，•）,© © ® °C) +→. +→. +→.!|-�
��M9;N}}， \！\， № №ſ\S* \！\， ， ∈§ © ®;:§2 - ºſe ~& – ） – ſº se to ſºg: $2） （$2$3$2 º cº tº， to to №） – gege cº ſº ſe cº „Lş.
= -））-- **—º→
<！--º�
<ſ°°°° * ºº º ºs º cº so - to º cº no cº cº º cº ſo - wo – wo – ſo ſo – to - no cº – – – to – – to – – – – – – to to – to ſo no coArticle8.
Ōt - - - ----• -- .-… • • • •-， → •
}}>Customer8.
E! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ！ ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | I º
<!-§3 ºſº）!…!.!? "$2,92 º $ $ ſº ſº,gºlº3 | $3 $2&§2）: «» - ſ- ſº ſº to gº | ► ► ► ► ►o ſo ſ.） - № ~ | ° || ~ ~ ~ ~ !, ſº ſo ſo vi s.Price Paid.
"GHQWNIOO TWINIOSHOI NO HGHLLIWWOO J.OGITGIS
6z I




'99'O
AoH ‘Z981
‘p # 3 - - - - -
‘p f 's I # 3 - - -
2
- 25e.Iaay
Joy pios SalogIt, ason, qumoub alſ.I.
00? - º - *- -> me - * = pIOS sologie Jo Iaquin N
093 * * tº tº- e- as - * tº tº- slauſo, Su O
'098I Kibnubſ u18 I
3 tºn - 4- - - &6 & 9?
tº - § 2, £º º - tº- - Gé & 4 Ž9.
007 g - - - - - “ “ P&
# º * - º- {- &&. # º gº : . - - º . Gl
# - tº e - - - 64 ſº º - 8
# - - - - tº # # - - - - - “ “ gl
º 98 g a s - º- º - tº º {& 9I
I - - - - - ( & 08 9 - - - - - “ “
# I - - - - {& 6
º 33 # 9 - - - - - 48 “ &
# I - - - qu soloſ).It ## #9 - - - - 2Aoqū SøIoI310 &
‘p ‘p
* |
8 g I 96 9 & I 60I 6 I I 601 8 II - 68
I — — . . I LLI # g – — I 811 # 9 — — z i ge
# - - | I 9LI I — — . I | LII I — — ; ;
* – I – # QEI z – - Q || 9 II a — — 3 L9.
g – — 9. fºLI # O I – I QII # - - 3 99.
t; I – . #: # - - I #II I — — I gg
*s ºr cº-º cº- º I g — – 8 9 II tº ex — —
8 * - I 083 & I – g IAI # g : - - * & II ;: - * ; º
g 3. 63% # z – — º, OLI # I — — I III # * – – ;
* 9 — - I 83% # & — — º, 69'I § F : - - g OII I — — : º
g * - I Lzz | # & — – I 89 I # g – — 9. 60I # I — – I og
8 I 9&z # - – - | I | 191 I — — . I 80L | # 6 - - 6;
z – — I 933 9 I - £ 99 I I — — 3 | LOI I – — 3 8%
- - I #33 OI – — 9. Q9I 6 — - 9 90I I — — i Lif
L - & 83% z - - || I | #91 L I - || 3 || 90L z – – gy
§ - I I zag | #g - - I | 89 I z - - I | #OL I – . g;
8 – & Izz # y – – a 39L | ## - - || 8 80I i – – | | | #
- q : - & ogg | # 1 - - f I9L | { z - - I ZOI # — — # £5.
#3 – — I 6I& I — — I 09.I 9 L - | # IOI I — – I 3}
# & 816 I — — . I 6qI | # z - - I 00I # - - || 2: If
# — — & || LI3. g — — 3 | 89 [ 9 3 - 9 | 66 † — – C Ojº
# = - I 916 || 20I I - & L9 I I — — I 86 I — - ; 68
#g — — I gTz # - I - f 99 I I — — I L6 # I — — I 89
§ 6 | p Ig | # - - - I QQ I z - - I 96 I — — I 18
# I I 3 || 9 I? I — — i #g| | # I - - I Q6 I — — 99.
# I - I || 2 Iz # I - - I 89 [ # I — – I #6 z - - I 99.
I - - 3 || II& z – — I 39 I z - - I 96 # 3 - - I #9
I — – I olz #3 – — I Ig I z – - I &6 # I — – & 88
† — — a 603 || # I - - I 0g I | # I — - 3 I6 9 — — I :
E - - a 80a | # I - - I 65 I I — — & 06 I — – 9 I9
; I - 9. 10& # 3 - - & 8; I #. * - & 68 # I — – : 08
# & - I 90& I — — I ºf I | # 8 - - 9 || 88 I — - I 6%
# - gog | | I - - || 6 || 971 9 z – y | 18 # 8 - - || 2 || 8%
# 1 - — I +0& f - - - I gº I z – – I 98 * g – – L3
g – I goz | {- - - I ##I I — - I 98 # I — – 3. 9%
} sms tº I z03 || - 3 - - I gł'L | # I — — 3 || #8 # — — — 3 93
& - I ioz #1 - - I &#I | { I - - I | 88 I — - L $2.
tº – 9 || 006 || 3 - - 3 If I I — - I 38 # 3 – — I §:
tº - - 8 ||66|| | | 9 l - # | OFL | # I - - & | 18 I — – ; 33
# I — — I 861 | #6 - - || 8 | 681 | # 3 - - || 6 || 08 || #- - - || 1 | tº
#! I 16|| | | | T - I 88L | #3 - - 3 || 6L # — — — 03
sºms - I 96L | # 3 - - 9. LGI | # 1 - - * | 8. 2 - - I 6 I
* * : 9 g61 | I - - I 98.I 8 — - I LL # g – — : 8L
& — - I #61 g — — 9 gg I # 8 — — & | 9A 9 - - I LI
# — — — & | 661 | #6 1 - | * | *gi ig 1 - || 8 |gt | #3 – T | 6 || 3:
# - - - | | 36|| | f : - - 8 gg I | # I - - I | #2 # I - - 9. QI
# I 16I 6 - - I 38L 3 - - I | 8L 3 - - p
#; I I I 06L | # 3 - - I I9I g — — I | 3L # I — - I º
# ams - & | 681 | . I - - I 08:I 9 - - 3 IL 3 – - I #
6 - - 8 || 881 | #t I - 3 6&I # - - - I 0L # 8 – — I º
I I | 181 8 - - 3. 8&I 9. - - I 69 # I I – G §:
* 6 - | g 981 | . I - - || 6 | 161 | # I - - I 89 9 - - I |
t?' I - & g8! | f = - - I 9&I z – — I | L9 3 – - } 's
#3 – — | | *SI #3 - - I gz.I # I - - I 99 # I — — I L
# I — — I g8! | # 6 - - || 1 | yet & - - || 1 |99 || | I - & 9
I I – | | | | * : : | : I — — ..] I | #9 | #z - - || 3 | 9
ºs - . . . . . . I r 3I I - - I | 89 I — -
t; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; :
...' ... ." I 8LL | #8 - - 3 6II tº — — ; § ;: I | | || 3
p ‘s "p 's eaſºn a sº º - I % I
3. p 's 3. ‘p 's 3:
P- 2, O 2. *, - - - -
annouv | ##| ##! . ##| ## ; : | g : P-2 || @ 2
3. E. S 5. quinouſy 5. E. § E. ‘qumoury # E § 5 “qumoury 3. # ă É
§ 3 ; ; # §§ É Ā ## É ## g :
S, ºf S, * g | 3 g * * | * : § 3 ; # 3
e --> | * * S, 3 S, O 3 o
wº-to s" tº
*IHAL GIHO:Hºſºſ NGIXIVL (IONGICIIASI IO SQLI.ſ.) NIW O8 l

‘8981 aunſ 91
*oºtty H J W
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 13,
1352. How did you arrive at such data ?—By noting down 6Very Customer as Mr. H. Kirkham.
they came into the shop, the number of articles they purchased, and the amount ill
of money they paid for those articles. 16 June 1853.
1353. Within what period 2–A day was devoted to each statement. One was
made out about 10 years ago, and the other three years ago.
1354. Have you made any inquiries of a similar description within the last
week or so 2–Those statements are applicable to the present time.
1354*. If parties buying such small articles as appear upon the face of those
documents you have handed in were made fully aware that 6d. would represent
25 mils instead of 24 farthings, do you apprehend any difficulty on their part —I
do not think that there would be, as regards the amount; there might be some diffi-
culty as to the names.
1355. What name would you prefer?—I should prefer the retention of the
term “farthing.” * * -
1356. Supposing the term “mill " to be used in accounts, do you not think that
the people would still look upon it as a farthing, and call it so?—I think they
would ; and, therefore, it would be better probably to change the name.
1357. From the constant fluctuation there is in the price of articles, of articles
consumed by the poor, such as tea, sugar and coffee, is there any difficulty in
assimilating the quantity sold to the value of the money received 7–Not at all.
* *
1358. The poorer classes are intelligent enough to know that the quantity must
be apportioned to the amount of money they pay ?—The weight is always the
same ; but as the market fluctuates, the price, of course, is increased or diminished.
1359. You increase the price, and not diminish the quantity of the article?—
The quantity of the article always remains the same.
1360. If you kept your books on the decimal system, would it or would it not be
a great saving of labour to you?--I do not think that it would save us much
labour; it would be more simple when better understood.
1361. Would it decrease the chance of mistake —I think it might.
1362. Assuming that the sovereign be divided into 1,000 parts or mils, the
half-sovereign into 500, the crown into 250, the half-crown into 125, the florin
into loo, the shilling into 50, and the sixpence into 25, how would you arrange
the copper coins, so as not inconveniently to increase the number of them, and
yet to facilitate the operations of the poor?—I see no difficulty in that arrange-
ment down to sixpence, although I think that the crown-piece might almost be
dispensed with ; below the sixpence, I would entirely do away with the three-
pence and fourpence. I would issue the one mil or farthing, the two mils or
halfpenny, and the four mils or penny, which is a very important coin in
dealing ; the five-mill piece is perhaps not altogether necessary, but I would
suggest the issue of a two-penny haifoenny piece or 10 mils.
1363. Should that be of silver or copper ?—A mixed metal, silver and copper;
if made of silver only, it would be objectionable, on account of the small size, as
is the case with the three-penny piece at the present time.
1364. In your business, do you require half-farthings or mils 7–Not at all.
1365. Are they used at all in Liverpool?—I should say not.
1366. Have you, generally speaking, a sufficient number of farthings?—There is
a very great deficiency.
1367. I think I understand that you would prefer the change of names, although
the poor might choose to continue the names of “farthing,” “halfpenny,” and
“penny”?—I think the sixpenny piece would not do if you retained the name of
“farthing,” and should prefer that of quarter-florin, as it would be difficult to
convince them that 25 farthings were sixpence; nor would it be desirable to have
the five-mil piece to be called one penny, inasmuch as for the sixpenny piece they
would naturally expect six penny pieces, whatever the value of the penny might
be, and the sixpence would only pass in exchange for five five-mil pieces.
1368. If the smallest denomination of coin were distinctly marked upon each
piece, from one mil upwards, would the poor at once be able to appreciate its
value, whether you adopt the name of “farthing” or “mil”?—I think so.
1369. Taking into consideration the difficulties that might arise on the
one hand, and on the other the advantages that would result, is it your
opinion that if the contemplated change took place there would be a fail. º
O.66. R 2 O
132 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. H. Kirkham.
16 June 1853.
of gain to the public 2–I think that the difficulties in the first instance would not
be so great or serious but that they would soon be overcome.
1370. You probably have not considered the difficulty as to bridge and other
tolls established by Act of Parliament?—I have not; I have considered, to a certain
extent, the alterations in duty, such as the present reduction of 4d. per lb. on tea,
and the further contemplated reduction on that article. I think that the five-mil
piece would interfere with the plan at present laid down by Act of Parliament for
the payment of duties.
1371. Probably that might be met by what one may call a give-and-take
system, increasing one duty and diminishing another?—It might; there would
ultimately be no difficulty in paying the duty, inasmuch as at present we never
pay fractional parts; in paying duty we are always charged by the Customs 1 d, if
there be a fraction of ; d. or 3 d.
1372. Do you keep your accounts in less coins than 1 d. 2–Not in the office,
but in the shops we do.
1373. Do you ever open accounts with the poor?—We do not.
1374. Mr. Kinnaird.] Is it principally the labouring classes who attend your
shops ?—From the two statements that I have submitted to the Committee, it will
appear that they are principally porters, or labourers connected with all branches
of trade; masons, bricklayers, and so on, and also parties who get a day's work
where they can.
1375. Mr. J. B. Smith..] By the statement that you have delivered in, I see that
to 230 customers you sold 400 articles, of the total value of 4!. 1s. 4d., or an
average of 23d, each article; what articles are comprised in that ?–Tea, coffee,
cocoa, spices of various kinds, sugars, soap, candles, soda, and all common articles
of consumption, and tobacco and snuff at some of our shops.
1376. If a person buys an article, the price of which comes to a half-farthing,
how do you dispose of it?—It is always charged as a farthing. At present the
prices are not so low as to make it requisite to descend so low ; we never make
up less than a quarter of an ounce of any article.
1377. Do you sell so small a quantity as half an ounce of tea —Yes.
1378. The duty on tea having been reduced 4 d. per lb., what advantage is
derived by the buyer of half an ounce 2—At the present time, on account of the
advance in the market, and principally on account of the unsettled state of China,
the advantage would be very trifling, not more than 2 d. per lb. in any instance.
It has been stated that the public would reap no benefit by the reduction, as the
4 d. would go into the pockets of the merchant and the dealer; but that is a very
false statement, and I have no doubt intentionally made, the real cause being the
disturbed state of China.
1379. Assuming that there were no disturbances in China, and that the 4 d.
per ib. were taken off tea, what advantage would the purchaser of half an ounce
reap from that reduction ?–Not any ; customers of not less than an ounce of tea
only would derive a benefit, except that they might get a little better quality for
their money.
1380. Is it not a great disadvantage with persons buying small quantities of
any article that there are generally fractions of a farthing?—A very great dis-
advantage. -
1381. But a great advantage goes to the shopkeeper?—Yes, except that we
must have a great deal of extra labour for it, which entails upon us more
expense.
1382. Would it not be a great advantage to the purchasers of those small
articles to have a coin of a less denomination than a farthing?—I think not; it
would lead them into a still worse practice than they pursue at present ; they would
become more improvident, and would be induced to buy more from hand to mouth
than they do now, and by that means suffer.
1383. If we had a half-farthing, do you think that people would be induced to
buy articles costing less than 2, d. on an average 2–Yes; and they would descend
into the very small hucksters’ shops, where they would be accommodated with
those very low fractional parts, but would get an article of not half the value of
that which they would purchase in the larger establishments.
1384. Do you conceive that the purchasers of those small articles are, generally
speaking, improvident people?—A good many of them are.
1385. Then
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 133
1385. Then you do not see any advantage in the use of half-farthings 7–Rather
a disadvantage.
1386. Do you make use of them —Never.
1387. When a person comes to purchase an article which comes to rather
less than a farthing, do you on any occasion give him any extra quantity of the
article?—We never make up anything that comes to less than a farthing; a quarter
of an ounce of 3 d. tea would be three-farthings, although at the present time we
have tea that we sell at 2 d. If a person wanted to buy a quarter of an ounce,
we should not sell him the 2 d. tea, which would leave a fraction; but if he asked
for half an ounce, we should sell him that at 2 # d., which would be 1 } d., with-
out any fraction.
1388. Those persons who buy half an ounce of tea derive no benefit from the
reduction in the duty 2–They do not from the present small reduction, but they
will ultimately. - -
1389. When the reduction amounts to 1 s. 4d. per lb. they would benefit to the
extent of a halfpenny ?—Certainly. In my opinion, the great mistake in making
any alteration in duties is in taking a small amount off a number of articles rather
than a large slice off one article. By taking off a small amount, say 4 d. a pound
on tea, you cannot, if it advances anything at all in the market, reduce the price
of so small a quantity as an ounce; if a large amount were taken off one article,
the public would reap the benefit.
1390. And at the same time the consumption would probably very much
increase ?—No doubt.
1391. As the purchasers of small quantities of tea derive no benefit from a
reduction of the duty, the consumption will not increase?—Not much.
1392. You do not look for any large increase in the consumption of tea until
the duty is further reduced 2–No.
1393. So far as your experience goes, has that been the case with sugar —
Sugar is rather a different article to tea, as the quantity bought is so very much
larger ; a working man's wife will not buy more than two ounces of tea in the
week, whereas she will buy two or three pounds of sugar.
1394. Do you find, as the reduction in the duty on sugar goes on, that the con-
sumption is increasing —Not so much as it would have done if the reduction in
the duty had taken place at once. If it had been reduced to the West Indian
produce of 1 os., the change would have been immense, as it would have brought
the price of sugar down 1 d. per lb. at once, and the loss to the revenue would
have been made up by the extra quantity sold.
1395. Are you not compelled to make changes to accommodate the quantity
and the value of the article to the money you receive, be that money what it may ?
—The quality of the article has to be changed in some instances almost weekly,
according to the fluctuations of the trade. That remark applies particularly to
the article of sugar, on which the profit is so very small, that if the market price
goes up 1 s. per cwt., we are compelled to sell an article of a shade worse colour.
If the poor people go to the very low shops, they get an inferior article for the
same amount as they pay at the best shops. $
1396. In the event of the article being of rather more value than one farthing,
the turn would be in favour of the poor man 7–Just so. -
1397. Mr. Kinnaird.] Have you considered the decimal coinage with reference
to facilitating the keeping of accounts –I think it would simplify accounts very
much.
1398. Have you formed any opinion as to whether the change of coinage and
the change of names would be an inconvenience to the working classes 2—I think
not ; they might have an objection to the change. -
1399. But no objection, you think, that would not soon yield to experience?—
I think it would soon be got over. *
1400. I understand that you would be very glad if this change were adopted ?
—I should have no objection to it at all.
1401. Chairman.] Do the country people deal much in farthings when they
come to your shop —Not at all. t
1402. Have they any objection to them 2–Yes; if we offer them a farthing they
will not take it.
Mr. H. Kirkham.
16 June 1853.
o.66. R 3 1403. Do
134 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. H. Kirkham.
16 June 1853.
C. H. Gregory,
Esq.
as gradients and run of water,
1403. Do you think that a coin of less value than a mil would be of any use
to the poor ?—It is not at all desirable. ſº
1404. Mr. Kinnaird..] Do they often prefer losing the farthing to taking it?—
They would not lose it; they take care we lost it, for they would not give it
us. In casting up a quantity of goods which would come to 5s. 73d. they would
take off the halfpenny, saying “we are not going to give you the halfpenny.”
They seem more rejoiced at getting that halfpenny than if it were a larger
amount in another way. -
1405. Mr. J. B. Smith..] I presume it is only in larger transactions that the
country people decline to pay the farthing?—Even the wife of a poor working
man in the country only earning his 10s. a week would not think of buying less
than 2s. or 3s. worth of goods; in fact, she buys her week's supply.
1406. Chairman.] Do you think that that prevails in the country shops also
—To a great extent.
1407. Mr. Kinnaird.] That makes Saturday with you a busy day ?—It does.
1408. Chairman.] Were the figures that you have put in taken on a Saturday !
—They were not, -
Charles Hutton Gregory, Esq., called in; and Examined.
1409. Chairman.] I BELIEVE you are a Civil Engineer 2—I am.
141 o. Your pursuits in life naturally lead you to consider what is the easiest
mode of making calculations and of keeping accounts ; in your opinion, what
would be the advantages attending the adoption of a decimal coinage, in contra-
distinction to our present system 2–I think the advantages of the change would
be very great in every way; the present divisions of money are a constant source
of error, and the calculations dependent upon them occupy much longer time than
would be necessary with a decimal coinage. I should particularly hail the intro-
duction of a decimal coinage, because I expect that it would naturally be fol-
lowed by a decimal system of weights and measures, which I believe almost all
people who are largely engaged in the operative and constructive arts would be
very glad to see.
1411. But inasmuch as our present inquiry is necessarily confined to decima-
lizing the coinage, do you not think that if we accomplish that end it would
enable the country more readily to fall into a system of decimal weights and
measures 2–I think it would be a very important step in the right direction, and
it would certainly facilitate the great improvement to which you have alluded.
1412. Have you turned your attention to the facility of keeping books, and the
advantages that would result from a decrease of mistakes 3–In the business
connected with my profession, there are necessarily very large calculations in the
way of estimates, and measurements, and certificates for the payment of con-
tractors and workmen; and I have do doubt whatever, that the introduction of the
decimal system would very much diminish the errors to which those calculations
are subject, and that the saving of time would be very considerable to all parties
engaged in such accounts. I may state, that the inconvenience of the present
complicated system of division, both of coinage and measures, is so great, that I,
in common with many others, have frequently adopted an arbitrary and limited
decimal system; for example, in working out large quantities of any unit, the
cost of which may be pounds, with shillings and pence, or shillings with pence,
we reduce the small coin to the decimal of the larger one, work out the calcula-
tions upon that temporary decimal system, and then reduce the decimals of the
results back again to shillings and pence. There are two well-known instances in
which a decimal system has already been adopted by engineers, the measuring
chain, which is divided into 100 links, and the levelling staff, the feet of which
are divided into tenths; the cause of the adoption of the last, which is of more
recent date, being the numerous errors to which the duodecimal system is subject,
the time which it involves, and the serious results of errors in levels as affecting
Parliamentary investigations, or as affecting great questions of construction, such
1413. You
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COIN AGE. 135
1413. You must of course employ a great number of men in the works
which you superintend ; in carrying on your business, do you think that any diffi-
culty would arise with the men as regards the payment to them of their wages in
decimal coinage?—-At first, the working men would perhaps in many instances
object to the system, but I think that objection would be very short lived. I have
found that working men have generally very great facility at accounts, and that
men who cannot read or write will keep, by some rule of their own, the accounts
of their wages with the utmost precision, working out the fractions of days, ac-
cording to the rate of so many shillings and so many pence, in such a way that
they will always correct any inaccuracies in the time-keeper’s book. The
accounts of the working man are so mixed up with his interests, that he neces-
sarily becomes a tolerably good accountant; and my conviction is, that as soon as
he finds the time and trouble which the decimal system will save him, he will be
glad of the change, although he might have slightly objected to its first intro-
duction.
1414. Assuming that 25 mils represented the present sixpence, probably a little
explanation would induce them to acquiesce willingly in the alteration ?–Clearly
so ; and I believe that in a very short time the working men of England would
become habituated to the change ; that a very few pay days would clearly explain
to them the equivalent which they would receive in the new coinage, and a few
journeys to the shop would show them practically the value of the new coinage;
and consequently the difficulty with the working men would be very transitory, and
very easily conquered. º
1415. Are you of opinion that we have, in general estimation, greatly under-
rated the shrewdness and sharpness of the labouring classes 2–Decidedly. My in-
tercourse with them has given me a very high opinion of their intelligence for the
most part ; I allude particularly to the operative classes. -
1416. Mr. Kinnaird..] Your experience is not confined to mechanics, but
extends to the other working classes 2–Yes, my experience extends largely to the
employment of navigators, and although in very many respects their intelligence is
far below that of the mechanical operatives, their facility at accounts is quite as
great.
1417. Chairman.] Have you thought what effect would be produced upon
education by a more general adoption in our schools of the decimal system 2–It
is evident to me that the adoption of the decimal system, by saving an enormous
amount of time which is occupied in teaching the ordinary arithmetic according
to the present system, would leave very much more time for the education
of all classes in other branches of knowledge which would be useful to them.
The economy in education would be perhaps as great, or nearly so, as the economy
in accounts.
1418. How would you divide the money of account and the money of exchange,
assuming that the sovereign be divided into 1,000 parts, the florin into 100, the
shilling into 50, the sixpence into 25, and that they each had marked upon them
the number of mils or farthings they represented 7–I have not considered in detail
the monetary working of the decimal coinage, as my observations apply princi-
pally to the advantages which would be derived from any decimal system, and I
am not therefore prepared to give an opinion as to whether the Sovereign ought to
be adopted as the starting point, or the farthing. I think that either would be a
very great advantage, and I must leave it for those who are better acquainted
with the monetary system than myself to say which would be attended with the
least inconvenience.
1419. You have probably not considered the nomenclature of the coins 2–
Only to this extent, that I would give such names to the divisions of coins as
should not be confounded with the divisions of measures, or which should not be
general names; I would not adopt such terms as “cent " and “mil,” because
those, I think, ought to be general names, and ought not to be applied to money
alone. -
1420. What would you substitute for the words “cent " and “mil’?—
I have heard of such a suggestion as retaining the name of “farthing ” for
the “mil,” although slightly altered in value, and using the old English word
“groat” for the “cent,” and I confess I think these would be preferable to the
other names suggested.
C. H. Gregory,
Esq.
16 June. 1853.
o.66. R 4 - 1421. Are
136 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
C. H. Gregory,
16
Esq.
June 1853.
1421. Are you not aware that a “groat,” in most parts of Her Majesty's
dominions, is considered to be of the value of 4 d. 7–I know that the four-penny
piece is called a “groat,” but I believe I am right in supposing that the value of
the “groat” has changed several times; I think that the numerical value, as com-
pared with the smallest coin, or the decimal value as compared with the largest
coin, ought to be marked upon the several coins; and I should certainly think
it undesirable to carry the division of the coin so low as in France, where a centime
is very little used, except upon paper; and indeed I have only seen a centime
as a curiosity; the sou is nearly equivalent to the English halfpenny, being the
smallest coin in common currency in France, so far as my knowledge goes. The
half-sou is in frequent circulation in Belgium.
1422. Have you considered how we may get over the difficulty that may
arise with regard to tolls established by Act of Parliament?—I am induced
to think that in many cases, I might say in most cases, the owners of these
tolls would not be injured, excepting for a very short time, by the adoption of the
nearest approximate amount of the new coinage to the present penny. I am led
to this conclusion by the observation, that where there are large numbers con-
cerned, which generally is the case with a low toll, lowering the toll often
produces an increase in number, which is, in fact, a compensation.
1423. Probably you think that the same result would follow as regards the
penny postage-stamp 2—I do ; I think the diminished value of the coin used as
a substitute for the penny would induce people to value it less, and sometimes
write a letter where now they would not think it worth while to spend a penny;
and my belief is, that the revenue would not permanently suffer by the reduction
which would be caused in the value of the penny postage-stamp.
1424. Have you considered whether, if Government issued a proclamation, or
an Order in Council, declaring that a halfpenny should be two mils, a penny
four mils, and that the old rimmed penny should be considered five mils, the
increased value of the larger penny would not afford a compensation for the
decreased value of the small penny ?—I think it would be so on the whole; and
I do not anticipate any very serious loss or inconvenience by such a change, as
there are very few people who are continually holders of any very large quantity
of copper coin.
1425. Have you any idea how much might be held by any one person at any
one time – I cannot say.
1426. Probably the largest quantity would be in the hands of gentlemen who
have to pay workmen —Yes, and they are not constant holders of it; they send
to the shopkeepers or to others for it. I do not think that a large quantity of
copper coin is ever lying in the hands of any one person, but that it accumulates
in the hands of shopkeepers, who are glad to get rid of it; and parties who
temporarily require copper coins to pay their workmen, retain it only for a short.
time, and it then passes into the hands of their workmen.
1427. If the course I have suggested were adopted, the quantity of copper
held by an individual would be so small, that by the adoption of the decimal
system he would, in the end, probably be a gainer P-There would certainly
be some few persons who would meet with a loss, but it would be inconsider-
able, that I do not think any public objection would be entertained to it on that
SCOre.
1428. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Have you had any professional engagement in France?
—I have had, and have at the present time.
1429. In all cases do you make your calculations by the French decimal
system of money and measures?—ln all the engagements I have in France, or in
reference to foreign countries, I use entirely the French decimal system, both as
to money and measures; and the experience I have had of its use has very
greatly increased the desire which I have to see so good a system introduced into
England.
1430. Do you think it would be possible to adopt the French system of weights
and measures without much inconvenience in this country 2—I am not prepared
to speak accurately as to the amount of inconvenience which might arise from the
absolute adoption of the French metrical system as it now stands. Some incon-
venience, undoubtedly, there would be; and I do not feel prepared at the present
moment
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 137
moment to give an opinion, which I should like to have considered as a definite
one, as to whether or not that system could be adopted without change; but as
far as I have considered the question, I confess that my feeling would be, if possi-
ble, to introduce the French metrical system entirely ; it is founded upon good
data, and works well; and it would have the advantage of giving us a community
of measures not only with France, but with several countries of the Continent
which have adopted that system.
1431. In the preparation of your estimates for works in France and in those
countries, have you found the adoption of the French system of money, weights
and measures much easier than the English 7–Decidedly so ; and I find that
estimates and calculations as to engineering works are worked out very much more
rapidly, and with very much less liability to error than by the English system.
1432. Do you know whether the French system is adopted in other countries
than France;—I know that the French metrical system is adopted in Belgium,
Switzerland and Portugal, and I am told that it is also adopted in Sardinia,
Spain and Modena.
1433. Do you think it would be a great advantage if it were possible to adopt
an universal system of weights and measures in the civilised countries of the
world !—I think it would be a great advantage, and that the advantage of that
community of system would go very far to outweigh the inconvenience which it
might be deemed would arise from an entire change of all measures now in use
in England ; so much so, that, as far as my present feeling goes, although further
consideration might modify it, I think I would rather have the French metrical
system introduced entirely into England.
1434. Would there be much difficulty in converting the French measures into
English measures —No ; in the transition State, before men had forgotten to work
with the old measures and learned to work with the new ones, they could carry
about with them multipliers which would convert the old measure into the new,
and artisans would probably carry rules such as I continually carry myself, having
the divisions of length marked according to two different systems, that is on one
edge the English measure, and on the other edge the French measure, and which
would become not only a rule, but a table by which one measure would at sight be
converted into the other. Ultimately the rules of conversion would be unnecessary,
because persons would get into the habit of working and thinking in the new
measure; I found no difficulty, after having had but a very short experience, in
working and thinking in the French measures.
Mr. Jacob Abraham Franklin, called in ; and Examined.
1435. Chairman.] WHAT is your address and occupation ?—I am a Pro-
ºfessional Auditor and Public Accountant, residing at No. 29, Throgmorton-street,
City.
1436. I believe you were, at an early period in life, engaged in the instruction
of youth –Yes, as an amateur.
1437. You of course have considered the subject of the advantages or dis-
advantages attending the adoption of a decimal coinage 2—I have.
1438. What is your opinion upon the subject, in the event of its being con-
sidered desirable to adopt it in England 3–It would afford great advantages, and
very great facilities to all parties concerned.
1439. You are the author, I believe, of some tables, having reference to a
deciinal system?—I am.
1440. Is there any portion of those tables which you desire to place upon our
Minutes ?—Those portions of the book which relate to the coinage would be use-
ful, and in the introduction there is an explanation of the decimal system,
comparing it with the existing one.
1441. Will you have the goodness to furnish us, at your earliest convenience,
with such tables as you think it necessary to append to the evidence 7–I will do
so ; I have proceeded, to some extent, on the assumption that the new system
might not be made compulsory at once, but that the existing system and the
decimal system might exist concurrently.
C. H. Gregory,
Esq.
16 June 1853.
Mr.
J. A. Franklin.
0.66. S 1442. Having
138 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
$ir.
J. A. Franklin.
"-------
16 June 1853.
1442. Having paid some attention to the subject of education, do you think that
the adoption of a decimal system in our schools would abridge the labour of the
pupils, and enable those who now occupy a great deal of time on our pounds,
shillings and pence system, to devote that time to other studies, that would be
useful to them in after life 3–A very considerable portion of their time.
1443. Have you any idea what saving of time it would effect 2–It is not
recently that I have been actually engaged in teaching; but I should think that
it might be easily deduced from the school routine painted upon boards usually
found in our pnblic schools, showing the occupation of time upon arithmetic,
and other subjects; a very large proportion of the time is occupied upon arith-
metIC. - -
1444. Do you consider that it would save a great deal of labout and com-
plicated calculation, and a great many figures?—No doubt of it; I am accustomed
now to make large calculations, and I do so by decimals, converting the results
afterwards into the present notation.
1445. In interest accounts, persons are now in the habit of referring to tables;
are you of opinion that under the new system it might be done as readily with
the pen as by reference to the tables?—It might be done very quickly.
1446. So as almost to supersede the use of interest tables with those who
are conversant with decimals?—Interest tables will always be useful as ready-
reckoners, or to test the accuracy of calculations made, but it would be exceedingiv
easy to make those calculations with the pen. I would not go to the extent of
saying that it would supersede interest tables.
1447. Have you turned your attention to the question of what coins would give
the greatest facility to our commercial transactions 2—i have. *...
1448. What do you think that our money of account should be 2–The sove-
reign, as the starting point, divided into 1,000ths, having two groups of figures, as
in the French system ; one representing the pound or sovereign and its multiples,
and the other the 1,000ths, consisting of three columns of figures.
1449. Sir W. Clay.] Have you formed any opinion as to what would be the
convenient coins of circulation –I would retain, first, the sovereign and half-
sovereign.
1450. Would you descend lower in the gold coins?
venient to have a five-shilling piece in gold.
1451. The Committee have had evidence as to inconveniences with respect to
coinage, and with respect to loss by abrasion which would attend the use of 5 s.
gold pieces; do you think that the conveniences of a gold piece of the value of
5s. would be sufficient to counterbalance those inconveniences 2—I have under-
stood that the American gold dollar is found a useful coin, and we have ourselves
had the quarter-guinea.
1452. Would you retain the silver crown -I have no objection to the silver
crown ; our silver coins are tokens.
1453, Are not the crowns found so inconvenient in use as to get very little into
circulation ?—Very inconvenient.
1454. Would you retain the half-crown –I have no objection to it; it is found
convenient at present. -
1455. And the florin 7—I consider that a necessary coin ; but I object to the
name, as being aiready appropriated in Europe to other coins of different
values.
1456. Is not the well-known florin of Holland and Flanders, and a part of
Germany, of nearly equal value to the English florin –The florin of Holland is
worth about 20 d., whereas the English florin is worth 24 d.
1457. Would you retain the 1 s. 7–I should, decidedly.
1458. Would you retain the 6 d. ?–I would. In Saying that I would decidedly
retain the 1 s. and 6 d., I do so with reference to their existence at present, and
because I would make as few violent changes as possible; I do not know that
they would be actually needful at some future period.
1459. What coins do you consider convenient below the 6 d. as coins of cir-
culation ?—The looth part of a pound.
1460. Ten mil?—Ten miſs. A
1461. Of what metal do you think that that coin should be made –Silver.
1462. Would
I think it might be con-
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 139
/
1462. Would it not be inconveniently small ?—It need not be much smaller
than the existing 3 d. piece, and might, if needful, be still further alloyed. The
Americans have just further alloyed their small silver coinage.
1463. What coins would, in your opinion, be convenient below the 10-mil
piece 2—Nothing in silver, but in copper the 1,000th part of the pound.
1464. Would you not retain the two-mil piece, three-mil piece, four-mil
piece, or five-mil piece —For the same reason that I would retain the 1s, and 6d.
I would have a five-mil piece in copper.
1465. And the four-mil piece 7–We cannot at once throw the 1d. Out of cir-
lation.
1466. Chairman.] The four-mil piece, I believe, would be nearer the present
1d. than any other we can adopt?—It would.
1467. You do not, I presume, see any objection to the binary system as regards
the change in making up particular sums, but you would discard it in money of
account 7–In money of account it would not be needful. You would have to
provide for the existing coins, and it would be necessary to issue a two-mil piece
in addition to those I have mentioned.
1468. You would have one-mil, two-mil and four-mil pieces?—One-mil, two
mil, and five-mil pieces.
1469. A suggestion has been made that the large I d. might be called a five-
mil piece — I have not fully considered that subject, but I should suppose that it
would be better to issue new coins for the five-mil pieces.
The JWitness subsequently put in the following scheme of Coinage under the Decimal
- System :
(The items between brackets are regarded as useful, but not necessary.)
Gold.
Sov. = 1,000 milles - - ¥ sov. = 500 milles - - [300 or 250 milles.]
SILVER.
[200 milles.] 100 milles. 50 milles. [30 milles.] 20 milles. 10 milles.
Existing coins tolerated :-Crown = 250 milles - - crown = 125 milles
6 pence = 25 milles.
CoPPER.
5 milles. [3 milles.] 2 milles. 1 mille.
Existing coins tolerated :-Penny; 6 make 25 milles - Halfpenny; 12 make 25 milles.
The 350 or 250-mille piece would be only of the size of the old quarter-guinea, or of the
existing gold dollar of the United States. Besides being a convenient multiple in point of
value, it might (if necessary) be expedient to legalise such a coin with reference to the pos-
sible relative supplies of gold and silver. Whether it could be at all times economically
issued and maintained in circulation, are questions for the Mint authorities. -
The penny, halfpenny, and farthing, although they remain extant, need not be declared
equivalents for any even number of milles. Change for a 50-mille piece (shiiling) would
be given in 12 pennies or in 50 milles, and for a 25-mille piece (sixpence) in six pennies or
25 milles indiscriminately. Postage stamps issued at the rate of 240 to the sovereign might
still be obtained in stips of six for 25 milies. If a penny be tendered, a single stamp must
be sold; if a five-mile piece be paid, the buyer loses only one-fifth of a penny (163 per cent.
of the five milles), a not unusual difference against buyers of the smallest quantities, com-
pensating for the extra time and trouble imposed, and, in this case, partaking of the nature
of a self-imposed tax on those who probably escape direct taxation.
1470. What names would you suggest for the coins to he issued ?—It seems
desirable, First, that the names of all units under the decimal system, whether of
moneys, weights, or measures, should be monosyllables, forming their plurals
with “s.” Secondly, that the terms adopted should be manifestly different from
those which indicate any of the values supplanted. Thirdly, that, having refer-
ence to international commerce, such terms be not borrowed from those borne by
dissimilar values in other countries. Fourthly, that the gradations of value should
be indicated by joining to the name of the unit certain convenient particles,
Mr.
J. A. Franklin.
16 June 1853.
O.66. S 2 expressive
1 40 EVIDENCE AND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE SELECT
Mr.
J. A. Franklin.
16 June 1853.
expressive of the several relations borne to the unit. Thus, all quantities, except
the unit, might be expressed by dissyllables; and, if the same particle, when
prefixed, might signify a multiple, and, when subjoined, a sub-multiple, the
notation would be exceedingly simple.
This sketch will exemplify such a method. The particles employed are neither
chosen nor recommended, but simply used for purposes of illustration.
Ounces, -
1234:567 (“1234 ounces, decimal 567.”)
Here the 1st figure might signify 1 “mille ounce.”
2d ditto 22 2 “ cent-ounces.”
3d ditto 35 3 “ten-ounces.”
4th ditto 9 3 4 “ounces.”
5 ditto 5 9 5 “ounce-tens,” or tythes.
6 ditto 39 6 “ounce-cents.”
7 ditto 59 7 “ounce-milles.”
Regarding the relations of coins to weights, it is well to remember that the
coin of a country is a convenient standard, or at least a test of weight available to
all. In France, 200 silver francs weigh just one kilogramme. In English banks,
weights are already in use in decimal gradation, which supersede or check the
counting of sovereigns, the accepted units of our monetary system.
1471–2. There is a strong desire on the part of many that we should retain the
present names as far as possible; do you see any serious objection to that ?—
I think that the 1d. and halfpenny of our system could only be maintained at
their present values under their present names. The pound or sovereign must also
be retained, but it is less important what names you apply to the other coins.
1473. Are you of opinion that we could conveniently keep the old coins and
new coins in circulation at one and the same time —I do not think it necessary to
recall the old coins whilst the new coins are issued.
1474. Do you consider that it should be made imperative to keep accounts
under the new system 2–I think that, at first, it should be permissive, and not
obligatory in private concerns. Even without reference to decimal coinage, it is
notorious that accounts and calculations of various kinds, and to a considerable
extent, may be more conveniently and expeditiously managed by decimal
notation. The emission of a decimal coinage does not necessitate a demonetisa-
tion of the existing coins, the majority of which, including all down to the
fourpenny-piece, are available under a decimal system. The superior simplicity
and advantages of the decimal method could not fail to become understood and
appreciated by all, provided that facilities for employing it, even optionally, were
afforded. The decimal system of France, introduced into the public accounts
at the end of the last century, is understood not to have been made obligatory
by law in private dealings until the year 1840. Then the decimal system, there-
tofore an alternative, was found to have so effectually supplanted other systems,
that the penalties about to be imposed upon any reversion to those systems
could scarcely concern the honest dealer. Again, in those countries of the
Continent which for a time were subject to French sway, the decimai system
having been introduced, has obtained so tenacious a hold, that in many cases it
is preferred to the national standards, even where they still exist concurrently.
I put in a single page of Table (A.) from my Tables, &c., published by
Letts & Co., entitled, “The Decimal System facilitated, and adapted inter-
mediately to the Routine Methods of Account, Money, and the Precious
Metals.”
(A.)—TABLE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE.
141
(*)-ºº: showing the Decimally-expressed Equivalent, in 1,000ths of £. 1 (Milles), for every sum, fr
ingle Farthing to £. 1, by gradations of One Farthing ; and showing also the Converse at one .." , Irom a
The residual number followin te c -
g the Decimals or Milles perfects the equivalent in case of e
parts, of which 24 make the single º of £. 1 or º represents fractional



Decimals | Parts ; º º º
*- of £. I 24 make --- º Parts ; Decimals | Parts ; Decimals Parts :
...” º of £. 1, 24 make | – of £. 1 -*. arts ;
or Milles. | One Mille. or Milles. One Mille i , 24 make of £. 1, 24 make
e or Milles. | One Mille. or Milles. One Mille.
s. d. s. d.
16 0 || '800 0 || 17 0 || 850 0 s; d. . S. d.
16 0} | '801 | # 3, | | | \, . . 0 19 O •950 ()
e 2. 18 0} ‘901 I tº I
16 0} 802 2 17 04 •852 2 4. º 19 0} 951
16 03 || '803 * | 1% of sº | | | | | . 2 19 0} | .952 2
e 4. 18 0; ‘903 3 19 0; e 3
16 1 804 17 1 & # '953
16 13 | "805 5 7 || | * 4. 18 I *904 4 19 I *954 4.
4. º 17 13. •855 5 18 14 •905 5 19 14 • (Y & 5. 5
16 l; 806 6 17 13 •856 6 A. 955
º e 18 14 •906 6 19 13 • (Tº º 6
16 13 '807 * | 17 13 '857 7 § iá . 13, '956
18 1; '907 7 19 13 | "957 7
16 2 •808 8 17 2 • S5 8 º w
16 24 '809 | | | | | . . . . . 908 8 || 19 2 '958 S
1 | * ~4. 18 24 ‘909 9 I9 2 • {\ ^{ 9
16 2; 810 10 17 24 e O 4. 9 2} 959
ić 3% 811 11 7 24 '860 I 18 24 910 10 19 23 -960 10
~4; 17 2% ‘861 11 3 ſº Q
4. 18 2; 911 1 1 19 23 tº 1 I
16 3 •812 I 2 17 3 •862 12 18 º 2} 961
16 3} •813 13 17 l, º 3 912 12 19 3 •962 12
4. º 3} 863 13 18 33. •913 13 19 3} ſº I 3
16 3} 814 14 17 3} •864 14 4. 4. 96.3
16 3% •815 15 17 3; •865 15 18 8% •914 14 19 3; •964 | 14
18 3; '915 15 19 3; 965 : ”
16 4 •816 16 17 4 •866 IG ©
16 4+ •S 17 17 17 43. •867 17 18 4, º I 6 19 4 •966 16
16 4+ | “818 18 # 18 4} 917 17 19 43 '967 "
: e •º 17 4% •868 18 18 4; •918 18 19 4 * i I S
18 4; 919 19 19 43 19
16 5 •820 20 17 5 •870. 20 - º # '969 “
16 5} | ‘821 21 £ 18 5 920 20 19 5 •970 20
4. aº 17 5} •871 21 18 5} •921 21 g
5 1 • Q J & 22 pº 4. * 19 54 •971 21
I 6 5 822 17 5%. , '872 22 4.
is 5; 823 * | # #| || * | * * | *: * | 19 5} | .972 22
4. { 18 5; ‘923 23 19 5; •973 23
16 6 •825 0 17 6 * 0 e
16 6} | *826 I a . 18 6 92.5 O 19 6 •975 ()
sº 4. 17 6 876 I 1 e
º 4. 18 6+ 926 I 19 6 pº I
16 63 827 2 17 6. • Q ºf 2 3. 976
- 3 .877 18 64 '927 2 19 6 || || '97 2
I 6 6# •828 3 17 6# •S78 3 3 e * 3 77
16 7 •829 4. * 4. 18 6; 928 3 19 6; •978 &
tº 17 7 •879 4. 18 7 •929 4 19 7 ... O r. 4
16 73 830 5 17 7 •880 5 & 979
# 18 7} •930 5 19 74. & G
16 7. •831 6 17 7+ •881 6 1. º / # 980
16 7; •832 7 17 7; •882 7 18 7. •931 6 19 7; •981 (5
4. * 18 7; 932 7 19 7; '982 7
16 8 •833 8 17 8 •883 8 18 © º
16 83 || 834 9 || 17 83. '884 9 3, º * | 19 S ‘983 S
º 2 18 84 •934 9 19 84 º 9
16 8 || 835 10 17 8 •885 10 4. 984
à s 11 # 8 18 83 .935 | 10 19 8] | *985 I9
16 8; 36 17 8; •886 T I 18 8; •936 11 19 s: •9 11
16 9 ‘837 * | 17 9 '887 ... . . . . . . . . . . . ; 192
16 9% •838 I 3 17 93. •888 13 18 9% • v. 13 987 *
e 4. 938 19 94. tº 13
16 93 839 14 17 93. ‘889 14 18 93 •939 14 19 pi :
16 9: *840 15 § & Sº \. 15 gº . r; § •989 14
4. 17 9; '890 18 9; 940 15 19 9; '990 15
16 10 •84] 16 17 10 e 16 e
1. •8 17 1 º 17 18 10 941 16 19 10 •991 I C
16 10} 42 17 10% 892 18 10] • Q A 9 17
•S IS 1 . 18 # '942 19 10} | *992 17
16 10; *844 19 17 10; *894 19 18 10; *944 19 is io, 993
I 6 11 *845 20 17 II •895 20 18 11 *945 20 10% *994 19
16 11% ‘846 21 17 11: •896 21 18 11 || º 21 19 11, •995 20
16 11, ‘847 22 17 114 | 897 * | is iii jº, . . . ; . 2 1
16 113 '84 23 pº 3 g 2 3 : 2 •997 22
4. 8 17 11; '898 18 11; '948 23 19 llā '998 23
20 0 1°000 C
SECTION 2.
THE DECIMAL NoTATION APPLIED TO CURRENT CoINs.
It is not intended here to discuss or determine the terms or denominations which may
ultimately be used to designate the decimal parts of a pound sterling, but with a view to
facilitate the reading off of these decimals, the term mille is employed to designate the
thousandth part of 1 l. Sterling, leaving the hundreth and the tenth to be expressed by their
o,66.
S 3
respective
142 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr.
J. A. Franklin.
16 June 1853.
respective equivalents, e.g. 500 (five hundred milles); ’050 (fifty milles) and '005 (five milles)
when added to be read ('555) five hundred and fifty five milles. The term mille is already
currently known and used in commerce, as a relation of one thousand, and it may be con-
veniently employed to represent a “money of account” until the money becotnes a reality;
just as the pound sterling remained for centuries a mere money of account, until the equi-
valent sovereign, a comparatively recent coin, having been long demanded, was at length
supplied.”
The farthing (fourth-ing), or fourth part of a penny, has now but a very limited circula-
tion; so that if a coin designed to represent the mille, or thousandth of l l were issued, the
only link remaining to be supplied would be a 10-mille piece, the decimal sub-multiple or
tenth of the recent piece called a florin.
Hence, the now current coins of the realm may be traced in Table A, as follows:–
Sovereign - g- º - tº- - – f. 1-000
Half-sovereign - tºº - - tº- --> ‘500 Milles.
Crown – º tº tº- tºº * º *250 2,
Half-crown - º -> º Q- º *l 25 ,
Florin tº º - º - º -> º “100 , ,
Shilling - - E → * * * *- - *050 ,,
Sixpence - º ſº - ºn º * *025 ,
Fourpence- - tº sº *ºs tº- - -016 Milles, and #ths.
Penny - tº- º º - vº - º *004 , and #ths.
Half-penny - tº - &= - º ‘002 ,, and #ths.
Farthing - - º - sº - tº- ‘001 , and #th.
It is only the coins beneath the line, or those less than sixpence, which do not contain
a round or even number of milles.
The Table shows that for every number of milles less than 25 (sixpence) so many 24ths
of a mille remain over, (inasmuch as 25 thousandths of 1 l. are the same thing as 24 nine-
hundred-and-sixtieths of 1 l., or farthings); so that while farthings continue to exist, we
may, in coinputations of unusual delicacy, requiring the closeness of a thousandth part of
1 l., take account of these minute fractions. The 24th of a mille is the 100th of a penny.
Whenever the decimal system shall prevail, instead of computing by the gross and the
dozen, the expression of whose values are so difficult of comparison with that of the unit,
we shall, as in other countries, compute by the thousand, the hundred, and the ten or tally ;
for instance, instead of—
Per unit. Per dozen. - Per gross.
7 s. 6 d. f. 4 10 s. £. 54.
Per unit. 'Per ten. T^er hundred. Per thousand.
£. 0°375. £. 3-750. £. 37'500. £. 375,000.
Where the figures are the same throughout, only the decimal point is removed one place
each time.
On an equitable principle of “give and take " it will be found that in the 23 gradations
(rising by a farthing each time) which intervene between every even sixpence, if in 11 cases
there be paid only the number of whole milles found on the corresponding line, and if in the
other 12 cases there be paid the number of milles on the next following line, then the
receiver will have an advantage of Tinth of a penny in every sixpence, 4ths of a penny in
every sovereign, or 4th per cent. But if this advantage were taken only up to 10 shillings,
and given between that sum and l l or otherwise alternately, then no advantage on the
aggregate would result to either side.
9
* The history of the “pound sterling” appears to be this. Down to the eighth of Edw. 1,
Anno 1280, 1 lb. (pound) or 12 oz. troy of sterling silver were coined into 20 shillings, and each
ounce into 12 pennies; hence there were then, as now, 240 pence in the pound (lb. or £.), and the
pennyweight (dwt.) expressed the weight of the penny, or 240th part of the pound. By the existing
law the same lb. of silver is now coined into 66 shillings, or 792 pence; so that a dwt. (penny.
weight) of silver now passes current for 3%, coined pennies. But although ad coined shillings still
represent the legal value of the pound sterling, that expression no longer indicates a weight of silver,
but the gold standard of our monetary system, the sovereign.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 143
Jovis, 30° die Junii, 1853.
smºº
MEMBERS PRESENT.
Mr. William Brown. Lord Stanley.
Mr. Cardwell. Mr. J. B. Smith.
Mr. John Ball. Sir William Clay.
Mr. Dunlop.
WILLIAM BROWN, Esq., IN THE CHAIR.
George Arbuthnot, Esq., called in ; and further Examined.
1475. Chairman.] YOU have been good enough to prepare a statement for G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
the consideration of this Committee, with a view to decimalise our coinage; will
you have the goodness to put that statement in, and make any remarks that
may occur to you, to elucidate any points you think may want explanation ?—
It having been intimated to me that the Committee wished me to put certain
proposals into a practical shape, I have, as the simplest way of doing that,
prepared the heads of a Bill, containing such provisions as appear to me cal-
culated to give effect to the views which have been submitted to the Committee,
and in which I assume they are disposed to concur ; but although it is under-
stood that I attend here with the permission of the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
I wish to explain to the Committee that I have prepared these heads as express-
ing my own individual views, and without communication with any Member of
the Government. I may add, also, that in some instances I have inserted pro-
visions, as for instance, one relating to coins of mixed metal, which appear to me
of doubtful expediency, for the purpose of bringing under review suggestions
which have been submitted of a practical character.
[The Paper was handed in, and is as follows :]
DECIMAL COINAGE.
Heads of proposed Enactment. Observations.
e=mmºdºº”
WHEREAs the pound sterling is the unit of
the money of account of the United King-
dom of Great Britain and Ireland, and is
divisible into twenty shillings, and such shil-
lings are divisible into twelve pence, and such
pence are divisible into two halfpence and
four farthings, and the pound sterling and
such subordinate coins as aforesaid constitute
the money account of the said United King-
dom: and whereas it would tend greatly to
convenience in the adjustment of pecuniary
transactions if, instead of the subdivision of
the pound sterling into shillings, pence, half-
pence, and farthings as aforesaid, the said
pound were divided into such parts as would
admit of the decimal system of notation in the
money of account of the said United King-
dom: Be it therefore enacted, &c., that from The change cannot commence from the
and after such day after the commencement of date of the Act, because the simultaneous
this Act, as shall be named and appointed in issue of a proclamation regarding the cur-
and by any proclamation which shall be made rent coins will be necessary
and issued for that purpose by Her Majesty,
by and with the advice of Her Privy Council,
the pound sterling shall be declared and
deemed to be divisible into one thousand
parts, whereof one hundred shall be equal to
the florin, and fifty to the shilling of the ex-
isting coin of the realm ; and each one thou-
sandth, part of the pound sterling shall be
denominated a mil, and ten such mils shall
30 June 1853.
0.60. be S 4
i 44.
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN. BEFORE THE
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
30 June 1853.
Heads of proposed Enactment.
be denominated a cent. And the currency
or money of account of the said United King-
dom shall be expressed in the terms or deno-
minations of pounds, florins, cents, and mils,
in the proportions aforesaid, instead of the
denominations of pounds, shillings, pence,
halfpence, and farthings.
II. In order to facilitate the conversion
into such currency of debts, contracts, &c.,
made or entered into previously to the pro-
mulgation of such proclamation as aforesaid,
the mil shall be divisible for such purposes
into one hundred parts; and such debts, con-
tracts, &c., as aforesaid, shall be discharged
in payments to be calculated in the manner
following; that is to say, when the same
shall consist of or include sums less than a
pound sterling, such sums shall be converted
into decimal fractions of a pound; and the
amount which shall arise by such conversion
shall be expressed in the terms of florins,
cents, mils, and hundredth parts of a mil,
which shall be deemed equivalent sums to
sums in shillings, pence, and farthings, in
which the debts, contracts, &c., as aforesaid,
were made or contracted to be paid : Provided
that, when in making such conversion, frac-
tions shall arise beyond Tłuth of a mil, such
fractions shall, if they amount to rāgths of a
mil, be computed as rºuth of a mil.
III. All duties and public revenues and
all funds and public debts shall be converted
into the currency established by this Act,
according to the foregoing rule; and it shall
be lawful for the Commissioners of Her
Majesty's Treasury to cause tables to be
prepared, according to the mode of calcula-
tion above directed, of the amount of duties
of Customs, &c., which will be payable in
the currency established by this Act, accord-
ing to the rates of such duties authorised by
any Act of Parliament; and the amount of
duties specified in such tables shall be deemed
to be equivalent to those imposed by any
Act of Parliament in the present currency
of the United Kingdom, and shall be charged
and payable accordingly.
IV. Tolls levied under the authority of
any Act of Parliament, or other authority
having the force of law, and limited in
amount thereby, to be computed in like
manner; and companies or others who are
required to exhibit tables of the tolls which
they are authorised to levy, shall prepare
amended tables thereof according to the
currency hereby authorised, and shall submit
the same for the approval of the Board of
Trade, and, after the signification of such
approval, shall exhibit the same as the tolls
they are authorised to collect in lieu of, and
as equivalent to, the tolls previously autho-
rised; and in case such companies, &c., shall
fail to revise the tolls as herein directed, and
to obtain the consent of the Board of Trade
to the revised tables, within months
from the date of the promulgation of the
said proclamation, then and in such case it
shall
Observations.
If it be objected that the proposed sub-
division of the mil would complicate calcu-
lations by the introduction of an inconvenient
number of figures, it may be remarked that
multiplication by decimals is so simple an
operation, that the addition of two figures
can occasion but little increased trouble in
the operation; and multiplication by sums of
the scale suggested, would be far more easy
than that by sums involving fractions, in our
present currency. For example, it would be
a more troublesome operation to multiply any
given number of ounces of gold bullion by
3 l. 17 s. 10 ; d., the Mint price, than by
£. 3.893.75, its exact equivalent in pounds
and decimals of a pound.
This rule will meet all cases of duties
which are paid in cumulative sums. Take,
for example, the duty on rum imported into
England, which is 8s. 2d. = mils 408.33.
Supposing the entries for consumption amount
to 2,500,000 gallons per annum, the duty
would amount, at 8s. 2 d. per gallon, to
1,020,833 l ; at 408.33 mils, to 1,020,825 l.
These sums are nearly equivalent. By any
other mode of computation there would be
gain or loss to the revenue; e. g. at 408
mils the duty would amount to 1,021,250l.,
being a gain of 417 l. ; at 408 mils, to
1,020,000 l., being a loss of 833 l.
But the rule will not apply to cases in
which small duties are levied in detail, e.g.
Post-office stamps; 1 d. receipt stamps under
the Bill now in progress. The mode in which
these duties should be dealt with will require
separate consideration.
It appears to me that it will be desirable
to have the revised scale of tolls authorita-
tively fixed, instead of leaving the matter for
companies to adjust for themselves.
In regard to the proposed compensation
for loss, I think that it will bé impossible to
devise any scheme of legislation which will
meet all the varying cases in detail; but if
the principle is defined in the Act, a Govern-
ment department might easily apply it to
individual cases with the aid of an actuary.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE.
#45
Heads of proposed Enactment.
shall not be lawful for them to levy or charge
any sums on account of tolls exceeding the
proportion of one mil for every farthing
which they are now authorised to levy or
charge, until the requirements of this Act
are complied with ; and if it shall be made to
appear, to the satisfaction of the Board of
Trade, that in any case in which tolls of less
amount than one shilling are levied in single
payments, and limited in amount, under the
authority aforesaid, loss would accrue to the
companies or persons authorised to levy the
same, by reason that in the conversion of
such tolls into the currency established by
this Act, fractions will occur of too small an
amount to be paid in any current coin, it
shall be lawful for the Board of Trade to
sanction an addition thereto, not exceeding
the proportions of a mil, which, with the
fractions accruing as aforesaid, shall amount
to one mil, for such a term of years and
months as, taking into account the period of
time during which such tolls are authorised
to be levied, will yield, on an average of the
amount of such tolls levied during the three
previous years, a sum equivalent to the
capital which, at the rate of interest of four
per cent. per annum, would represent the
value of an annuity equal to the estimated
amount of loss on such tolls as aforesaid
during the period of time in which they are
authorised to be levied: Provided that, in
case the tolls which such companies or per-
sons are empowered to levy or charge shall
consist of various rates, the additional charges
hereby authorised by way of compensation
for the loss accruing as aforesaid may be
levied by a re-adjustment of the rates of
such tolls collectively, although there may
be included therein tolls upon which no loss
will arise on their conversion into the cur-
rency authorised by this Act: Provided also,
that in case such claim to compensation be
not preferred or established, it shall be law-
ful for the Board of Trade to revise the
Scale proposed according to the scheme here-
after provided (Sect. ix.) And after the
signification of the sanction of the Board of
Trade to the levying additional tolls hereby
authorised, the companies or persons as afore-
said shall be entitled to levy the same for
the period, to be fixed as aforesaid by the
Board of Trade, as fully and effectually as
they are entitled to levy the tolls now autho-
rised: Provided that, after the expiration of
such period, the tolls in respect of which
such addition was authorised shall be reduced
by the amount of one mil ; and thereafter
no higher sum shall be charged or payable in
respect of such toll than the amount which
shall arise on the conversion of the present
toll into the currency established by this
Act in the manner hereinafter provided.
(Sect. IX.)
V. Whereas the coinage of the silver coin
of this realm is regulated by an Act passed, &c.
(56 Geo. 3, c. 68), and by another Act passed,
&c. (12 & 13 Vict. c. 41): And whereas the
coins into which silver bullion may be coined
*Inder the said recited Acts are crowns and
pieces of lower denomination: Be it enacted,
that
Observations. G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
30 June 1853.
There are cases of turnpike trusts which
are let on lease, and in which the proposed
mode of dealing with the tolls would give
undue advantage to the lessees.
o, Gö.
146
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
30 June 1853.
Heads of proposed Enactment.
that it shall be lawful for Her Majesty's
Master and Worker of Her Majesty's Mint,
in London, to coin silver bullion, of standard
weight and fineness, into coins of any deno-
mination representing multiples of a mil.
VI. It shall be lawful for Her Majesty to
cause copper coins, or coins of mixed metal,
to be issued, representing mils, or fractions
or multiples thereof, provided that no coins
of mixed metal shall be issued of a denomina-
tion exceeding mils.
VII. Former Acts relating to silver and
copper coins to extend to this Act; and Acts
relating to copper coins to extend to coins of
mixed metal.
VIII. It shall be lawful for Her Majesty,
by any proclamation, &c., to declare the rates
at which silver and copper coins now current
in the United Kingdom shall pass in the
denominations of the currency or money of
account established by this Act, notwith-
standing that the rates so assigned to the silver
coins may differ from the value at which
they were issued under the provisions of the
said recited Acts: Provided that no rate be
assigned to such silver coins exceeding the
relative value which they would bear in the
currency or money of account established by
this Act, as compared with that which they
bear in the existing currency.
IX. Whereas in comparing sums under
the amount of twelve pence into the currency
or money of account established by this Act,
fractional parts of a mil will arise, and in the
payment of several such sums it is unavoid-
able that an inconsiderable loss of part of a
mil must be incurred, either by the debtor
or creditor, and it is desirable that a rule
should be established for determining upon
which party the loss should fall: Be it there-
fore enacted, that in money payments of
sums in which such fractions shall arise, all
fractions amounting to haf a mil or up-
wards shall be discharged by the payment of
a mil, and no payment shall be required in
discharge of fractions less in amount than
half a mil.
X. Publication of the Act, with explana-
tory tables by the Treasury.
XI. Act to extend to the colonies, under
such limitations as will prevent interference
with local legislation.
Observations.
The weight of the coins to be defined in the
proportion of 66 s. to the pound troy.
I apprehend that if it is not intended to
have coins of mixed metal, this clause will be
unnecessary. If mixed metal is used, the
proportions of silver should be specified.
This clause would govern the case of tolls,
if not otherwise provided for.
If the coin of half a mil is recognised, the
difference will be less.
It may be convenient to have a clause for
this purpose; but I am not sure that it is
necessary, for in those colonies in which the
currency is regulated by local law, it may be
amended by Acts of the Colonial Legislatures;
and in those in which no such laws are in
force, the required change may, I apprehend,
be effected by an Order of the Queen in
Council.
For convenience of reference, I subjoin a table of sums from 12 pence to one
farthing, with their equivalents in mils and decimals of a mil.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 14.7

PENCE. MILS. PENCE. MILS, PEN CE. MILS. PENCE, MILS.
I 2 50.00000 9 37.50000 6 25.00000 3 12.50000
11 : 48.958.33 8 # 36.45833 5 # 23.958.33 2 # | 1,45833
ll # 47.91666 8 # 35.4 1666 5 § 22.91666 2 # 10.4 1666
11 # 46.87.500 8 } 34.37500 5 # 21.87500 2 # 9.37 500
1 I 45.83333 8 33.33338 5 20.83333 2 8.33333
10 # 44.79166 7 # 32.29166 4 # 19.79 166 I # 7.29166
10 % 43.75000 7 § 31.25000 4 * I 8.750t)0 I # 6.25000
10 % 42.70833 7 % 30.20833 4 + 17.70833 1 % 5.208.33
I () 41,66666 7 29. 16666 4 16.66666 l 4. 16666
9 : 40.62500 6 : 28.12500 3 # 15.62500 # 3. 12500
9 # 39.58.333 6% 27.08333 3 # 14.58.333 # 2.08333
9 # 38.541.66 6 # 26.041.66 3 + 13.54 166 # 1.04] 66
1476. Sir W. Clay.] With regard to the second head, have you any explanations
to offer to the Committee as to the view with which you propose to insert in the
Bill the dividing, for the purposes of account, the mil into 100 parts 2—I think
it is obviously necessary that there must be some rule defined in the Bill for con-
verting previous contracts and engagements from the present into the proposed
currency. It seems to be the opinion of several witnesses, whose views are enti-
tled to great weight, that this may be left to a rough adjustment by striking out
small fractions in one case and adding them in another. I think there are a great
many cases in which such a rule would not be applicable. The most important,
perhaps, refer to the Mint and Bank prices of gold bullion, which are respectively
3 l. 17s. 10; d. and 3 l. 17 s. 9 d. the ounce. Those sums, in their equivalents of
pounds, mils, and decimals of a mil are 3.893.75 l. and 3.887.50 l. Then as to
those fractions of a mil being either included or excluded : if they are excluded
there would be a trifling difference between the new and the present price of bullion;
it would be so minute, certainly, as hardly to affect the current value of a sovereign,
but at the same time it would alter the proportions, at present established by law,
between the Mint and the Bank price; because the fraction of the Mint price
being .75, and the fraction of the Bank price .50, there would be the loss of a
quarter of a ſnil to the Bank upon each ounce of gold if the fraction was included
or excluded. That seems a very small sum, but if 13 d. be considered as the proper
measure of remuneration to the Bank for the duty of taking the bullion in and
getting it coined, a deduction of more than 4th per cent. may affect them con-
siderably. In the Customs there are duties on coffee of 3d. a pound, and various
twopences, threepences, and fourpences. There the addition or exclusion of a
Small fraction would make a material difference. I have instanced the case of
rum in the paper I have put in. But take the case of the income tax at 7 d. in
the pound. I think that Sir John Herschel in his evidence proposed that this
tax should be adjusted, by taking three per cent. instead of the 7 d. in the pound,
by way of equalising it. It is apparently very easy to settle that matter in the
Committee here; but if you rely upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer bring-
ing in a new Income Tax Bill to adjust it to your scheme, you would probably
defer the measure for at least seven years. Then in the case of railway tolls.
It is quite true that with respect to the great bulk of the tolls which are limited
to so much a mile by Act of Parliament, the tolls charged by the companies
are considerably within the limits proposed by Parliament, except, I apprehend,
in the ease of a penny a mile for the third-class trains; the railway com-
panies probably look upon that as a hard bargain with them, and if you compel
them to take of 4; per cent. from their charge, they would hardly consider
it fair. Then there are cases in which railways are obliged to allow the use of
their lines to other companies at certain fixed rates. I was looking at the South-
western Railway table the other day, where it is fixed at 2d. a mile for each
passenger; in case any other railway uses the line, they are authorised to make
that charge. Take four per cent. from 2d. a mile, and it might interfere with
the arrangements made between different companies. All those matters are
simplified by the plan I propose. By allowing the introduction of the fractions,
you get almost an equivalent. I propose to take two decimal places, because I
think that sufficient; but if you take three figures, you would have nearly a per-
fect equivalent. The way I propose would give an approximate equivalent; but
if you add another figure, it would be a perfect equivalent at every #d. You get,
in º case of bullion, which I think is very important, an exact equivalent, and
O.00. T 2 in
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
***-*~~~~~----, -s-s-s-sº
30 June 1853.
- 148 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
30 June 1853.
in all other cases so nearly an equivalent, as that the difference would be hardly
appreciable. This removes one great class of difficulties, and those fractions
would never be wanted except by persons who are conversant with accounts, to
whom it would give no trouble. In the daily transactions of the people it would
not come into operation at all. I propose that authorised tables should be pub-
lished with each sum from a pound to a farthing, arranged in three columns,
the first column stating the sum in money of the present denomination ; the
second its legal equivalent in mils, and one hundredth parts of a mil; the
third column would be for the money payment authorised by the Act.
1477. You mean the nearest equivalent in the proposed coins of circulation ?
—Yes, and thus, in fact, as far as I can see, you reduce all the difficulties to be
encountered in the change from one currency to the other, to two cases, viz.,
tolls, which are levied in single payments, and the penny stamps; with these
two exceptions, I do not see any cases which are not met by the proposed scale.
1478. You propose that your process of dividing the inil into one hundredth
parts should only apply to contracts or engagements existing before the passing
of the Act 2—Yes.
1479. All engagements or contracts to be made after the passing of the Act
are to be expressed in the monies of account prescribed by the first clause of
your proposed Bill ; namely, in pounds, florins, cents, and mils?—Yes.
1480. You do not propose therefore that the one-hundredth parts of the mil
shall be an extension of the new monies of account 7–Not as to transactions to
be entered into subsequently to the passing of the Act.
1481. Nor, if the Committee rightly understand you, do you mean that your
scheme implies the necessity of any further coins of circulation ?—No, none
below the mil.
1482. Would you propose, then, that in the actual transfer of money from
one hand to another in liquidation of any existing engagement all the one-hun-
dredth parts of a mil below 50 should not be paid, and that from 50 upwards.
should be counted as one entire mil?– I think that in contracts owing, which
involve numerous small sums, the fraction should be taken into account, and
that the question of a money payment will not apply until they are added
together.
1483. At last the liquidation of all payments must be in a coin of circula-
tion ?—Yes.
1484. Mr. Ball.] To take as an illustration the income tax; do you propose
that in future the income tax shall be calculated at the rate of 29 mils and ºths.
of a mil upon each pound sterling 7–Yes."
1485. Does not it appear to you that, so far from facilitating matters, it would
cause an increased amount of trouble to the public offices making that calcula-
tion, and to the public seeking to verify that calculation ?—I think that if
you try a few sums in detail you will find it much less trouble to multiply by
the figures 29:17, than, as at present, by 7d., afterwards having to divide by 12.
and by 20, and then to find the tax on the fractions of a pound.
1486. Would not the introduction of decimal fractions that are not very
familiar to the public, tend to create a prejudice against the new system 2–You
would have the equivalent sums in the tables handy for the person to refer to.
I think that much greater difficulties now arise in calculating income tax, when
you come to fractions of a pound.
1487. This suggestion of yours is based upon the assumed difficulty of
altering existing duties or charges —Upon the impression that, if the change
can be effected without disturbing existing engagements, a great difficulty will,
be avoided.
1488. You assume there is a difficulty in altering the existing rates and .
taxes, or duties?—Yes, my first difficulty referred to the price of bullion ; my
second one was to the rates and duties; and I think that, as respects the proposal
for adjusting the rates and duties, it would be a haphazard way of settling.
the thing, and the Government would, I think, lose considerably by it, if you.
established any general scheme for giving and taking. On looking through the
duties, I am satisfied the Government would lose very much ; and if in order
to avoid this loss you brought in bills to re-adjust the present duties, I think
you would impose considerable labour. Then there is the pay of troops, which,
in the case both of officers and men, consists of day pay, comprising frequently,
odd pence. It might be a serious thing if the receipts of any one rank were
affected.
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 149
affected to the extent of four per cent. It would only aggravate the difficulty,
if, by the rough mode of compensation proposed, one rank gained while another
lost.
1480. The loss that would arise from the adoption of the suggestion before
this Committee would be chiefly upon postage stamps and other stamps of lower
value; all those losses put together would be more than compensated by the
increase of the income tax from 29 mils and ºths of a mil to 30 mils?—That
would yield an addition to the income tax of 83 mils per 100 l. only for two
years, to which term the tax at the rate of 7 d. in the pound is limited.
1490. Mr. Smith..] Would it not be a much more simple plan, as you would
have to legislate at once, to alter the whole tariff, giving and taking, so as to
make it round numbers ?—It is no light task to re-adjust a tariff, even if you
could guarantee that it should pass without comment—that no Member with a
favourite scheme would take the opportunity of pressing it ; and, after all, the
difficulty which would be occasioned by adding these decimal figures seems to
me so very trifling, that it is not worth considering. You are now dealing every
day with much more difficult fractions. Look, for instance, at the return that
was furnished to the House of Commons the other day; look at the fractions
involved in the additional five per cent. upon the Customs duties: you get ºth
and ºth of a penny without end.
1491. In the income tax, do you think that anybody would object to the
addition of 1 S. 8 d. per cent, so as to make the calculation more simple than at
present –-I do not know that the public would object ; I think the Chancellor
of the Exchequer would object to have to go through the Bill again ; but if the
question were re-opened, there would no doubt be convenience in fixing the tax
at 30 mils.
1492. Do you think he would object to the trifling addition of income that it
would bring 2—Not if the public desire it; but I may observe, that the adoption
of my proposal would not interfere with a revision of this tax, or of any others,
if thought desirable. A plan had been suggested for a general adjustment of
existing engagements, to which I have stated objections which appear to me
very strong; and I have proposed another, which will, I think, be more uniform,
more just, and more convenient in its operation. I conceive that, however you
may desire to deal with particular cases, many must remain for settling which
it will be necessary to lay down some general principle; and I submit that you
will only encumber your measure if you render it dependent on a revision of
the tariff in detail, instead of leaving such questions to be adjusted hereafter, as
experience may show the necessity for alteration. After the decimal system of
coinage has been established, all traces of engagements in the denominations of
#. s. d. will gradually disappear.
1493. Sir JV. Clay.] The difficulty with respect to the coinage might be of
course obviated by empowering the Mint to retain a small seignorage; to
retain, for instance, the ºth part of a mil in the form of seignorage, so that,
instead of giving 3-893 mils and ºths of a mil, they should only give 3-893
mils, retaining the #ths of a mil, or the #ths of a farthing, in the shape of
seignorage 2–When you come to seignorage, that is a very difficult and compli-
cated question. As far as my opinion goes, a Mint charge of that description is
incompatible with our present system of note circulation. It would practically
operate as a charge upon the Bank of England. A proposition was made last
year by the Mint authorities of a character similar to that which you have sug-
gested, but it was rejected after consideration by both the last and the present
Government. -
1494. Do you recollect the amount of the seignorage they proposed to retain 3
I think it did not exceed one-sixth per cent.
1495. Will you express that in decimal coinage?—One florin, six cents, six
mils.
1496. That would be a much larger seignorage than the seignorage implied
in my former question ?—Yes; but I do not see the object of your suggestion.
If the Mint charge a seignorage, you would still further reduce the profit of the
Bank, and the objection to which I have adverted would be increased instead of
being diminished.
1497. Mr. Ball.] Would not the adoption of the 9th section of the Draft Bill
which you have favoured the Committee with lead to this: that in all cases of
tolls, where none of the tolls exceeded d. or 1d., the result of the clause would
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.-
30 June 1853,
o.66. T 3 be-
150 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
30 June 1853.
be to entail an absolute loss of four per cent. upon the owners of the bridges or
ferries, or other places where the tolls are taken !—Yes, unless they are adjusted
as provided for in the 4th section. e e e ©
i498. Would you be kind enough to point out the proviso in the 4th section
which would apply to that case ?—It would act in the same way upon bridges
as upon other tolls. º º te
1499. Chairman.] Would not it have this effect insamuch, as we are not
expected to have a new coinage representing a penny, that if the parties took
four mils they would lose four per cent, and if they took five mils they would
gain 20 —They would gain 20 per cent. tº , a sº º
1500. Would it not be quite convenient to adjust it in this way, that for a
short period they should take five mils?—That I have provided for in the
4th section.
1501. Mr. Ball.] You suggest that “it shall be lawful for the Board of Trade
to sanction an addition thereto.” That is, to the tolls?—Yes.
1502. “Not exceeding the proportions of a mil, which, with the fractions
accruing as aforesaid, shall amount to one mil, for such a term of years and
months as, taking into account the period of time during which such tolls are
authorised to be levied, will yield, on an average of the amount of such tolls
levied during the three previous years, a sum equivalent to the capital which,
at the rate of interest of four per cent. per annum, would represent the value of
an annuity equal to the estimated amount of loss on such tolls as aforesaid,
during the period of time in which they are authorised to be levied,” and so on.
Now, in ordinary tolls, it will be necessary to adjust a considerable number of
different charges and different amounts. I apprehend that no returns can be
obtained of the separate produce of the different tolls, such as, for instanc , four-
wheeled carriages and two-wheeled carriages, and four-footed beasts; and there-
fore I do not see, from the terms of the section, as drawn up by you, what the
calculation is 7–No doubt there would be difficulty in those cases. I merely
sketched an outline of the proposal, which must be filled up when it comes for
consideration ; that would apply clearly to such tolls as Hungerford Bridge,
where they have only one toll to deal with. It may be sufficient to establish by
enactment the principle to be followed, leaving it to the Board of Trade to decide
in what manner it should be carried out. I apprehend, however, that owners
of tolls have some check over their collectors, and must therefore have the means
of furnishing information. It will rest with the owners to establish their claims
to compensation.
1503. Chairman.] Have you any observations to offer upon the subject of the
postage stamps. One of the greatest difficulties the Committee have found in
their investigation is to arrange some equivalent for the present penny stamp,
which shall at the same time not entail a heavy loss upon the revenue, and yet not
be inconvenient to the purchaser of the stamp 7–It is quite clear that the altera-
tion of the rate from one penny to four mils would entail a loss on the revenue
of 100,000 l. It is calculated that that would be the loss; and I think that, what-
ever opinion may be entertained regarding the Post-office as a source of revenue,
it ought clearly to cover its expenses. I do not think it does that at present.
Last year was a productive year; but the payments into the Exchequer, I see, by
the finance accounts, were no more than 1,022,000 l. on account of postage.
The payments to the Post-office by the public departments, exclusive of some
payments that are made in detail by the different departments, amounted to
168,000 l. The packet service cost 870,000 l. Those amounts added together
make 1,038,000 l. ; leaving a deficiency against the revenue of 16,000l. If you
add the further loss of 100,000l., it is quite clear the Post-office would be a losing
concern. I think that in times of prosperity like the present you ought to have
a clear margin of revenue above the expenses; for on the occurrence of war
or any time of commercial embarrassment, or anything interfering with cor-
respondence, that affects the postage as much as anything else; and I think you
ought to look at the possibility of a dark side of the picture as well as a bright
side. There is another view of the question which it is material to refer to. It
is a fair view to take of the matter to consider what you would have done if,
instead of adapting the postage rate to a new denomination of money, you had
had in existence a decimal currency, and were now about to establish for the first
time an uniform postage rate. I doubt whether any one would have thought of
proposing four mils; five mils would be the natural sum you would fix upon.
1504. Sir
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 151
1504. Sir W. Clay.] What would be the increase to the revenue by making
the postage stamp five mils instead of 1d, as at present, and what would be the
difference between making it five mils and four mils?—I think that is stated
in Mr. Rowland Hill's Evidence, and I would rather depend upon his calcula-
tions than my own. It has been suggested that if the postage was lowered to
four mils, it would have the effect of increasing correspondence so as very soon
to make up the deficiency; but I think it is a great fallacy to suppose that a very
small increase in the postage rate would have the slightest effect upon the number
of letters that would be posted. If a person now posts 96 letters, he would not
post four more in order to spend his money in postage. I conceive that with
the penny postage people practically write as many letters as they want, and if
you reduce the postage a small per-centage below that, a per-centage not appre-
ciable in any coin, it would not have the slightest effect upon the correspond-
ence; so also I doubt very much, if you added a fraction of a mil, whether it
would diminish a single letter. I do not think it would be felt. There is one point
that hardly belongs to the question of postage properly, but to which I wish to
refer; and that is, that the penny stamps are now very much used as a means
of remittance of small sums; and it would be a great convenience if they were
still maintained at some proportion to the shilling, so as not to interfere with
that use of the stamps; that would be a reason for raising it to five mils.
1505. Have you any suggestions to offer to the Committee as to the mode of
effecting this change, and of obviating the inconvenience that would arise from
the transition from the one system of currency to the other ?—Some little time
must elapse before you can introduce the new system perfectly. You cannot in
a day change all the coins in circulation in a country. The point to consider
seems to be, how long that period of transition should last. I think it would
tend very much to the convenience of the public if the new system were so ad–
justed as to allow the use of the coins with which we are already familiar; at
any rate, in the first instance. As to the lesson that the common people would
have to learn, they do not keep accounts, not one out of a hundred of them.
They are very acute in ordinary retail transactions; they know very well the value
of money in detail, and if a proclamation was issued rating a farthing as the one-
thousanth part of a pound, they would very soon learn to apply that to the coins
in circulation, and they would know that they must get 1 d, more change for
the shilling. I do not see that in zeal for system you should try all at once to
force them to become perfect adepts in calculating decimals; but when the
shilling is made to consist of 25 instead of 24 halfpence, the existing pence-table
will be effectually knocked on the head, and it would be impossible to render
intelligible accounts without resorting to the decimal division of money. For
mercantile matters, when the decimal system is established, the coins by which
that system may be carried out will not be of material consequence; but for the
sake of the common people, it would be desirable to leave them the use of the
coins with which they are acquainted, as a standard by which they may compare
the new system with the old ; and I confess I should be very sorry to see the
shilling removed as a coin of circulation by name. It might facilitate the
transition, if, before any proclamation were issued for the adoption of the new
currency, some coins were previously prepared ready for issue, which would
be peculiarly adapted to the new system, such as 20-cent pieces and perhaps
15-cent pieces; but I think the pence and half-pence might be let alone for the
present.
1506. Chairman.] There is a general unwillingness among the witnesses who
have been examined before this Committee to increase the numbers of coin in
use, and an impression that the fewer coins you can carry on the business with,
the less trouble and the less difficulty; what is your opinion upon that 2–1
think so; I think florins, shillings, 25-cent and 20-cent, in silver pieces would
be enough.
1507. You see those coins before you ?–Yes.
1508. There is a 1-mil piece, a 2-mil piece, a 3-mil piece, a 4-mil piece,
a 5-mil piece, and a 10-mil piece in copper ; and a 10-mil piece in silver, and
a 20-mil piece in silver; what is your opinion with respect to them 2–I should
prefer the 10-mil piece in silver to one in copper.
1509. Would you exclude the 10-mil piece altogether –As a copper coin
it would be very clumsy, but a silver piece of that denomination might be cou-
ver) lent.
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
30 June 1853.
3.06. T 4 1510. Would
1 52 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
4G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
30 June 1853.
1510. Would you exclude the 3-mil piece —I do not think it would be
required.
1511. Mr. Smith..] You would think it desirable, before the decimal system
was carried into operation, to have a number of coins circulated bearing the
impression of the new currency ; that is to say, you would have the florins,
probably, with 100 mils upon them besides; and you would have half-florins and
quarter-florins, with the mils marked upon them, so as to accustom people to
calculate the number of mils when the coinage was brought into circulation ?—
I do not think you could issue them before the proclamation, or they would
have no meaning. I do not think the Queen would be authorised to issue coins
under the new denomination until it was declared by law.
1512. Chairman.] Would you see any objection to the halfpenny and penny
that are now issuing, if two and four were marked upon them —I do not know
that there would be ; but the change in the copper money would be so very
small that people would continue to use them as pence and halfpence; and they
would call them pence and halfpence, call them what you would.
1513. Mr. Smith..] Would you propose, in coining the half-florin, that there
should be marked “shilling” upon it, or that it should be called a “half-
florin 2 °–I should like it still to be called “a shilling,” from old association ;
and the people would always call it a shilling.
1514. Chairman.] You would mark 25 mils upon it !—Fifty mils. I think
it would be desirable to retain the coin under its present name, but there would
be no objection to its being marked in a way by which its value in the new
currency would be denoted.
1515. Sir W. Clay.] In the 8th section of your proposed Bill, you say, “It
shall be lawful for Her Majesty by any proclamation to declare the rates at which
silver and copper coins now current in the United Kingdom shall pass,” namely,
“in the denominations of the currency or money of account established by
this Act” 2–Yes.
1516. And you add, “Provided that no rate be assigned to such silver coins
exceeding the relative value which they would bear in the currency or money
of account established by this Act.” But if they pass for somewhat less than
their real value, there would be a loss to be sustained by the present holders of
them —Yes, there must be either loss or gain. In the case of coins which
involve a fraction, which is not expressed by any coin of a new denomination,
there must be loss or gain.
1517. Would not it, then, be desirable that such coins should be called in by
the Government, and that equivalent value in the new coinage should be given
to the persons so bringing them in r—I think it would be desirable to remove
them from circulation previously to the adoption of the new currency.
1518. Possibly you might think it desirable to add that to the section now
under consideration ?—I apprehend that the Queen has power to decry any
coins in circulation, without the authority of a special Act of Parliament. Practi-
cally, the measure would only apply to the fourpenny and threepenny pieces.
1519. In section 11 you say, this Act is to “extend to the colonies, under
such limitations as will prevent interference with local legislation.” I believe
you have had some experience with regard to the colonial currencies: have
you any explanation to give to the Committee with reference to that section?
—I saw that a question was asked one of the witnesses, about the measure that
has been adopted in Canada for introducing the decimal system in their currency,
as if that would have a bearing upon the measure proposed here. But, in point
of fact, the measure which has been proposed in Canada (but which I do not
think has yet become law, I am not quite sure how that stands) had in view the
assimilation of their currency to that of the United States rather than to that of
England. The pound currency of Canada is of less value than the pound sterling,
in the proportion of 1 l. 4s. 4d. currency to 11. Sterling; that makes the Il.
currency equal to four United States gold dollars. In 1836 the gold currency
of the United States was depreciated. There was a very slight alteration in
1837, when they altered the standard of fineness; but for all practical purposes
their gold coin has been the same since 1836. The Canada currency, which
was originally based on what is termed Halifax currency, that is, on the arbitrary
valuation of the Spanish dollar at 5 s., has followed the changes in the Mint law
of the United States. In the West India Islands they have our currency nomi-
mally, but they use British silver as an unlimited tender; and it would require
consideration
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 153
consideration how to deal with their currency, when we have changed our silver
here.
1520. Chairman.] Do you think there would be any probability of the Cana-
dians accommodating their currency to ours, when they have such large transac-
actions with the people in the United States, where the decimal coinage is
already adopted, and would be more convenient to them —Their view in deci-
malising their currency has been to make it accord with that of the United
States, and not with the coinage of this country. A proposition was made to
them a few years ago, when they wanted to strike a new gold coin ; an effort
was made to induce them and all the North American colonies (for each colony
has a different currency) to enter into concert with each other, and adopt the
pound sterling. ... But that did not meet their views, and the Canadians rather
wished to assimilate their currency to the United States currency than to ours.
Martis, 12" die Julii, 1853.
Dr. John Bowring, called in; and Examined.
1521. Chairman.] WHAT offices have you recently held in China?—I was
three years Consul at Canton and one year Her Majesty's Plenipotentiary and
Superintendent of Trade at Hong Kong.
1522. You were for many years a Member of the House of Commons 2–
I was.
1523. During that period you directed your attention very much to the
decimal system 7–I did. It was in consequence of a motion of mine in the
House of Commons that the first step was taken for introducing the decimal
system by coining the silver piece that represents the tenth of a pound, called the
florin.
1524. You have had many opportunities of comparing the system in various
parts of the Continent and in China with the system which is adopted in England?
—Very many.
1525. Will you state your views upon those points?—My attention was called
early in life to this subject, being then engaged in business, and having com-
mercial relations with various parts of the globe. In the year 1832, I was
Secretary of the Commission of Public Accounts, and had many opportunities of
comparing different systems of currency and accountancy. I have been much in
Spain and Portugal; and inention, as an example, that in Spain, in consequence
of the absence of a decimal system, accounts are kept with considerable diffi-
culty, and their correctness is seldom to be depended on. I had often occasion
to see the perplexities and mistakes of the commissariat functionaries in Spain
during the Peninsular war, while, just crossing the frontier into Portugal, where
there exists a decimal system of coinage and account inaccuracies were very
rare, and all money operations recorded with great facility. I may also mention
in reference to the coinage of Spain, that as the different Spanish colonies
emancipated themselves from the mother country, they every one, without
exception, adopted the decimal system, and the universal adoption of that
system has been everywhere recognised as a great benefit and blessing to the
people. The system in Spain is as absurd and inconvenient as most of the
other non-decimal systems. The accounts are kept in reals of vellon, every one
of which represents 34 maravedis; but it is less inconvenient than the English
system, where the divisions are by 4, 12, and 20. o *
1526. You have had some experience of the mode of keeping accounts in
Russia 1—Yes; and the same advantages will be found in favour of Russia, as
contrasted with Germany. From the non-existence of the decimal system in
Germany there are frequently great difficulties in understanding and in record-
ing matters of account. In Russia, where the decimal system prevails by the
division of the rouble into 100 copecks, I found generally the accounts kept with
great clearness and great accuracy.
1527. You have also some knowledge of keeping accounts in Japan 2– Yes;
Japan is in some respects a sort of dependency of China. And it may be inte-
G. Arbuthnot, Esq.
sº
30 June 1853,
Dr. J. Bowring.
12 July 1853,
0.66. U resting
154 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. Bowring.
12 July 1853.
resting to know that in Japan the accounts have been kept in decimals from time
immemorial. I had occasion to look lately into the accounts of our factories
there during the time of Charles the First, and the period antecedent to that,
and I found all the accounts were kept in decimals. But it is more important
that I should state that the decimal system is the universal system throughout
the Chinese empire, and that it is there employed by more than 400 millions of
the human race. I think I may state, as the result of my own experience, that
nearly one-half of the great family of civilised man has adopted the decimal
system, and with great advantage in every point of view
1528. I think you were particularly struck with the mode in which they keep
their accounts in China, and especially with the facility with which boys of very
tender years are able to cast up accounts?—Such is the fact; the Chinese system
of accounts is one of great simplicity. The integer is an ounce of pure silver,
which is divided into 1,000 parts, called cash or tchien. I venture to say that
a boy in a Chinese school will in one month acquire a more thorough knowledge
of all the purposes to which figures are ordinarily applied than would be obtained
in a year with our complicated system. I have scarcely ever known an instance,
even among the working people, of an inaccuracy of account in China; and the
extraordinary rapidity and facility with which their arithmetical operations are
conducted and recorded has frequently excited my admiration and astonishment.
I was never able to keep pace with their calculations, and invariably found them
right when there was any difference between us.
1529. Notwithstanding your knowledge of figures, you have stated, I think,
that your servant was able to beat you, and make out an account much more
rapidly than you could follow him 2–I never could, by any system I have
learnt, approach my own servants in the celerity with which they kept my
accounts.
1530. I think you have brought a little instrument to explain that?—I have
brought the abacus, which is universally used in China, and pretty universally
also in Russia, by which the children are taught to keep accounts and make
calculations.
1531. Will you have the goodness to explain it to the Committee 7–The
Chinese name of this instrument is “Swan-pan.” It is an instrument divided
into two parts. On one side are five movable circles, or balls, representing
units, and on the other side two fives, which represent tens. These balls move
on wires, representing decimal quantities; first, millions, then hundreds of
thousands, tens of thousands, thousands, hundreds, tens, and then the units, or
integer, and then the decimal parts of the unit, thus:
1,000,000
100,000
10,000
1,000
100
10
l
• 100
010
•001
1532. How much do you think it would abridge the labour in schools if the
Chinese mode of calculating decimals were adopted —I think more would be
learnt in one day, with the assistance of the decimal system and the abacus, than
would be learnt in twenty with the complicated system of pounds, shillings,
pence, and farthings.
1533. Would not it be very desirable that we should have an instrument of
that kind made with English characters, that it may be easily understood by the
parties who would have to carry out the decimal system, if it is adopted?—I
think so; and that the instrument would be of exceeding value to be associated
with the introduction of a decimal system of coinage and accounts.
1534. Are there any further observations which you have to make with respect
to the general facility of the decimal coinage, before we proceed to speak of the
coins -I may say that I have visited many countries in which the decimal sys-
tem has been introduced, and superseded ancient and imperfect systems, and that
its
SELE('T (TOMM ITTEE ON
D.E ( IMA I, C () INA (; E.
Zö race //x/r. Z94. j
- - - ~ - • - - --- - º --~~~~ * 2” º,
AD/A1///?AM (MF (Aſ/AW/ESA SI/AAV-/21,\) O/P C0///W7//VG /*OAAP/). ..? -º-Hº i.;...;
re ~~~~~~ - .
- #. * . - _. . . . . -
# §º
==ººks
# * , Fºº-º-º- - g
- . 22& 3.2% Af * >
. . gº º sº wº g § … . $
––. -:#138 ºcłºść
§ gº - gº & º § *
- ( ) *) A / // º żº ) < • ‘y - (...) : * A. * {} /* . A ) .2. º }/ / / ?/ ?/ ?/ ?/ ? '': š, ; ** . — *.*.*.*.*.* -, * * ### à. *...* #: #.
A//c/ 9.25 #786 (.37 .Szz//zzzzº 9.64786:/.3/ /o/, ////0//'6% ==== F------ §
§: , * * * * #º--~~~~~
Y----—---- - --------- #. alſº - i tº . gº fº - gº º
§:::::::= ------ ––– ==##########.
--~...~ ; : * * * * x- -
^\{A
{}{3}
ſº
Ü
$)
•2
as a
ſº
Q_900/00/
200,000
3%(%%)
4%('%'(/
7%
&//
•(()(?
3.25476.6/37
{ {} Ç
7 7////////'
</ /('ſ '('('
5 3//('0'
* – A'('C'
7–%
9 –”
(, . . .6%
------ •////?
7./62/.3.969
2////zzyzs
7%000
////'0
%20%
//7(?
• (707 |
ºx §nºi -
- £º. ºf
W . . . . . . .
3. ‘’’ º” . . . º
- *:
rº-rr- * ~ *
- '* .
- o
- “... . .
N.º.
...: Y :
sº - -
- !:, ;
we s
.* * *
& . -
ºv/º,
w r - -
w * - . . . . .
tº:
.*
**
xzºN ...a...º .
Kº: tº . ." - ,
. * . . . * *|| -- -
º, 3 tº: ----
* ...xt ºr * -
“..." . . .
- tº: •5.
. . . . * * *. " . >.
š. 2 : ‘. . .
ºº: #3384–-
--
& “l
§§ º'. "
*** Yº..
*
* * .
sº t
k *.
*.
w. ... " -
tº * * * ... "
ãºzº
#3%\º
º, ºf
ºf ºt, . .
*
! . . .
§§: -------------
... . f : *-
- - - º -
32. 2 - - - - * . -
º $º: ". . . . . .
3. " º!: ". . . . . . -
£2: . ; : ** > *-' ‘. . .
&\,\! * ..., ------
- e - e.
$ ...: - -T-
F: ... --
a '.' " " - *
3ºyº t **
*: ; ºtyżº
Żºłº
. . . . . iv. ... : :
ºğ'.3% º & --
ifiº -
º
ºwºw
...wºwe -----**** * - r . -
----- * * * 4.--z ‘....” “vº - .-- :*
ſº/º
jº’ ºff; ; ;
Zºº<! ; :
§3. *:::::
• -->S
- s .g. -ºº ºt
£º & **º A.
'* , , 2 &I.3.2%, ,
. Iſſa ... § j-, ... "
'* . . . -
**********--~~~~~<--- ... . . . .
*~~~~~~...~~~~...' ...... : ...,
& 4
... vºv ve
* * * *-** * * *#70000 … + - “...' ... -- * *, *
;
- 200% ºf
. -
* ::: '' . . . . * v- ....:
::Sºx, &zºº. tico&
70%)
i. ...
t -
* * :-------- ~~~~
** .
76 ºr=
. (27.
• 0/27
º
- * : *
É £º hº
**
Syr; * ...; *. - º
§§Yć
tº . ºlfº K
. . . ***.*
& º 3.
* * : * * -**, ºf sº º
ºf: 3.3. §§ §:
*... . . **. * . **: , ,
"...ºf §º:: ** *
t
w - - … .
º, ºr Sºº
§ 3 ºff
*.*.*.*
º:
*:: .
^: 3.
2:::
"...º.º. ...A's 3.;
§§
jº', (§§º
Fºº...º.º. 3
º-ſ,
º:
:"...º.º.
: * * “:
i:. . §
exº-.
:
*ś
*::::
§
7%e Æa//s or //e Ze//, wºole ///reserez 33; &/owe &/z //* ////, zzzzzzº.
.////s.
N
*S§º
/00000
*
x
/(2000
///0/)
//7//
//?
}
./7/
..(?///
y
s
Sº
R
k
-
S.
§
i
º
*>
*
./ A'. 2.57% ./ z//
Nº. 85],
- p : * o t - st 9.
()rdered, by | Jºe |ouse of Coin mous, 1 ſ ) | “ l’rinted 4 15 August. 1853.
//zzy ////wazz/, //////z.






























SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 155
its introduction has been accompanied with universal satisfaction, as being a great
facility to reckoning, and in many instances a great security against fraud, even
enabling the labouring people to keep their little accounts without embarrasment,
while in the greater operations of trade and commerce it has been of boundless
benefit. -
1535. It has been stated that when the coinage was changed in Ireland, it was
done with great facility, but that some little difficulty arose in the Isle of Man;
can you give the Committee any information upon that subject?—I believe
when the size of the shilling was changed in the Isle of Man, some people were
rather disappointed that they did not immediately get more for the big shilling
than they did for the little shilling; but that soon rectified itself; and it was
soon found that for a greater quantity of silver, they got a greater quantity of
commodity.
1536. You think, if they got 25 mils for the 6 d. instead of 24 farthings, they
would be quite satisfied ?–That would of course be a benefit to the buyer if the
seller would give as much for the 25th as for the 24th part of a sixpence, and he
would probably do so in very many instances, by which the poorer classes would
obtain an advantage of 4°/o; that 4°/2, however, is not a matter of any great
consideration, for the whole copper currency of this country, which alone would
be affected by the proposed change, has never, I believe, been estimated to
exceed 1,000,000 l. Sterling in value, and is generally supposed not to be more
than half a million. Taking the medium of three-quarters of a million, the
question of loss involved, whether to be borne by the Government or by the
community by calling in the copper coinage, would be only 30,000 l., a mere trifle
compared with the advantage associated with a decimal system.
1537. It has been suggested that we should consider the sovereign as the
integer ?—I should deem this almost a sine qud non for the success of the decimal
system. The pound sterling is one of the most ancient and generally known
standards of value. It has been the basis of our accounts for many centuries;
it is the integer upon which almost all our exchanges are founded with foreign
countries, and the inconveniences would be exceedingly great indeed, as it
appears to me, of introducing any other standard of value, or integer of account,
than that which has existed for so very many years, and is so universally recog-
nised throughout the commercial world.
1538. I have placed in your hands a document sent to me by the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, signed by Thomas Nimmo, of Demerara; have you read that ?
—I have.
1539. Is it practicable to adopt the system there referred to ?—I do not approve
of any scheme that does not recognise the pound sterling, so long established
and so widely known, as the integer and foundation of the decimal system.
The only question is, in what manner the pound sterling shall be divided. I
think nothing would be more convenient than the division of the pound sterling
into 1,000 parts. When the integer is of small value, as in the case of the
French franc, a division into cents, or hundredths, will answer every purpose of
exchange and account. A farthing may not have been found practically objec-
tionable as the smallest of our coins, but I deem it of some advantage that the
smallest coin should be of somewhat less value than a farthing.
1540. It has been suggested also by a statement which has been laid before the
Committee, that, it would probably better answer the purpose of decimalising our
coinage if we commenced with the penny as the integer, and ascended ?–That
would be very inconvenient. It is better in the columns of an account that the
integer should be divided, rather than that the integer should be multiplied.
1541. It has been suggested also that the present copper coinage might be
adopted by making the present farthing a mil, the halfpenny two mils, the
smailer penny four mils, and the larger rimmed penny, coined by Bolton and
Watt, five mils, and that the loss to the public of four per cent. upon the small
penny, would be as nearly as possible compensated by the increased value of the
large penny constituted a five-mil piece 7–My own view would be, to avoid the
use of a great variety of coins, especially at first. I should prefer only two
copper coins, the one-mil piece and the two-mil piece, and that neither a four nor
a five-mil piece should be put in circulation. The fewer the number of coins
employed, the more easily will their relative values be understood, and the less
will be the confusion in the public mind. *
Dr. J. Bowring.
12 July 1853.
0.60. U 2 1542. The
156 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. Bon-ring.
12 July 1853.
1542. The general feeling, I believe, is, that the fewer coins we can transact
our business with the better; is that the view you entertain — My view would
be to have two copper coins, namely, the one-mil and the two-mil piece. I
would have three silver coins representing the hundredth of a pound, the fiftieth
of a pound, and the tenth part of a pound; in gold, the half-sovereign of
500 mil, and the sovereign of 1,000 mil; and I would withdraw all other coins
from circulation.
1543. What names would you give to those coins –It is of great importance
that the coins should bear some name which conveys the idea of their decimal rela-
tions and values. I saw, with very great regret, that the name florin had been
adopted. The associations connected with that name are exceedingly vague. The
florin varies in value in different parts of the world. The name has little or no
connexion with the value of the coin, and none whatever with a decimal system.
The name of every coin issued ought to be in some way associated in the mind
of the payee or receiver with a decimal idea. I venture to suggest the name of
mil for the 1,000th part of the pound, the name of cent for the 100th part of
the pound, and the name of dime for the 10th part of the pound. Dr. Franklin
introduced the word “dime,” and it has obtained currency, and is constantly used
in America as the 10th of a dollar. The reason I prefer the word dime to decime
is that it is monosyllabic, as are the proposed names of the other decimal divisions
of the pound sterling, mil, cent, dime, pound. Dime has the advantage, too, of har-
monising with the other names proposed to be introduced. The Saxon forms of
thousandth, hundredth, and tenth are too unmanageable and ungainly, otherwise
they would have been valuable for popular use. -
1544. Would not it obviate a great deal of the difficulty as to the names,
provided the number of mils were stamped upon each piece —I should prefer the
name of the coin ; the evil will wear itself out. No doubt that for a long time
the new coin will be associated with old designations; everybody knows that
though the ancient system of pounds, shillings, and pence, was wholly overturned
in France, and the system of francs and centimes established by legislation, in
many parts of France, to this hour, the names of livre, sou and denier are still
retained ; but it is also known to those who are acquainted with France, that
those terms are getting more and more out of use, and probably in another
generation no other words will be used than francs and centimes. The same
thing would occur in England, no doubt, and for a time the mil would be
called the farthing, the two-mil the halfpenny, and if the 4-mil piece were to
come out, it would be called the penny. But the introduction of the two
pennies, one to represent four mil and the other five mil, would produce a great
deal of confusion in the popular mind.
1545. If it were even difficult to change the name from farthing, or halfpenny,
or penny, that would not interfere at all with the keeping of accounts decimally?
—By no means.
1546. They would be kept decimally 2–Yes.
1547. So that there would be no serious inconvenience from it?—No, the
inconvenience would be transitory; the teachings of youth would be associated
with the new names, and in process of time the ancient names would pass away.
1548. You seem to have an objection to the two pennies; you are aware that
by Act of Parliament there are 1 d. tolls established on bridges, &c.; that there is
the penny postage stamp, and that within a few days we shall have the penny
receipts stamp. It would be very difficult to deal with the Post-office penny stamps,
and the penny receipt stamps; but as regards the tolls it has been suggested,
that if we had the 4-mil piece, and the 5-mil piece, the 5-mil piece might be taken
for a certain number of years for the penny tolls established by law, so as in time to
create a fund that would produce some four per cent. afterwards upon the amount
of those tolls, in order to indemnify the owners of those tolls for taking 4-mils
ever afterwards. What is your opinion of that?—There are many ways in
which indemnity could be obtained. I think a provision ought to be made for
regulating all money contracts or engagements which are disturbed by the intro-
duction of a decimal system, so that no injustice should be done, and it has
occurred to me that such questions as are not provided for by the general Act
of Parliament might be entertained and settled by the county courts, with
power of appeal to the Board of Trade. I can conceive great difficulty
in any all-embracing legislation, because there certainly would be many special
cases to which the general legislation would not fairly apply. Particular
grievallces
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. I 57
grievances should be provided for by special means. In the case of tolls it
might be done by elevating certain tolls and lowering other tolls. There might
also be a scheme of allowing a higher rate to be collected during a certain period,
and a lower rate to remain in perpetuity. These are all questions of very trifling
importance compared to the greater question under consideration, and they have
reference entirely to the copper coinage, the circulation of which is comparatively
small.
1549. This difficulty creates one of the greatest obstacles in our way, and
the mode of getting over it is what we are endeavouring to find?—An Act of
Parliament is all-powerful until it is superseded by another Act of Parliament.
There might be an Act of Parliament authorising an appropriate tribunal to
examine and decide on cases not provided for by the general legislation. There
is no reason that the claims of justice should in any case be forgotten ; nor
am I aware that they have anywhere, or in any way, suffered by the intro-
duction of a decimal system ; the difficulty has nowhere been found invincible. }
i 550. Actuaries tell us that tables could easily be framed to define what
the tolls should be for a certain period, to indemnify the owners of them from
loss 2—It is impossible that any great change can be introduced without a
certain amount of difficulty and inconvenience; but the greatness of the object
to be accomplished, and the smallness of those difficulties, ought not to be lost
sight of. *
1551. And you consider that it would be a good plan to refer the difficulty
to the county courts 7–To any competent tribunal whose decisions would be
rapid, and whose administration would not be costly.
1552. With power of appeal to the Treasury 2—With power of appeal to the
Board of Trade, which I think would be better.
1 55 3. Sir W. Clay.] Have you considered the question of the expediency of
making coins of mixed metal, with a view of obviating the objection of having
the silver coins of the lowest denomination inconveniently small?—Generally
speaking, the adoption of that plan has given rise to successive adulterations.
That has been the case in China, where there is only one current coin. Accounts
are, as I stated, kept there in ounces of silver, which are divided into 1,000 parts;
these thousandths of the ounce of silver have always been made of mixed
metai, generally copper and spelter; they are about the size of an English
shilling, and have a square hole in the centre for the purpose of stringing
them together in hundreds and thousands, a very convenient arrangement with
a decimal system. But these coins have been gradually diminished in size and
purity ; so that at the present time they scarcely represent half their aboriginal
and nominal value, more than 2,000 being frequently required to purchase an
ounce of silver. The mixed metal has facilitated the gradual deterioration of the
coin, and the progress of deterioration has been scarcely traceable from one
period to another.
1554. Is there a Chinese coin of the weight of one ounce of pure silver ?—
None; the only currency is the small coin, which generally circulates in knots
of 1,000 or 500, but invariably in decimal quantities. Silver passes by weight,
not by tale.
1555. They are assumed to be equal in value to the 1,000th part of an ounce
of pure silver ?–In accounts they are, but as the adulteration has gone on, the
loss of value in consequence of that adulteration has been to the extent I have
stated. That is also the case in the Ottoman Empire, where the adulteration
has been carried on to a frightful extent.
1556. Is there no coin of circulation in China of a higher value than the
assumed 1,000th part of an ounce of silver ?--None in the Chinese community;
but amongst the British merchants, and in the ports opened by treaty to foreign
trade, the dollar has been introduced, and that is the coin in which all commo-
dities of export are bought, and articles of import usually sold.
1557. In calculations of account in China, what relation does the dollar bear
in value to the ounce of pure silver of account 3–About three-fourths. The
Spanish dollar, which is called the Pillar or Carolus dollar, is the only dollar that
is considered a legal tender among merchants, and so strong is the prejudice in
favour of this Carolus dollar, that the Mexican dollar, though equal in intrinsic
value, was, when I left China, at a discount of nine per cent. as compared with
the Pillar dollar. That shows how strong the prejudices of China are in refer-
ence to particular coins ; and I was lately compelled to sell in some of the ports
Dr. J. Bowring.
12 July 1853.
o,66. U 3 Of
158 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. Bowring.
12 July 1853.
of China, our gold currency, the sovereign, at a loss of 18 to 22 per cent, as
against the Carolus dollar.
1558. Is there any law in China with regard to a legal tender of payment, that
you are aware of 2–There is a law. The basis of all accounts is a tale of
pure silver, which represents the English ounce.
1559. Precisely the English ounce 2–Precisely the English ounce. That,
and this division of small coin of amalgamated metals, are the sole currency of
the interior, and when merchants of the ports go into the interior to purchase tea
and silk, they sell their dollars either for the Sycee, which is the pure silver, or
the Small tehien, known generally by the name of cash.
1560. Mr. Hamilton.] Is there a law there against adulteration ?—Many laws;
but in China the law is so feeble, and the extent of the country so vast, it is
impossible to prevent it.
1561. Sir W. Clay.] The Committee are to understand that there is a legal
standard of value 2–Yes, the silver ounce, called leang, which is represented on
the abacus by a special character. .
1562. The result of your opinion is unfavourable to coins of mixed metal P –
Yes.
1563. As affording, what the example of China shows it to afford, great facili-
ties for adulteration ?—Without exception it does afford great facilities for
adulteration and fraud, with very great difficulty to detect the point at which
the adulteration becomes fraudulent.
1564. Do you think there would be any very considerable conveniences in the
ring coins you have alluded to ?—They are very convenient in a country which
furnishes you readily with the means of stringing them together. The bamboo
in China affords the always ready means of tying up those coins.
1565. By its fibre 2–By its fibre or thread, which is universally at hand, and
is exceedingly strong; but I doubt whether our hempen cord would not soon be
broken by the weight. In China, the strung coins are conveyed on men's shoulders,
and there it is convenient to have them strung by the thousand.
1566. Chairman.] With respect to changing the currency, would you do it at
once, or would you do it gradually; that is, would you try to enforce its imme-
diate adoption, or give it time for working its way ?–I see no reason for delay;
what is good ought to be done, and what is good to be done, to be done quickly.
1567. I think you have stated to me, that there are great facilities by
using decimals in France; I believe females keep the accounts there very fre-
quently 2—Women are very frequently at the head of commercial houses in
France; and the women in China keep accounts with the greatest possible
facility. I venture to say, that with the decimal system, and the use of the abacus,
there is scarcely a child in China, of seven or eight years of age, who is not quite
competent to keep all the ordinary accounts of life. , -
1568. How would you keep book accounts 3–With one column for the pounds,
and another for the decimal parts.
1569. How many lines would you rule in your account book --Only one,
to divide the pounds from the decimals. That is the system adopted in China,
where the integer is divided into thousand parts; and also in Portugal.
1570. Would not there be less liability of mistake, if there were four lines for
the pounds, the florins, the cents, and the mils?--I see no advantage in that, my
plan has more simplicity.
1571. It would much facilitate, probably, the exchanges between England and
every other part of the world !—Certainly ; our present system is frequently the
cause of great embarrassment and perplexity in our relations with foreign
countries. It is almost impossible to explain to a stranger the mysteries of
English accounts : and it is the same where the non-decimal system of other
lands comes to the uninitiated, as for example, the accounts from Bengal. Nothing
can be more inconvenient. There are few who know the value of the pice and the
anna as constituent parts of the rupee. I believe, even in our great commercial
houses very few clerks are to be found, who are able to audit and correct the
accounts which arrive from countries where the decimal system has not been
introduced, the non-decimal monetary system being so very various and com-
plicated.
1572. We have had it in evidence that gentlemen who are now frequently
obliged to employ their stewards or bailiffs to make out their accounts, would
with great facility, under the decimal system, make them out or check them
themselves?—Undoubtedly. It is the fact that many merchants and bankers
do
SELECT COMMITTEE ON DECIMAL COINAGE. 1.59
do not introduce farthings into their accounts at all, on account of the complexity
associated with another sub-division of the pound, and some draw no checks even
for pence.
1573. Do you consider that any advantage would arise, if Parliament were
this Session to pass an Act, declaring their intention of decimalising the coinage;
would not that be the means of bringing the attention of schoolmasters and
others to the subject P−No doubt; the diminution of labour to schoolmasters
no one can estimate who has not had the advantage of contrasting the decimal
with the non-decimal system.
1574. Is there anything further you can point out to the Committee ?
Nothing occurs to me, except to reiterate my hope that, associated with the decimal
system, the terms introduced will be such as to convey an idea of the value of
the piece to which the particular name is given. That is of very great import-
ance to the success of the system.
1575. When you consider the great difficulty there is to induce people to
change the names of coins (and inasmuch as it would not interfere with the
adoption of the decimal system), should you be disposed to retain or reject the
name of farthing, halfpenny, or penny ?—I attach much value to well-chosen
names; I do not expect you will destroy all the old terms and their associations
in one generation, but it is well that the ground should be laid on a sound,
intelligible, and philosophical basis. Proper terms being used to designate the
new coins, and those terms being introduced into schools, it may be expected
that the erroneous terms will pass away with the passing generations.
1576. Those decimal names have been objected to, it being thought that they
might interfere with the decimal division of weights and measures 2–You had
better adopt the very best terms you can find for your decimal currency. There
will be less, not greater difficulty in discovering appropriate names for decimal
weights and measures when names for decimal coinage have been established.
1577. Mir. J. B. Smith..] Would it be desirable to retain the name of the
shilling 7–-No ; I should be glad to see all the old terms completely got rid of.
But it is known, so strong are the associations with particular money, that even
in America, where shillings do not exist, the term shilling is constantly used;
and the terms pounds, shillings, and pence are phrases that would not readily
pass away from the public mind, as I instanced in the case of France ; though
a different system was there introduced, the old terms have not yet been entirely
got rid of. Time alone will effect the change.
1578. You are aware that the price of almost all commodities is calculated in
shillings —Yes; whatever you call your new coins, for a time the old names
will prevail. -
1579. Could you abolish the name of “shilling,” do you think?–In process
of time it would die away; but familiar terms are not easily extirpated ; an
altered character and appearance of the new coin would facilitate the use of
a new name, and aid the breaking up of old associations.
1580. You have observed that in America the name of shilling is still retained :
—Yes. -
1581. Are you aware that the shilling has a different meaning in almost every
State —No doubt, which shows the great inconveniences of retaining those old
names of coinage. In America the accounts are universally kept in dollars
and cents, and it is an evil that old associations should have retained ancient
names. Such names lead to much confusion, and I conceive the use of the word
“florin,” which has not even the claim"of old association, to be objectionable on
account of its vagueness.
1582, Chairman.] I apprehend that it is no matter what the particular names
of the coins may be, so long as the accounts are kept decimally 3–It is certain ;
you cannot easily change the language of a nation, but you can, by legislation,
alter the form in which the accounts of a nation are to be kept, and I am
persuaded that the labour of those engaged in keeping books would be diminished
one-third by the system of decimal currency and accountancy; independently
of the greater security and accuracy which will be associated with the change.
1583. Mr. J. B. Smith..] Have they a decimal system of weights and measures
in China 2–To some extent; but it is not carried out so thoroughly as the
decimal system of coinage and currency.
1584. Would you think your system complete without a system of decimalised
weights and measures 2–The great confidence I feel in the success of the decimal
Dr. J. Bowring.
12 July 1853.
0.66. U 4 coinage
160 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. Bowring.
12 July 1853.
coinage, leads me to think that it will be inevitably followed by a decimal system
of weights and measures. People will soon see the advantages of saving them-
selves trouble and of insuring correctness in calculations, and they will be very
glad to apply decimals to the whole field of accounts.
1585. If it be desirable to adopt as well as the system of decimal coinage, the
system of decimal weights and measures, would it be advisable, do you think, to
adopt the two systems simultaneously, monies and measures?—I think not ; on
the ground that it would lead to some additional intricacy in the public mind.
I would rather dispose of one difficulty first, than entangle it with another diffi-
culty.
1586. Do you think it would be advisable, with regard to the decimal system
of weights and measures, if it were practicable, to adopt a universal system —No
doubt; but the national spirit is so strong in various parts of the world, that I
fear it would be very difficult to induce all nations to adopt a common standard ;
it is like the question of a universal language. It would be a great advantage if
all nations could understand one another, in books, in weights, and in measures,
and in everything else; but you cannot hope for such a consummation.
1587. Would it be desirable for any nation to effect such a measure ?—Yes,
but I think all nations would be struggling for their own views; particularly
those who would incur great changes by the proposed universal system; they
would not be easily induced either to modify their own opinions or to receive
legislation from other nations.
1588. You are aware that many nations in Europe have adopted the French
system of weights and measures?—Yes, some ; but not many.
1589. It would appear, therefore, that the objections are not insuperable?
—The objections are not insuperable among adjacent nations; but the difficulties
would, of course, be increased by the remoteness of nations, and their small
amount of intercourse. -
1590. Chairman.] Any attempt on our part to introduce a universal system
of weights and measures, or a universal system of coinage throughout Europe and
America, if we are to stand upon that ground as the basis of our operations, must
be postponing all improvement sine die 2–No doubt. But if the general integer
were changed, the pound sterling would not be adopted. The currency which is
the most extensively known and most generally used in commerce is the dollar ;
and the dollar, I think, would have the best claim to be adopted as the ground
work of any general legislation with respect to one general system of currency
and account. -
1591. Mr. J. B. Smith..] You mean as to a universal system of monies?—
The dollar has a strong hold on the commercial mind all over the world.
1592. Is it not advisable to adopt a universal system of money, as regards
different nations?—The decimal system would be one step towards such a result ;
but it will never be easy to mould the habits of a variety of nations to a common
standard.
1593. There is not that fixity in regard to weights and measures —The diffi-
culty is, in inducing other people to concur in your opinions.
APPENDIX,
[ 161 ;
A P P E N D L X.
EXPERIMENTS UPON THE WEIGHT OF COPPER COIN.

One pound's worth of mixed coin, the produce of the bank tills,
10 lbs. 53 oz. avoirdupois as ºne ºr me * * * *
One pound's worth of mixed coin from a public-house - º º sºme
Eight shillings’ worth from a huckster's shop weighed 3'951 lbs. avoir-
dupois, and consisted of—
43 in half-pence of several kinds.
39 pence, without ritus.
14 pence, with the rims (1797/9.)
96 pence.
*
A pound's worth of the same would weigh - º - * tº- gº
£. 1 = Average avoirdupois - º
w EIGHT,
A VOIR DU POIS.
Lbs.
10°344
10°855
9°879
3) 31.078
10°359
somewhat more than 3 per cent. above the metal it would take to replace them.
One pound's worth of penny pieces dated 1806/7,
Loss by wear, about º
not rimmed - tº º º º
10 per cent.
One pound's worth of halfpenny pieces about the
33 6 9)
same date tº- º tº- -> tº º -
One pound's worth of old penny pieces with the
TInn - - - - - - - -
yy 6 : 35
- Lös.
£. 1. worth = Average avoirdupois -
Weighed
Lbs.
9°034
9°409
I 3°943
3) 32°386
10°795
Thus, supposing an equal admixture of the three kinds, the result would give a surplus of
copper of nearly 8 per cent.
o,66. X
[ 162 J
A N A L Y S IS OF IND EX.
Alph ABETICAL and CLAssIFIED LIST of the PRINCIPAL HEADINGs in the following INDEX,
with the Paging at which they will be respectively found.
PAGE.
Abrasion of Coin - tº- gº -> - 165
Milled Edges - - tº - - 179
Accounts :
1. Remarks as to the inconveniences
of the existing Mode of keep-
ing Accounts - º - 165
2. Advantages which would result
from the adoption of the Deci-
mal System - - - 165
3. Suggestions as to the best Mode
of keeping Accounts under the
Decimal System - - 165
Bank of England - - - - 138
Calculations - - - - - 169
Education º -> tº - - 172
Introduction of the System - - 176
Post-office - º tº - - 182
Public Departments tº - - 182
America - - - - - - - 167
Canada - - tº- tº - - 169
Cents - º - º º 170
Bank of England - - m ºn - 168
- Abrasion of Coin - º - - 165
Accounts, 2 - wº- tº - - 165
Mint - tº a -> tº a - - 179
Weights and Measures - -> - 185
Bank Notes - tº º º º º - 168
Ireland - dº tº- tºº - - 177
Calculations - º -> sº º - 169
Accounts * > -> gº º - 165
Bank of England - us cº - 168
Education ſº - º - - 172
Logarithms - º i- -> - 178
Working Classes - gº tº - 185
Cents - - - - - º - 170
Names of Coin - º -> - 1 1 O
New Coins - - º - - 18O
Silver Coins - Q- º -> - 183
China - º º º tºº º - 170
Accounts, 2 - -> º -> - 165
Coins - - º - tº º - 170
Copper Coins - -> tº º º- - 170
Gold Coins - º wº- º - 173
Names of Coins -> º --> - 18O
New Coins - {-> * --> - 18O
Number of Coins - wº - - 18O
Silver Coins - - tº º - - 183
Value of Coins - - - - 185
Colonies tº- tº - * > -> - 170
Canada - º tº- tº wº- - 169
Decimal System - tº - - 171
Contracts --> º - tº - - 170
Railways tº- tº - - - 182
Copper Coins tº- º
Farthings tº º
Half Farthings tº-
Ireland - sº -
Måls - º -
Mew Coins - tº-
Penny - tº- -
Poorer Classes -
Customs Duties - -
Decimal System - -
Education - º -
Farthings - º -
Copper Coins - t-
Half Farthings -
MŽls - tº -
Unit of Account -
Florins - - tº- -
Names of Coins º
Shilling - ſº tº-
Silver Coins - tº-
Unit of Account º
Foreign Exchanges - -
Gold Coins - º -
Paportation of Coin
Half Sovereigns -
Pound Sterling º
Half Crowns - º G-
Half Farthings º ->
Farthings gº º
Mils - ſº •
Income Tar - º -
Introduction of the System
America - tº a -
Ireland - º º º
Bank Notes - º
Farthings tº -
Issue of New Coins
Introduction oft
Logarithms - tº tº-
Milled Edges º
Silver Coins -
Mils - - º -
Cents - tº- -
Copper Coins - -
Names of Coins -
New Coins - -
Penny Postage -
Poorer Classes º
he System
º.º->
t
PAGE.
170
173
174.
177
179
18O
181
181
171
171
172
173
17o
174.
179
184
173
18O
182
183
184
I 73
173
172
- 174.
182
1 74.
174.
173
179
176
176
167
177
168
173
tº-º:.-
177
176
179
183
179
17o
17o
18O
18O
181
181 .
O.66.
X 2
164 A N A L Y S I S OF IN D E X.
e PAGE. Silver Coins—continued. PA Gºe
Mint - - wº tº tº tº - 179 Fourpenny Pieces - tº {º} - 173
Introduction of the System tºº - 176 Half Crowns - † : tºº sº - 174.
Issue of New Coins . tº tºº - 177 New Coins - tº º º - 180
º e Shilling - tº ę º wº - 182
Mired Metal Coins * * * - 179 sº, Pieces - - - - 183
Names of Coins - tºº gº gº - 180 Small Coins - dº $º tº - 183
Cents - & sº tºº gº - 170 Threepenny Pieces - &º tº - 184
Mils sº * , gº - gº - 179
* Small Coins - - - tº a - 183
New Coins - - tº tº tº - 18O Gold Coins - tº tº ( º - 173
Gold Coins - - tº gº - 173 Half Farthing tº º º ( tº - 174
Jssue of New Coins - * &_* - 177 Poorer Classes º tº tº - 181
Number of Coins - * -º { * - 180 Silver Coins - tº sº tº - 183
Payment of Troops gº * -º wº - 181 Standard of Value - êº tºº tº- - 183
Pound Sterling º tºº gºs - 182
Penny - - - - - - - 181 $
Copper Coins - ſº { * º - 170 Tolls, &c. - tº º ſº gº - 184
Newspaper Stamps - tº * * * - 18O Penny - tºº ſº tº º - 181
Penny Postage - - - - 181 Penny Postage tºº - - - 181
Tolls, &c. tº- ſº tº a $º - 184 Unit of Account - tº tº tº - 184.
Penny Postage tº &º * - & º - 181 Pound Sterling tº º cº - 182
Postage Stamps tº gºe tº - 182 Shilling - • gºe “º tº - 182
Tolls, &c. - - gº tº º • *4 | Universal System - tº e º & tº - 184
Poorer Classes tº - gº - - 181 Coins - ºn tº º tº tº º - 17o
Competition - tº tº tº - 170 Standard of Value - tº t tº - 183
Half Farthings tºº sº tºº - 174 g
Penny - { ºs tº wº * - 18 Value of Coins gº gº tº gº - 185
Shilling - &º tºº tº tº - 182 Coins - - tº ſº tº tº - 170
Working Classes - - - - 185 Copper Coins - - - - - 170
Florins - tº tºº º • nº - 173
Pound Sterling - - - - - 182 Issue of New Coins gº ºn - 177
Miſs - - - - - 179 Shilling - - - - - - 182
Names of Coins - - - - 180 Silver Coins - - - - - 183
Unit of Account - - - - 184 *
* * Weights and Measures - tº º - - 185
Receipts Stamps - - - - - 182 Bank of England - - - - 168
://znor Customs Duties tºº tº sº - 171
sºil. r C -. : : §º º - 1 : Portugal t- * > * * tº - 182
AYZ!?)63)" (UO272& - - - 183 Universal System - - - - 184
Silver Coins - º tº tº tº - 183 e
Cents - - tº - - - 170 || Working Classes - - tº - 185
Crown Pieces - tº tº-e ( * - 171 Calculations - sº tº tº - 169
Plorins - { * º tºº ſº - 173 Poorer Classes º º sº - 181
INDEX.
I ºffs
I N D E X.
[N.B.—In this Index the Figures ſollowing Rep. refer to the page of the Report; those following
the Names of the Witnesses refer to the Questions of the Evidence; and those following App.
to the Page of the Appendix.]
A BACUS. See China. Education.
Abrasion of Coin. Opinion that Government and not the public should be liable to any
loss arising from abrasion of the coin, Hankey 89–97—The last holder of the gold
coin, and not the Bank, should undergo the loss arising from abrasion or “sweating;”
remarks as to the annual amount of this loss to the public, Sir J. Herschel 623–642.
679.-See also Milled Edges.
A CCOUNTS :
. Remarks as to the Inconveniences of the existing mode of keeping Accounts.
. Advantages which would result from the adoption of the Decimal System.
. Suggestions as to the best mode of keeping Accounts under the Decimal
System.
.
1. Remarks as to the Inconveniences of the existing mode of keeping Accounts:
Great inconveniences of the existing system; the system is shown to entail a vast
amount of unnecessary labour, and great liability to error, to render accounts needlessly
complicated, to confuse questions of foreign exchanges, and to be otherwise inconve-
nient, Rep. 3——The present monetary system of this country is very irregular, and
gives rise to great labour and liability to error in the keeping of accounts, Sir C. W.
Pasley 201-205; Airy 267–291 ; Sir J. Herschel 504-508. 602 ; Bennoch 1251—1253.
1273, 1274, .
2. Advantages which would result from the adoption of the Decimal System :
Opinion of the Committee that the adoption of a decimal system would lead to
greater accuracy, would simplify accounts, and greatly diminish the labour of calcula-
tions, Rep. 3 The advantages of a change from our present system of coinage to
a decimal system would be very considerable; great saving of time and labour that
would be effected in calculations generally, Hankey 4-10. 26–28; De Morgan 702–711.
766. 822; Miller 1 136-1145. 1158–1170. 1242; Taylor 1176, 1177. 1192; Bennoch
1251-1253. 1273, 1274—The true system of numbers consists in the decimal relation,
and this principle applied to accounts generally would be a vast improvement upon the
present division of the coinage, Laurie 143–146. 159——The adoption of decimal
coinage would after a time effect a great saving in the keeping of accounts, and would
render them very simple, Strugnell 882-888——Decimal calculation is so simple that
Tables are not required; one clerk in twelve would probably be saved at the Bank by
the reduction in time and labour, Miller 1243–1246——A decimal system of coinage
would greatly facilitate and simplify the accounts and calculations of architects and
engineers, Beard 1293–1296—Accounts are kept with the greatest ease and accuracy
in Portugal, Russia, France, Japan, and China, in consequence of the adoption of the
decimal system, Bowring 1525–1534, 1567–1570.
3. Suggestions as to the best mode of keeping Accounts under the Decimal
System :
Under witness's proposal all accounts would be kept in decimals, in pounds, florins,
and mils or cents, that is, in three columns as at present, though two columns of pounds
and mils would answer the purpose as well, Hankey 115–129——In keeping accounts
four columns of figures would be desirable; the calculation would be much easier than
0.66. X 3 O in
166 A C C A I R. [Becimal
-ms
Report, 1852-53—continued.
Acco UNTS—continued.
2. Suggestions as to the best mode of keeping Accounts, &c.—continued.
in columns of pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings, Sir C. W. Pasley 208–220–
Under a decimal system the only factor necessary to be retained is 2; Airy 290, 291
Manner in which accounts would be kept under the decimal system ; number
of columns desirable to be used, Airy 444–467; Sir J. Herschel 586–590 ; Bevan 952–
956. 968–976; Bowring 1568–1570——Under witness’s system accounts would be kept
in Victorias, florins, ten mil pieces, and one mil pieces, that is, in 1000ths, looths,
Ioths, and units, Headlam 863, 864 Accounts should be kept decimally in pounds,
florins, and cents; but witness advises the retention of the 3d. piece for circulation,
though not forming any decimal relation to the pound; a strictly decimal system should
mot be attempted, Taylor 1178–1191——How far it should be rendered imperative or
permissive to keep accounts on the decimal principle, Franklin 1474.
See also Bank of England. Calculations. Education. Introduction of the
System. Post Office. Public Departments.
Airy, Professor George B. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Astronomer Royal, 262 Chair-
man of a commission for superintending the construction of standards of weight and
measure, 263-266 The present monetary system of this country is in the main very
inconvenient, and gives rise from its irregularity to much labour and to great liability to
error, 267–291 Opinion that a coin, representing one-third part of the common silver
coin is of very little use; the present fourpenny-piece is an instance of this, but under a
decimal system, such coin would be abolished altogether, 276. 280–289—Under a
decimal system the only factor necessary to be retained is 2; 290, 291 The pound
sterling should be continued as the basis of the monetary system, and it should be divided
into 1,000 parts or mils to correspond with our present farthings, 292.
It is very inexpedient to alter the unit of the pound sterling; statement of reasons in
support of this opinion, 293–297. 302. 443—Any adjustment will be better than retain-
ing the present 1 d., or a coin equivalent to it; certain difficulties will however attend
the substitution of a mil for a farthing; instance of this in bridge and road tolls and the
penny postage, 294. 298–308. 346, 347. 476–480 Evidence to the effect that a smaller
coin than the present farthing is not needed, and would not confer any advantage upon
the lower classes in their dealings with tradesmen, 309—343 Witness strongly objects
to making los. instead of 20s. the unit, and dividing it into 1,000 parts; the greatest
confusion would result if 2 l. of the new coinage were to represent 1 l. of the old,
325–336 Half farthings are now in existence, but are very seldom made any use of,
335. 340.
The introduction of the centime into the coinage of France has been of great service,
337–339 Under a decimal system there would be no especial necessity of two or more
coins for the settlement of transactions, 344 As to different copper coins, a three-
mils piece is not needed, but a four-mils piece is indispensable, 345–348 Suggestion
for the compensation by Government for the loss to the public in the substitution of mils
for farthings, the former being of less value by four per cent., 349——A system of
decimal weights and measures, in conjunction with a decimal coinage, would afford great
facilities in calculation, 350-360. 481–493 A change from 112 lbs. to 100 lbs. would
be a great advantage; how far a decimal system of weights is in use at the custom-
house, 357–360 Anything short of the actual substitution of new copper coins cannot
produce the desired effect, 361-363.
Calculations of every kind would be greatly facilitated under the decimal system, and
would be made in about half the time they now occupy, 364–371 In the event of the
decimal system being adopted, the gold coins proposed by witness are the sovereign and
half sovereign; objection to the quarter sovereign, 372-374.386, 387. 400–402——If
another gold piece were desired, witness would recommend one of 300 mils, or 6 s.,
373-374. 388. 427——The silver coins proposed are one of 200 mils, equivalent to the
American dollar; one of 100 mils, or florin; one of 50 mils, or shilling, one either of 25 or
30 mils, and one of 10 mils, 374-381. 383-385. 390. 439–441——The 10-mils piece
might be of mixed metal, or might be coined in the form of a flattened ring, otherwise
its size would be inconveniently small, 375. 410–417. 420. 433–435.
Three copper coins are suggested, namely, the 1-mil, 2-mils, and 4-mils; the latter
coin might after a time be replaced by a 5-mils piece, 381, 382. 389. 395–399. 418. 425,
426——Opinion that as a permanent coin a 20-mils piece is preferable to that of 25-
mils, and that the latter coin, or sixpence, might gradually be abolished without inconve-
nience, 388-394. 403-409. 431, 432. 442-——It is very desirable to have as few coins as
possible, 421, 422 The present coinage of this country affords great facility to the
introduction of the decimal system, 423, 424—Objection to the introduction of a silver
piece of 250 mils, or 5s. ; there is no necessity for any piece between 500 mils and 200
mils, 428, 429––The calculations used at the Bank of England with respect to the
weighing of bullion prove the advantage of the decimal system, 429, 430.
Q It
Coinage.] . A I R. A R. C 167
sº
Report, 1852–53—continued.
Airy, Professor George B. (Analysis of his Evidence)—continued.
It would be very easy to distinguish a 5-mils piece from a 4-mils piece without coining
them in different shapes, or without having recourse to the milled edge, 436–438——
Manner in which accounts would be kept under the decimal system ; number of columns
desirable to be used, 444–467——If gold were adopted as the standard of value by other
countries, it would be possible to make such international arrangements as would make
the coins of different countries interchangeable at a fixed rate, 468–475——A uniform
system of weights and measures throughout the world is not much required, but a decimal
system for this country in conjunction with a decimal coinage is very desirable, 481–493.
[Second Examination.]—In the event of the decimal coinage being adopted it will be
necessary to call in the shillings and to issue half florins instead thereof; the term
“shilling ” must be abolished altogether, and that of “florin’’ substituted as the next
step to the pound, 494. 499-502——Further reference to the French coinage and the
introduction of the centime; the coins of that country are all under the decimal scale,
495-498.
America. Observations of the Committee relative to the introduction of the system of
decimal coinage into the United States ; no inconvenience appears to have attended the
change, Rep. 5—Reference to the assimilation of the coinage of the different American
states in 1792; the change was effected with great facility, Hankey 130.
See also Canada. Cents.
Arbuthnot, George. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Chief clerk in the Treasury, oã5—
Remarks as to a former change in the Irish currency, in altering the 13 d. into 12 d. ;
memorandum on the subject prepared by witness from the Treasury minutes, showing how
the change was effected by proclamation, 1056–1076 The change was well received
throughout the country, though the holders of copper coins were slightly sufferers,
1059–1076 A change in the coinage system of England could be effected without
any serious difficulty, by means of proclamation, 1978 Opinion that the present penny
should be retained as ałoth part of the pound, 1078–1081––Amy change of value in the
smaller coins would cause great inconvenience with respect to the penny postage, penny
tolls, &c., 1082–1086.
[Second Examination.]—Witness has prepared and delivers in the heads of a proposed
bill for decimal coinage, containing provisions calculated to give effect to the views which
have been laid before the Committee; observations thereupon, 1475——Suggestions in
this Bill for facilitating the conversion into decimal currency of debts, contracts, &c.,
entered into under the existing currency; proposal that the mil be divided into one hun-
dred parts to meet such conversion, 1475 et seq.--—Mode of dealing with customs
duties and public revenues, under the bill proposed by witness, 1475 Detail of the
mode by which tolls now levied under Act of Parliament should be dealt with, 1475.
1497–1502—Table subjoined to witness's currency scheme, showing sums from 12
pence to one penny, with their equivalents in mils and decimals of a mil, 1475.
Further explanation of witness's proposal for dividing the mil into one hundred parts,
for the purpose of calculation ; statements showing that the trouble of calculation will be
much less as applied to the income tax, &c., than under the present system, 1476 et seq.
— In the issue of new coins, the mint should not be allowed to charge a seignorage, as it
would practically be a charge upon the Bank of England, 1493–1496 With respect
to the penny postage stamp, witness recommends to fix its price at five mils instead of
four mils, as more in keeping with the decimal system, 1503, 1504——Whether the
charge be five mils or four mils, there will be no imperceptible decrease or increase in
the postage, and at present there is quite deficiency enough in the revenue of the Post
Office, 1503, 1504.
The transition from the present currency to the decimal system should be very gradual;
many of the present coins should be continued for some time, as a standard of the value
of the new coins, 1505——Recommendation that the term “shilling” be retained as the
name of the 50-mil piece, 1505. 1513, 1514 The fewer the number of decimal coins
the better, 1506––In silver the coins might be the florin, shilling, 25-cent piece, and
20-cent piece; a 10-mil piece would also be convenient, 1506–1509. 1513, 1514––
The copper coins might be pieces of one, two, four and five mils, 1507–1510. 1512
Opinion that silver or other coins, bearing the number of mils upon them, cannot be
issued till the new currency is formally proclaimed, 1511, 1512.
Instead of fixing by proclamation the value in decimal currency of the present silver
coins, as proposed in witness's Bill, it might be better to call in such coins, and give an
equivalent for them in the new coinage, 1515–1518––Explanation with respect to
witness's proposal to extend the new Act to the colonies, under such limitations as will
prevent interference with local legislation, 1519, 1520 The Act would not apply to
Canada, as the Canadians prefer assimilating their currency to that of the United States,
and object to making the pound sterling the unit of account, 1519, 1520.
Architects’ Accounts. See Accounts.
O.66. X 4
168 B A N B E V [Berintal
º
—º *—ºf ~~~-º-º: ...? :-x_*, *—z-e-Am
Report, 1852–53—continued.
B.
Bank of England. Employment of the decimal system of weights by the Bank of England,
in their purchases and sales of bullion; great advantage has resulted from the adoption of
the system, Rep. 4; Hankey 3 ; Airy 429 ; Sir J. Herschel 511 The system of keep-
ing accounts with respect to all transactions in the purchase or sale of buliion at the
Bank was, till lately, of a very complicated character, Hunkey 2, 3 Three elements
make these transactions of a very difficult nature, viz., the weight, the quality of the gold,
and the divisions of our coinage, ib. 3 On witness's suggestion, a set of tables was
drawn up, from which the pound troy was discarded, and the decimal ounce used in-
stead; general adoption of these tables after the decimal weight had been legalised, ib.
3–10. 16–20 The calculations used at the Bank of England with respect to the
weighing of bullion, prove the advantage of the decimal system, Hankey 3-10. 16–20 ;
Airy 429, 430—Witness delivers in a statement of the mode of calculating dividends
at the Bank of England, and a comparative statement of the mode proposed by the deci-
mal system, Miller 1242.
See also Abrasion of Coin. Accounts, 2. Mint. Weights and Measures.
Bank Notes. Suggestion that bank notes be stamped with their value in the proposed
Victorias, Headlam 857—Reference to the facility with which bank notes were
generally circulated in Ireland, in lieu of so much gold and silver, Duke of Leinster 1121-
1124.—See also Ireland.
Bazley, Thomas. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—President of the Manchester Chamber of
Commerce, 1306 In March 1852 that Chamber presented a petition to Government
in favour of decimal systems of coinage and weights and measures, 1307, 1308——The
simplicity of a decimal coinage would save considerable time and labour in calculations,
and might be adopted without inconvenience to the working classes, 1309-1317.
Beard, John Baron. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Architect and engineer, 1291, 1292
A decimal system of coinage would greatly facilitate and simplify the accounts and cal-
culations of architects and engineers, 1293-1296——Decimal calculations should be an
essential part of the education of every school-boy, 1297, 1298 Advantages of a deci-
mal system of weights and measures, 1299–1302—No inconvenience would result from
a decimal coinage, either as regards the relation of employers and workmen, or in the
transactions of the poor, 1303–1305.
Bennoch, Francis. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Commission warehouseman in Cheapside,
1250—The present currency system of this country is most inconvenient and incon-
sistent; the adoption of a decimal coinage would save an immense amount of time and
labour in calculations of every kind, 1251—1253. 1273, 1274—Suggested alterations in
our present coins, as necessary for introducing the decimal system; the pound should
continue as the unit of account, and should be divided into looo parts, or mils, 1255 et
seq.--—The gold coins should be the sovereign of 1000 mils, the half sovereign of 500
mils, and the quarter sovereign of 250 mils, 1260–1265––The silver coins should be the
florim of one hundred mils, the half florin of fifty mils, the quarter florin of twenty-five mils,
and the cent of ten mils, 1260 The copper coins proposed are a 2-mil piece and a 1 mil
piece, 1260. 1270, 1271.
Advantages of as small a number of coins as possible, 1261 There would be no
inconvenience on account of the size of the quarter sovereign, or of the ten-mil silver piece,
and they are both very desirable coins, 1262–1264. 1275–1278——Considerable disad-
vantages to the public results from the difficulty of obtaining a sufficiency of small coins,
1272. 1279–1283——There are certain difficulties and prejudices against a decimal
coinage, but they can easily be removed, 1284–1286—Opinion that a coin of a half
farthing is not required, 1287 It would be all the better if a decimal system of weights
and measures could accompany a decimal coinage, 1288–1290.
Bevan, R. C. L. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Banker in London, 938, 939——The advan-
tages of a decimal system of coinage are very great, and might be realised without much
difficulty, 940. 957—962——Suggestions for dealing with specific tolls, which under the
new coinage there would be no coin to meet, 940-944. 980-982 The difficulty of the
penny postage might be overcome by the public paying five-mils for the stamp instead of
four farthings; this would be no real hardship on the community, 940. 977–979—In
dividing the sovereign into 1000 mils, witness would withdraw the present silver pieces
of 5s., 2 s. 6 d., 6 il., 4 d., and 3 d., and would have the new coins all bear a decimal
relation to the 1,000 mils, 945. 947, 948.
The copper coins proposed by witness are pieces of one, two, and five mils, 945. 950, 951
The silver coins proposed are pieces of twenty, fifty, and one hundred mils, 945——It
is very desirable to have as few coins as possible, 946–949——Explanation of the manner in
which accounts might be kept under the decimal system, 952–956. 968–976. The old
coins should, if possible, be called in at once, and the new ones substituted for them ;
Ill AIAlle?'
Groimage.] , B E V C A N 169
Report, 1852–53—continued.
Bevan, R. C. L. (Analysis of his Evidence)—continued.
manner in which the public mind might be prepared for this change, 964—967 Far-
things are very inconvenient in accounts, and are seldom included; coins of half farthings
are not at all required, 968–970. 983–990.
Bowring, Dr. John. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Has been consul at Canton, and plenipo-
tentiary at Hong Kong, 1521——When witness was a Member of the House of Commons,
he was the means of introducing the present florin into coinage, 1522, 1523——Remarks
as to the confusion existing in monetary transactions in Spain and parts of Germany, in
consequence of the absence of the decimal system of accounts, 1524–1526 On the
other hand, accounts are kept with the greatest ease and accuracy in Portugal, Russia,
France, Japan and China, in consequence of the adoption of the decimal system, 1525–
1534. 1567–1570 — More than 400,000,000 of the human race, or nearly one-half of
the population of the globe, adopt the decimal system, and with very great advantage,
1527.
Remarks as to the peculiar simplicity and facility with which accounts are kept in
China, even by children of only seven years of age ; this arises from the use of the
“swan-pan” or abacus, an instrument in universal use in that country, and pretty much
so in Russia also ; mode in which this instrument is used, 1528–1531. 1567–1570
By the adoption of the decimal system, and of the abacus in schools, more would be
learnt in one day than in twenty days under our present complicated system, 1532, 1533
- Reference to the manner in which the change in the value of the shilling in the Isle
of Man was received in that island, 1535 The question of loss to any parties by the
adoption of a decimal coinage, is as nothing compared to the immense amount of benefit
that would arise, 1536. 1548–1552—The pound sterling should continue the integer of
account and should be divided into 100 parts, 1537–1540 Two copper coins, a 1-mil
piece and a 2-mil piece would be sufficient, 1541, 1542.
There should be three silver coins representing the loth, the 50th, and the looth parts
of the pound, 1542——Objection to the term “florin,” 1543——Suggestion that the
names of the new coinage be the mil or 1,000th part, the cent or looth part, and the dime
or i oth part of the pound sterling, 1543. 1574–1576––In course of time the present
names of coins would be superseded by the new names, but the names would not at all
interfere with the keeping of accounts, 1544–1547. 1577–1582——The difficulty of apply-
ing the new coinage to the penny postage, penny tolls, &c., should be provided for by
special legislation; suggestions on this point, 1548–1552—It is very objectionable to
have any coin of a mixed metal, on account of the adulteration that may be practised ;
instance of this in the coins of China and the Ottoman Empire, 1553–1555. 1560–1563
——Among the Chinese there is no higher coin than the 1,000th part of an ounce of
silver; prejudices of China against foreign coins, 1556–1559—The introduction of the
China ring coins into this country would be very inconvenient, 1564, 1565.
The decimal system should be introduced quickly; its immediate adoption is demanded
by the benefits that would arise in the keeping of accounts and in foreign exchanges, &c.
&c., i566. 1571–1573——Manner in which book accounts should be kept under the
decimal system, 1568–1570——A decimal system of weights and measures would probably
follow the decimal coinage, but the latter system should be first adopted; impracticability
of the universal adoption of both systems, 1583-1593.
Brown, William, M.P. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Hands in a statement showing the
facility of the transition from gold to notes in 1809 amongst the weavers of the north
of Ireland; opinion that after a time a change could also be made in the currency of
this country without any difficulty, 1194.
C.
Calculations. The adoption of a decimal system would greatly diminish the labour of
calculations, Rep. 3 Calculations of every kind would be greatly facilitated under
the decimal system, and would be made in about half the time they now occupy, Airy
364–371 The advantages of a decimal coinage are very great with respect to calcu-
lations of every kind; a transition from the present coinage system would be very easy,
and would not be inconvenient to the working classes, who would soon understand the
decimal system, Gregory 1410–1417 Table subjoined to witness's currency scheme,
showing sums from 12 pence to 1 penny, with their equivalents in mils and decimals of
a unil, Arbuthnot 1475.
See also Accounts. Bank of England. Education. Logarithms. Working
Classes.
Canada. The Act proposed by witness would not apply to Canada, as the Canadians prefer
assimilating their currency to that of the United States, and object to making the pound
sterling the unit of account, Arbuthnot 1519, 1520.--See also Colonies.
O.66. t Y Centimes.
170 C E N C O P [IBtrinal
Report, 1852-53—continued.
Centimes. The introduction of the centime into the coinage of France has been of very
great service, Airy 337–339.-See also French Coins. Half Farthings.
Cents. Recommendation of a coin to be called a cent, of the value of lo-mils, and equal
to the hundredth part of the pound, or the tenth part of a florin, Rep. 5——The term
“cent” is preferable to that of “mil,” and has been found to answer better in America
and elsewhere, Taylor 1182, 1183.
See also Names of Coins. New Coins. Silver Coins.
China. Remarks relative to the decimal system in existence in the vast empire of China,
Rep. 4 Evidence as to the peculiar simplicity and facility with which accounts are
kept in China, even by children of only seven years of age; this arises from the use of
the “swan-pan’’ or abacus, an instrument in universal use in that country, and pretty
much so in Russia also ; mode in which this instrument is used, Bowring 1528–153i.
1567–1570 Among the Chinese there is no higher coin than the loooth part of an
ounce of silver; prejudices of China against foreign coins, ib. 1556–1559——The intro-
duction of the China ring coins into this country would be very inconvenient, ib. 1564,
1565. See also Accounts, 2.
Coins. Observations of the Committee on the coins required to be in circulation under
a system of decimal coinage; and the coins which it will be necessary to withdraw from
circulation, Rep. 7. Enumeration of the different coins proposed by witness under
a system of decimal coinage, as best suited to the wants of the general trading of the
country, Hankey 29 et seq. Circumstances under which it would be desirable to
assimilate the coins of this country to that of France and other countries, Sir C. W.
Pasley 244-252.
See also Copper Coins. Gold Coins. Names of Coins. New Coins. Number
of Coins. Silver Coins. Value of Coins.
Colonies. Opinion of the Committee that no indisposition is felt on the part of the colo-
nial legislatures to the introduction of the decimal system; the Legislature of Canada
has just established a decimal currency in that country, Rep. 8–The decimal system
should be extended to the colonies, but Canada would probably prefer an assimilation
to the system of dollars and cents, as in the United States, Sir J. Herschel 550–552.
584, 585 Explanation with respect to witness's proposal to extend the new Act to
the colonies under such limitations as will prevent interference with local legislation,
Arbuthnot 1519, 1520. See also Canada. Decimal System.
Competition. Competition invariably causes the quantities of the articles sold to adjust
themselves without difficulty to the value of the money received for them, Rep. 5.
Contracts. Opinion that the difficulties of a practical character arising from the necessity
of a re-adjustment of a large number of existing contracts and obligations based upon
the present system of coinage are not insuperable, Rep. 5 Suggestions in the Bill,
prepared by witness for decimal coinage, for facilitating the conversion into decimal cur-
rency of debts, contracts, &c., entered into under the existing currency; proposal that
the mil be divided into 100 parts to meet such conversion, Arbuthnot 1475 et seq.
See also Railways.
Copper Coins. Recommendation that all the copper coins that may be issued under the
decimal system should have their value in mils marked upon them, Rep. 7——The copper
coins should be a 3-mils piece, a 2-mils, and a 1-mil piece or farthing ; preference given to
a 3-mils piece over a 4-mils piece, Hankey 29. 34–39——Recommendation of a 3-farthings
piece, a 1-farthing piece, and a half-farthing piece; remarks as to the inconvenience of
abolishing the penny, Laurie 166–176——The copper coins suggested by witness are a
4-tithing piece, a 2-tithing piece, and a 1-tithing piece; the term “mil” might perhaps
be better than that of tithing, Sir C. W. Pasley 235-238. 242, 243——As to copper
coins, a 3-mils piece is not needed, but a 4-mils piece is indispensable, Airy 345–348
Anything short of the actual substitution of new copper coins cannot produce the desired
effect, ib. 361-363——Three copper coins are suggested by witness, namely the 1-mil,
2-mils, and 4-mils; the latter coin might after a time be replaced by a 5-mils piece, ib.
381, 382. 389. 395–399. 418. 425, 426.
The copper coins should be 1, 2, 3, and 5 mils; at first a 4-mils piece might be more
desirable than the 3-mils piece, Sir J. Herschel 529, 530——The copper coins proposed
are pieces of 1, 2, 4, and 5 mils, De Morgan 747; Arbuthnot 1507–1510, 1512––Pro-
posal that the copper coins be 1, 2, and 5 mils pieces, Bevan 945, 950, 951—The
copper coins are the most difficult part in a change to the decimal system; suggestions
on this point, showing that such system may exist with the present coinage, without any
new coins; accounts may be kept and payments made on the decimal principle, Miller
1147–1167——Two copper coins, a 1-mil piece and a 2-mils piece would be sufficient,
Bennoch
Coimage.] C O P D E M 171
Report, 1852–53—continued.
Copper Coins—continued.
Bennoch 1260. 1279, 1271 ; Bowring 1541, 1542——Statement of experiments upon the
weight of copper coin, App. 161.
See also Farthings. Half Farthings. Ireland. Mils. New Coins. Penny.
Poorer Classes.
Crown Pieces. The 5 s. pieces are not extensively used at the Bank of England, and need
not be continued, Hankey 85, 86——Objection to the introduction of a silver piece of
250 mils or 5s. ; there is no necessity for any piece between 500 mils and 200 mils, Airy
428,429.
Customs Duties. Observations as to the difficulties in the way of the adoption of a decimal
system from the charges payable to the public revenue for duties and stamps, being very
generally expressed in pence or fractions of a penny, Rep. 6——Manner in which this
difficulty may be overcome, ib. 6.7——The monetary system of this country is exceedingly
complicated; and, as applied to customs’ duties, causes a great increase of labour and cal-
culation, which might be avoided under a more equal division of coinage and a better
system of weights and measures, Laurie 138–142. 197, 198——If all the customs duties
were charged at the rate of so much per pound avoirdupois, the loss to the customs
would be very slight, ib. 188–192——Reference to a calculation of customs duties on
certain articles by the pound; table handed in showing a comparison between the two
systems of calculating a particular entry, ib. 194---—The business of the Custom-house
would be immensely simplified and facilitated if the duties were levied in decimal
farthings to the pound avoirdupois, ib. 197, 198——The customs duties would
require a complete alteration by Acts of Parliament to come under the proposed system,
Headlam 838. 842, 843——Mode of dealing with customs duties and public revenues
under the Bill proposed by witness, Arbuthnot 1475.
D.
Decimal System. Opinion as to the great advantages attached to a decimal system as com-
pared with the present system of calculation, Rep. 3.8—Observations of the Committee
that the decimal system has been already practically adopted to a certain extent in this
country, ib. 4.—Explanation of witness’s proposed scheme of a decimal currency for
Great Britain and the colonies, Laurie, 154, et seq. 194 Recommendation of a decimal
coinage as the only substitute for the present system, Sir J. Herschel 508–5 lo Wit-
ness is a strong advocate for decimal coinage, but considers the schemes laid by different
parties before the Committee as quite impracticable ; grounds for this opinion, Headlam
838–853—All the unavoidable changes would deter any Government from sanctioning
the contemplated alteration in the value of our coinage, ib. 838. 844 The objections
apply to all sums calculated in pence and not in sovereigns, ib. 846–848 The advan-
tages of a decimal system of coinage are very great, and might be realised without much
difficulty, Bevan g40. 957-962 ; Meeking 1032-1043 Witness has prepared, and
delivers in the heads of a proposed Bill for decimal coinage, containing provisions calcu-
lated to give effect to the views which have been laid before the Committee; observations
thereupon, Arbuthnot 1475 More than 400,000,000 of the human race, or nearly one-
half of the population of the globe adopt the decimal system, and with very great advan-
tage, Bowring 1527 ——The question of loss to any parties by the adoption of a decimal
coinage is as nothing compared to the immense amount of benefit that would arise, ib.
1536. 1548–1552.
De Morgan, Augustus. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Professor of mathematics in University
College, 701 The advantages of a change from our present system of coinage to a
decimal system would be very considerable; great saving of time and labour that would
be effected in calculations generally, and in the teaching of arithmetic, if decimal coinage
were adopted, 702–711. 766. 822 Under the decimal system the table of logarithms
would doubtless be brought into use, and would tend greatly to facilitate calculations,
709 The teaching of the decimal system in schools would be undertaken and carried out
without any difficulty, if decimal coinage were established, 712. 811–815––There are not
in present use any books referring entirely to decimal coinage, 713, 714 Suggestion of
the best steps to be taken for the introduction of the decimal system into practical working,
715, et seq.
It is questionable whether a gradual or a sudden and general introduction be the more
advisable, 715—Under a gradual introduction of the decimal system, the first step
should be to call in the half-crowns, and issue florins, 715 A silver coin of 2; d.,
present coinage, should then be issued, as familiarising the public mind with the principles
of decimal calculation; this coin should in time be made one-fifth of a shilling and one-
tenth of a florin, 715–727 The pound sterling must be retained as the integer on
account of the associations connected with the term, 728. 781-809 Objection to
making los. the unit and dividing it into 1,000 parts, 729. 781-809 Witness also
objects to the retention of farthings, with a change of all the other coins, 730, 731---
O.66. Y 2 Remarks
172 D E M E X P [Becimal
Report, 1852–53—continued.
De Morgan, Augustus. (Analysis of his Evidence)—continued.
Remarks to the effect that much confusion of the ideas would arise from the terms cents
and mils under the decimal coinage; suggestion of some other monosyllabic names for
those coins, 732-746. *
The copper coins proposed by witness are pieces of 1, 2, 4, and 5 mils, 747 The
silver coins proposed are pieces of 1, 2, 4, and 5 cents, 747——The number of cents and
mils should be marked on all the coins, except the gold coins, 748, 749——The half florin
should be marked “one shilling,” “half florin,” and “50 mils,” 749——The retention of
the 4-mil piece, or penny, would not impede the change towards the decimal system,
which would soon be understood by the lower classes, 750. 755–759 There will be no
difficulty in the 4-mil piece being four per cent. less in value than the present penny; the
articles sold will soon adjust themselves to the prices paid, 751, 752.799–809 Tolls,
&c., which are now fixed by Act of Parliament at a half-penny or one penny, might easily
be dealt with ; paper delivered in, showing the rule for the determination of the term
during which a toll should be, in new farthings, one more than now in old ones, in order
to compensate the owner of the tolls for the reduction of the farthing to the 1,000th of a
pound, 753, 754.
A decimal system of weights and measures is very desirable, but the decimal system of
coinage should be first adopted; how far the French system of weights and measures is to
be recommended for general adoption, 761–780——Difficulties in the way of universal
decimal systems of coinage and of weights and measures, 766–780. 81 o. 816–821——
There were in England, at the time of the Restoration, fifty-nine gold pieces of different
values; the transition from these coins to others tends to prove the facility of a transition
now to the decimal system, 822–826——Centimes are very scarce in France, and there
are in this country plenty of half farthings at the Mint which are never called for ; inference
from this that a smaller coin than the present farthing is not needed, 827-837.
I)ollars. See Silver Coins.
Dowie, Kenneth. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Member of the Liverpool Chamber of Com-
merce, 1318 That Chamber have sent in a memorial to the Board of Trade, recoul-
mending the adoption of the decimal system, 1319. 1338–1340 Witness and some
others i. made inquilies throughout Liverpool as to the feelings of parties, in the
habit of dealing with the lower classes, upon the subject of a decimal coinage, 1320
The opinion of these parties was, that the value of the new coins would soon adjust itself
to the quantity sold, without loss to the purchaser, 1321, 1322——The decimal system
would be of considerable advantage in calculations, &c.; suggestions as to the coins
most required for a decimal coinage ; a half farthing is not wanted, 1323–1337. 1348——
Desirability of a decimal system of weights and measures, 1341–1347.
Duties. See Customs Duties.
E.
Edges of Coins. See Milled Edges.
Lducation. The education of the people generally would be much facilitated by the intro-
duction into our schools of a decimal system, which is so directly calculated to render
easy the acquirement of arithmetic, Rep. 3——The adoption of the decimal system would
reduce immensely the labours of scholars and teachers in schools, and would be of the
greatest benefit in calculations generally, Sir J. Herschel, 602——A decimal system of
coinage would greatly facilitate calculations, and would save considerable time and labour
in the arithmetical education of youth, De Morgan 709–712; Franklin 1436–1446——
The teaching of the decimal system in schools would be undertaken and carried out
without any difficulty, if decimal coinage were adopted, De Morgan 709–714.811–815——
There are not at present any books referring entirely to decimal coinage, ib. 713, 714
——Decimal calculations should be an essential part of the calculations of every school-
boy, Beard 1297, 1298——By the adoption of the decimal system, and of the Chinese
abacus in schools, more would be learnt in one day than in twenty days, under our com-
plicated system, Bowring 1532, 1533.--See also China. -
Engineers’ Accounts. See Accounts, 2.
Erchanges. Remarks showing that in the exchange of commodities the decimal system is
more useful and convenient than the present system, Sir J. Herschel 591, 592.
See also Foreign Exchanges.
Eaportation of Coin. Account of the number of ounces of British gold coin exported from
the United Kingdom in each year, from 1842 to 1852, inclusive, Sir J. Herschel 679.
Coinage.] F. A. R. G O L 173
Report, 1852-53—continued.
F.
Farthings. Farthings are very inconvenient in accounts, and are seldom included; coins
of half-farthings are not at all required, Bevan 968–970. 983-990——Farthings are not
used in Ireland to any great extent, Duke of Leinster 1 128–1131.
See also Copper Coins. Half Farthings. Mils. Unit of Account.
Florins. With the exception of the florin, our present coinage does not afford any facilities
for the introduction of the decimal system, Sir J. Herschel 514, 515 The florins and
half florins should each bear upon them the number of mils they represent, ib. 532–534.
542 Between one and two millions of florins have been issued; they are being rapidly
coined at present, ib. 539-541 When witness was a member of the House of Com-
mons, he was the means of introducing the present florin into coinage, Bowring 1522
1553—Objection to the term florin, ib. 1543.
See also Names of Coins. Shilling. Silver Coins. Unit of Account.
Foreign Exchanges. Remarks of the Committee as to the inconvenience of the existing
system, as tending to confuse questions of foreign exchanges, Rep. 3––The adoption
of a decimal system, by facilitating the comparison between the coinage of this country
and other countries that have adopted that system, would tend to the convenience of all
those who are engaged in exchange operations, ib.--Thºre is immense disadvantage
under the present system with respect to foreign exchanges; instances of this in our
exchanges with France and Holland, Laurie 147–153——Table showing foreign exchanges
by the present complex mode, ib. 1134—Table showing foreign exchanges by the
proposed mode of florins and cents, which renders exchanges uniform and intelligible, ib.
——See also Introduction of the System.
Four-penny Pieces. Opinion that a coin representing one-third part of the common silver coin
is of very little use; the present four-penny piece is an instance of this, but under a decimal
system such coin would be abolished altogether, Airy 276. 280–289 Under a decimal
system it would not be well to let the three-penny or four-penny pieces remain in circula-
tion, Sir J. Herschel 575-578.
France. See Accounts, 2. Foreign Exchanges. Standard of Value. Universal
System. Weights and Measures.
Franklin, Jacob Abraham. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Auditor and public accountant in
Throgmorton-street, 1435 A decimal system of coinage would greatly facilitate calcula-
tions, and would save considerable time and labour in the arithmetical education of youth,
1436–1446 Under a decimal coinage the sovereign should be the starting point, and
should be divided into 1,000 parts; suggestions as to the other coins most required, 1447–
1469—The names of penny and halfpenny must be retained with the 4-mils and 2-mils
pieces; any monosyllabic names will do for the other coins, 1470–1472——The present
coins need not be recalled when the new ones are issued, 1473 How far it should be
rendered imperative or permissive to keep accounts on the decimal principle, 1474.
French Coins. Reference to the French coinage and the introduction of the centime; the
coins of that country are all under the decimal scale, Airy 495-498. See also Centimes.
G.
Germany. See Spain.
Gold Coins. Statement of certain objections against gold pieces of the value of 5 s., as
being expensive coins in the fabrication, and as being liable to abrasion, “sweating,” and
other drawbacks, Hankey 87–89 The gold coins for a decimal coinage should be the
sovereign, half sovereign, and a 5 s. gold piece, Sir C. W. Pasley 232; Bennoch 1260.
1265 In the event of the decimal system being adopted, the gold coins proposed by
witness are the sovereign and half sovereign ; objection to the quarter sovereign, Airy
372-374. 386, 387. 400–402—If another gold piece were desired, witness would
recommend one of 300 mils, or 6 s., ib. 373, 374. 388. 427 The gold coins should be
500, 1,000, and 2,000 mils, Sir J. Herschel 529—Objections to having any gold coin
of a less denomination than 10 s. ; ib. 611-614 There would be a great disadvantage
in issuing gold coins below a sovereign as tokens, thus laying on Government the loss of
wear and tear, as in the case of silver coins, ib. 615–618 There were in England at the
time of the Restoration, 59 gold pieces of different value; the transition from these coins
to others tends to prove the facility of a transition now to the decimal system, De Morgan
822–826——A new gold piece worth 12 s. 6d., would be very convenient for many pur-
poses, Headlam 857 Objections to the issue of a gold coin of so low a value as 5 s.,
Miller 1247–1249.
See also Exportation of Coin. Half Sovereigns. Pound Sterling,
O.66. Y 3 Gregory,
174 G R E H A N [Decimal
Report, 1852–53–-continued.
Gregory, Charles Hutton. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Civil engineer, 1409––The advan-
tages of a decimal coinage are very great with respect to calculations of every kind ; a
transition from the present coinage system would be very easy, and would not be incon-
venient to the working classes, who would soon understand the decimal system, 1410–
1417 Suggestions as to the value and denominations of the coins to be adopted under
a decimal coinage; a change in the value of the present copper coins would not be pro-
ductive of any material or ultimate loss, either to tolls and bridges, or to the penny
postage, 1418–1427––It is very desirable to introduce the French decimal system of
weights and measures into this country, and to make that system universal, 1428–1434.
H.
Balf Crowns. There are about 37,000,000 half-crowns in circulation, and altogether, in
silver and copper, about 700,000,000 pieces would require recoining; considerable time
would be necessary to complete so extensive an operation, Sir J. Herschel 536–538. 542–
549. 564–574—Under a gradual introduction sf the decimal system, the first step
should be to call in the half crowns and issue florins, De Morgan 755.
Płalf Farthings. Evidence to the effect that a smaller coin than the present farthing is not
needed, and would not confer any advantage upon the lower classes in their dealings with
tradesmen, Airy 309-343; Sirugnell 891-894. 907–915; Benuwch 1287 Half farthings
are now in existence, but are very seldom used, Airy 335-34o —Centimes are very
scarce in France, and in this country there are plenty of half farthings at the Mint,
which are never called for; inference from this that a smaller coin than the present
farthing is not needed, De Morgan, 827-837––See also Farthings. Mils.
Half Sovereigns. Under the decimal system of coinage there should be, as at present, a
half-sovereign representing 500 mils, but no smaller gold coin, Hankey 29; Laurie 160,
161.--See also Gold Coins. Unit of Account.
Hankey, Thomson, jun. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Late Governor of the Bank of
England, 1––The system of keeping accounts with respect to all transactions in the
purchase or sale of bullion at the Bank was till lately of a very complicated character,
2, 3 Three elements make these transactions of a very difficult mature, viz., the weight,
the quality of the gold, and the division of our coinage, 3——On witness's suggestion a
set of tables was drawn up, from which the pound troy was discarded and the decimal
ounce used instead ; general adoption of these tables after the decimal weight had been
legalised; great amount of labour saved thereby in the Bank, 3–10. 16–20–––If a
decimal system of coinage were adopted calculations would be much more simplified, and
great benefits would be conferred on the community at large, 4. 10. 26–28. *
Avoirdupois weight is only used at the Bank of England in buying paper and goods of
that kind; if a change in the system of measures were made it would be desirable to
keep the pound avoirdupois, and not to have any reference to troy weight, 11–25——
Enumeration of the different coins proposed by witness, under a system of decimal
coinage, as best suited to the wants of the general trading of the country, 29 et seq.
The sovereign should be divided into a thousand parts, or farthings, those parts being
called mils, 29——There should also be, as at present, a half sovereign, representing 500
mils, 29——-The silver coins proposed are a florin of loomils, a half florin or shilling,
a quarter florin, and the doit or groat of 10 mils; that is, four silver coins, 29. 31, 32.
——The copper coins would be a 3-mils piece, a 2-mils, and a 1-mil piece or farthing;
preference given to a 3-mils piece over a 4-mils piece, 29.34–39.
Opinion that taking the sovereign as the main coin the term unil is more suitable than
that of cent, 29, 40-42 It would be very undesirable and inconvenient to have any
coin of a lower denomination than a 1-mil or farthing, 43–66——With respect to the
smallness of the proposed 10-mil piece, it is not likely to create any inconvenience, or to
be mistaken for the next silver piece of 25 mils, 67, 68——Objection to the 10-mil piece
being surrounded with a copper rin, 69–71. 79——As it is very desirable to have as few
coins as possible, witness would abolish the fourpenny pieces, and would not have any
Smaller copper coins than those before mentioned, 72–74. 81–84——Consideration of
the best course to be pursued by Government in calling in the present coins and replacing
them by a new issue, 75–78. 99-114——The 5s. pieces are not extensively used at the
Bank of England, and need not be continued, 85, 86.
Statement of certain objections against gold pieces of the value of 5 s. as being expen-
sive coins in the fabrication, and as being liable to abrasion, “sweating,” and other
drawbacks 87-89——Opinion that Government, and not the public, should be liable to
any loss arising from abrasion of the coin, 89–97——The present system of milling the
edges of coins is very objectionable, and leads of itself to considerable abrasion, 98——
How far any prejudice might be excited amongst the lower orders by a change in the
denominations of copper coins; inconvenience or fraud can best be remedied by a general
and total substitution of the new coinage for the old, 99-114.
Under
Coinage.] H A N H E R 175
Report, 1852–53—continued.
Hankey, Thompson, jun. (Analysis of his Evidence)—continued.
Under witness’s proposal all accounts would be kept in decimals, in pounds, florins,
and mils or cents, that is, in three columns, as at present; the two columns of pounds
and mils would answer the purpose as well, 115-129--—Reference to the assimilation of
the coinage of the different American states in 1792; the change was effected with great
facility, 130——An assimilation of weights and measures, as well as of coinage throughout
the world, would be a great advantage, 131, 132——It is very desirable to retain the
sovereign as our unit of calculation, as being at present the standard coin by law, and the
basis of calculation with respect to the value of land and other property, 133–136.
Headlam, Thomas Emerson, M.P. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Is a strong advocate for
decimal coinage, but considers the scheme laid by different parties before the Committee
as quite impracticable; grounds for this opinion, 838–853 It is perfectly essential that
any new coins to be issued in this country should be interchangeable with those now in
circulation, 838 Under the proposed decimal system of dividing the sovereign into
1,000 mils, or farthings, one difficulty to be met is the penny postage, in which case
there would be no coin to pay for the 1 d, stamp, 838. 841. 852, 853 The income tax,
at 7 d. in the pound, is another difficulty, and could not be calculated at the present rate,
838. 845 The same principle applies to customs’ duties, which would require a com-
plete alteration by Acts of Parliament to come under the proposed system, 838. 842,
843 Acts of Parliament would also be necessary to alter the terms of contracts
imposed on railways, &c., under the existing coinage, 838 It would also be necessary
to deal separately by Act with every toll-gate in the country, 838–840.852—All these
unavoidable changes would deter any Government from sanctioning the contemplated
alteration in the value of our coinage, 838. 844.
The objections apply to sums calculated in pence, and not in sovereigns, 846-848
A former change in the Irish coinage is not a parallel case to the proposed change in the
English coinage, 849-852 Statement of certain means by which a decimal system of
coinage might be introduced without much inconvenience, 854-864—Every existing
coin should be stamped with its value in existing farthings, or in mils, 855—The
silver pieces of 2 d. and of 3 d. should be called in, 856, 857——A silver coin of 2 # d.
should replace the silver 3 d., 857——The other new coins recommended by witness
should be multiples by 10 of the existing farthing, the new pound or “Victoria,” being
of the value of 11. O's. 10 d. ; 857——Suggestion that bank notes be stamped with their
value in the proposed Victorias, 857—A new gold piece, worth 12 s. 6d., would be
very convenient for many purposes, 857——Witness would thus alter all the existing
gold and silver coins, the principle of his decimal system being to build up from the
mil, or farthing, 858–862——Under this system accounts would be kept in Victorias,
florins, 10-mil pieces, and 1-mil pieces, that is, in 1,000ths, 1 Ooths, 1 oths, and units,
863, 864.
Herschel, Sir John. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Master of the Mint, 503 The present
monetary system of this country is very irregular, and gives rise to great labour and
liability to error in the keeping of accounts, 504-508. 602—Recommendation of a
decimal coinage as the only substitute for the present system, 508—51 o —The decimal
system of calculation is now used at the Bank of England, in reference to bullion and
assaying, 511 Witness is convinced of the advantages of the system at the Bank,
and it will be introduced into the Mint as soon as possible, 51 1-513 With the excep-
tion of the florin, our present coinage does not afford any facilities for the introduction of
the decimal system, 514, 515 In the decimal scale, the pound sterling must continue
as the unit, and the other coins must be in relation to it; reasons for this conclusion,
516–529.
The pound should be divided into 1,000 parts or mils, 529—The copper coins sug
gested are pieces of 1, 2, 3 and 5 mils; at first a 4-mils piece might be more desirable than
the 3-mils piece, 529, 530——The silver pieces proposed, are coins of 10, 20, 30, 50 and
100 mils ; these might be distinguished more fully by the edges of each alternate coins
being milled, 529-531 —The gold coins should be pieces of 500, 1,000, and 2,000 mils,
529 Evidence as to the best means of introducing decimal coinage into practical use,
532 et seq. The first step should be an anticipatory one, and should consist in familiar-
ising the public with the ideas and denominations of the system, 532 The operations
of the Mint should consist in issuing, from time to time, florins, &c., and in gradually
withdrawing first the half-crowns, and then the other silver pieces now current, 533.
569–574.
The florins and half-florins should each bear upon them the number of mils they repre-
Sent, 532–534. 542. There are about 37,000,000 half-crowns in circulation, and
altogether, in silver and copper, about 700,000,000 pieces would require re-coining;
considerable time would be necessary to complete so extensive an operation, 536–538.
542-549. 564-574––Between one and two millions of florins have been issued, and
they are being rapidly coined at present, 539-541—The decimal system should be
º to the colonies, but Canada would probably prefer an assimilation to the system
O. O(). Y 4 of
176 H E R I NT [Þecimal
Report, 1852-53—continued.
Herschel, Sir John. (Analysis of his Evidence)—continued.
of dollars and cents, as in the United States, 550-552. 584, 585 There would at first
be some difficulty with the lower classes in the introduction of the decimal system, but
this would gradually subside, 553–557. 564-568––When the change in the coinage
of Ireland was made, the copper coins were raised in value by eight per cent.; manner in
which the change was effected, 558–563.
An adequate supply of decimal coinage would be necessary for the replacement of the
coins called in, 569–574 Opinion that under a decimal system it would not be well to
let the threepenny or fourpenny pieces remain in circulation, 575-578——Very few silver
10-mil pieces would be necessary; their size would be an objection to a large issue of
them, 579–582——Objections to the issue in alloyed metal of a 10-mils piece or any
other coin, 583— Manner in which accounts might be kept under the decimal system,
586–590—— Remarks showing that, in the exchange of commodities, the decimal system
is more useful and convenient than the present system, 591, 592 A decimal system of
coinage should be accompanied simultaneously by a decimal system of weights and
measures, 592–602 The adoption of both systems would reduce immensely the labours
of scholar and teacher in our schools, and would be of the greatest benefit in calculations
generally, 602.
A universal system of weights and measures common to all countries is very desirable
but is not practicable; extensive adoption of the French system, which is a very good
one, 603–610 Objections to having any gold coin of a less denomination than 10 s. ;
611-614——There would be a great disadvantage in issuing gold coins below a sovereign
as tokens, thus laying on Government the loss of wear and tear, as in the case of silver
coins, 615–618 The milled edges of sovereigns and other coins cause great loss by
abrasion, but are a considerable safeguard against counterfeit coin; on the whole, witness
prefers to retain the milled edge, 619–622 The last holder of light gold coin, and not
the Bank, should undergo the loss arising from abrasion or “sweating;” remarks as to
the annual amount of this loss to the public, 623-642. 679.
The decimal system of coinage might be adjusted to meet the penny postage, penny
tolls, and other fixed payments; under any circumstances the penny must be withdrawn
from circulation, 643-652 Evidence showing how far it is practicable or desirable to
make the coins of this country and of other countries, such as France, interchangeable,
by adopting a common standard of value, and of fineness of metal, 653–689 The
adoption of a common standard in different countries would not have much effect in
checking speculation in the exchanges, 676–678. 687, 688——Account of the number of
ounces of British gold coin exported from the United Kingdom in each year, from 1842
to 1852, inclusive, 679.
Hill, Rowland. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Secretary to the Postmaster-general, 11.95
Under the proposed decimal coinage, by which the pound would be divided into
1,000 mils, it would be much better that the penny postage stamp should cost four mils
than five mils, 1196–1200. 1216 et seq.--—The risk to the post-office would be about
1oo,000 l. annually, or four per cent. On the gross revenue, but this loss would be gradually
made up by the increase of letters consequent on the reduction, and would be more than
compensated for by the advantages of decimal coinage to the community at large, 1197–
1200. 1216. 1226–1237——Remarks as to the number of postage stamps of the different
classes, from 1 d. to 1 s., which are sold to the public; opinion that there would be no
saving of any importance in the non-extension of the proposed diminution to the dearer
staups, 1201-1216. 1238-1240.
In making 4-mils the cost of the 1 d, stamp, the decimal calculation is certainly lost,
but this inconvenience is better than the impolicy of raising the postage 20 per cent., by
fixing the price of the stamp at five mils, 1217–1225. 1233 There would be a con-
siderable saving of labour and time, and consequently of expense, by the introduction of
the decimal system into the post-office, and more especially into the money order depart-
ment, 1230. 1234–1237.
Holland. See Foreign Exchanges,
I.
Income Taº. The income tax at 7 d. in the pound is one difficulty in the way of the adop-
tion of the proposed decimal system, and could not be calculated at the present rate,
Beadlam 838. 845 Explanation of witness's proposal for dividing the mil into loo
parts for the purpose of calculation; statements showing that the trouble of calculation
will be much less as applied to the income tax, &c., than under the present system
Arbuthnot 1476 et seq. - y
Introduction of the System. Recommendation that no unnecessary delay should prevent
the full introduction of the decimal system, and the necessary preparatory measures
should be entered on at the Royal Mint as soon as possible, Rep. 7, 8 Opinion of
the
&toimage.] I N T . K I R. 177
Report, 1852-53—continued.
Introduction of the System—continued.
the Committee that the present moment is especially adapted for introducing the decimal
system, in consequence of the prosperous state of the whole community, Rep. 8 Evi-
dence as to the best means of introducing decimal coinage into practical use, Hankey
75–78. 99-114; Sir J. Herschel 532 et seq.; De Morgan 715 et seq.; Headlam 854–
864––The present coinage of this country affords great facility to the introduction of
the decimal system, Airy 423, 424—The first step should be an anticipatory one, and
should consist in familiarising the public with the ideas and denominations of the
system, Sir J. Herschel 532 The operations of the Mint should consist in issuing,
from time to time, florins, &c., and in gradually withdrawing, first the half-crowns
and then the other pieces now current, ib. 532. 569–574 An adequate supply of
decimal coinage would be necessary for the replacement of the coins called in, ib.
569–574.
It is questionable whether a gradual, or a sudden and general introduction, be the
more advisable, De Morgan 715––It would be better to adopt decimal coinage at
once than to introduce it gradually, Strugnell 870, 871. 879 The old coins should,
if possible, be called in at once, and the new ones substituted for them ; manner in
which the public might be prepared for this change, Bevan 964-967——The transition
from the present currency to the decimal system should be very gradual; many of the
present coins should be continued for some time as a standard of the value of the new
coins, Arbuthnot 1505 The decimal coinage should be introduced quickly ; its im-
mediate adoption is demanded by the benefits that would arise in the keeping of
accounts and in foreign exchanges, &c., &c., Bowring 1566. 1571–1573.
See also America.
Ireland. When the change in the coinage of Ireland was made, the copper coins were
raised in value by 8 per cent.; manner in which this change was effected, Sir J. Herschel
558–563—A former change in the Irish coinage is not a parallel case to the proposed
change in the English coinage, Headlam 849–852——Remarks as to a former change
in the Irish currency in altering the 13 d. into 12 d. ; memorandum on the subject pre-
pared by witness from the Treasury Minutes, showing how the change was effected by
proclamation, Arbuthnot 1056–1076—The change was well received throughout the
country, though the holders of copper coins were slightly sufferers, ib. 1059–1076
Observations relative to the change in 1826 in the Irish currency, when the Irish shilling
of 13 d. was reduced to the English shilling of 12 d. ; the transaction was after a time
very easy, and the poorer classes found that commodities soon adjusted themselves to
the new prices, Duke of Leinster 1087–1 lol. 1 1 16-1 119 Statement showing the
facility of the transition from gold to notes in 1809 amongst the weavers of the North
of Ireland; opinion that after a time a change could also be made in the currency
of this country without any difficulty, Brown 1194.
See also Bank Notes. Farthings.
Isle of Man. Reference to the manner in which the change in the value of the shilling
in the Isle of Man was received in that island, Bowring 1535.
Issue of New Coins. The present coins need not be recalled when the new ones are issued,
Franklin 1473—In the issue of new coins, the Mint should not be allowed to charge
a seignorage, as it would practically be a charge upon the Bank of England, Arbuthnot
1493–1496——Opinion that silver, or other coins bearing the number of mils upon them,
cannot be issued till the new currency is formally proclaimed, ib. 1511, 1512.
See also Introduction of the System.
Japan. See Accounts, 2.
K.
Åirkham, Henry. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—-Clerk in an extensive tea and grocery
establishment at Liverpool, 1349, 1350—Delivers in “A statement of one day's tran-
sactions at a shop in the tea and general grocery trade in a low part of Liverpool,” showing
the small sums paid for a given number of articles, &c., 1351 Examination on this
statement to the effect that decimal coinage might be adopted without inconvenience or
injury to the lower classes, and wtih great advantage to the community at large, 1352
et seq.--—Suggestions as to the coins most required for the decimal system ; remarks
showing that a coin of less value than a farthing is not wanted, 1362–1408.
O.66. Z
178 * L. A U I, O W [Decimal
Report, 1852-53—continued.
L.
Laurie, James. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Wine merchant, 137 The monetary system
of this country is exceedingly complicated, and, as applied to customs duties, causes a
great increase of labour and calculation, which might be avoided under a more equal
division of coinage, and a better system of weights and measures, 138–142, 197, 198—
The true system of numbers consists in the decimal relation, and this principle applied to
accounts generally would be a vast improvement upon the present division of the coinage,
143-146. 159 There is immense disadvantage under the present system with respect
to foreign exchanges; instances of this in our exchanges with France and Holland,
147-153.
Decimal system of coinage suggested by witness in lieu of that now in practice, 154
et seq——The pound should be divided into 1,000 farthings or mils, and all the other
coins should have relation to the pound sterling, as is the case in the United States, 157,
158 There should also be a half-sovereign, but no smaller gold coin, 160, 161
With respect to the silver pieces, a coin of four shillings, or dollar, would be very con-
venient, and would suit many purposes of exchange; inconvenience of the present crown
piece, 161–163——The other silver coins proposed by witness are the florin or coin of 100
mils, a coin of fifty mils, one of twenty, and one of ten, 164, 1657––The copper coins
suggested are a three-farthings piece, a one-farthing piece, and a half-farthing piece;
remarks as to the inconvenience of abolishing the penny, 166–176.
The proposed change in the copper coinage would be well received by the lower classes,
who would soon understand the difference between a mil and the present farthing, 177–
181——Great difficulty is now experienced hy the shopkeeper in calculating interest on
any article he obtains; the calculation would be much easier under the decimal system,
182–187——If all the customs duties were charged at the rate of so much per pound
avoirdupois, the loss to the customs would be very slight, 188-192 Reference to a
calculation of customs duties on certain articles by the pound; table handed in, showing
a comparison between the two systems of calculating a particular entry, 194——Explana-
tion of witness’ proposed scheme of a decimal currency for Great Britain and the colonies,
194——The business of the Custom-house would be immensely simplified and facilitated
if the duties were levied in decimal farthings to the pound avoirdupois, 197, 198.
[Second Examination.]—Hands in two tables, showing how the penny postage may be
adjusted if the pound be divided into 1,000 mils, l 134——Remarks as to the best means
of compounding with tolls under the contemplated change in the coinage; table delivered
in, showing the present value of a perpetuity of from 1 l. to 100 l. per annum at twenty
years’ purchase, at certain rates per cent., 1134 Different tables, showing the present
sovereign and the half-sovereign taken as units, and divided into certain decimal parts,
1 134 Opinion that decimal currency can be best effected by making the florin the unit
of account, with loo cents to one florin, and ten florins to one pound, 1 134——Table
delivered in, showing the decimal pound sterling of ten florins of 100 cents, with their
equivalents in the pound sterling, 1134 Table showing foreign exchanges by the pre-
sent complex mode, 1134 Table showing foreign exchanges by the proposed mode of
florins and cents, which renders exchanges uniform and intelligible, 1134.
Leinster, Duke of. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Remarks as to the change in 1826 in the
Irish currency, when the Irish shilling of 13 d. was reduced to the English shilling of
12 d.; the transition was after a time very easy, and the poorer classes found that commo-
dities soon adjusted themselves to the new prices, 1087–1 lol. , 116–1119——Under a
decimal system in this country, three denominations, of pounds, florins, and mils, would be
sufficient; number and value of coins suggested, 1 102-1 107. 11 13, 11 14——A decimal
system of coinage would facilitate calculations and payments of every kind, and should be
followed by a decimal system of weights and measures, 1108–11 15. 1 120. 1132, 1 133——
Reference to the facility with which bank notes were generally circulated in Ireland in lieu
of so much gold and silver, 1121-1 124——Farthings are not used in Ireland to any great
extent, 1128–1131.
Lindsey, Samuel. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Grocer and tea-dealer, in Lower Marsh,
Lambeth, 991–993——If, by a change in our coinage, 6d. represented 25 farthings or
mils instead of 24 farthings, the poorer classes would soon get accustomed to the new
system, and would not be any sufferers thereby, as the article sold would soon adjust
itself to the value given, 994, et seq.—--It would be better to retain the shilling as a
common coin than the florin, but there is no necessity of going lower in the scale than
the present farthings, 1008–1029.
Liverpool Chamber of Commerce. The Liverpool Chamber of Commerce have sent a memo-
rial * the Board of Trade, recommending the adoption of the decimal system, Dowie 1319.
1338–1340.
Logarithms. Under the decimal system the table of logarithms would doubtless be brought
into use, and would tend greatly to facilitate calculations, De Morgan 709.
Lower Orders. See Poorer Classes. Working Classes.
&toimage.J M A N M I X 179
Report, 1852-53—continued.
M.
Manchester Chamber of Commerce. In March 1852 the Manchester Chamber of Commerce
presented a petition to Government in favour of decimal coinage, weights and measures,
Bazley 1307, 1308.
Meeking, Charles. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Draper, on Holborn Hill, 1030, 1031——A
decimal system of coinage would facilitate business transactions of every kind, and the
transitition to it from the present system would be very easy, 1032-1043—The poorer
classes would not suffer any practical injury from a change in the value of the present
coins, by a division of the sovereign into 1,000 parts; reference to the small coins most
required, 1035–1050——There should be a simultaneous adoption of decimal measure-
ment and decimal coinage, 1051–1054.
Milled Edges. The present system of milling the edges of coins is very objectionable, and
leads to considerable abrasion, Hankey 98 It would be very easy to distinguish a
5-mils piece from a 4-mils piece without coining them in different shapes, or without
having recourse to the milled edge, Airy 436–438——The milled edges of sovereigns and
other coins cause great loss by abrasion, but are a considerable safeguard against counter-
feit coins; on the whole, witness prefers to retain the milled edge, Sir J. Herschel 619–
622. See also Silver Coins.
Miller, William. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Cashier in the Bank of England, 1135
The adoption of a decimal system of coinage would save considerable clerical labour in the
bank, and would facilitate calculations, &c., throughout the country generally, 1 136–1145.
1158. 1170——The sovereign should be divided into 1,000 parts, and the names of all
the other coins except the 6 d. should be retained, 1146——The copper coins are the most
difficult part in a change to the decimal system; suggestions on this point, showing that
such system may exist with the present coinage ; and that, without any new coins,
accounts may be kept and payments made on the decimal principle, 1147–1167 Refer-
ence to the best means of dealing with tolls and the penny postage under a division of the
sovereign into 1,000 parts, 1147. 1151, 1 152. 1 168, 1169 A decimal system of
weights and measures in conjunction with a decimal coinage would tend still more to faci-
litate calculations, 1171–1173.
[Second Examination.]—Delivers in a statement of the mode of calculating dividends
at the Bank of England, and a comparative statement of the mode proposed by the decimal
system, 1242 An illustration from these statements shows a considerable saving of
calculation under the decimal system, 1242 Decimal calculation is so simple that
tables are not required; one clerk in twelve would probably be saved at the Bank by the
reduction in time and labour, 1243–1246——Objections to the issue of a gold coin of so
low a value as 5 S.; 1247–1249.
Mils. Proposal of the Committee that the lowest denomination, in order to mark its relation
to the unit of value, should bear the name of mil, Rep. 5–Opinion that taking the
sovereign as the main coin, the term mil is more suitable than that of cent., Hankey 29.
40–42——It would be very undesirable and inconvenient to have any coin of a lower
denomination than a 1-mil or farthing, ib. 43–66 Suggestion for the compensation by
Government for the loss to the public in the substitution of mils for farthings, the former
being of less value by 4 per cent, Airy 349.
See also Cents. Copper Coins. Names of Coins. New Coins, Penny
Postage. I’oorer Classes.
Mint. Remarks relative to the announcement of the Master of the Mint of his intention to
introduce the use of the decimal system, Rep. 4.——Witness is convinced of the advan-
tages of the system at the Bank, and it will be introduced into the Mint as soon as
possible, Sir J. Herschel 511–513.
See also Introduction of the System. Issue of New Coins.
Mized-Metal Coins. Objection to the 10-mil piece being of silver surrounded with a
copper rim, Hankey 69-71 Any coin of mixed-metal is very objectionable, Sir C. W.
Pasley 239; Sir J. Herschel 583 The 10-mil piece might be of mixed-metal, or
might be coined in the form of a flattened ring, otherwise its size would be inconve-
niently small, Airy 375. 41 o–417. 420. 433–435 It is very objectionable to have
any coin of a mixed metal, on account of the adulteration that may be practised; in-
stance of this in the coins of China and the Ottoman Empire, Bowring 1553–1555,
1560–1563. * *
0.66. A A
180. N A M P A s [Decimal
Report, 1852-53—continued.
N.
Names of Coins. The list of coins necessary to represent the monies of account would be
pounds, florins, cents, and mils, Rep. 5––Remarks to the effect that much confusion
of the ideas would arise from the terms cents and mils under the decimal coinage; sug-
gestion of some other monosyllabic names for those coins, De Morgan 732-746 The
present names of all the coins except the sixpence should be retained, Miller 1146——
The names of a penny and halfpenny must be retained with the 4-mil and 2-mil piece;
any monosyllable names will do for the other coins, Franklin 1470–1472——Suggestion
that the names of the new coinage be the mil or 1,000th part, the cent or 1 ooth part,
and the dime or 1 oth part of the pound sterling, Bowring 1543. 1574–1576—In course
of time the present names of coins would be superseded by the new names, but the
names would not at all interfere with the keeping of accounts, wb. 1544–1547. 1577–1582.
See also Cents. Mils.
Wew Coins. The only new coins required are copper pieces of 1, 2, 3, and 4 mils, and silver
pieces of 1, 2, 3, and 4 cents, Sir C. W. Pasley 695,696 It is perfectly essential that
any new coins to be issued in this country should be interchangeable with those now in
circulation, Headlam 838——The new coins recommended by wituess should be multi-
plied by 1o of the existing farthing, the new pound or “Victoria” being of the value of
il. os. Iod., ib. 857——Description and value of the different coins most desirable
under the decimal system, starting from the pound which should be worth a 1,000 mils,
Strugnell 872-879.895–897——In dividing the sovereign into 1,000 mils, witness would
withdraw the present silver pieces of 5s, 2s. 6d, 6d, 4d., and 3d, and have the new
coins all bear a decimal relation to the 1,000 mils, Bevan 945, 947, 948—Remarks as
to the new coins to be adopted ; statement of the old coins of circulation and of account,
Taylor 1178–1191——Suggestions as to the coins most required for the decimal system ;
remarks showing that a coin of less value than a farthing is not wanted, Dowie 1323–1337.
1348; Kirkham 1362–1408; Gregory 1418–1421.
See also Gold Coins. Issue of New Coins.
Wewspaper Stamps. Remarks relative to the difficulties connected with the re-adjustment
of obligations expressed in the penny, by receipts in which coin various portions of
the public revenue are raised, as in newspaper and receipt stamps; the case of the penny
newspaper stamps presents but little difficulty, Rep. 6.
Number of Coins. The smailer the number of coins with which it is practicable to effect
purchases and exchanges, the better, Rep. 7; Hankey 72-74. 81–84; Airy 421–422;
Eevan 946–949; Bennoch 1261 ; Arbuthnot 1506 Under a decimal system, there
would be no especial necessity of two or more coins for the settlement of transactions,
Airy 344—Under a decimal system in this country, three denominations, of pounds,
florins, and mils, would be sufficient; number and value of coins suggested, Duke of
Leinster 1 1 02-1 107. l l 13, 1 1 14.
P. *
Parliamentary Papers. Opinion of the Committee that it would tend to familiarise the
public with the new system of account, if some of the papers submitted to Parliament and
most generally referred to were exhibited in the decimal as well as in the ordinary form,
Rep. 7, 8.
Pasley, Lieutenant-general Sir Charles William, K.C.B. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—The
present monetary system of this country is exceedingly complex and inconvenient, 201—
205 Proposal that the pound sterling be divided into 1,000 parts, and that the other
coins be in relation to the pound, as florins or one-tenth, cents or one-hundredth, and
tithings, or one-tenth of a cent, 206 et seq.-In keeping accounts four columns for
figures would be desirable; the calculation would be much easier than in columns for
pounds, shillings, pence and farthings, 208–220 How far there would be any difficulty
in the payment of troops, if the value of the present coins were altered to decimal coinage,
221-231. 261 The gold coins suggested by witness for a decimal coinage are the
sovereign, half-sovereign, and 5 S. gold piece, 232 The silver coins are a piece of lo
cents or florin, 5 cents or 1 S., 2% cents or 6 d., 13 cents or 3 d., and 1 cent or 21; d., of the
present money, 233, 234.
The copper coins suggested are a 4-tithing piece, a 2-tithing piece, and a 1-tithing piece;
the term “mil ‘’ might perhaps be better than that of “tithing,” 235-238. 242, 243
Any coin of mixed metal is very objectionable, 239 Opinion that a change in the
value of the present coins would be well received by the lower classes, 240, 241 Cir-
cumstances under which it would be desirable to assimilate the coin of this country to that
of France or other countries, 244-252 A decimal system of coinage should be followed
by a decimal system of weights and measures; illustration of the simple working of these
systems, and the saving of time that would result from their adoption, 253-269.
[Second
Coinage.j * . P A S g - P o O 181
Report, 1852–53—continued.
P
P
P
asley, Lieut.-general Sir C. William, K. C. B. (Analysis of his Evidence)—continued.
[Second Examination.]—Further reference to the payment of soldiers under a system of
decimal coinage, showing that no difficulty will be experienced, 690, 691 Table handed
in, of sterling money, and of the proposed decimal coinage compared, from one farthing to
two shillings of the former, and from one mil to ten cents, or one florin, of the latter, 692–
694 The only new coins required are in copper, pieces of 1, 2, 3, and 4 mils; and
in silver, pieces of 1, 2, 3, and 5 cents, 695, 696 The silver coins should be marked
with their value in mils as well as in cents; this is not necessary in the pound,
697–700.
ayment of Troops. The payment of the troops may be easily arranged in the event of the
adoption of a decimal coinage, although the men are nominally paid at the rate of so
many pence per day, Rep. 6 There would not be any difficulty in the payment of
troops, if the value of the present coins were altered to decimal coinage, Sir C. W. Pasley
221-231. 261. 690, 691.
enny. The most important obstacles to the adoption of the decimal system, are those
connected with the re-adjustment of obligations expressed in the penny, by receipts in
which coin various portions of the public revenue are in great part raised, such as postage,
newspaper and receipt stamps, as well as many duties of customs, in addition to the class
of cases in which private interests are concerned, Rep. 5, 6 Any adjustment will be
better than retaining the present 1 d., or a coin equivalent to it; certain difficuities will,
however, attend the substitution of a mil for a farthing; instance of this in bridge and
road tolls, and also in the penny postage, Airy 294. 298–308. 346, 347. 476–480
The retention of the 4-mil piece, or penny, would not impede the change towards the
decimal system, which would soon be understood by the lower classes, De Morgan 750,
755–759——There will be no difficulty in the 4-mil piece being four per cent. less in value
than the present penny; the articles sold will soon adjust themselves to the prices paid,
ib. 751, 752. 799-809——Opinion that the present penny should be retained as goth
part of the pound, Arbuthnot lo?8–1081––A change in the value of the present copper
coins would not be productive of any material or ultimate loss either to tolls and bridges,
or to the penny postage, Gregory 1422-1427.
See also Copper Coins. Newspaper Stamps. Penny Postage. Tolls, &c.
Penny Postage. Observations of the Committee as to the importance of the subject of the
penny postage, as connected with the introduction of a system of decimal coinage; man-
ner in which the difficulties of the case may be overcome, Rep. 6, 7––Any change in
the value of the smaller coins would cause great inconvenience with respect to the penny
postage, penny tolls, &c., Sir J. Herschel 643-652; Headlam 838–841. 852, 853; Ar-
buthnot 1082–1086——The difficulty of the penny postage might be overcome by the
public paying 5 mils for the stamp instead of four farthings; this would be no real hard-
ship on the community, Bevan 940. 977–979; Arbuthnot 1503, 1504——Witness hands
in two tables, showing how the penny postage may be adjusted if the pound be divided
into 1,000 mils, Laurie 1134——Under the proposed decimal coinage, by which the
pound would be divided into 1,000 mils, it would be much better that the penny postage
stamp should cost four mils than five mils, Hill 1196–12Oo. 1216 et seq.--—The risk to
the Post-office would be about loo, ooo l. annually, or four per cent on the gross revenue,
but this loss would be gradually made up by the increase of letters consequent on the re-
duction, and would be more than compensated for by the advantages of decimal coinage
to the community at large, ib. 1197–1200. 1216. 1226–1237 In making 4 mils the
cost of the penny stamp, the decimal calculation is certainly lost, but this inconvenience is
better than the impolicy of raising the postage twenty per cent., by fixing the price of the
stamp at 5 mils, ib. 1217–1225. 1233 Whether the charge be 5 mils or 4 mils, there
will be no imperceptible decrease or increase in the postage, and at present there is quite
deficiency enough in the revenue of the Post-office, Arbuthnot 1503, 1504 The dif-
ficulty of applying the new coinage to the penny postage, penny tolls, &c., should be pro-
vided for by special legislation ; suggestions on this point, Bowring 1548–1552.
See also Postage Stamps. Tolls, &c.
Poorer Classes. How far any prejudice might be excited amongst the lower orders by a
change in the denominations of copper coins; inconvenience or fraud can best be remedied
by a general and total substitution of the new coinage for the old, Hankey 99–1 14—
The proposed change in the copper coinage would be well received by the lower classes,
who would soon understand the difference between a mil and the present farthing, Laurie
177-181 ; Sir C. W. Pasley 240,241; Strugnell 867–869, 881. 898 et seq.; Lindsey
994 et seq.; Dowie 1320–1322 ; Kirkham 1351 et seq. There would, at first, be some
difficulty with the lower classes in the introduction of the decimal system, but this would
gradually subside, Sir J. Herschel 553–557. 564–568
With respect to the dealings of
the poorer classes, the article sold would soon adjust itself to the value of the money re-
ceived, without prejudice to the interest of the public, Strugnell 889-893. 916-937
The poorer classes would not suffer any practical injury from a change in the value of
O.66. A. A 2 the -
182 : P O O S H I [Becimal
Report, 1852–53—continued.
Poorer Classes—continued.
the present coins by a division of the sovereign into 1,000 parts; reference to the small
coins most required, Meeking 1035–1050 Witness delivers in “A statement of one
day’s transactions at a shop in the tea and general trade in a low part of Liverpool,”
showing the small sums paid for a given number of articles, Kirkham 1351.
See also Competition. Half-farthings. Penny. Shilling. Working Classes.
Portugal. Remarks relative to the introduction of the French decimal metrical system of
weights and measures into Portugal, where the mode of reckoning has long been based
on the decimal system, Rep. 4. See also Accounts, 2.
Postage Stamps. Remarks as to the number of postage stamps of the different classes from
I d. to 1 s. which are sold to the public; opinion that there would be no saving of any
importance in the non-extension of the proposed diminution to the dearer stamps, Hill
1201-1216. 1238–1240. See also Penny Postage.
Post Office. There would be a considerable saving of labour and time, and consequently of
expense, by the introduction of the decimal system into the Post Office, and more espe-
cially into the Money Order Department, Hill 1230. 1234-1237.
Pound Sterling. Recommendation that the present pound sterling shall be the unit of the
new system of coinage, Rep. 5; Airy 293–297.302. 443; Sir J. Herschel 516–529;
Franklin 1447–1469; Bowring 1537–1540 The sovereign should be divided into a
thousand parts or farthings, those parts being called mils, Hunkey 29; Laurie 157, 158;
Sir C. W. Pasley 206, et seq.; Airy 292; Sir J. Herschel 529; Miller 1146; Franklin
1447–1469; Bowring 1537–1540 It is very desirable to retain the sovereign as our
unit of calculation, as being at present the standard coin by law, and the basis of calculation
with respect to the value of land and other property, Hankey 133–136—The pound
sterling must be retained as the integer, on account of the associations connected with the
term, De Morgan 728. 781-809 Table delivered in showing the decimal pound
sterling of lo florins of loo cents, with the equivalents in the pound sterling, Laurie 1 134.
See also Mils Names of Coins. Unit of Account.
Private Interests. See Decimal System. Ičailways. Tolls, &c.
Proclamation. A change in the coinage system of England could be effected without any
serious difficulty, by means of proclamation, Arbuthnot 1078.
Public Departments. An important benefit would be derived in several departments of the
public service from the proposed change to a decimal system, Rep. 3.
R.
Railways. It would be necessary to have Acts of Parliament to alter the terms of contracts.
imposed on railways, &c., under the existing coinage, Headlam 838.
Receipt Stamps. Observations of the Committee upon the subject of the penny receipt
stamps as connected with the adoption of a system of decimal coinage, Rep. 7.
Russia. See Accounts, 2. China.
Seignorage. See Issue of New Coins.
Shopkeepers. Great difficulty is now experienced by the shopkeeper in calculating
interest on any article he obtains ; the calculation would be much easier under the decimal
system, Laurie 182-187.
Shilling. In the event of the decimal coinage being adopted, it will be necessary to call in
the shillings, and to issue half-florins instead thereof; the term “shilling” must be abolished
altogether, and that of “florin’” substituted as the next step to the pound, Airy 494.
490–502 The half-florin should be marked “one shilling,” “half-florin,” and “50
mils,” De Morgan 749 It would not be possible to retain the shilling under the
decimal system, though it would be desirable to do so; the pound and not 10 s. must be
taken as the unit of the system, and the poorer classes would soon learn to reckon in
florins instead of shillings, Strugnell 898–915—It would be better to retain the shilling
as a common coin than the florin, but there is no necessity of going lower in the scale than
the present farthing, Lindsey 1008–1029 Recommendation that the term “shilling” be
retained as the name of the 50-mils piece, Arbuthnot 1505. 1513, 1514.
See also Silver Coins.
Silver
Coinage.] S I L S T R 183
Report, 1852–53—continued.
Silver Coins. Recommendation that all the silver coins hereafter coined should have their
value in mils marked upon them, in order that the public might, at the earliest possible
period, associate the idea of that system with their different pecuniary transactions, Rep.
7; Sir C. W. Pasley 697–700; De Morgan 748, 749 The silver coins should be the
florin of loo_mils, the half florin of 50 mils, the quarter florin of 25 mils, and the cent
of 10 mils, Hankey 29.31, 32; Bennoch 126o With respect to the silver pieces, a
coin of 4 s, or dollar, would be very convenient, and would suit many purposes of
exchange; inconvenience of the present crown piece, Laurie 161–163 The other
silver coins proposed by witness are the florin, or coin of 100 mils; a coin of 50 mils; one
of 20, and one of 10, ib. 164, 165 The silver coins suggested by witness are, a piece
of 10 cents, or florin; 5 cents, or 1 s. ; 2 # cents, or 6 d. ; 1 + cents, or 3 d. ; and 1 cent,
or 21% d. of the present money, Sir C. W. Pasley, 233, 234 Proposal of a silver
coin of 200 mils, equivalent to the American dollar; one of 100 mils, or florin; one of
50 mils, or shilling; one either of 25 or 30 mils; and one of 10 mils, Airy 374-381. 383–
385. 390. 439-441 The silver pieces should be coins of 10, 20, 30, 50, and loo mils;
these might be distinguished more fully by the edges of each alternate coin being milled,
Sir J Herschel 529-531. -
A silver coin of 23 d. present coinage should be issued as familiarising the public mind
with the principles of decimal calculation; this coin should in time be made one-fifth of
a shilling, and one-tenth of a florin, De Morgan 715–727 The silver coins proposed by
witness are pieces of 1, 2, 4, and 5 cents, ib. 747 A silver coin of 23 d. should replace
the silver 3 d., Headlam 857 The silver coins suggested are pieces of 20, 50, and 100
mils, Bevan 945——In silver the coins might be florin, shilling, 25-cent piece, and 20-
cent piece; a 10-mil piece would also be convenient, Arbuthnot 1506–1509. 1513, 1514
Instead of fixing by proclamation the value in decimal currency of the present silver
coins, as proposed in witness's bill, it might be better to call in such coins, and give
an equivalent for them in the new coinage, ib. 1515–1518——There should be three
silver coins, representing the 10th, the 50th, and the 100th parts of the pound, Bowring
1542. *
See also Cents. Crown Pieces. Florins. Fourpenny Pieces. Half Crowns.
#: Coins. Shilling. Sia'penny Pieces. Small Coins. Threepenny
26C0S,
Sixpenny Pieces. Opinion that as a permanent coin a 20-mils piece is preferable to that of
25-mils, and that the latter coin or sixpence might gradually be abolished without incon-
venience, Airy 388-394. 403-409. 431, 432. 442. See also Names of Coins.
Small Coins. With respect to the smallness of the proposed 10-mil piece, it is not likely to
create any inconvenience, or to be mistaken for the next silver piece of 25-mils, Hankey
67, 68 Very few silver 10-mil pieces would be necessary; their size would be no objec-
tion to a large issue of them, Sir J. Herschel 579–582 There would be no inconvenience
on account of the size of the quarter-sovereign or of the 10-mil silver piece, and they are
both very desirable coins, Bennoch 1262–1264. 1275–1278 Considerable disadvantage
to the public results from the difficulty of obtaining a sufficiency of small coins, ib. 1272.
1279–1283.
See also Gold Coins. Half Farthing. IPoorer Classes. Silver Coins.
Spain. Remarks as to the confusion existing in monetary transactions in Spain and parts
of Germany, in consequence of the absence of the decimal system of accounts, Bowring
1524–1526.
Stamps. See Customs Duties. Newspaper Stamps. Postage Stamps. Receipt
Stamps.
Standard of Value. If gold were adopted as the standard of value by other countries, it
would be possible to make such international arrangements as would make the coins of
different countries interchangeable at a fixed rate, Airy 468-475 Evidence showing
how far it is practicable or desirable to make the coins of this country, and of other coun-
tries, such as France, interchangeable, by adopting a common standard of value, and of
pureness of metal, Sir J. Herschel 653-689 The adoption of a common standard in
different countries would not have much effect in checking speculation in the exchanges,
ib. 676–678.687, 688. See also Pound Sterling.
Strugnell, Frederick. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Grocer, &c., in the Edgeware-road,
865, 866––There would be no difficulty with respect to the lower classes of the people
in carrying out a decimal system of coinage, 867–869. 881. 898 et seq. It would be
better to adopt decimal coinage at once than to introduce it gradually, 870, 871. 879
Description and value of the different coins most desirable under the decimal system,
starting from the pound, which should be worth 1,000 mils, 872-879. 895–897 The
adoption of decimal coinage would after a time effect a great saving in the keeping of
accounts, and would render them very simple, 882-888——With respect to the dealings
of the poorer classes, the article sold would soon adjust itself to the value of the money
o,66. A A 3 received
184 s T R UN I [pecimal
Report, 1852–53—continued.
Strugnell, Frederick. (Analysis of his Evidence)—continued.
received, without prejudice to the interests of the public, 889-893. 916-937––Opinion
that there is no necessity to go lower in the decimal scale than the present farthings,891–
894. 907–915 It would not be possible to retain the shilling under the decimal
system, though it would be desirable to do so; the pound and not los. must be taken
as the unit of the system; the poorer classes would soon learn to reckon in florins
instead of shillings, 898–915.
“Swan-pan,” or Abacus. See China.
Sweating of Coin. See Abrasion of Coin.
T.
Taylor, Henry. (Analysis of his Evidence.)—Clerk to Messrs. Whitbread, & Co., brewers,
1 174— Has º a book on decimal coinage, 1175. 1 193 The adoption of the
decimal system would save considerable time and labour in calculations; illustration of
this from witness's book, I 176, 1177. 1 192 Suggestions as to the new coins to be
adopted ; statement of the old coins and new coins of circulation and of account, 1178–
1 191 Accounts should be kept decimally in pounds, florins, and cents, but witness
advises the retention of the threepenny piece for circulation, though not forming any
decimal relation to the pound; a strictly decimal system should not be attempted, 1178–
1 191 The term “cent” is preferable to that of “mil,” and has been found to answer
better in Ameriea and elsewhere, 1182, 1183.
Threepenny Pieces. The silver pieces of 2 d. and 3 d. should be called in, Headlam, 856,
857. See also Fourpenny Pieces. Silver Coins.
Tolls, &c. Tolls, &c., which are now fixed by Act of Parliament at # d. or 1 d, might easily
be dealt with under a decimal coinage; paper delivered in shewing the rule for the
determination of the term during which a toll should be, in new farthings, one more than
now in old ones, in order to compensate the owner of the tolls for the reduction of the
farthing to the 1,000th of a pound, DeMorgan 753, 754 It would be necessary to deal
separately by Act with every tollgate in the country, Headlam 838–840. 852 Sugges-
tions for dealing with specific tolls, which under the new coinage there would be no coin
to meet, Bevan 940–944. 980–982 Remarks as to the best means of compounding
with tolls under the contemplated change in the coinage; table delivered in showing the
present value of a perpetuity of from 1 l. to loo l. per annum, at twenty years' purchase,
at certain rates per cent., Laurie 1 134 Reference to the best means of dealing with
tolls and the penny postage, under a division of the sovereign into l,000 parts, Miller
1 147. 1151, 1 152. 1 168, 1169 Detail of the mode by which tolls now levied under
Act of Parliament should be dealt with, Arbuthnot 1475, 1497-1502.
See also Penny. Penny Postage.
Troops. See Payment of Troops.
U.
Unit of Account. Observations of the Committee on the proposal for the retention of the
present farthing as the basis of a new systein of coinage, leaving its relation to the
existing penny untouched, Rep. 5 The adoption of that proposal would necessitate
the withdrawal of the whole of the present gold coinage and nearly the whole of the
silver; the Committee do not feel themselves warranted in recommending the adoption of
such a proposal, ib. Objection to making 10 s. the unit, and dividing it into 1,000
parts, Å; 325-336; De Morgan 729. 781-809——Witness objects to the retention of
farthings with a change of all the other coins, De Morgan 730, 731 Witness would
alter all the existing gold and silver cons, the principle of his decimal system being to
build up from the mil or farthing, Headlam 858–862 Different tables showing the
present sovereign and the half-sovereign, taken as units and divided into certain decimal
parts, Laurie 1134——Opinion that decimal currency can be best effected by making
the florin the unit of accounts, with 100 cents to 1 florin, and lo florins to 1 pound,
ib. Suggested alterations in our present coins for introducing the decimal sys-
tem; the pound should continue as the unit of account and should be divided into a
1,000 parts or mils, Bennoch 1255 et seq. See also Pound Sterling. Shilling.
United States. See America.
Universal System. General adoption of a decimal system in the different countries of the
world, not only in the case of money, but also as respects weights and measures; no
instance has occurred in which a country, after adopting the decimal system, has aban-
doned it, Rep. 4.——An assimilation of weights and measures as well as of coinage
throughout
coinage.] U N I W O R 185
Report, 1852–53—continued.
Universal System—-continued.
throughout the world would be of great advantage, Hankey 131, 132; Airy 481–493
---A universal system of weights and measures common to all countries is very
desirable, but is not practicable; extensive adoption of the French system, which is a
very good one, Sir J. Herschel 603–610——Difficulties in the way of universal decimal
systems of coinage and of weights and measures, De Morgan 766-780, 810. 816-82.
––– Impracticability of the universal adoption of both systems, Bowring 1586–1593.
See also Coins. Standard of Value.
V.
Value of Coins. Table handed in, of sterling money and of the proposed decimal coinage
compared, from one farthing to two shillings of the former, and from one mil to ten cents,
or one florin, of the latter, Sir C. W. Pasley 692-694——Every existing coin should be
stamped with its value in existing farthings or mils, Headlam 855.
See also Coins. Copper Coins. Florins. Issue of New Coins. Shilling.
Silver Coins.
“ Victorias.” See Wew Coins.
W.
Weights and Measures. Observations of the Committee with respect to the advantage of
applying the decimal system to weights and measures as well as to coinage, Rep. 8
Avoirdupois weight is only used at the Bank of England in buying paper and goods of
that kind; if a change in the system of measures were made, it would be desirable to keep
the pound avoirdupois, and not to have any reference to troy weight, Hankey 1 1-25
A system of decimal weights and measures, in conjunction with a decimal coinage, would
afford great facilities in calculation, Sir C. W. Pasley 253-260 ; Airy 350-360. 481–493;
Sir J. Herschel 592–602; Meeking 1051–1054; Duke of Leinster 1 1 08-11 15. 1 120.
1132, 1133; Miller 1171–1 173; Bennoch 1288–1290 ; Beard 1299–1302; Dowie
1341-1347 A decimal system of weights and measures is very desirable, but the
decimal system of coinage should be first adopted; how far the French system of weights
and measures is to be recommended for general adoption, De Morgan 761–780 It is
very desirable to introduce the French decimal system of weights and measures into this
country, and to make that system universal, Gregory 1428–1434.
See also Bank of England. Customs Duties. Portugal. Universal System.
Working Classes. Observations of the Committee with regard to the feeling of the public,
especially of the working classes, in reference to the proposed change, Rep. 4, 5 No
inconvenience would result from a decimal coinage, either as regards the relation of
employers and workmen, or in the transactions of the poor, Beard 1303–1305——The
simplicity of decimal coinage would save considerable time and labour in calculations,
and might be adopted without inconvenience to the working classes, Bazley 1309–1317.
See also Calculations. Poorer Classes.
PRELIMINARY REPORT
OF THE
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSIONERS.
#3tegented to floti) #01tgeg of $3arliament bp (tommantù of £er ſºlajegtp.
**s--- - -
L O N DO N :
PRINTED BY GEORGE EDWARD EYRE AND WILLIAM SPOTTISWOODE,
PRINTERS TO THE QUEEN's MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.
FOR HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE.

1857.
LETTERS PATENT APPOINTING THE COMMISSION
CONTENTS.
PRELIMINARY REPORT - º sº º sº º ºn tº
EVIDENCE OF WITNESSES :
Robert Slater, Esq. gº * - tº º sº º wº cº
Robert Shaw, Esq. - tº gº tº- • ‘ wº wg uº.
Dr. John Edward Gray dº * * gº esº * , sº •.
Theodore W. Rathbone, Esq. g- sº tº gºe sº *
James Hovell Turner, Esq. tº sº tº * sº tºº
Fred. J. Minasi, Esq. - sº sº tº gº wº dº
T. C. Mossom Meekins, Esq. - gº gº - dº º * > gº
APPENDIX :
No.
1.
Synoptical Table of the several Schemes proposed for a Decimal Coinage which are
based on the present Coinage gº * . {º º * = & Eº
Table of the Value of the present current Coins, and of the Ounce of standard
Gold, expressed in terms of the lowest Unit, of the several proposed Decimal
Schemes which are based on the present Coinage ſº * * * = dº
. Comparative Table of the present Coins of the United Kingdom, and of the
Decimal Coins proposed by the Committee of the House of Commons in 1853
(retaining the Halfcrown and adding a Four-mil Piece) gº - gºe
. Memorandum by Henry Williams Chisholm, Esq., Senior Clerk of Exchequer Bill
Office. Dated Feb. 1, 1856 - tº gº
. Letter from F. Hincks, Esq., Governor of Barbadoes, to the Right Honourable
Robert Lowe º tº º Gº gº ** º
. Circular to Bankers. By Sir J. F. W. Herschel, Master of the Mint, with an
Analysis of Replies º º * =
. Answers to Queries as to Decimal Coinage, circulated by R. Heaton and Sons, of
Birmingham, Contractors for Copper Coinage, dated 8th June 1855. Com-
municated by Thomas Graham, Esq., F.R.S., Master of the Mint gº tº
7. Communication from Manufacturers at Manchester * -º sº º g-
8. List of Petitions to the House of Commons for adoption of Decimal Coinage gº
Petitions to the House of Commons in favour of the Scheme of Decimal
Coinage, recommended by the Committee of 1853. Ordered to be printed by
w the House of Commons tº- gº º º E = tºº dºg
9. Circular to Bankers, with Replies - tº gº tºº º iº gº
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Answers to Query as to Prices and Quantities of Articles of Consumption sold to
the Poorer Classes circulated by the Commission ; by Henry Kirkham,
9, Roe Street, Liverpool; by F. W. Strugnell, 109, Edgware Road tº a º
Statement furnished to the Commissioners by Messrs. Dawbarn and Sons,
Grocers and Drapers, Wisbeach º º • ‘ gº tº
An Account of the net Public Income of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland, in the Year ended the 31st day of December 1855, in f s. d., and
in # fl. c. and m. * * * Q = tº i__ tºº º is sº
A Commercial Account between New York and Liverpool in the present and
Decimal Systems - * --> - ſº sº 4 º' gº wº
Memorandum and Report on the Decimal Bullion Weights of the Bank of
England gº º gº º gº º
Bank of England. Paper showing the Calculation of Dividends and Duty carried
to Decimals of One Penny º º º sº dº tºº •º
Memorandum on the Introduction of the Decimal System of Weights into the
Customs Department º sº sº wº gº º wº
Directions given to School Inspectors. Extract from Minutes of the Education
Committee of the Privy Council for 1854–5, p. 115 * * sº wº
Page
vii
ix
114
1 is
125
13]
137
138
139
1.59
a 2
No.
. Change of Currency in Ireland gº es tº tº iº
Abstract of Act 6 Geo. IV. cap. 79 * * iº • • *
Extracts from Coldwell's Tables for reducing Irish Money into British
Currency * > gº tº tº a * > tº º gº *º
Letters respecting the Change of Currency in Ireland - tº º •º gº
18. Change of Currency in Isle of Man sº • - gº tº º
19. East Indies :
Memorandum by William Leach, Esq., Assistant Secretary to the Board of Control,
on the Measure adopted by the Government of India in the Year 1835, for
establishing a uniform Currency in the British Territories sº * - e. Eºs
Extract of an Act of the Government of India (No. 6. of 1847) for establishing a
Copper Currency in the Settlements of Penang, Singapore, and Malacca, dated
1st May 1847 gº tºº º ſº tº º *
Act No. 17, of 1835. Passed by the Honourable the Governor-General of India
in Council, on the 17th of August 1835 tº º gº ſº sº -
Memorandum by James Cosmo Melvill, Jun., Esq. {º tºº sº
20. Extract from the Memoirs dictated by Napoleon at St. Helena to Count de
* Montholon, vol. 3, p. 210. tº º •º º sº tº e sº gº
21. Extracts from a Report upon Weights and Measures. By John Quincy Adams,
Secretary of State of the United States wº cº dº *
“Notes on the Establishment of a Money Unit, and of a Coinage for the United
States.” By Thos. Jefferson - tºº & º sº sº tº º
22. Monnaies Decimales de France. Extracted from the “Amnuaire du Bureau des
Longitudes” for 1856 tºº sº ſº º a • * * > • *
23. Extracts from the Third and Fourth Reports of the Committee of the Legislative
Assembly of Canada on Decimal Currency, 1855 * > « º • º
Memorandum on the State of the Currency in Canada - tº-> gº
24. Questions circulated by the Decimal Coinage Commission in Foreign Countries
which have adopted a Decimal Coinage & e º dº tº dº
ANSWERS to Circular Questions from the following Countries:—
25. France. French Government. Sent through Her Majesty's Ambassador at
Paris gº * = º tº º sº tº •º tº
26. with Letter to Lord Monteagle, by M. Michel Chevalier - * > tº º
27. with Letter to Lord Monteagle, by M. Gabriel Delessert - «º dº
28 by the French Correspondent of a London Mercantile House tº sº
29 by M. Barthelemy St. Hilaire tº a º tº e - •º
30. Sardinia. Sent by Her Majesty's Minister at Turin * tº º tº
31. Sig. Cattaneo, Intendent General of the Mint º gº tº-e
M. Despine, Ex-Inspector of Weights and Measures sº º
32. Belgium. Belgian Government. Sent through Her Majesty's Minister at
Brussels sº e- º tº * gº tº e
33 Communicated by Thos. Baring, Esq., M.P. & º tº e tº a gº
34. Sent by Her Majesty's Minister at Brussels dº - gº tº
35A. Switzerland. Prepared by the Direction of the Federal Council of the Swiss
Confederation tºº º * * * * - º
35B. by a Member of the Firm of Messrs. Marcuard and Co., of Berne gº
35C. by M. Trumpler, of Zurich tº º gº tºº * § e
35D. by an old Commissariat Officer, at the request of Capt. A. Pictet, Her
Britannic Majesty's Consul at Geneva gº gº gº º - tº
36. Letters of W. Brown, Esq., M.P., on the Change of Coin in Prussia and
Switzerland & gº cº tºº ſº wº sº Ge
37. Law of the Swiss Diet on the Federal Coinage of May 1850 - dº
Federal Law concerning the carrying out the Reform of the Swiss Coinage -
38. Iombardy. Austrian Government. Sent through Her Majesty's Minister at
Vienna, tº sº tºº sº * … tº * >
39. Two Sicilies. Sent by Her Majesty's Minister at Naples $º gº * *
40. Tuscany. Sent by Her Majesty's Minister at Florence * gº gº tº
41. The Netherlands. By Sir J. H. Turing, Bart., Her Majesty's Consul at
Rotterdam gº gºe tº
42. by James Annesley, Esq., Her Majesty's Consul at Amsterdam º &º
43. Portugal. Sent by Her Majesty's Minister at Lisbon tº tº sº gº
44. Russia. Sent through Her Majesty's Minister at St. Petersburg sº tº
45. by Edward Morgan, Esq., Treasurer of the British Factory, St. Petersburg
Page
178
178
178
18O
182
183
186
186
187
183
189
194
199
2O3
204
205
2O7
21O
214
219
222
225
229
252
259
269
273
277
283
286
289
291
293
2.94
297
299
302
46. Greece. By C. W. Merlin, Esq., Her Majesty's Vice Consul at Athens sº g-
306
3.11
315
320
325
327
V
. United States of America. By James IRoss Snowden, Esq.,
of the United States * * tº tº - º
by Edw. Everett, Esq. • , - & tº e sº gº
. Extract from a Report of the Director of the Mint of the United States to the
Secretary of the Treasury <--> * > sº tº º & s gº
. The new Coinage Law of the United States sº sº tº * <-->
51. Letters, &c. as to the Coinage of the United States sº º 4 º' gº
. Canada. Extract from Answer to Circular Queries by R. N. Cassels, Esq.,
Manager of the Bank of British North America, Montreal º wº tº º
. Abstract of Answers received from Countries where a Decimal System has been
adopted º tº º º - ... • cº gº
. Notes on the relative Weights and Values of the principal English and Foreign
Coins gº tºº º tº º tº º wº tº º
. List of Books, Pamphlets, Letters, and Articles on Decimal Coinage, communicated
by Dr. John Edward Gray, F.R.S., &c. º cº º tº gº
Director of the Mint
Page
330
336
339
339
342
345
346
35()
356
LETTERS PATENT. /
©ittoria, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith. To Our right trusty and well
beloved Councillor Thomas Spring Lord Monteagle of Brandon, Our right
trusty and well beloved Samuel Jones Lord Overstone, and Our trusty and well
beloved John Gellibrand Hubbard, Esquire, greeting. Whereas We have
deemed it advisable for divers good causes and considerations that a Com-
mission should forthwith issue to enquire into the expediency of introducing
the principle of Decimal Division into the Coinage of Our United Kingdom:
Now know ye, that We, reposing especial trust and confidence in your approved
wisdom and fidelity, have assigned, nominated, and appointed, and by these
Presents do assign, nominate, and appoint you, the said Thomas Spring Lord
Monteagle of Brandon, Samuel Jones Lord Overstone, and John Gellibrand
Hubbard to be Our Commissioners for considering how far it may be practicable
and advisable to introduce the principle of Decimal Division into the Coinage
of Our United Kingdom. And We do by these Presents give and grant unto
you Our said Commissioners, or any two of you, full power and authority to
enquire of and concerning the premises by all lawful ways and means what-
soever, and to call before you or any two of you such persons as you shall judge
necessary by whom you may be the better informed of the truth in the premises.
And We do also give and grant unto you, or any two of you, full power and
authority, when the same shall appear to be requisite, to administer an oath or
oaths to any person or persons whatsoever to be examined before you, or any
two of you. And We do by these Presents require and command you, Our said
Commissioners, or any two of you, to report to Us in writing under your hands
and seals all and every your proceedings by force of these Presents, and your
opinions touching and concerning the premises. And We do by these Presents
declare and ordain that this Our Commission shall continue in full force and
virtue, and that you Our said Commissioners, or any two of you, shall and may
from time to time proceed in the execution thereof, although the same be not
continued from time to time by adjournment. And We do by these Presents
require and command all and singular Our officers and ministers, and all other
Our subjects whatsoever, to the aiding and assisting to you and each of you in
the execution of this Our Commission. And for your further assistance in the
execution of these Presents We do hereby authorize and empower you to
appoint a Secretary to this Our Commission, whose services and assistance We
require you to use from time to time as occasion may require. In witness
whereof We have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent. Witness Ourself
at Westminster, the first day of November, in the nineteenth year of Our
reign.
By Warrant under the Queen's Sign Manual.
C. ROMILLY.
Great Seal.
ix
PRELIMINARY REPORT.
TO THE QUEEN'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.
WE, Your Majesty's Commissioners for considering how far it may be prac-
ticable and advisable to introduce the principle of Decimal Division into the
Coinage of the United Kingdom, humbly offer to Your Majesty this our First
and Preliminary Report:-
Before entering upon the different heads of the inquiry, it was important to
consider and define the precise subject referred to us by Your Majesty, and
as a preliminary matter to trace the progress of the question of Decimal
Coinage, and to ascertain the position in which it had been left at the time
of the issuing of the Commission.
The question of a Decimal scale, though only as regards weights and
measures, came under the consideration of a Royal Commission, appointed
in the year 1816, “to consider how far it might be practicable or advisable to
“ establish a more uniform system of weights and measures.” The Com-
missioners were, Sir Joseph Banks, President of the Royal Society, Sir George
Clerk, Mr. Davies Gilbert, Dr. Wollaston, Dr. Thomas Young, and Captain
Kater. Their first report, presented in 1819, contained the following recom-
mendation:—
“The subdivision of weights and measures at present employed in this country appears
“ to be far more convenient for practical purposes than the Decimal scale, which might
‘ perhaps be preferred by some persons for making calculations with quantities already
“ determined. But the power of expressing a third, a fourth, and a sixth of a foot in
* inches, without a fraction, is a peculiar advantage in the duodecimal scale; and for
the operations of weighing and of measuring capacities the continual division by
two renders it practicable to make up any given quantity with the smallest possible
“ number of standard weights or measures, and it is far preferable in this respect to
“ any Decimal scale. We would therefore recommend, that all the multiples and sub-
divisions of the standard to be adopted should retain the same relative proportions
* to each other as are at present in general use.”
In 1824 the late Sir John Wrottesley, afterwards Lord Wrottesley, brought
before the House of Commons a motion for inquiring into the applicability of
the Decimal scale to coins. The mover stated that he had no intention
of proposing any change in our gold or silver coins. He referred to the
example of France, of the United States, and of China, and described the change
he advocated as the substitution of a simple for a complex system of account.
The coins recommended by Sir John Wrottesley were pounds, double shillings,
and farthings, the last having 4 per cent. deducted fom their present value,
making 100 farthings= 1 double shilling, and 1,000 farthings= 10 double
shillings= 1 pound.
The Master of the Mint, Mr. Wallace, afterwards Lord Wallace, on the
part of the Government, opposed the motion on the ground of the inconvenience
which might attend its adoption. He stated, however, that he did not deny
the advantages of the plan. The motion was withdrawn, a pledge being given
(which was carried into effect by the 6 Geo. IV., c. 79.), that the currencies of
Great Britain and Ireland should be assimilated.
In consequence of the destruction of the standards of weight and measure in
the fire which destroyed the Houses of Parliament, Commissioners were ap-
pointed in May 1838, to whom the question of the restoration of the standards
was referred by Lord Monteagle, then Chancellor of the Exchequer. These
Commissioners were, G. B. Airy, Astronomer Royal, Francis Baily, President
of the Royal Society, J. E. Drinkwater Bethune, Sir J. F. W. Herschel, Bart.,
Sir J. G. Shaw Lefevre, Sir J. W. Lubbock, Bart., the Very Rev. George Peacock,
Dean of Ely, Lowndean Professor of Agonomy. and the Rev. R. Sheepshanks.
X
These Commissioners made a report on the 21st December 1841, containing
the following statement:—
“The first point which has called for our special notice is, the general question of
Decimal scale. In introducing this subject we beg leave to invite the attention of
“ the Government to the advantage and the facility of establishing in this country a
“ Decimal System of Coinage. In our opinion no single change which it is in the power
“ of a Government to effect in our monetary system would be felt by all classes as equally
“ beneficial with this, when the temporary incomweniences attending the change had
“ passed away. The facility consists in the ease of interposing between the sovereign
“ (or pound) and the shilling a new coin equivalent to two shillings (to be called by
“ a distinctive name); of considering the farthing (which now passes as the trº-gth part
“ of the pound) as the rººth part of that unit ; of establishing a coin of value equal
“ to rººth part of the pound ; and of circulating, besides these principal members of
“ a Decimal Coinage, other coins of values bearing a simple relation to them, including
“ coins of the same value as the present shilling and sixpence. We do not feel ourselves
“ at liberty further to enter into this subject, but we have felt it imperative on us to
“ advert to it, because no circumstance whatever would contribute so much to the intro-
“ duction of Decimal scale in weights and measures in those respects in which it is really
“ useful as the establishment of a Decimal Coinage.” -
&
6
In the year 1843 a second Commission was appointed for the same purposes
as those which had been contemplated in the appointment of the Commission of
1841. It included the names of the Astronomer Royal, Sir J. F. W. Herschel,
Sir J. G. S. Lefevre, Sir J. W. Lubbock, the Dean of Ely, and Mr. Sheepshanks,
members of the former Commission, with whom were associated the late
Marquis of Northampton, President of the Royal Society, the Earl of Rosse,
Lord Wrottesley, and Professor Miller. The report of this Commission
referred to and proposed to carry out the recommendations which we have
quoted of the report of 1841.
On the 27th of April 1847 the question was brought before Parliament by
a motion made in the House of Commons by Sir John Bowring, for an Address
to the Crown in favour of the coinage and issue of silver pieces of the value
of ºth and rhoth of the pound sterling, avowedly as a step to the complete
introduction of a Decimal division of the pound.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Charles Wood, stated that the first
step in the adoption of such a system was to establish a coin ºth of a pound
sterling. To strike a two-shilling piece he had no objection.
The motion was withdrawn on the understanding that a silver piece of the
value of Tºth of the pound sterling should be coined and issued. This engage-
ment was afterwards carried into effect by the issue of the florin.
On the 26th of March 1853 the Commissioners who had been appointed
in 1843 addressed a letter to Mr. Gladstone, then Chancellor of the Exchequer,
in which they stated, that “they it felt their duty to represent that they
“ were strongly impressed with the advantages of a Decimal System of Coinage,
“ and that having learnt that an immediate coinage of copper to a considerable
“ amount was in contemplation, they made an urgent request, that, before
“ specific steps were taken in reference to the proposed coinage, the Decimal
“ System might be carefully considered, trusting that the result would be that
“ the Government would decide on issuing coins related to the millesimal
“ subdivision of the pound.” They suggested “that coins of the value rºoth,
“ Tºroth, and it ºrgth of a pound (differing little from the farthing, the half-
“ penny, and the penny) might be extensively used by the public without
“ present inconvenience, while the inscription of their values, as estimated in
“ the Decimal scale, would afford the means of shortly introducing that scale
“ throughout the entire system.” This letter was signed by the Astronomer
Royal, the Earl of Rosse, then President of the Royal Society, Lord Wrottesley,
now President of the Royal Society, the Dean of Ely, Sir J. W. Lubbock,
Sir J. G. S. Lefevre, the Rev. R. Sheepshanks, and Professor Miller.
On the 5th of April 1853, in answer to an inquiry made in the House of
Commons, whether it was the intention of Government to carry out the system
of Decimal Coinage, and whether it was intended to issue the new copper
coinage on a Decimal basis, Mr. Gladstone, then Chancellor of the Exchequer,
stated “that there was no intention on the part of the Government to make
“ any change with respect to the copper coinage. With respect to the general
“ question of a Decimal Coinage the Government were fully sensible of the
XI
6
“ great importance of it, and they likewise felt that the utmost attention was
“ due to the arguments and opinions of those who had recommended the
“change ; but the Government were also of opinion that the matter was one
“ of great importance, and of great delicacy as well as importance, and that the
altering of the value of those particular coins, which are in point of fact
“ the measures of value and the basis of the whole idea of value of the mass
“ of the people, was a very serious matter indeed, and one which ought not to
be undertaken on any mere abstract opinions and considerations without fully
“ ascertaining that the ground under foot was secure. The course which
“would be taken by the Government was this:—An Honourable Member had
“ lately given notice of a motion for the appointment of a Select Committee
“ to inquire into the subject, and the motion would receive the support of
Government, for it would lead to such an elucidation of the matter as would
“ enable the Government and the House to form a conclusive judgment on
“ the subject.”
Accordingly, on the 12th of April 1853, on the motion of Mr. W. Brown,
M.P. for South Lancashire, and with the concurrence of the Government, a
Select Committee was appointed to take into consideration and report to the
House the practicability and advantages or otherwise that would arise from
adopting a Decimal System of Coinage.
It appears that the entire subject of decimalizing moneys, weights, and
measures, had been at first included in the notice of motion for the Com-
mittee, but that the question of weights and measures had been withdrawn
from the notice at the suggestion of Mr. Gladstone, who was of opinion that
it would be more advisable for the present to fix attention upon the single
object of coins and accounts,
The witnesses examined by the Committee, twenty-five in number, were all
in favour of the introduction of a Decimal Coinage, and all, except
T. E. Headlam, Esq., M.P. for Newcastle, in favour of the particular scheme
which had been recommended by the Commissions of 1841 and 1843, and
which is known as the Pound and Mil Scheme.
The Committee reported to the House of Commons on the 1st of
August 1853. -
The recommendations of the Committee were in substance identical with
the propositions made in the House of Commons in 1824 and 1827, and with
the recommendations of the Commissioners of 1838 and 1843.
The report stated, that “ with regard to the inconveniences of the existing
“ system the evidence was clear and decided. That system was shown to entail
“ a vast amount of unnecessary labour, and greatl iability to error, to render
“ accounts needlessly complicated, to confuse questions of foreign exchanges,
“ and to be otherwise inconvenient. On the other hand, the concurrent
“ testimony of the various witnesses was to the effect that the adoption of a
“ Decimal System would lead to greater accuracy, would simplify accounts,
“ would greatly diminish the labour of calculations (to the extent of one half.
“ and in some cases four fifths, according to Professor De Morgan, who had
“made the question his especial study), and, by facilitating the comparison
“ between the coinage of this country and other countries that have adopted the
“ Decimal System, would tend to the convenience of all those who are engaged
“ in exchange operations, of travellers, and others. An important benefit would
“ be derived in several departments of the public service, and in every
branch of industry, from the economy of skilled labour which would result
from the proposed change; at the same time that the education of the
“ people generally would be much facilitated by the introduction into our
“schools of a system so directly calculated to render easy the acquirement of
“ arithmetic.”
The Committee recommended the pound sterling as the unit of the new
system of coinage. “Considering that the pound is the present standard,
“ and therefore associated with all our ideas of money value, and that it is
“ the basis on which all our exchange operations with the whole world rest,
“ any alteration of it would lead to infinite complication and embarassment
“ in our commercial dealings; in addition to which its retention would afford
“ the means of introducing the Decimal system with the minimum of change.”
6
&
6
6
6
6
66
C
C
G
%
b 2 -
xii
The Committee recommended the withdrawal of the half-crown, the 3d.
and 4d. pieces, and the introduction of copper coins of one, two, and five mils,
and silver coins of ten and twenty mils.
The Committee summed up their recommendations in the following words:–
“In conclusion, your Committee, having well weighed the comparative merits of the
“existing system of coinage and the Decimal System, and the obstacles which must
“ necessarily be met with in passing from the one to the other, desire to repeat their
decided opinion of the superior advantages of the Decimal System, and to record
“ their conviction that the obstacles referred to are not of a nature to create any doubt
of the expediency of introducing that system as soon as the requisite preparations
shall have been made for the purpose by means of cautious but decisive action on the
“ part of the Government.”
The publication of the Report of the Parliamentary Committee is an era in
the history of the progress of the question of the introduction of a Decimal
Coinage in the public mind. It excited much discussion in newspapers,
pamphlets, and other publications, as well as in the deliberations of public
meetings and learned bodies; and not only the existing system and the
scheme proposed by the Parliamentary Committee, but a variety of other
schemes, which will be found in the synoptical table which forms part of the
Appendix to this Report, found able and zealous advocates.
It is not consistent with the object of the present Report to enter into the
discussion of the relative merits of the schemes so proposed, but it may not be
considered inconsistent with it to point out that while each scheme claims, and
perhaps with justice, in some one or more points advantages over the others,
that all the schemes except the Pound and Mil Scheme abandon our present
principal unit, the pound sterling, as one of the chief monetary units—that the
Pound and Mil Scheme, which retains the pound as the principal unit of account,
sacrifices the exact expressibility of the penny, halfpenny, and farthing in the
proposed new coinage, and that of the other shemes, all, except the Penny, Half.
penny, and Farthing schemes, abandon the pound sterling as a unit of account,
as well as sacrifice the exact expressibility of the present penny, halfpenny, and
farthing in the proposed coinage.
Of these schemes the Penny Scheme appears to be, on the whole, the prin-
cipal rival of the Pound and Mil Scheme in the number, the ability, and the
zeal of its advocates.
In June 1854 an association was formed under the name of the Decimal
Association, with the object of promoting the adoption of the Decimal System
in money, weights, and measures.
To a deputation from this body, which, through Mr. Brown, their Chair-
man, urged on Mr. Gladstone, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, the imme-
diate introduction of the Pound and Mil Scheme, Mr. Gladstone made the
following observations, the importance of which may justify their introduction
in this report:—
-{{
(C(
*
G
“I conceive that the intention of this deputation is that of a public demonstration
“ to awaken the country to a proper consideration of the question. For, although it is
“ true that we have had Royal Commissions and Select Committees of the House of
“Commons to inquire into the subject, it has not, as I think, yet gone through anything
“ near that process of sifting in public opinion that would make it safe for the Govern:
“ ment to take any decisive steps in regard to it. I cannot doubt that a Decimal
System of Coinage would be of immense advantage in monetary transactions. The
weight of authority on that head is altogether irresistible ; but I do not think, when
“we come to the adoption of a system, that we have obtained sufficient evidence &S
to the sense and feeling of the country with respect to it. It is true that those
people who have studied and paid attention to the question of a Decimal Coinage
are unanimous in recommending it on account of the many advantages it possesses
over all other systems. Now, the people who have so studied the question are gen-
tlemen who have been more or less actively engaged in commercial bursuits; but the
public at large do not seem to be acquainted with it. It is, as yOu are aware, the
enormous masses of the community who have immense business to transact that must
guide the Government in the matter. They are attached to the Dresent arrangement
of the currency, as it admits of the different systems of divisors, and is the basis of
all their notions of value. It has also many facilities of division which you must
lose if you abandon it. It is impossible for you not to be struck with this ºn advan.
“tage which takes its origin from the number of factors which a Combination of the
decimal with the duodecimals give rise to. With the Government it is impossible not
“ to be so struck. Again, it is so wound up in the habits of the people, that it would
&
{
(
&
{
(
&
(
{
{
C
C
(
C
(
{
{
{
{
{
C
(
(
&
&
{
{
&
&
{
xiii
“ not be advisable to have recourse to any change in it, unless we had clear evidence
“ that it was one the people themselves required and understood. This, too, is a ques-
“tion in which the mere judgment of a Minister is of no importance, and which the
“general feeling of the public can alone decide. I frankly own I am by no means
“ convinced that you can get rid of the penny; but as I said just now, nothing is more
“ unimportant on such a question than the opinion of any individual Minister. I would
“ only ask you, are the people prepared for the change 3 All I say is, that I cannot take
“ any decisive step until we are satisfied that the subject has been thoroughly sifted, and
“ is well understood by the public. Patience is never a good text to preach upon, espe-
“cially to men who have laboured and waited long for the attainment of an object,
“ and I can well understand the feelings of Mr. Brown, who now expects ºcm fuit
“ from his labours on this subject. I think that so far as it has been discussed there has
“ been a great deal of opinion expressed in reference to it, but I do not think from what
“I gather from the press that the feeling in favour of it is so unanimous as you repre-
“sent. I hope, however, that those who are engaged in this movement will persevere in
“ their labours until they bring it fully and fairly into the view of the public, when
“ discussion will, I hope, bring it to Some practical result. As it is I feel that we are
“ not ripe for a decisive measure on the subject, and I think that the aid of Parliament
“should not be invoked until we are ready for the change. When that change may
“ take place it will involve the re-adjustment of tolls, and such matters; a process which,
“ however important, is yet, when taken in connexion with the measure itself, a mere
“ matter of manipulation. Again, we must not lightly bring about a change which will
“ take a long time to work its way into the habits of the people ; for Sir John Herschel,
“ no unfriendly witness, says that it would require fully twenty years to carry the
“ contemplated change into effect. Its perfect and full adoption by mercantile men
“ might be more immediate; for I agree with Mr. Brown, that it would be regarded
“ by them as a labour-saving machine, and as such be quickly brought into use; but
“ it would, I am persuaded, take a very long time before the people would become
“ habituated to it.”
To a deputation from the same body which was subsequently received at the
Board of Trade by Mr. Cardwell, then President of the Board of Trade, Lord
Stanley of Alderley, and Sir James Emerson Tennent, Sir John Herschel, the
Master of the Mint, being present, Mr. Cardwell, who had been a member of
the Parliamentary Committee, made the following statement:—
“The Committee felt the advantage of obtaining the opinions of practical and
“ scientific men, and there was but one opinion amongst them as to the advantages of
“ the Decimal System. There were, however, more opinions than one as to the mode in
“ which it was to be carried into effect, and although we were very nearly unanimous
“ in thinking that the report we adopted contained the best plan that could be proposed,
“ yet there was a sufficient amount of Scientific and of educated opinion on the other
“ side to render it desirable that public opinion should be further directed to the subject.
“Your inquiries are, therefore, most valuable, as tending thoroughly to clear up the
“ subject, so as to procure general unanimity before anything like transition is attempted.
“When you speak of a Decimal Coinage to be established amongst the less educated
“ portions of the community you must bear in mind that it is desirable that they should
“ be well prepared for its introduction. You have to change a great number of statutory
“ contracts, postage, tolls, and railway fares.”
On the 12th June 1855 Mr. W. Brown moved the following resolutions in
the House of Commons:—
1. That in the opinion of this House, the initiation of the Decimal System
by the issue of the florin has been eminently successful and satisfactory.
2. That a further extension of the system will be of public advantage.
3. That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that she
will be graciously pleased to complete the Decimal scale, with the
pound and florin, as suggested by two Commissions and a Committee
of the House of Commons, by authorizing the issue of silver coins to
represent the value of the one hundredth part of a pound, and copper
coins to represent the one thousandth part of a pound, to be called
cents and mils respectively, or to bear such other names as to Her
Majesty may seem advisable.
After a protracted debate the first resolution was carried by a majority of
135 to 56. The second resolution was then carried without a division, and
the third resolution was withdrawn. In the course of the debate the Govern-
ment urged that it was inexpedient to make a change which would so deeply
affect the interests of the poorer classes without much more investigation than
had yet been given to it, and gave an assurance that the subject should
receive the most careful consideration possible. -
b 3
xiv
The next step taken was the issuing of the present Commission by Your
Majesty, by which we are instructed to consider “how far it may be practi-
“ cable and advisable to introduce the principle of Decimal division into the
“ coinage of the United Kingdom.” e
Having thus traced the progress of the question of Decimal Coinage down
to the issuing of this Commission, we had next to consider and define the
precise subject referred to us by Your Majesty, -
The questions of the decimalization of weights and measures and of inter-
national coinage were early forced on our notice...These are questions of great
importance, and upon which probably much difference of opinion will exist.
But they are not, we conceive, necessarily involved in the subject of our
inquiry, and it appears to us that the terms of the Commission under which
we act restrict our investigations to the practicability and expediency of intro-
ducing the Decimal principle into the coinage of this country, without
contemplating any change in our present system of weights and measures, and
without considering the possibility or advantage of an international system of
coinage.
Under these circumstances, the weight of authority and evidence which we
found had been already brought to bear in favour of the Pound and Mil
Scheme by the recommendations of preceding Commissions, in the Evidence
and Report of the Parliamentary Committee, and by the proceedings of the
Decimal Association, led us to select our first witnesses from among the
opponents of that scheme, and to postpone the examination of witnesses favour-
able to that scheme.
We accordingly proceeded to call before us, as witnesses, those persons
who were understood, by their publications or otherwise, to be the most
prominent and the best informed of the opponents of the recommendation
of the Parliamentary Committee, and who were either supporters of the
present system of coinage or advocates of the scheme known as the Penny
Scheme.
The evidence of these witnesses will be found in the Appendix to this
Report.
We likewise, at an early stage of our proceedings, applied ourselves to the
preparation of a series of questions to be sent to foreign countries in which a
Decimal Coinage had been introduced, with a view of obtaining information
on several points, namely, the previous state of the coinage, the reasons which
led to the introduction of the Decimal Coinage, the difficulties which had
been found to attend the change, the extent to which the Decimal Coinage
had been brought into practical use, and the result how far satisfactory or
otherwise.
Copies of these questions were transmitted, on the 4th of March 1856,
by our Chairman to Your Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs,
with a request that they might be sent to Your Majesty's Ministers or Con-
sular Officers in the several countries to which they were applicable, and copies
were also sent by different members of our Commission to personal friends,
in those countries, who were known to be competent to give valuable informa-
tion on the subject of the queries.
To these inquiries, and principally by means of Your Majesty's Ministers
in the countries in question, and the courtesy of the Governments of those
countries, numerous answers have been received, which will be found in the
Appendix to our Report, and in some of the more important cases these
answers have been accompanied by large and valuable collections of public
documents relating to the changes in the coinage of those countries.
We also caused to be printed for the use of this Commission, and have
included in the Appendix to the Report, several communications made to us
in the course of this inquiry, various tables prepared for the Commission, and
other documents, public and private, which we have found to be useful in the
prosecution of our inquiry, and which we think may tend to promote a
thorough sifting of the subject, and thus lead to a correct understanding of
the subject by the public. .
A series of questions has been laid before us, prepared by one of our
members, Lord Cºverstone, described by their author as being drawn up with a
view of bringing under distinct notice and examination some of the advantages
of the present system of coinage, and some of the principal difficulties and
XV
objections which have been suggested with respect to the introduction of a
system of Decimal Coinage. -
We do not consider that it would be expedient that the Commission should
express, or that any grounds should be given to infer, any opinion on the subject
of this paper, and therefore we feel it would be open to misconception if it
were made part of our Appendix; but we have directed it to be printed as a
separate document communicated to the Commission by its framer, and humbly
submitted to Your Majesty.
Having arrived at this stage of the inquiry, and before proceeding to the
other branches of the subject which still remain for investigation, it has
appeared to us to be of importance for the satisfactory prosecution of this
inquiry that we should make this Preliminary Report for the purpose of
submitting to Your Majesty the information which we have obtained as to the
state of the coinage in foreign countries, and the evidence of the witnesses
already examined before the Commission, together with the other documents
to which we have referred.
By these means we hope that the attention of Parliament and of the public
may be directed to many important considerations and difficulties connected
with this subject, without a careful examination of which no safe and satis-
factory judgment can be formed.
By these means, too, we hope that the witnesses who remain to be examined
will be better prepared to assist us in discovering, weighing, and answering the
arguments and objections for and against the present system, and the various
schemes which have been proposed.
Some important branches of the question still remain for investigation,
and there are also to be considered some points of detail connected with the
means and the difficulties of a transition from the present system to the
Pound and Mil Scheme, or any of the other proposed schemes.
We therefore humbly submit this our First and Preliminary Report for
Your Majesty's gracious consideration.
4th April 1857.
MONTEAGLE, Chairman, (L.S.)
OWERSTONE. (L.S.)
J. G. HUBBARD. (L.S.)
o 4
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE
TAKEN BEFORE
THE DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
Wednesday, 7th May 1856.
PRESENT,
The Right Honourable The Lord MonTEAGLE OF BRANDON.
The Right Honourable The Lord OVERSTONE.
J. G. HUBBARD Esquire. -
The Right Honourable The Lord MONTEAGLE OF BRANDON in the Chair.
ROBERT SLATER, Esquire, examined.
1. (Chairman.) You have turned your attention, have you not, to the question which
has been referred to the Commissioners?—I have. -
2. Are you aware of the terms of the Commission ?—I believe that it is confined to the
question of coinage; the decimalization of coinage alone.
3. The Commission is “for considering how far it may be practicable and advisable to
introduce the system of decimal division into the coinage of the United Kingdom **—
Yes.
4. The subject is one to which your attention has been directed both as a writer and as
a thinker ?—It is.
5. You are the author of a treatise which you were so good as to lay before the Com-
missioners?—I am.
6. When was it printed ?—I think in November last; indeed I was led to print it
more for the purpose of laying it before the Commissioners than for any other reason.
7. Are there any points upon which your opinions subsequently to the writing of that
treatise have varied from the conclusions which you adopted then 2–My opinions have
not changed in the least degree; but I would beg leave most respectfully to offer to the
Commissioners the 10th and 11th chapters, which, as I think, comprehend almost all the
points of investigation, and almost everything that I could lay before your lordships in my
examination.
8. (Lord Overstone.) You are strongly impressed, are you not, with the expediency of
introducing the decimal principle into the coinage of this country?—Not so strongly
impressed in favour of the decimal coinage, but if we are to have a decimal coinage I
should certainly prefer a decimal coinage having a small unit rather than a large one. I
would prefer that, because it would thereby enable us to assimilate pretty closely to the
coinage of France and America; but I am by no means an advocate for any change. I
consider that our present compound system of coinage is a very convenient one for mer-
cantile calculations, and unless I saw some advantage to arise from an alteration I should
certainly not advocate a change for the mere sake of decimalizing our coinage.
9. You are not of opinion that the advantages of that mode of calculation, the saving of
time, and other grounds that have been set forth by the advocates of the decimal system
are sufficient to justify the country in embarking in the difficulties that are supposed to
attend that change 2–I am not.
10. If the decimal system of coinage is introduced you think that the reasons in favour
of a lower unit than a pound sterling are very strong 2—I think so.
11. Have you considered the difficulties which would attend any alteration of the pound
sterling as the basis of our monetary system 2–I have.
12. What is your opinion respecting it? —I do not think that the difficulties are to be
compared to the advantages which a lower unit would certainly give if our currency were
to be decimalized.
13. What are the advantages that you consider would attend a lower unit than a pound
sterling 2—My objection to the pound sterling as the basis of a decimal coinage is that it
requires three decimal places, which I think a great inconvenience. The tempenny
requires only two decimal places, and, as far as banking accounts and mercantile accounts
are concerned, it need only be confined to one single decimal place. My objection to
three decimal places as to the pound is that you cannot withdraw any of those places from
the account, because they are all too valuable. The third decimal place itself may be of
the value of about 2%d., the second decimal place may be about 1s. 9d., and, of course, the
first decimal place may be 18s, or nearly that; therefore it is out of the question to expect
that any reduction of those decimal places could conveniently be made if the pound were
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
2 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
to be adopted as the unit of the decimal coinage. On the other hand, the first decimal
place of the tempenny embraces everything that is at present comprehended in a cheque or
in a banking account or in a merchant's account. The introduction of a tenpenny unit
would occasion no alteration whatever. Then I also object to the three places of decimals,
the pound being the unit, because it would displace all our existing coins under 6d., and
would interfere, I think, rather disadvantageously with our calculations of quantities, such
as we are accustomed to at the present moment. The binary divisions which we have,
and the relative proportions which our weights and measures bear to our existing coinage,
are so convenient, that we can readily make calculations even of a very intricate character
without the smallest difficulty. Clerks who are in the habit of extending invoices, com-
prehending large quantities at exceedingly small values, find great facilities by our present
system; and I very much question whether the introduction of the decimal system would
improve that. I think the contrary. I think that it would be a great disadvantage to
mercantile people, and would lead to a great many calculations necessarily upon paper
which at present are done mentally. It does not appear to me that that would be any
improvement at all. I will take as a single example the first that occurs to my own mind;
144 articles at 23d. ; take that as a case, that is 12 dozen; and the rule at present is,
that we reduce the quantity and increase the price in the same proportion. We should
say twelve dozen at 2s. 9d. ; that is 33s. The process is done without putting pen to paper;
and it is wonderful to see how readily experienced clerks make all calculations of that kind
without having recourse to putting them upon paper; but I apprehend if you took a
corresponding number of mils you could not arrive at a correct result, particularly if the
price happened to be of a mixed character corresponding to 2s. 1%d, or some such price;
you could not arrive at the result unless by a lengthy calculation upon paper. I offer that
opinion with some qualification, because I cannot speak from my own experience as to
the time such decimal calculations would require, but I speak with large experience of
the other.
14. You state, do you not, in your pamphlet that in case of the introduction of a decimal
coinage it would lead to an alteration in the mode of making up packages of things, and
instead of making them up by the dozen they would make up parcels of tens !—I think so;
indeed there always has been a habit of accommodating quantities to prices, and of late
years particularly with some classes of goods. In the instance of hosiery, everybody
knows that they are made up in dozens; but in the instance of lace goods, comprehending
sometimes a large number of yards, they formerly used to be sold in pieces of every
variety of length; they are now put up in parcels of 10 dozen yards each, or some such
quantities, so as to simplify long calculations, the improvements by machinery in the
meantime having so completely reduced the value of the article from the facility of pro-
duction that there is a tendency at present towards a reduction of price generally in all
articles that are produced otherwise than by hand labour.
15. If parcels were so made up in tens instead of dozens, do you think that any practical
inconvenience would arise from the less perfect divisibility of the ten than of the twelve 2
—No ; people would very speedily get accustomed to it. -
16. The question did not allude to the difference of divisibility, but to the less possible
divisibility of the 10 than of the 12; for instance, if you had a dozen pairs of stockings,
or a dozen yards of lace, you could take the fourth part or the sixth part or the eighth
part of those, but you could not take it if divided into 10; would that be a practical
inconvenience in those branches of trade with which you are acquainted or not ?—I think
that it would be attended with no practical inconvenience to the wholesale trader, who only
sells in large unbroken quantities. It is an inconvenience which would apply rather to the
retailer, and he would accommodate his price accordingly.
17. (Mr. Hubbard.) Taking the particular sum that you mentioned, “ 12 dozen of
any article at 2s. 9d per dozen,” you said that it could be done by mental calculation with
great facility; but supposing that the price were in decimals, that the 2s. were a florin,
and the 9d. were 3c. 5m., if the prices ranged in that way they would run as evenly as the
French prices do ; the French do not take the odd centime; they generally stop at five or
sometimes at two and a half; and to multiply 12 dozen by 1.f. 3c. 5m. would be a process
almost as easy as multiplying by 2s. 9d. ?—I dare say it is, except where the quantity is very
large and the price very small. I will mention another point with reference to the French
system. I speak in that respect practically. In the house in which I am a partner we
are very large importers of French goods, and of course we have to sell those goods in
English money. I think it would be a very great advantage to importers if the coinage
of this country were established upon the basis of 10d. as the unit, because money values
would then assimilate so closely to each other with respect to the goods bought from
France that it would only be a matter of deduction of a certain rate of discount from the
invoice to equalize them, and this would be a great convenience in turning French prices
into English ones.
18. Instead of making a deduction for discount from the price you would add some-
thing for profits?—That may be ; we should find equal facilities in doing that ; but we
should regulate that by a per-centage.
19. The question of a uniform currency hardly comes just now under the consideration
of the Commissioners; but is it not clear that any assimilation of value between our
currency and theirs would be practically useless, unless it were absolutely identical ?—
Quite so. We could never make it absolutely identical.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. . 3
20. Is it not the case that absolute identity of value never could prevail, until the same
standard of value were established in both countries?—Even if they were the same they
could not be relied on to continue the same for a single day, for variations in the exchange
would immediately alter them.
21. So that your invoices from Paris, as the rate of exchange might vary from 25 francs
to 26 for a pound sterling, could not be calculated at the same rate to find the selling
price of the commodity in England?–Yes; it would be easily done. At the present
moment it is the practice to take French monies as at 25 francs to a pound, whatever the
rate of exchange may be ; the difference of exchange becomes a matter of calculation with
other expenses, and then the difference is regulated by a per-centage of the whole; but the
simplicity of converting French money into our present monies by the simple multiple
four, striking off the last cypher, is so great, that any little difference afterwards is to be
regulated by a per-centage.
22. Practically speaking, you have already what you wish to have under a decimal
system; you have now the means of converting at once any French price into an English
price, at the rate of 25 francs to the pound sterling 3–Yes; but that is not the correct
exchange.
23. Under the proposed (tenpenny) system would you have more equable prices than you
have now * Would there not be always some causes varying the rate of exchange, and
with the variation of that rate of exchange must there not be some difference between the
average rate of calculation you may choose to adopt and the actual cost, dependent on the
rate of exchange at which your invoice will be drawn by your correspondent at Paris?—
Yes; but if our denominations of money were equal, we should have only one process
instead of two. I may mention another point, and I sincerely hope that I shall be correct
in my anticipations on that subject, that the French ports may be opened for the reception
of English goods; in that case it would be a decided advantage to the French people to
have the English monies so regulated as to harmonize with their own.
24. (Lord Overstone.) You have had considerable practical experience in your business
in retail transactions?–In wholesale transactions; our business is entirely wholesale.
25. So far as your observation and experience go, should you say that there is any
practical inconvenience, or that there is not, in paying and receiving with our present
coinage 2–I should say none whatever.
26. You think that our present coinage is fairly and properly sufficient for all public
convenience in the processes of paying and receiving in retail transactions ?—I think so,
decidedly.
27. You do not think that the decimal coinage, even if introduced upon your basis,
would increase that facility ?—I do not.
28. Do you think that it would diminish it?—I am not prepared to say that it would
diminish it; but I think that it would be a great inconvenience, unless it were accom-
panied at the same time by a simultaneous decimal division of our weights and measures.
29. Have you considered the relative advantages or disadvantages of our present
coinage, and of the supposed decimal coinage, with regard to the mental processes of
calculation which the masses of people, especially of the lower orders, must frequently
perform —I am acquainted with the decimal processes usual in this country.
30. Do you think that the decimal system of coinage would facilitate the mental calcu-
lations which the lower orders of the people are continually called upon to perform 2–I think
not; on the contrary, I think that it would rather tend to destroy them.
31. Do you think that upon the whole, looking to wholesale transactions and to retail
transactions, the general result of a decimal system of coinage would be to increase or to
diminish the facility and conveniences of dealing with the fractional parts of a pound
sterling 2—I think it would have a tendency to decrease the facility of transactions rather
than to increase it.
32. Do you think that a decimal coinage would increase the facility of adjusting
transactions 2—I do not think so, particularly if the unit was a high one, as I mentioned.
* 33. Have you considered, upon the supposition of retaining the pound sterling as the
unit, in what way the decimal system would probably work with regard to the intermediate
stages between the highest and the lowest money accountº—So far as my attention has
been devoted to that question, my mind is impressed with this conviction, that it would not
work conveniently unless we could increase the value of the pound, that is, that we could
make it divisible by 25 tenpennys instead of 24 tenpennys, as at present; then I think it
would be a great convenience to have such a coinage ; and if there were to be a coinage
with the basis of 10d. as the unit, I consider that it must of necessity be attended with a
gold coin of 25 tenpennys, because there would be no idea of substituting anything like a
silver standard for the gold one. I consider a gold standard of great importance to be
maintained in this country.
34. Are you conversant with the existing decimal coinages of other countries of the
world?—Only with France and with America.
35. In both of those countries I believe the decimal system has only two monies of
account, the highest and the lowest?—Yes.
36. With the decimal system, and a pound sterling for the highest or something more
than a pound sterling, according to your suggestion, would it not be necessary that we
should use more than two monies of account —I think practically we should only use two
monies of account. - w
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
A 2
4. MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater:
7th May 1856.
37. How do you think it would work, considering that the intervening stages must be
1,000?–More would be reckoned by the lower denominations. By mils if the pound were
the unit.
38. Do you not think that great inconvenience and difficulty in calculations, especially
in mental calculations, would arise from the necessity of dealing with sums so high as
would necessarily be involved when you pass from 1 all the way to 1,000 without an
intermediate stage or break 3–I should think that there would be difficulties of that kind
necessarily presenting themselves to the mind in large totals, but I do not know that the
want of an intermediate coin would occasion any difficulty.
39. The question was not so much with reference to the want of an intermediate coin as
the want of an intermediate stage or step for calculation. Do not you think that if you had,
both in writing and still more so if you had in mental calculations, to carry the sums
unbroken and unassisted by an intermediate stage from one to 1,000, when you came to
the higher amounts above 100 great inconvenience and difficulty, and great liability to
error, would occur 2–Most undoubtedly; and that can be exemplified completely in the
processes of mental calculation, to which we are at present accustomed by our existing
system of coinage, because we make steps at various places. . As in the instance of
converting pence into shillings, we arrive at a certain stage of the process, and stop, and
the mind carries it on until we reach another stage.
40. Under our present system of coinage we must carry our calculations at once from a
penny to a pound, without the intermediate stage of the shilling?—Yes, in cases where the
pence are an aliquot proportion of the pound.
41. Looking at the adoption of the intermediate stage of the shilling, is not that, in your
judgment, a clear proof of the necessity of some such assistance between the penny and the
240 multiple —Yes, I think so, because the decimal process could no longer assist the
mind in arriving at a conclusion.
42. Do you not think that it would inevitably be necessary that we should use the florin
or some similar stage to assist us in our calculations between a mil and a pound?—I am not
prepared to say that a florin, occupying itself only one decimal place of a pound, would be
any great assistance in calculations; but I have not attended much to that, having had no
opportunity of performing decimal calculations, except incidentally. I do not think we
should derive much advantage from taking any stage, whether the florin or the next stage,
the cent, as the intermediate stage. I very much question it.
42 a. You have a strong opinion, have you not, that great confusion would arise in the
adoption of a decimal coinage, unless it was accompanied by a corresponding alteration in
our system of weights and measures?—I have.
43. Can you explain to the Commissioners the grounds of your opinion?—I entertain
that opinion because the division of our weights and measures bears a close relative
proportion to the division of our coinage, and by that means it greatly facilitates any
calculations that are to be made arising from the parts of those divisions. It is the harmony
that exists between the coinage and the division of our weights and measures that gives us
those facilities.
44. (Chairman.) In your book you call the attention of your readers naturally, at page 8,
to the vast varieties of weights and measures which at present exist, and you refer in the
weights to the imperial troy weight, the apothecaries' weight, the diamond weight, the
avoirdupois weight, the cheese and butter weight, the wool weight, the imperial long
measure, and the superficial measure, and then you go on, at page 9, speaking most truly of
the additional confusion that in practice arises from those customary weights, which, in
despite of all law, have maintained their use amongst the people, “in stones, seams, or
“ trusses, as applied to hay or straw ; in cloves, weys, or firkins, as applied to cheese and
“ butter; or cloves, stones, tods, weys, sacks, or lasts, as applied to wool.” I believe you
might have carried that nomenclature somewhat further. Taking into account the bolls in
Scotland and barrels in Ireland, the confusion is infinite; and that being the practical state
of our weights and measures, can we assume that, they varying in themselves without any
integer from which they spring or to which they reach in the subdivisions which take
place between those extremes, there is, practically speaking, any harmony, as it may be
termed, between those almost innumerable weights and measures and the coinage 7–The
harmony is still the same, though the nominal weights are in themselves different ; for
instance, the divisions are the same, as we observe in the case of stones. A stone is sometimes
14 lbs. or 7 or 8 lbs., or a tod, or a wey. There are some of them of the same denomination,
actually representing different weights for different commodities. Still the proportions of
those weights bear the same relative proportion to the coinage.
45. Do they usually do so in all cases?—They do not.
46. You are probably not sufficiently acquainted with the matter to set us out those
customary weights, so as to enable us to ascertain whether the confusion or the want of
harmony which is attributed in reasoning to the substitution of the decimal coinage without
the adoption of decimal weights is not an inconvenience which as you may say is at both
sides of the question existing at present, and which would exist if decimal coins were
introduced?—I have not sufficient practical acquaintance with that question to enable me
to furnish the Commissioners with information on that point.
47. You have spoken of the facilities of the present mode of calculation, and you told the
Commissioners that the commercial house in which you are a partner has large transactions
with the Continent, with France, and probably with Belgium and Holland?—Yes; chiefly
with France. We sell to Belgium and Holland; we do not buy there, +
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 5
48. Do you find in those countries where the decimal system has prevailed for a consider-
able time, and in which the usual rendering of accounts is in francs and cents, any greater
inconvenience in dealing in your own large concerns with those accounts in francs and
cents, or in the money which is represented by those numbers, than you do in the coins of
England?—None whatever. We do not sell the goods; we buy those foreign goods; but we
keep our accounts in francs in all the transactions we have in France and some parts of
Germany, and in Switzerland, where they actually invoice our goods in French money, and
do not adopt the money of their own country.
49. You are aware that within a period relatively short they have adopted the French
system in Switzerland 7–Yes, I have understood so.
50. When that change took place did it produce any inconvenience in your transactions?
—The trade had not arisen then between Switzerland and England, or between Switzer-
land and our own house. The character of the trade has changed in Switzerland within a
few years only, through that country having adopted the manufactures of France very
successfully.
51. You spoke just now about the practice in certain branches of trade and production
of putting up and selling things in dozens, and you stated, did you not, that, probably as an
incident to the decimal coinage there might be cases in which the parcels would be put
up in tens rather than in dozens. Would that be an inconvenience to the buyer or to the
seller ?—I think it would be a great convenience to the retailer especially. He would
know at once what his price would be. *
52. You state at page 33, most truly, “Were a system of decimal coinage introduced
“ quantities would cease in practice to be put up in dozens. They would be formed into
“ tens, and as the tenth part of one penny, were a tenpenny unit introduced, is so much
“ more minute a fraction than our present farthing, the decimal system might be expected
“ speedily to reconcile itself to the convenience of the people. Quantities in harmony with
“ prices would be introduced to suit mental processes of calculation, and in a brief space.
“ when the people had been sufficiently trained, they would arrive at results by decimals
“ with great rapidity.” There would be that tendency, you conceive, in matters, to adjust
themselves 2—Yes, I think so; it seems to be the natural bias of the human mind.
53. When persons have suggested that there would be any permanent difference in
price by means of the introduction, or I should say, if it existed, the cessation of the
decimal system, do you think that it would be possible, viewing the ordinary principles of
supply and demand in the market, that there could be any permanent increase or dimi-
nution of price resulting from the alteration of the coinage?—No, I do not think that it
would occasion any difference.
54. Competition would settle that ?—Yes; that is governed by a different law entirely.
Perhaps I might say, by taking the case of a single shilling divided into 10 parts, and
divided into 12 parts, it stands to reason that of the 10 parts each contains a greater
quantity and greater value than the twelfth part of the shilling, and if you can divide that
shilling into no more parts, then the holder of the shilling must lose, unless he gets some
extra quantity of the article that he is purchasing for the price that he is giving for it, the
tenth part of a shilling instead of the twelfth. I refer to matters chiefly by which the
sums of 10 and 12 can be subdivided, showing that the 12 is capable of division by a
much greater number of times than the 10, and therefore is capable of showing a greater
variety of prices in the same proportion.
55. (Chairman.) Are there not modes of adjusting the value of articles sold by the
alteration of the quality of them somewhat ?—Of course they are higher or lower in price
according to the quality. -
56. Suppose an alteration of the coin which placed in the hand of the purchaser a given
amount of gold or silver or copper, not divisible, and that suddenly it was altered, either
making it more or less, and he went to the market without having coins so minute in
division as would meet the alteration in the weight and fineness of the coins which he had,
in that case, if he were driven to buy an article in the market, might there not be a way of
adjusting the price with precision by giving a better quality if there was more coin given,
or a lower quality if there was a less coin given, and would it not adjust itself after that
fashion ?—It would and does so now, inasmuch as in a variety of trades, as in the grocery
trade, and I am told in the spirit trade, if they have some small change to return they
give it in the shape of an extra quantity, or they give, as I have understood in Ireland and
elsewhere, a glass of whiskey to make it up.
57. Will you have the goodness to state whether, supposing the seller had the power, or
endeavoured, upon a change of coimage, to put four per cent. additional into his pocket
in the way of increased profits in the article which he sold, arising out of the difficulty of
fixing the exact amount to be given for the new coin that was presented to him, that
additional four per cent, so acquired by the seller in addition to any profits that he had
previously had would bring at once a new competition into that trade of which the profits
were so acquired, which would lower those profits to the ordinary rate of other profits in
the trade 2—I think so. His next door neighbour would immediately sell more at a
reduced rate.
58. (Lord Overstone.) Suppose the integral part of any article, say a pound of sugar or
a pound of tea, is sold for a given sum, when we come to divide this into fractional parts
or ounces, for instance, is it not clear that the coin in which they are to be paid for would
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
*º
A 3
6 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
º
harmonise with those subdivisions, say of ounces, more conveniently if the original sum is
divisible by 12 than if it is divisible by 10?–Certainly. , -
59. If then, under a division of the coins by 10 instead of by 12, we come to fractional
sums to represent an ounce which are not stateable in figures or representable in coins,
will there not arise a difficulty between the buyer and the seller?—There must, unless
there is an equality of the proportions. . - -
60. Can that difficulty be got over by any general principle of adjustment of prices to
the ordinary rate of profit, or is it, not a difficulty necessarily inherent in a different
system of subdividing the integral price which must involve confusion and probable loss;
that is to say, the turn of the price in favour of the one party or the other?—I think that
refers to the difficulty in adjusting the integral price alone; and that difficulty, I think,
would be rather increased than otherwise if the decimal coinage, whatever may be its
basis, were introduced without a corresponding decimal division of the weights and
In ea.SUlreS.
61. Then the difficulty alluded to as arising from the subdivision of the integral quantity
into its fractional parts will be greater under the nonintroduction of a decimal system of
coinage to correspond with it than it would be if a decimal system of coinage were
introduced in correspondence with it?—Precisely so.
62. You consider that a difficulty constituting an objection to the introduction of a
decimal system of coinage unaccompanied by a corresponding decimal system of weights
and measures?—I do. -
63. The difficulty having reference to the fractional subdivision of the integral parts?—
Yes. - - * -
64. Your transactions with foreign countries, more especially with France, are wholesale
transactions, are they not ?—Entirely. -
65. You, therefore, in measuring the convenience of the currency of the country with
which you trade have to deal with the multiple of the integer in your accounts rather than
with the subdivision of it into fractional parts?—Yes.
66. But the question of decimal coinage has reference to the subdivision of the
fractional parts exclusively. The decimal coinage has not reference to a decimal mode of
multiplication of the integer upwards, but to a decimal system of subdividing the integer
into its fractional parts?—Yes.
67. Your experience in wholesale transactions with foreign countries does not bear upon
the question, one way or the other, the convenience or inconvenience of the decimal system
of subdividing the integer. It really has reference to retail transactions which correspond
to the retail subdivision of the integer of our monetary system 2–I am afraid that I do not
understand you exactly. If the Commissioners will permit me I will explain what I
believe to be the view that you are now taking of that question. We have nothing to do
with the subdivision of the decimal currency of France in our invoices; but we convert
that currency into English money, and we sell French goods in English money, without
reference at all to the French money between us and our customers, after having adjusted
the price, as I stated before, according to the expenses and the profit, which is necessary for
us to take into consideration in that question.
68. So that in fact in your accounts with France you have to deal with the multiplica-
tion of their integer, be it a franc or any other integer, a great deal more than you are
concerned with the mode in which the franc is subdivided into its fractional parts?—
It is so.
69. Consequently, when you say that you find the French monetary system, or the Swiss
monetary system, or the Dutch monetary system, equally convenient in large transactions
with our own, that has reference to the mode in which the integer of the account is
multiplied so as to give you the large amounts involved in your wholesale transactions?—
Yes; but each individual invoice is formed of a great many goods all at an immense
variety of prices.
70. Does that immense variety of prices involve, to any considerable extent, calculations
in the fractional parts of the integer ?—Every line of an invoice renders such calculations
indispensable.
71. But the calculations are altogether calculations of multiplication rather than of
fractional division?—Of multiplication only.
72. Again, with reference to your statement that if parcels were divided into tens
instead of twelves, you thought that it would be an additional convenience rather than an
inconvenience. In that answer you had reference again, had you not, rather to the multi-
plication than to the subdivision of those parcels –It had reference, perhaps, more to the
retailer than to any convenience or inconvenience that the wholesale dealer or manufacturer
would experience from such a change.
73. In what way do you conceive that the retailer would experience convenience 2—If a
parcel formed of ten articles sells for one franc, or sells for 10d., one article would sell for
ld. , that would be the facility that it would afford to arrive at the actual price of a single
article. -
74. Your answer has reference then exclusively to the supposition that you have a
decimal arrangement of commodities to correspond with the decimal?—Precisely.
75. (Chairman.) Can you account at all for the practice that has arisen of making up
certain articles and selling them in dozens, and other articles in other ways; as, for
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 7
instance, buying stockings or gloves by the dozen, which does not apply to buying shoes
or other articles even of equal value to the stockings?—I have no reason in the world.
myself to doubt that that arrangement originated in the days of our forefathers, and when,
as it exists now, 12 ounces were 1 lb. troy, and that it arose simply because it would
assimilate with the division of the pound weight, and consequently with the coins which
were so adjusted as to harmonize with the weights. - t
76. Therefore there is a tendency so to apportion the articles sold as to adjust them-
selves to the convenience of the coin in which the purchase is made ?—Yes; I quite
think so. - - -
77. How shall we account for this, for instance,—a fact with which some of us are
familiar as country gentlemen,_-they sell sheep by scores?—That is entering again into the
old division; that applies in many cases, as in the case of hundreds between wholesale and
retail dealers. In some places 1 cwt. is 120 lbs., called a “long hundred,” while the
standard weight is 112 lbs. to a cwt. ; and there is no giving any reason, except the desire,
arising from competition originally, to throw in a little more as an additional inducement
to buy, like a baker's dozen. -
78. You have been asked upon a very important question as bearing upon this subject.
In the great wholesale operations which your house conduct you have told the Commis-
sioners that your proceedings would naturally be to a considerable extent in multiplication
rather than in the division of articles. In the transactions of the market itself, in small
transactions of the persons under your employment, do you consider that the calculations
by division in the market are more important to them than the calculations of multiplica-
tion ?—I should think that they were equally important. -
79. Are you aware of a popular book which is published for the purpose of despatch in
the market proceedings of parties less initiated in accounts, called the “Ready Reckoner?”
I have often seen it. -
80. Are you not aware that the “Ready Reckoner” is altogether for giving facility in
multiplication for the operations in the market 2—Yes; but it is seldom used. -
81. It has been used for some centuries 2–Yes, it is very common; but it is never
used by clerks; it is only used by small traders. You would be astonished at the
facility with which grocers and others calculate quantities without such aids. They would
be ashamed to use this book; and if a clerk were to use it he would lose caste directly.
I would at once discharge him.
82. Do they not in some of the greatest establishments in the world with which we are
familiar enough make use of tables of computations that are made use of for exactly the
same purpose ?—I think not, except the interest tables.
83. In that book, such as it is, it is altogether a process of multiplication ?—Entirely.
84. (Lord Overstone.) Is there not a difference between dealing in commodities and
dealing with values? —Very great.
85. Commodities are necessarily divided, while values are naturally added ?–Not always
added. We are obliged to take all the rules of arithmetic with the values; but with com-
modities they are either simple multiplication or simple division. It is a very short
process. - -
86. Is not the great familiarity of the terms “ halves and quarters,” &c. conclusive
practical proof that division has reference to commodities, and is a process of universal
daily and hourly practice 2–Undoubtedly.
87. (Chairman.) In what you have referred to, as well as what is more plainly set out
in an extract from Mr. Laurie's book under the head of “ (G.),” you refer under note
“ (G.)” to the process that you have already described in your oral evidence, the conse-
quence of the stimulus given by improved machinery or the application of machinery in
acting upon productive labour, and lessening the cost of particular articles?—Yes.
88. From which the inference has been drawn by Mr. Laurie that the unit or integer,
for the convenience of parties, ought to be lessened rather than increased ; is not that so 2–
Quite so. w •
89. The articles are given, and other articles that would occur, such as pearl shirt
buttons, sewing cotton on reels, and needles, and pins, and all those articles which are
cheapened very much in production, and are now unrepresented in the smaller denomina-
tions, if it were a single needle or a single pin, by any one coin that ever has existed or
ever can exist. Then, so far as this table goes, ought we not rather to look to the price
that would be paid for that quantity of the article which would be ordinarily sold than for
the estimated cost of the articles in detail, which in detail are never purchased ?–Quite
so. It is the power to purchase them in detail.
90. Surely in those things that have been named to you, buttons, or pins, or reels of
cotton, they cannot purchase them in detail without having a coin to represent it; therefore
is not the argument fallacious?–It is not altogether fallacious, for this reason, that though
the price of an article or a gross of articles sufficient for the wants of a poor person may be
ld, in a month hence, by the improved machinery, it may become #d.; that is, he may get
a double quantity. He does not want a double quantity; he does not want as much as a
penny's worth. If it is a button to his shirt, he does not require half a gross of buttons for
that single purpose. Therefore I apprehend, so far as the poor are concerned, a small coin is
indispensable; smaller even than our present farthing.
91. Are you aware that there has been an attempt made by the Government, upon that
hypothesis, to coin half-farthings, and that they have not been taken by the people?—I
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
*m-.
A 4
8 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
esmº
have seen the coin, and it appeared to me that there never seemed to be any great desire
that the people should take them; they never circulated very widely.
92. Are you aware that in the last report made from the Mint of the United States to
Congress there is a statement made that the half-cent which had been coined for some time
was found so entirely useless that they had recommended a cessation of the coin 2–I can
readily believe that, because I believe it is not the interest of the trader, the person who
sells, to have such exceedingly small coins, though it is the interest of the poor to have
them, so as to be able to command the commodity. It is directly the interest of the trader
to compel his customers to buy more than a small quantity. I look upon that division as
rather important, in the calculation of the original prices of manufactured articles, which go
very low indeed, rather than as to coins representing those prices which we have in our
business for articles, representing the 32d part of a penny; but we have no coin, and we
require none, to represent a value so small.
93. Would not that apply in the same way to those illustrations which are given in some
of the books, say a hank of cotton, though a very small fraction by the pound; and is not
that rather a standard of estimating sums which will be paid in larger amounts?—It is
exclusively the mode of calculating. It appears here in this book as a difficulty, or rather
it shows the greater difficulty we should have by calculating the decimal parts of a pound,
than we have at present by the decimal parts or fractional parts of a penny; but we have
no coin, and we require none, to represent it; it is merely a question of calculation with
reference to original cost; nothing else.
94. Therefore the supposition that because cotton per pound is very low there would be
a necessity for a small coin corresponding to the hank of a pound of cotton is ill founded?
—It is so entirely; but I wish the Commissioners to see this point in connection with it,
that in calculating the 32d part of a penny by mils of a pound or anything equivalent to
it you would find that you would require no less than five figures to do it; there is the
difficulty as a matter of account. As an example of the difficulty experienced in com-
mercial operations of hourly occurrence in a country possessing a unit of a decimal coinage
smaller than £1, and of the inconvenience in the transactions of life of a minute decimal
subdivision, I beg to quote from a New Orleans price current just received the rates of
sundry articles:– “Louisiana sugar of fair to fully fair quality is quoted at 7 to
“ 7+ cents tº it; ; ginger at 6 to 64 cents ºf 15 ; tobacco at 74 and 84 cents tº ft (and
also, exceptionally, amongst a multitude of quotations exhibiting binary subdivisions at
7+, and 817 cents). Green meat (pork) found purchasers at 7+ cents tº fê, and lard at
“ 94 to 94 cents. On cotton the advance within the week has been fully # to + cent tº fê,
whilst freight to Liverpool was taken at ++ to #d, this year, against + to Hºd. in 1855,
“ and # to 4d. in 1854. To Havre cotton is taken on freight at # cent. A ship was
“ taken for Bordeaux to ++ cent, and at Boston at ºr cent,” whilst we look in vain for any
decimal quotation of freight. Amongst the articles fluctuating in price by + cent are found
almonds, bacon, bagging, coffee, hides, lead, rice, soap, spirits; thus showing that a binary
division is preferred for practical purposes by a people already possessing the supposed
advantages of a decimal monetary system. -
95. (Lord Overstone.) Are the Commissioners to understand your view to be this, that
for the purpose of representing, not in coins but in calculation, those minute values which
are often necessarily involved in mercantile transactions, the present system of division is
more convenient and more efficient than the decimal system 2–Yes.
96. Secondly, I understand your view to be that a coin of a very low denomination is
favourable, not to the seller or to the comparative wholesale dealer, but to the poor
purchaser, as enabling him to get smaller values at a less sacrifice P−Yes.
97. (Chairman.) Do you conceive that if it was for the interest of the buyer or any
considerable class to obtain a coin which the Government had coined, and they found it
advantageous to them in their transactions, that that coin would not be had somewhere
or another?—I do not know a class more indifferent in this matter than the poor themselves;
they are the last persons to know what is best for them; they would readily use it if they
had it; but they are not the people themselves, I apprehend, to move in the matter; they
are always passive.
98. Do you think that it is a process of that description, a want of activity and an
immediate sense of their own interest, which would lead at once in England to the cessation
of the half-farthing and in America to the cessation of the half-cent?—I think so; they
submit to the force of circumstances.
99. The statement made in the report of the Commissioners sent to Congress is that the
people found it exceedingly troublesome and inconvenient to pay a cent by two coins when
they could pay it in one 2–The poor in America and the poor in England are very
different ; there is little poverty there compared with this country.
100. With reference to some questions I put to you antecedently about the possibility
of any class in the community adding 4l per cent. to their own profits without at once
raising a competition that would bring down that 4l per cent. to the ordinary rate of
profits in the country, I wish to ask you whether the change proposed from the 960
farthings to 1,000 mils could by possibility lead to a standing confiscation acting upon the
poor to the amount of that 4l per cent. 2–No, I do not think anything of the kind.
101. Supposing any change in the coinage were made, do you not think it of great
importance that it should be made in such a way so as slightly as is possible to affect
existing fixed contracts?—I do so, certainly. * *
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 9
102. Is not the effect that might be produced upon fixed contracts, whether it is in the
toll of a bridge which is a halfpenny, or whether it is in the more material contracts entered
into by the State, one of the great difficulties in making any change in the currency?—I
am quite satisfied upon that point.
103. Will you have the goodness to state whether you consider that the majority of the
fixed contracts are represented by the price of the gold and silver coin of the realm,
meaning by that, from the shilling upwards to the pound, or any decimal below a shilling *
—If I took the number alone I might give a very successful answer to that question by
referring to postage and receipt stamps. &
104. Those are concerns of the State. The question had reference to fixed contracts
between individual and individual. I mean a contract even of the humblest description ?
—I should say that contracts are generally above a shilling, except ordinary purchases of
WareS.
105. My question referred to fixed contracts 2–Then there is no doubt about it.
106. You are aware that the scheme which calls itself commonly the mil and the pound
system preserves as they now exist all the existing coins from the sixpence upwards to the
pound as they now stand 2–I believe so.
107. Then whatever possible collateral inconveniences might arise from the adoption of
the mil and the pound scheme, has it not at least that advantage of leaving the greater part
of the fixed contracts of the country undisturbed ?–I am not aware that that could have
much to do with the question. I do not exactly see the operation of that question ; it does
not convey itself clearly to my own mind. If I fix upon, as I will imagine, contracts to
furnish a certain quantity of goods at a certain number of pence each, they would most
assuredly be interfered with by the decimals of one pound. I might enter into the
furnishing of the army with a large number of articles at 4d. or 3d, each; those would
most assuredly be influenced by the proposed decimal division of one pound ; while, on the
other hand, there must be a great number of articles which would not be affected by such
a division ; but whenever you come to a broken price, I mean such a price as 2s. 4d. or
2s. 3d., which is common, as, for example, in confracts for shoes, if we will give 5s. 1d.
a pair or 14s. 3%d, a dozen, that is always with reference to the existing coinage, then I
should say that the introduction of the decimal coinage with a pound as a unit would most
assuredly interfere with that contract.
108. With respect to any future contracts to be entered into after the change had taken
place, I presume those contracts being entered into in relation to the coin that was then
made by law would adjust themselves according to the new system 2–Most assuredly.
109. Confining yourself upon that ground to the antecedent but permanent contracts,
supposing a contract was made to pay 2s. a week for a poor man's bed in the lowest part of
Westminster, if a change took place, would he still be enabled to satisfy that contract by
the payment of 2s., namely, the same coin that he had previously contracted to pay ?—
Yes, he would ; but I suppose again, that if I entered into a contract with a man to pay
him a pound a week, of course if he was to get a sixth part of it to day, I could not by
decimal of a pound arrive at the precise value so as to enable me to fulfil my contract, as
the day's wages is an indefinable quantity.
110. Supposing it was a pound, he would have no difficulty in paying 20s. at the end
of the week 2–None at all, but it is the parts that I am looking to.
111. Suppose he paid at the end of three days, he could not have any difficulty at the
end of three days in paying 10s. ?—None.
112. The utmost inconvenience would be if that contract for paying wages at a pound
a week resolved itself into a division of time that was not represented by any corre-
sponding division of coin 2–I believe that in all contracts of that kind in which labor is
concerned, whether for a week or a month or yearly salary, when it is to be paid in
proportions, it would be affected, although of course in a very small degree; and except as
a matter of minute correctness I would not raise the question.
113. (Lord Overstone.) Under the proposed decimal system called the pound and mil
system, all sums involving a penny otherwise than multiplied by six or by 12 would be
absolutely inconvertible into the new coins at precisely equivalent values?—Yes.
114. Consequently all contracts involving such multiples of a penny must when paid in
the decimal coinage involve gain or loss to the one side or to the other ; upon the suppo-
sition of a decimal coinage based upon the penny, no such difficulty would arise in any sum ?
—None whatever.
115. Every sum would be strictly convertible into equivalent values 2–Yes.
116. Whatever the contracts might be, whether in shillings or whatever sum, there would
be under the penny basis of a decimal coinage the power of conversion into any coin of
precisely equivalent values 2–Yes.
117. The difficulty therefore of converting existing contracts involving multiples of a
penny into the new coins is applicable only to the decimal coinage which takes the pound
sterling for its basis, and is not applicable to the decimal coinage in any part of the process
of converting the new coin into a decimal coinage which takes the penny as its basis 2—
Precisely.
I 18. (Mr. Hubbard.) There are two or three points very strongly treated in your very
interesting pamphlet, upon which I wish to receive information. You state that you are
familiar with the French system of coins ; therefore, of course you are aware that under
their decimal system the French succeed in regulating their prices and recording their
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
&=sºº.
- B
10 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
transactions with equal or greater facility than under the old system of sous and francs 2–
am not conversant with the habits of the common people there in accounts. In business
transactions we have no difficulty at all. :
119. I imagine that you would not doubt that in the event of the decimal system in
this country being adopted, prices would be easily estimated under the decimal system, and
that the transactions arising under it, and the records of them, would be effected with perfect
facility? —Yes; I think they would speedily adjust themselves to any change.
120. Under the present division of the pound sterling, the minimum coin is a farthing
or the 960th part of a pound ; under the proposed pound and mil scheme the smallest coin
would be a mil, being the one thousandth part of a pound sterling, and therefore smaller
than the farthing by four per cent, 7–Precisely so.
121. You would therefore admit, would you not, that there would be no difficulty if you
descended as low as a mil in the common treatment of prices, and in the common record of
transactions in estimating as closely and calculating as accurately as you could possibly
wish 2–Yes; we should find the means of doing so.
122. Will you have the kindness to refer to page 50 in your treatise, where you state,
“ the decimals of one pound, although pronounced to be the only system adapted for the
“ wants of the country, are utterly and altogether impracticable for the ordinary purposes
“ of business.” I imagine that that inference is a consequence of the calculations which
precede it?—Yes, I refer to that.
123. Now will you allow me to direct your attention to the first rule there stated, “By
“ the simple rule 3,612 yards at 3%; d.” By the simple rule you mean the rule commonly
pursued now 2–Yes, precisely so. t
124. The number of figures I find occupied in bringing out that rule are 46. The next
rule which you show is a supposed operation of the same kind of transaction under the
tenpenny decimal system 2–Yes; the simple rule is the practical rule.
125. In the third instance you show the calculation of the same 3,612 yards under the
pound and mil system 2–Yes.
126. The figures by which you represent the 3-ºrd, are 01328.125, which you have
taken as the precise equivalent of the 3+?—Exactly so.
127. But under the decimal system there is no reason whatever to suppose (by the
analogy of the custom of France) that prices would not be estimated in decimal money by
far fewer figures. If you descend to the same amount of detail as 34%; you may suppose
31% d. to be represented by 1 cent. 3 mils?—Yes.
128. Suppose that you went further, and took 134 mils or 13.5 mils, the use of three
figures, including a decimal below a mil, would allow a variety of price far exceeding what
you could get by sixteenths of a penny, and therefore we may assume that you never need
to go below that. If then you take 3,612 yards multiplied by 13.5 mils, you will find
that the whole calculation will be accomplished in 27 figures, and with great simplicity. I
apprehend that such would practically be the way in which the decimal system would
operate —I beg pardon. I understood you to say if we multiplied 3,612 by 3 mils.
129. 13.5 mils?—You must remember that you must have two decimal places before that
on the left hand side. -
130. Those decimal places being filled with blanks —Yes. -
131. I observed that in answer to some previous questions you insisted as a disadvantage
to the pound and mil scheme that it required in all instances three decimal places. By that
I understand you to mean that if you are dealing with mils only you must still precede the
mil by 3 zeros representing three decimals, but if, on the other hand, you are dealing with
pounds sterling, you must put three decimals after it to mark its affinity to the mil. I am
not aware that the advocates of the pound and mil scheme make any stipulation that a
useless retinue of zeros shall always either precede or follow the precise coin with which
they are concerned?—I do not see how they can help it.
132. I apprehend that as, under the present system when you wish to speak of pounds,
you speak of pounds simply, so you would do under the decimal system, as now when
dealing with pence and farthings. In this very calculation, for instance, you speak of
them without reference to shillings and pounds; so under the decimal system you would
speak of whatever coins were concerned, cents or mils; you would make no unnecessary
mention either of florins or pounds?—I do not see how you could distinguish the one from
the other. I believe your suggestion is one that would be likely in practice to be carried
into effect. People would occasionally put down some stroke to indicate that that
which followed was a mil, as they do at present with 1/1; they put 1 for the shilling
and a stroke between it and the penny. I fear it would lead to very great confusion,
from the great number of decimal places. At present we have got only pence, and a
farthing is a thing so well understood that we have no difficulty in distinguishing it.
133. I must assume for the position that I am putting to you that the cents or mils
would be distinguished by some mark, C. or M., as we do now with 38 s. d., in which case I
reject the preliminary retinue of cyphers, and simply place upon record the 3,612 yards
multiplied by 13:52—This might be taken for 135 florins. You put a decimal point after
the 13; there is nothing to show that that is a decimal. There is the difficulty that I see
in practice, - e
134. Whoever makes the calculation knows what he is dealing with ?—Yes, but it
comes into the hands of some person afterwards that does not know.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 11
135. You have only to put your mark against it. Might not the same thing occur now 2
Might not 135 be 135l. sterling or 13/52–I dare say we shall find modes of making it
understood, but when we are investigating things of this kind at first these difficulties will
naturally present themselves to the mind as almost insuperable. I cannot see how they
can get over that difficulty. If you run into the lowest decimal place that the decimal
division of the pound admits of, I think it would lead to difficulty and mistakes. I dare
say we shall find means of getting out of the difficulties, but at present I do not see how.
136. (Chairman.) There are three figures that enter into the French calculation.
Suppose a single franc, or one franc two centimes. Under the English system, as pro-
posed, there would be a point which I should take as analogous to a franc, and three
figures instead of two. Do you consider that the addition of that single figure is a
difficulty that is worth very much?——I think it is a very great difficulty in calculation ;
it does not necessarily follow that it will always be a cipher; it may be something
else.
137. Suppose the French were able to reduce their system to a franc and a simple
figure, in place of two, do you think that that would facilitate the matter very much 2–I
think it would. That is the suggestion I have made with reference to dropping the half-
pence, which is customary with bankers and merchants.
138. (Mr. Hubbard.) I will pass on to the last point, which will illustrate my meaning.
At the bottom of page 51 you impugn the advantages which the advocates of the pound
and mil scheme ascribe to it as a medium of keeping accounts?–Yes.
139. You illustrate your objections to their theory by the tables which are in page 52.
In the first column of that table you state 20 sums expressed in pounds, shillings, and
pence 2–Yes.
140. In the next column you state the equivalents of those sums in decimals of a pound;
but you carry those decimals below a mil?—Yes. *
141. In practice we agreed just now that no record would be made of any sums below a
mil, the mil itself being below a farthing. If therefore you strike out of that second table
or column the figures less than a mil, and add up the remaining figures, we shall find (as
stated in your own paragraph below) that the addition of the decimals will be 107 figures;
the addition of the pounds, shillings, and pence being 1012–Quite so.
142. I take the comparison of those two columns as a fair illustration of the number of
figures required by the one and the other system —Yes.
143. They show, therefore, that the decimals required rather more figures when carried
down to the details of mils (which we assume to be inevitable); but that, on the other
hand, they have, first the advantage of the greater accuracy of detail by going to mils than
stopping at pence only, and next they save the intricacy of adding up and dividing by 12
from the pence and by 20 from the shillings, the addition of the decimals being simple
addition throughout. Setting aside, therefore, the question of how you would treat the
subdivisions of a pound in order to avoid confusion, I think it is obvious that if you do not
go into greater detail than mils both the calculations and the accounts are less laborious,
and that the accounts require a very few more figures under the #' and mil than under
the present system 2–I think the proposed new system is more laborious. I understood
you of course that we must go into mils; because the very last member of the mils of the
third decimal place may be worth more than 24., and we cannot drop it; but you will
observe that in that case it must be an elaborate calculation in all instances to produce
such a result as that. If you compare the number of figures with the figures on the
opposite side, in dropping those fractions of a mil altogether, you will find that there is in
no case less than five figures; while in many of the other cases by shillings and pence there
are only four figures to indicate each amount, and of course to produce those five figures
must be a much more elaborate process than to produce four. You will find, however, that
the decimals in the third column of the tenpenny divisions present a much smaller number
of figures than either of the two, I think.
144. You draw a distinction in the next paragraph between the millesimal system and
the pound and mil scheme 2—The millesimal system is what I understand by the pound
and mil scheme.
145. You say, “If, however, the millesimal system were introduced, and that not more
“ than three places of decimals were used, at the expense of precision in amount, the
“ number of figures would be reduced to 107 °?—Yes; “while 73 mils would be lost in
“ the amount of the total.”
146. That would be lost as a matter of conversion, not as a matter of simple account in
adding up 2–It would no doubt be a small loss even the whole of those fractions. We are
supposing that farthings are dropped altogether in the system of pounds, shillings, and
pence, and are taking the equivalents here; in that case, suppose you had got the benefit
by those five figures of the lowest mil which comprehends farthings, then there are the
fractions of those mils, or the decimals of those mils, following, and those mils together in
that total amount to 7%, being something less than 24.
147. It is not a question of equivalents of values; it is rather a question of ultimate
saving of labour in the keeping of accounts upon the decimal as compared with the present
system ; the addition of the 20 sums stated here in decimals is a process involving, it is
true, six more figures in use, but a saving of time by avoiding the division of the pence by
12 and of the shillings by 20 °–I confess that I never felt the loss of time in that. I
think a great deal more is said about that than it is worth; but there is a larger amount of
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
*-
B 2
12 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
figures necessary by the decimals of a pound than by the other two processes, as I think is
quite manifest from those tables. Here is a case, at page 54, where small amounts are
represented. It says, “one decimal place, therefore, may be all that is considered necessary
“in the case of the tempenny, while the whole of three decimal places must be used in the
“ instance of the pound, and even then without producing an exact result. In small
“ amounts this is exemplified in a striking manner; for example” (see Table end of Chapter
X) Without the decimals of a mil the figures are no less than 31, compared with 21
represented by the other, our present system ; while the tenpenny comprehends only 17
figures and no more ; that shows, I think, incontestably and unanswerably, that the ten-
penny is the least laborious system of the three ; it requires fewer figures than our present
system, which requires 21, and the other requires 31, including fractions.
148. 21, exclusive of fractions, are the number of figures engaged in the representation of
five sums under the pound and mil scheme ; 21 are equally the number of figures enguged
in representing the pounds, shillings, and pence?—Yes.
149. In that instance there is a parity of numbers ?—Yes.
150. Will you permit me to refer to the question touching the foreign exchanges, at
page 57 ? You remark that there might be an advantage in the change of our coinage as
illustrated in the matter of foreign exchanges, and you observe that “the rates in the
“ majority of instances are quoted in foreign monies of a variable amount, and compared
“ with the fixed sum of # 1 (which is, however, an anomaly, as persons buying or selling
“ generally value the fluctuating worth of an object by the money of their own country).”
That anomaly is a matter upon which I shall be glad to have a little information. I
observe, at page 58, you support that view of its being an anomaly by remarking of its
converse, that it is “ the mode in use in almost every other country of importance, and which
“ is undoubtedly the most natural, by deciding upon a fixed valuta in foreign coins to be
“ valued by a variable valuta in British money —Yes.
15t. You would express yourself in this way; the anomaly consists in London taking
a variable quantity of foreign coin in exchange for a pound sterling?—Yes.
152. And the improvement that you would suggest is, that London should give a
variable value for foreign coins ?—A variable value.
153. Which is the practice now pursued with most countries with which our foreign
exchanges are conducted. But does not this difficulty arise, that if London gives a
variable value for foreign coin foreigners must give that fixed coin for our variable value?
—They would regulate it according to their own arrangements, as at present, in drawing
upon us. We have nothing to do with what they would do on the exchange in France ; but
in regulating our own exchanges we should give so many cents of tenpence. I am
supposing the lower unit is here introduced. I am raising this argument with reference
to the lower unit, and not with reference to the high one, proving that the decimals of a
pound are inconsistent with that minute division which we at present observe with
reference to certain markets, such as St. Petersburgh and Madrid, where the difference
varies, generally the eighth of 1d, only, so small is it. I mean to show that the tenpenny
is capable of a more minute demonstration than the decimal of a pound would be. I have
put down calculations here to establish that principle. I think I may also say, with reference
to the foreign monies, and the course of exchanges of different countries, that by purchasing
a certain quantity of their money, such as in Amsterdam 100 guilders, the exchange
might be regulated to a per-centage of the tenpenny, say five cents of 10d. ; that would
be an easy mode of calculation, showing the tenpenny itself to be simpler in arriving at
results.
154. You have now raised another question, and that is whether our exchange opera-
tions would be more convenient or advantageous if one of the equivalents was not so high
as 11. Sterling?—I think a low equivalent would be most advantageous.
155. The position I understand you to take here is, that it is an anomaly in the exchange
operations of this country that we should take a variable quantity of foreign coin in
exchange for the pound sterling ; that we ought to follow the example of the chief foreign
countries, in giving a variable quantity for the coin of the country with which we are in
negotiation ?—Yes.
156. My question is this: If we reverse our position, say with France, and instead of
taking a variable number of francs for a pound sterling, give them a variable number of
pance for a franc, must not France be placed in the anomalous position in which we are
now, giving a fixed coin and receiving a variable equivalent 2–No doubt about it, as a
Parisian would regard the London quotations; but it would occasion no alteration in the
principle pursued on the French bourse, as Paris would doubtless fix on a fixed valutation,
in British coins.
157. Convenience seems to have established, that whereas London gives the variable value
to St. Petersburgh, Madrid, Naples, and Lisbon, those cities shall give the invariable value,
whether the bills be drawn on their own bourse or in London; and that whereas London
gives the invariable 8 to Amsterdam, Hamburgh, Paris, Berlin, and Vienna, those cities shall
always give the variable value, whether the bills be drawn on their own bourse or in London.
So long, therefore, as this correspondence of practice prevails, must not the anomaly complained
of attach to the one or to the other country 2—As regards exchanges between London and
the respective countries you name, the anomaly complained of certainly must attach while
the practice you allude to continues. But as between themselves foreigners as an almost
invariable rule already avoid occupying this anomalous position, exchanges between any
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 13'
two cities being generally regulated on the same principle as that obtaining between Paris
and Vienna. Thus, Paris quotes the exchange on Vienna at 247 francs for 100 florins,
whilst Vienna quotes Paris at 119 florins for 300 francs, each adopting its own money as
the variable measure of value.
158. Upon the other question which you have raised incidentally, namely, the disadvan-
tage of the high value of the coin which is our chief measure of exchange with other
countries, you seem to intimate that we should deal with them upon more advantageous
terms if we had a smaller equivalent, because the subdivisions would be more minute 2–
Yes.
159. Are you aware what the subdivisions of the franc are in the exchanges with London ?
Do you know how the exchanges run between Paris and London —I believe they go as
low as 2% centimes. sº
160. If then we find that in the equivalent that we receive for a pound sterling France
measures never more closely than two centimes and a half, it is quite clear that no gain
could be derived from exchanging the pound sterling as our fixed value for another, because
it is now capable of receiving an equivalent graduated as closely as convenience permits 3–
At the present time that is so, in the case of the French exchanges. The question is whether
it would be so in general under the decimal system with the pound as the unit.
161. Under the decimal system, the pound sterling remaining as it is now, the rate of
exchange would not at all be affected; it would only affect those exchanges where we give
pence for a foreign coin P-Yes; that is a point of very great interest; it is one that I should
indeed feel glad to see more closely inquired into, as the decimalising the pound might
occasion much inconvenience in certain exchanges, and would not correct the anomalous
position in which we now stand. When I wrote upon this subject, my own experience not
enabling me to speak very decidedly upon it, I was tempted to show the differences, rather
to attract the attention of those better acquainted with the question than I was myself, and
I thought the smaller unit in such cases might lead to very great improvement.
162. (Lord Overstone.) I wish to draw your attention to the question of the general
convenience or inconvenience of the decimal coinage, especially the pound and mil scheme,
as compared with our present scheme, with regard to the transactions of the lower classes in
small amounts. Will you have the goodness to look at this table (handing the same to the
witness), in which I have converted a penny, and every multiple of a penny, up to 11d.
into the approximate values in mils. By that table I think you will perceive that if
you take a penny, and all the multiples of a penny under a shilling, and add them
together, the total sum involves 13 figures?–Yes.
163. By this table you will observe that the addition of a penny, and every multiple of
a penny under one shilling, involves 13 figures, whilst the addition of the corresponding
approximate value in mils involves 20 figures 2–-It does so.
I64. The total sum of the pence so added gives 66 pence or 5s. 6d.?—Yes.
165. The total sum added in mils gives 270 mils, or 2 florins 70 cents. I wish to ask
you whether upon the examination of that table you think that the convenience and
accuracy of the transactions as regards the poorer classes would be greater under the
present penny system or under the proposed mil system, as regards accuracy and convenience,
both in writing and in mental operations?—I think it would be more convenient under
our present system; it embraces a smaller number of figures, and is easily and readily com-
prehended by them.
166. Is it not more easily carried in the mind?—Yes, I think so.
167. For the purpose of testing that more in detail, I will take the case of 11d. as
represented by 45 mils plus 10d., represented by 41 mils plus 9d., represented by 37 mils
11d., 10d., and 9d., give 30 pence or 2s. 6d.; the equivalent values in mils will give 123; do
you not think that it would be far more easy for the poorer classes to go through that
process under the pence system than under the mil system?—I think so, undoubtedly.
168. Take again another case:—2s. 4d. will be represented by 116 mils, and 2s. 8d will be
represented by 133 mils; which do you think would be the most convenient and most
accurate for the poorer classes, both in writing and in mental calculation, to know that
2s. 4d. and 2s. 8d. make 5s., or to ascertain the value of 116 mils added to 133 mils?—I
think that there can be no question that the shillings and pence system is most easily
understood,
169. As to those sums, again, represented by 125 mils, 28. 6d. added to the preceding 5s.
would give 7s.6d. ; do you think that that would be a more convenient process for the
lower orders to perform, in writing and in their minds, than the addition of 125 mils to the
preceding total 116, up to 133 mils?—I do, unquestionably ; it would require a higher
amount of education in that class who do not receive education to enable them thoroughly
to understand the mil system.
170. I think I gather from the general tone of your evidence, that you are not prepared
to recommend an attempt to exchange our present system of coinage for the decimal
system 2–It is so.
171. But you are of opinion that if the decimal system of coinage is introduced it should
not be founded upon the pound as the main integer of account?—Yes; that is so.
172. You are also of opinion that the attempt to introduce the decimal system of coinage,
unless accompanied by a corresponding decimal system of weights and measures, would be
highly inexpedient, and lead to inconvenience and confusion?—That is my opinion.
Mr. R. Slater,
7th May 1856.
B 3
14 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
173. (Mr. Hubbard) Are the Commissioners to understand you to say, that if the
tenpenny were adopted as the unit you would adopt also some higher gold unit?--I would
withdraw our present pound; I would have a coin representing 25 tenpennies.
174. You would substitute, as the highest unit of one pound, a coin of the value of
£1. O. 10 of the present currency —I would.
175. Then, in regard to accounts, would you introduce that new highest unit into
accounts?—No.
176. You would reduce all accounts to the tenpenny ?—Yes.
177. So that the National Debt would not be 800,000,000l. sterling; it would be equi-
valent to so many tenpennies?-Yes. The calculations of the country require people so
seldom to refer to the National Debt in their general business that it would not be felt in
those large accounts as any inconvenience. That is the exceptional case; not the rule.
178. Setting aside the National Debt, will not this inconvenience result, that whenever
now sums are expressed only in pounds sterling, the expression of those sums would be
considerably increased ?–If only in pounds sterling they would be undoubtedly increased,
but in pounds sterling only. That is likewise an exception; the pounds are generally
followed by shillings and pence.
179. You recollect that contracts, settlements, foreign engagements, and foreign loans,
generally require the expression only of pounds sterling. In every one of those instances
the expression of those engagements would be considerably lengthened, and by their being
lengthened there would be a greater liability to confusion and error?—A gold coin of
25 tenpennies might be made to answer in the place of the pound.
180. But you have already agreed to except that from matters of account 2–Yes.
181. Therefore contracts would not be expressed in that coin, but in tenpennies?–Yes;
or they might be contracted in gold coin representing 100 tenpennies.
182. For convenience sake, you would be driven to re-adopt a higher unit than the
tenpenny ?—The tenpenny itself would become the unit of a gold coin higher. I would
adopt a higher unit. I see no objection to that ; but I would have the tempenny for money
account. I think it would be a great convenience to pay large quantities of gold in higher
pieces than we have at present.
183. (Chairman.) Will you be so kind as to state what would be the new coins that
would be required in gold, silver, and copper ?—I would recommend a four-guinea piece,
being equal to 100 tenpennies; and a two-guinea piece, being equal to 50 tenpennies; a
one-guinea piece, being equal to 25 tenpennies; a half-guinea piece, being equal to 12,
tenpennies, a 20-franc piece, being equal to 20 tenpennies, and a 10-franc piece, being
equal to 10 tenpennies. Those I would recommend as the new gold coins. With regard to
silver coins, I should recommend a piece of five francs, being equal to five tempennies, a
one-franc piece, and a half-franc piece.
184. Those would be all new coins?—Yes. -
185. How many old coins in the adoption of the tenpenny system of decimals would be
abandoned? Those marked with a star in the table at page 56, viz., the sovereign, the
half-sovereign, the crown, the florin, the shilling, the sixpence, and the threepenny piece,
are to be abandoned, are they not ?—I should recommend that those should be called in ;
but the tenpenny would comprehend the whole of those.
186. Then that would involve practically the substitution of the whole of the new coins
which you have stated, and the withdrawal of the old ones?—Precisely.
187. (Lord Overstone.) I presume you would leave the old coins to be withdrawn by
the sense of public convenience 3–Yes; they would get speedily so much worn.
188-9. Public convenience would drop the use of them —Yes.
The following Table was handed in :
NEW COINS. OLD COINS.
**) = 100 Tenpennies. Gold - ..] Sovereign = 24 Tenpennies.
16Ce 2 3 9 = 12 }}
2 ” = 50 55 ſ” # do. or Crown = 6 J2
Gold - { 1 , , = 25 5 y § do.or; Crown = 3 X5
# , = 12.50 ,, *1 Florin = 2.40 ,
20 Franc = 20. 5 5 Silver A * 1 Shilling = 1.20 ,,
U 10 , = 10 5 3 *1 Sixpence = .60 ,
5 s, = 5. 35 1 Fourpenny = .40 ,
Silvert 1 , = 1. 35 | *l Threepenny = .30 ,
# 2, F. .50 , l Penny = . 10 ,
Copper 1 Cent. = .01 .,, - cº- I Halfpenny = .05 .
1 Farthing = .025 .
* Those marked * to be discontinued and called in. -
f These silver coins would immediately harmonize with coins in France, Holland, America, Belgium, Genoa, Geneva,
Naples, Rome, Madeira, Turkey, Austria, Frankfort, Spain, Gibraltar, and Sicily,–in many instances, precisely,–in
others, by a near approximation.
190. (Chairman.) In the new coins that you propose I observe a 10-franc and a
20-franc gold coin ; take the 10-franc piece ; have you not given the Commissioners a
calculation here from the observations made in Lord Auckland's time of the more rapid
loss by abrasion of the Smaller gold coins 2—I have. -
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. . . 15
191. Would not it be an inconvenience to the public (I mean to the holders of coin), so
long as the present system prevails, to throw the loss upon them 2–I think so; the smaller
the gold coin the greater the abrasion, because the two sides of a half-sovereign are much
larger than the single side of a sovereign ; there is a larger space to be wrought upon.
192. Are you acquainted with Jefferson's notes on the coinage of the United States?—
I have seen it, but I am not particularly acquainted with it.
193. There is one extract from it which I think you refer to, and I will read it over to
you:—“The most easy ratio of multiplication and division is that of ten. Every one knows
“ the facility of decimal arithmetic. Tvery one remembers that when learning money
“ arithmetic he used to be puzzled in adding the farthings, taking out the the fours, and
carrying them on ; adding the pence, taking out the twelves, and carrying them on ;
adding the shillings, taking out the twenties, and carrying them on ; but when he came
to the pounds, where he had only tens to carry forward, it was easy, and free from error.
Morris (the financier) therefore well proposes that our coins should be in decimal propor-
“ tions to one another.” Do you differ from that statement or not?—I adopt it, because I
think he is perfectly right. He says when people are learning. I am supposing that the
majority of persons have learnt.
194. Supposing two parties, neither of whom had learnt, to have the two systems pro-
posed to them, do you think that it would be as easy to learn this proposed mode of
working out figures as the other?—It stands to reason that there is a greater amount of
difficulty given by the compound system than by the decimal system; but speaking from
my own practical experience and my own habits, I find no difficulty ; and I do not believe
that any person accustomed to our mode of calculations finds any difficulty in our present
mode of casting up money totals in business.
195. Does it not require rather more attention and care, as being more liable to error in
cases in which that attention is not given 2–We do it naturally, without thinking of any
difficulty; it is a part of the process which is operating in the mind. I can speak only of
myself; I experience no difficulty.
196. When we have been talking about the mil system, and supposing it were introduced,
do you not consider it highly probable that, as a matter of general convention and convenience
that which in France is adopted as a matter of convention and convenience with regard to their
centimes would be adopted with respect to mils; that question applying, not to the rectifi-
cation of existing money amounts, but to future transactions between the buyer and seller?
—I think people would naturally adopt that which was easiest, under any circumstances;
that I think is to be expected, whatever may be the principle of the decimal coinage.
197. (Lord Overstone.) Do you think that it is the primary purpose of coins to facilitate
calculations, or that it is their primary purpose to facilitate payment, which must be made in
adjusting retail transactions?—I think that all coinage bore reference to buying and
selling commodities.
198. Do you not think, therefore, that the principle by which the division of coins should
be regulated should be derived from convenience in dividing commodities, rather than con-
venience in making calculations?--I think so, decidedly.
199. (Chairman.) Does not that depend upon the degree to which the dividing of com-
modities enters necessarily into the operations of buying and selling, as compared with
the principle upon which the multiplication of prices enters into the transaction of buying
and selling 2—We find, I should think, that the great majority of calculations are those
made by the poorer classes; and they are all fragments of large quantities; and it is that
principle macadamized, so to speak, which is going on amongst the poorer classes, who cannot
command a large quantity. They buy the smaller quantities; and I think it is the business
of a coinage to be so arranged as to meet the convenience of the poor with reference to
those small quantities. I think that was the original intention of coin.
200. Is it not the adoption of a lesser unit for the purposes of convenience?—I think
G6
66
6 &
& 6
SO.
201. Say the purchase of a pound of tea may be a large matter; is the value of an
ounce, practically speaking, by the poor buyer, deduced from the specific price of a pound,
or does he deal with an ounce of tea as if it was of itself an integer for which he gives
a given amount 2–He deals with the ounce solely, and not as a part of a pound.
202. (Lord Overstone.) You are of opinion, are you not, that coins are instruments for
adjusting the retail transactions of the market?—Yes.
203. And that the division of coins ought to be principally regulated with reference to
the main consideration of what is the most convenient mode of dividing commodities to be
so paid for 2–Perfectly so. May I request that the two chapters in my pamphlet, which I
think embrace almost everything that I have to say on this question, chapters Nos 10 and
11, be appended to the report of my evidence before the Commissioners?
204. (Chairman.) I think it would be a very clear way of putting your views upon the
subject.
The following extract from Mr. Slater's Treatise is referred to in his evidence.
Chapter X.
The decimals of one pound will be found on analysis to be “utterly impracticable” for
monies of account, as well as most inconvenient for ordinary calculations. The whole
fallacy on the part of the advocates of that integer rests here, as their theory is founded
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
B 4
16 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
on a high integer, which involves the necessity of a descending series of decimals, instead of
a low unit with an ascending series of decimals.
This may be exemplified in the single instance of the mint price of gold (31. 17s. 10%d.
per ounce), which, being a price determined by law, may be regarded as a fixed quantity,
which no system of decimalization of our coinage will be permitted to alter, unless by Act
of Parliament. That price is represented by the decimals of 11, as 3.89375l., while by the
tempenny it would simply be expressed by 93.45. The tempenny unit has here, manifestly,
the advantage, because as it starts from a decimal twice as small as our smallest existing coin,
it necessarily comprehends every possible variety of amount by decimals, which is at present
demonstrable by the duodecimal system. Nor is it possible by any arrangement of coinage
forming aliquot parts of ll, to get out of this difficulty (so long as it is intended by the
advocates of the pound integer to confine monies of account to three decimal places only),
or to define results by calculations which must of necessity descend lower than the mil
itself (the lowest terms of that theory), no provision being made by their system for
expressing a precise result.
The late Mr. James Laurie, in his recently published pamphlet on decimal coinage, has
shown, not only by the arguments he uses, but by the tables accompanying them, that the
decimals of one pound are wholly inapplicable, either for monies of account or for circula-
lation, and that the wants of the poorer classes, who have a deep interest in this question,
as well as the necessities of trade and commerce, require the unit of account to be divisible
into a coin of a smaller denomination than the 1000th part of one pound. (Note G.) In
practice, our present system enables us, by adopting a minute fraction of one penny, to
indicate a value or price far lower than the decimal parts of the pound can express, unless
by continuing a series of figures beyond the three decimal places, to which by the mil it is
proposed to confine that system. . This may be illustrated by the following examples:—
By the last advices from New Orleans freights of raw cotton to Liverpool are quoted at
++nds, 4ths, and ºths of one penny ; and the comparative value of these freights in mils
of Il. and cents of 10d. are as under:—
d. £ o 10d.
= .0014322916 or 1-ºr mils = .034375 or 347 cents.
. OO15625 ,, 14%. , = . 0375 .. 3
- Tºr = . 001822916 , 1%; , = . 0437.5 , 4
In Manchester, gray domestics are quoted as under:—
@1+ = .005989583 or 5% mils = . 14375 or 14 cents.
l
-I-
:
3.
4. 35
3.
8
25
14 = .0072916 , 74, , = , 175 , 174 ,
2 = . 0083 , 8%. , = , 20 × 20 ,
2* = .009635416 , 93++ , = .23125, 23%. ,
3+} = .015885416 , 155# , = .38125, 384 »
These, however, are merely comparative results, although it will be seen at a glance
how easily the lower decimals of the 10d. may be converted into a simple fraction ; one
most important consideration is the process by which these results are ascertained, and it
will be sufficient to exemplify this by a single example; and here it is proper to state that
our present duodecimal system, however objectionable for the addition of pounds, shillings,
pence, and farthings, is admirably adapted for mental calculations,—that universal system
which every invoice clerk understands and must have recourse to, whose business is much
concerned in the rapid extension of quantities and prices into their accurate results, but
which must be abandoned if decimals are introduced. By mental arithmetic, calculations,
apparently the most difficult, are resolved without even putting pen to paper ; indeed
NoTE (G.)
(Extracts from “PRACTICAL ANALysis of THE CoMPARATIVE MERITs OF £1 and 10d. As THE RULING INTEGER FOR
“A DECIMAL CURRENCY. By James Laurie.”)
“Again, the vast stimulus which improved machinery, or the application of machinery, has given to productive
“labour, during the last twenty years especially, has not only lessened the cost of a variety of articles, but has actually
“so far reduced their value compared with a former period as to compel manufacturers to sell the goods in parcels or
fixed lots (usually corresponding to the aliquot parts of a pound or a shilling, for the convenience of calculation),
“ their minute value making it otherwise impossible to affix a price demonstrable by any even of our smallest coins.
I'or instance,
“ Pearl shirt buttons are sold as low as 2%d. per gross, or 14; for a farthing.
“ Agate or porcelain shirt buttons, at 13%d. per great gross, or 32 for one farthing.
“ Bone buttons, at 10%d. per great gross, or 414 for a farthing.
“ Tapes, at 1%d. for 12 pieces, measuring 24 yards each, being 5 yards for a farthing.
* Cotton bobbins, at 1%d. for 12 pieces of 3 yards, or 6 yards for a farthing.
“ Sewing cotton on reels, at 2d. per dozen, being equal to 1% reels for a farthing.
“ Sewing cotton in balls, at 1s. per lb. of 128 balls, being equal to 24%; balls for a farthing.
“ Needles, 9d. per thousand (in 40 papers containing 25 each), being 27% needles for a farthing.
“Pins, at 10d. per lb. of 16 ounces, put up in papers of ounces or half ounces, or about 40 pins for one farthing.
“With facts before us such as these, and which refer to only a few of the very numerous articles at the command
of the public, in their constant traffic, it requires no arguments to establish the great truth, that our coinage as it
stands accs not descend low enough for the wants of the great bulk of the community; and for this evil the proposed
decimal coinage, consisting of pounds, florins, cents, and mils, supplies no remedy, and leaves that important consi-
“ deration altogether untouched. There can be no question that under the existing system of coinage for circulation
the public is exposed to much loss, either by buying a larger quantity of a commodity than occasion requires, or
submitting to pay a much higher price than any reasonable profit on the original cost of an article would
2% × * x
{
&
$
&
{
:
&
$
&
&
&
&
“justify.” nk :*
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 17
never, by an experienced clerk, are such aids had recourse to, unless in the instance of
large or intricate quantities or prices. That process is extremely simple, and is founded
on the principle of reducing or dividing by 12 or 20, as may be most convenient to the
operator, any given quantity, while its price is increased in the same proportion, so that
every dozen of articles counts one ; while, if the price be one penny, it is in the same
proportion taken as one shilling; thus by mental arithmetic,+
2 Vards = - Qū; &
3612 yards 301 25 + 1 at 3/2} at 38/3 £47 16 3
at 34%; d. = 3/2} = 38/3 0 3 24
47 19 5}
By the simple rule. By the decimals of tempence, By decimals of ll, as under.
as under. **
361.2 3+} = . 3 1875 3612 yards at 3-fººd.
3+ 361.2 3+2 = . 01328.125
{-ººººººººººººmsºmºsºsºsºs - 361.2
10836 637 50 *-*mmsºme
* = + 45.1% 3.1875 2656.250
Th; 225% 191250 I 328 125
ºmsºmºmºmºmºsº 95625 7968,750
12)11513+ 3984.375
20)95. 9.5% 1151. 32500 = 47. 97.1875.00 =
g?47 19 5} £47 19 5}
47. 19.5% N.B.-In both these cases a laborious process must be first undertaken
to ascertain the decimal corresponding to the price.
If, instead of a whole number, we were to take a broken quantity, such as 36.124 yards
at 34%d, it will be found that the additional #ths increases the labour of calculation to an
enormous extent. -
But it is unnecessary to continue examples like these, which are of constant occurrence
in the innumerable ramifications of trade, to convince any practical arithmetician that the
decimals of 11., although pronounced to be the only system adapted for the wants of the
country, is utterly and altogether impracticable for the ordinary purposes of business. It
must be evident to all who are accustomed to calculations, involving broken or fractional
quantities at minute prices, that a system which requires so enormous an amount of labour
to obtain even an ordinary result is not adapted for the commercial wants of a country
like this; indeed, the whole trade of the country would be grievously interrupted were it
possible to inflict upon the people so elaborate a system. In support of this position we
need only appeal to the common rules of arithmetic as well as to common sense. It is no
answer to say that a mil is as capable of fractional subdivision as a penny, because, not
only is there no provision made by the millesimal theory for carrying into account a
denominational value lower than the mil itself, but for want of that duodecimal quality
possessed by our existing coinage the decimals of a pound are incapable of being reduced to
a vulgar fraction, with denominators admitting of simple notation.
In the decimal calculation immediately before us, it is seen that an operation compre-
hending upwards of 100 figures in its entire process is required to produce a result in ten
figures, five of which can only be represented in the ledger, according to the proposed
theory of the decimals of £1., while the remaining five figures must be dropped as wholly
unnecessary. Indeed, so small a numerical quantity as one eighth of our present penny
could not be shown at all, leaving lower denominations of value out of the question. And
although their approximates, if not their equivalents, could be obtained by a lower decimal,
there would, in the “ mil” system be no place to specify the result. By our present
duodecimal, or rather mixed system, we possess advantages in the simplicity of calculations,
and the ease with which such calculations are performed, from mixed numbers, forming
aliquot parts of the coinage, which a merely decimal system, with a large integer, could not
confer. This will be at once seen, if we look at the properties of the numbers 10 and 12,
the former of which is divisible by only two whole numbers, 2 and 5, without a remainder,
while the latter is divisible by four whole numbers, 2, 3, 4, and 6; but if we increase these
numbers in the same proportion, i.e. to 100 and 120, we find that while 100 is divisible
only by 2, 4, 5, and 10, 120 is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, and 12, the one being
capable of division by four numerals only, while the other is divisible by eight, without any
remainder. For the purposes of calculation, therefore, it is self-evident that a thing
divisible into twelve parts contains a larger number of aliquot fragments than a thing
divided into ten parts; but when it is considered that these twelve parts (or other binary
division) are like the foldings of a sheet of paper, formed into halves, quarters, eights,
twelfths, &c., all in harmony with the coinage, it follows that they are more easily adapted
to calculations of aggregate amounts than quantities of small value and large volume can
by possibility be under a decimal system.
But it is not in calculations only that we have to condemn the pound as an integer for
our coinage on a decimal principle. We unhesitatingly deny to it that advantage which
the advocates of that theory would ascribe to it, as a medium for keeping accounts. In
copying the following twenty totals, consecutively entered in and copied from a mercantile
book of accounts, and in converting these totals into the decimals of ll, and 10d, respec-
C
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
18 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
*mºsºme-mºsºme
tively, we shall be able to judge how far the title of a “labour-saving machine” can with
any degree of consistency be attributed to the higher decimal." -
39 s. d. Decimals of Il. Decimals of 10d.
124 15 0 124. 750 2994.
148 0 1 1 148.04583 3553. 1
25 2 9 25. 1375 603. 3
121 12 8 121.633 2919 - 2
133 3 0 133. 150 3.195. 6
702 13 2 702.6583 16863. 8
78 17 10 78. 8916 1893. 4
31 18 1 31.90416 765 .. 7
60 3 9 60. 1875 1444. 5
39 16 8 39.833 956 . 0
15 1 5 15.07.083 361. 7
39 8 2 39.4083 945. 8
28 2 2 28. 1083 674. 6
20 13 11 20.69583 496 . 7
19 8 11 19.44583 466 .. 7
23 18 7. 23.92916 574. 3
48 7 10 48. 3916 1161 .. 4
32 l 5 32. 07083 769. 7
29 2 7 29. 12916 699 - 1
1,722 8 10 || 1722.4416 41338. 6
An analysis of these twenty totals shows that by our present system, they require 101
figures to denote them,--by the decimal theory with 11, as the unit they will require 132
figures; while by the tenpenny theory they will be represented by 89 figures only. If,
however, the milesimal system were introduced, and that not more than three places of
decimals were used, at the expense of precision in amount, the number of figures would be
reduced to 107, while 7# mils would be lost in the amount of the total.
In posting accounts into the ledger, the practice is universal to omit the fractions of a
penny. It is scarcely saying too much when we state, that there is no banker, merchant,
or trader of the least importance who either pays or receives them ; and it is more than
probable that the same rule may be continued in accounts were the tenpenny adopted as the
unit of the coinage, because the second decimal place represents tenths of one penny only.f
* That the decimal of 1 would largely increase labour has been unanswerably established by Mr. Minasi, in an
elaborate calculation made by him of the number of figures required to express in the three systems every amount
between pne penny and one million of pounds inclusive, the results of which are published in the Society of Arts
..Journal, for 5th October 1855, and with his permission are printed in the Appendix (H).
f It may save trouble to those who may hereafter be seeking for equivalents between the relative values of pence
and fractions of a penny, compared with decimals of 1. and 10d., that we should here supply them :—
:6 s. d. Decimals of ll. Decimals of 10d.
12 Pence. .05 1.2
11 do. .04583 1.1
10 do. .0416 1.0
9 do. .0375 .9
8 do. .03 .8
7 do. .02916 .7
6 do. .025 .6
5 do. .02083 .5
4 do. .016 .4
3 do. .0125 .3
2 do. .0083 .2
I do. .00416 .l
# or halfpenny. .0C2083 .05
# or farthing. .0010416 .025
# .00052083 .0125
Y’s .000260416 .00625
+ºr .00078.125 .01875
+ºr .001802083 * 03125
+ or § .0015625 .0375
# .001822916 .04375
*r .00234375 .05625
# or ; .00260416 .0625
# .002864580 .06875
# or ; or #d. . 003125 .075
# .003385416 .08.125
# or #4. .00364583 .0875
.# .0039.0625 .09375
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. I9
This would effect a saving alone of one figure in every line posted in the ledger,
which comprehended cents of the unit. But it would be out of the question to adopt such
a rule in the instance of mils, much less to strike off the figures after the first decimal
place, where the pound is the integer; because, while the first figure to the right of the
point represents two shillings, the second can never be less than 2.14d., while it may amount
to 21+%d in value; even the third decimal place will be as often above the value of one
penny as below it. One decimal place, therefore, may be all that is considered necessary
in the case of the tenpenny, while the whole of three decimal places must be used in the
instance of the pound, and even then without producing an exact result. In small amounts,
this is exemplified in a striking manner; for example—
29 s. d. gſ? 10d.
I 13 5 1. 67083 40. 1
I 16 7 1.829|16 43.9
3 9 10 3.491.66 83.8
5 12 9 5. 63.750 135.3
I2 12 7 12. 629|15 303. I
ſ 21, exclusive of fractions l e
No. of figures, 21. U 31, including fractions ſ 17 precisely.
The tenpenny unit possesses this peculiar advantage in book-keeping, that if the fractions
of a penny are omitted in the ledger, as at present, every sum under 4l. 3s. 4d. (or 1000
pence) is expressed in three figures only; the fractions of a penny themselves only add one
figure more, as we see in the example of the fixed price of standard gold, 31. 17s. 104d. =
93:45, but which, if 31, 17s. 10d., would be only 93.4, being three figures only.
A great outcry is raised against tenpence as the unit, on the ground that it would
lead to the discontinuance of gold coin, and occasion enormous labour to the Bank of
England, as well as other Banks, by compelling them to pay and receive everything in
tenpennies instead of sovereigns / / / This is certainly a most gratuitous assumption; because,
a new tenpenny piece, if adopted as the integer of accounts, would displace no coin what-
ever at present in use, while it would afford an additional division of the pound by 24 as
well as by 20 ; and we can see no good reason why, if there is a gold coin for 20 shillings,
there should not also be one for 20 tenpennies. In France, where gold is not the standard
of value, gold pieces circulate as low as five francs.
We have already shown that the decimals of a pound are wholly impracticable for such
arithmetical operations as involve precision and rapidity in calculation. On that point,
therefore, the advocates of the pound as the integer of the coinage ought at once to join
issue, in order to confute that position if it be a false one; but if they fail in doing so it
becomes a mere work of supererogation to persist in advocating the pound as such integer,
while there is nothing to prevent its continuance in circulation as a multiple of the unit.
The entire question rests here. A modification of the same theory, namely, that a florin
or two-shilling piece be adopted as the unit, is open to precisely the same objections as the
pound, except that it requires only two places of decimals instead of three. In a decimal
point of view, neither the pound nor the florin harmonizes with any existing coin under
sixpence; and the florin is obnoxious to the same objection with reference to the gold
standard as is urged against the tenpenny, namely, that it introduces a silver unit of
account instead of a gold one. Now this difficulty is readily met by introducing gold
coins of 5, 10, 124, 20, 50, or even 100 tenpennies, which from their convenience, and
applicability to matters of account, would speedily displace the sovereign. The pound
itself, except from its traditional importance, has no especial claim to be considered as an
everlasting unit in this country, if the convenience of the people demand one that is better.
Indeed, its very existence as a gold coin was not known before 1816, and our gold standard
existed long before it was introduced. To persist in the pound, as a decimal integer, is
therefore only a vexatious mode of disturbing our currency, doing no good to ourselves,
and affecting no approximation to the coinage or exchanges of other countries, as we
should remain simply “the same, with a difference,” but a difference attended with very
Serious consequences.
On the other hand, were the tenpenny unit introduced, our gold coinage could
itself be advantageously extended, and every coin with reference to that unit would
be thus represented, while the closeness in value of the new gold coins to the guinea
and half-guinea of former and only recent times, might justify the same names being
applied to them, viz.:
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
20 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. R. Slater.
*
7th May 1856.
NEW COINS. OLD COINS.
º e º % ior = e
ſ 4 *} = 100 Tenpennies. Gold - { : sº =:: termia
2 s, = 50 35 *} do. or crown = 6. Jy
Gold - Q 1 , = 25 55 | # do. or # cwn = 3. 5.5
: # 2, = 12.50 ., *1 Florin = 2.40 ,
20 Franc = 20. , Silver- *1 Shilling = 1.20 ,
| 10 , = 10. • l *1 Sixpence = .60 ,
5 : = 5. 33 1 Fourpenny = .40 ,
lsº 1 9, = 1. 55 li Threepenny = .30 ,
* 5 9 - .50 3.5 l Penny = . 10 55
1 Dol. = 5. 93. cº 1 Halfpenny = .05 ,
Copper 1 Cent. = .01 .,, 1 Farthing = .025 ,
The fraction, under these coins, beyond the second decimal places, will be readily
supplied by 3, 4, or ; , if the termination happens to be 75, 50, or 25, but none of the
decimals will descend to a lower denomination. In such case, common consent will
introduce the 10th or 100th of one cent. (as is the case at present in the instance of 8th,
16th, or 32d) for minute calculations; a precision not unlikely to exist in the invoice, but
which would altogether be dropped in the ledger.
However objectionable the pound may be, as the integer of a decimal coinage, arising
almost entirely from its excessive value, there are many reasons which would render the
introduction of a decimal coinage and a decimal system of keeping accounts, a matter of
great public convenience, particularly where the integer, as in the case of a tempenny coin,
would be so small as to be more readily applicable to the value of general commodities,
and to the coinage of other countries. This will be clearly seen in the case of foreign
exchanges.
The extensive character of our intercourse with foreign countries renders it necessary
that we should compare our existing mode of converting values from sterling into foreign
monies, or vice versä. . We, therefore, take from Lloyd's List indiscriminately the course
of exchange as it stood at 5th February last.
We there find, that although the rates in the majority of instances are quoted in foreign
monies of a variable amount, and compared with the fixed sum of ll, (which is, however,
an anomaly, as persons buying or selling generally value the fluctuating worth of an
object by the money of their own country), there are some instances in which the quota-
tions are made in pence, thus:—
St. Petersburg is quoted 35d. rising #d.
Madrid º - 49%. , §
Naples gº - 43; , ;
Palermo, &c., &c. - 130} , ;
Let us look at these quotations with advances, and compare them with the decimals of
ll. and 10d. respectively:—
Decimals of £. Decimals of Xd.
. 50
.5.125 or 3.53
.525 , 3.54
35 —0.14583 –
35}–0. 14635083–
35} — 0.146875 —
353–0. 14739583 – 3.5375 , 3.5g
Madrid - - 493 – 0.2072916 — 4.975 , 4.9% \
St. Petersburg 3
3
3
3
4
494 – 0.2078.125 — 4.9875 , 4.9%
5
5
4
4
4
50 – 0.2083 –
50} – 0.20885416–
Naples - - 433–0. 18177083–
433 – 0.1822916 —
43% — 0.1828.125 —
.0125 , 5.0%
.3625 , 4.3%
.375 , 4.3%
.3875 , 4.3%
44 – 0.183 — 4.40
Palermo – - 1303 – 0.5427083 — 13.025 , 13.04
1303 – 0.54375 – 13.05 , 13.04
1303 – 0.5447916 — 13.075 , 13.0;
131 – 0.54583 – 13.10
* Those marked * to be discontinued and called in.
f These silver coins would immediately harmonise with coins in France Holland, America, Belgium. Geno
Geneva, Naples, Rome, Madeira, Turkey, Austria, Frankfort, Spain, Gibraltar, and Sicily,–in # iº.
precisely,–in others, by a near approximation. y - - - P
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 21
The adoption of the tenpenny unit would afford the opportunity of revising the present
mode of quoting exchanges, and of our adopting the mode in use in almost every other
country of importance, and which is undoubtedly the most natural, by deciding upon a
fixed valuta in foreign coins, to be valued by a variable valuta in British money, as is
shown in the subjoined table:—
London Course of Exchange, 11th September 1855.
Amsterdam Q - 11.18 Guilders and Stivers per £
Antwerp tº - 25.37% Francs and Centimes ,
Hambro' tºº - 13.8% Marks Bco. and Schellings,
Paris º & - 25.40 Francs and Centimes 33
Frankfort-on-the-Maine - 1183 Florins, per 10l.
St. Petersburg - - 35; Pence per Rouble
Berlin tº – 6.21%. Thalers and S. gros. per £
Vienna tº tº º - 11.23 Florins and Kreuzers 59
Madrid tº tº 49%. Pence per Dollar
Leghorn ºn sºme - 29.95 Lire and Centimes per £
Genoa tºº wº – 25.45 53 25 5 y
Naples gº tºp * , 44} Pence per Ducat
Palermo * = tº - 132 ,, per Onza
Lisbon sº º wº 53 ,, per Milreis
In place of which the tenpenny would enable the quotations to be made:–
Xdys. The Exchange rising or falling.
Amsterdam * - – 201.50 for 100 Guilders 25 cts. of xdy
Antwerp * } tºe – 94.60 , Francs 5 35
Hambro? wº º - 177.75 , Mark Boo. 25 55
Paris tº tº tº - 94.50 , Francs 5 5 5
Frankfort-on-the-Maine - 202.75 , |Blorins 25 53
St. Petersburg - – 354. , Roubles 100 ,
Berlin tº º – 357. 35 Thalers 100 52
Vienna tºº º – 210.75 ,, Florins 25 3 y
Madrid - sº - 499. 55 Dollars I00 95
Leghorn º – 80. 15 , , Lire 5 35
Genoa wº º - 94.30 ,, Ditto 5 55
Naples tº tºº – 441. 35 Ducats I00 92
Palermo ſº tº - 320. 33 Onza 250 5 5
Lisbon * * * º - 530, 59 Milreis I00
J)
* These quotations do not profess to be the exact equivalents of the exchanges above quoted, but are approximate,
and show that the xdy. admits of even smaller advances than the existing system.
Mr. Slater desires to hand in the following copies of actual, not fictitious, transactions,
with the view of illustrating the practical operation of the three different systems of monies
under the consideration of the Royal Commissioners, viz. –Copies of two separate
invoices of goods sold, and of the balance sheet of the United Kingdom as it stood on
31st December last, calculated in pounds, shillings, and pence, in pounds and mils, and
in tempennies and cents. In the number of figures employed in the balance sheet, which
comprehends large totals, there seems very little difference in either of these systems, but
in the instance of the invoices, particularly where the prices quoted happen to be above
the value of one shilling, the disadvantage of the pound and mil system is strikingly
apparent, not only from the greater number of figures employed, but in the enormous
labour required to arrive at the money amount, corresponding to each quantity and price.
These invoices would also establish the fact, that our present compound system is much
superior to a decimal system, from the greater facilities it affords, and the time it saves in
the extension of commodities into their respective money values, by means of mental
calculation alone, while the same quantities and prices by the pound and mil system involve
an elaborate process to obtain a result which is altogether impracticable by mental
calculation.
Mr. R. Slater.
7th May 1856.
90 I 19 8% * - “Iſu pue 3. “
9II 69 ## * - “ p 's 3’ “
60I G9 ## * = - Ssaooid Apx Ag .
“Igo, IL “Spoooo.I.I "3oEIGH ‘Seinäpä Jo *N
#II LIl &#3; #8 61 &#3; - - | p 's 3 uſ synaſeAmbH
668 &# #8 6 I zī, #9 I90I
06/ I ###| || 01 GI I to: gif #OI - - e - Oly-8 × 9 &
009 6 #g/ | #I 9 6 #8 *g gzz #8 || 31|||Int) puoſq. 23p'I *996
g x +g “4-g
z x *g
g x +g
9.5 x g
#60 I #1z/ | #0I I I #g #g | 93 #g |3UITUnöpuoſas.uoan') 09-g × 0I | 68
jº 13 || 8 #z| | # g 9. #g | ## | 84 #g | - - #991–º-I “gif x ç gaoz
83/ & #81/ | #g # I 3. *# #g g9 ## - 208T -
Uomoo 'zoCI #gſ I- #I ‘8; x 8 || 3:303
I09 #gg/ &I 8 # | # I 8 || - tº gº 4- - 8 I 96 I&
& I | 060%
9/9 #z/ | 9 Il #g 8 || 9 | #g - - gº ºs -º-;
& I | [8%
º, I8 #z| | #6 || 9 | #g ## | 1 #g | - se *e • - 9 I | 9 Igº,
I9% #61/ | #1 # ## #g g # - - - tº. - 3I 084%
Al6 I #1. I/ | 8 8 I I # 6 gif ## - - aoe'ſ “ 80I =9 × 99
#8% II | #1| II II | #I z 116 #1 | - - Mogg #89 I
g x #9
3 × I9
g x #19
+, × 99
# x #zg
9 x *[g
iſ x Og ‘aj | 89
699 8 #6/ | #g A. 9. *z #1 || 08 *z uſ[HoeyMayu A+698=#68 ‘8 × {Iſº
996 #II/ | 8 61 #g I 8% #z - - * Hoeig w8=ow “Fy
z9a | g | #II/ | #II g g | #z #1 | 161 #z - - ‘19N ‘qog spie K 82%
8 x #09 * 09
#9; * j, x 9’ſ.
‘90I.I.I 'aoûdſ ‘80ſ.IJI
“[IUI put ºf ‘p 's 3: ‘Āpx - *=º º
'998I Áeſ H18 uo pios sqoob Jo IOIOANI Adoo ‘ZIZ H '998I Agw. Hºl
g - - ‘Hoogſ KëCI
“I 'ON togp1S ºr '4Aſ
GIHL Hºſ(), HGISI NGIXIVJ, GIONSICIIAGI HO SQLI.ſ.l. NIWI 3%




DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 23
No. 2. Mr. R. Slater.
Day Book, º
H. 228. Copy INVoICE of GooDs sold on 20th May 1856. 7th May 1856.
º * Xdy. £ s. d. £ and mils.
Price. Price. Price.
871 24; Yds. Moire Silk - - 6.6 | 163 3} | 5/6 6 | 16 1% /275 6 806
9028 25 - tº º - 9.— 225 7/6 9 7 6 || |375 9 || 375
3028 || 81 Radzimere - - || 4.4 356 4 3/8 14 17 |18 3 14 || 823
9323 97 - º - — ; 5. – || 485 4/2 20 4 2 || ||208 20 || 176
692 || 32 Velvet - - - 7.8 249 6 6/6 10 8 /325 10 : 400
8404 || 35 tº ºs - - lo. 5 367 5 8/9 15 6 8 || |438 15 330
15706 || 323 Perle es - || 5.1 | 167 # 4/3 6 19 24 || |213 6 || 976
4619 12
3761 || 10
3716 25+
3721 17+
4711 || 13
4910 7
4900 16#
. 1013 Imperial - - - 2.8%| 288 5% 2/4} 12 5% /1183| 12 || 023
so Ps. 24d. Oriental Lutes - 21.5 645 17|11 26 17 6 || |896 26 880
108 No. 1. Satin - - 2. 1 || 226 8 /21 9 || 9 /87% 9 || 450
180 1% º - - || 2.9 522 2/5 21 || 15 /121 21 780
48 7 - * - || 1 1.6 556 8 9/8 23 4 /483 23 | 184
169 1 Simoline - - | 1.2 202 8 || |12 8 9 /50 8 || 450
164 1} - - - | 1.6}| 270 6 || |16% 11 5 6 /683 11 275
6 16 Lute - - - || 42.9 257 4 35/9 10 | 1.4 6 |1/788 10 728
8 x 10, 6+ =l 173 yds.
} stamped } 2. 6 || 306 1} | 2/2 12 15 1} | | 108 12 || 717
7 x 2 , 7} and 10 Satin.
Box - " - 3 6 3 150
5293 53 220TTT| 33 220 || 523
Equivalents in £ s. d. - - £220 11 33 £220 10 5}
Number of Figures. Price. Proceeds. Total.
By Xdy. process * - 38 76 114
, £ s. d. , - - 39 76 115
, £ and mil, - tº 52 84 136


C 4
24 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
BALANCE SHEET of the UNITED KINGDOM on 1st January 1856.
INCOME.
* Xdy. #8 and mils. £ s. d.
Customs - * º & tº- tº- * - tºº º 503,706,057.3 20,987,752.388 20,987,752 7 9
Excise º tº- cº tº * - º º º tº-e 393,347,667.6 16,389,486. 150 | 16,389,486 3
Stamps - e * - º - e- - 163,334,517.6 6,805,604.900 6,805,604 18
Taxes (Land and Assessed) º º - - º - 70,698,820.9 2,945,784.204 2,945,784 4 1
Property Tax se º - - - - - 329,236,446.2 | 13,718,185.258 13,718,185 5 2
I’ost Office tº tºº - - tº- º - 27,293,266.1 1,137,219.421 1,137,219 8 5
Crown Lands tº tºº - º tº- * -º - 6,732,378.9 280,515.787 280,515 15 9
Produce of Old Stores, &c. º sº º *- tº -º- 12,531,323.5 522,138.479 522,138 9 7
Received from East India Company - - º º sº 1,440,000. 60,000. 60,000
Miscellaneous Receipts - - º º º - 9,666,454.6 402,768.942 402,768 18 10
Unclaimed Dividends received - sº t- tº e- - 2,763,590.5 115,149. 604 115,149 12 1
1,520,750,523.2 | 63,364,605. 133 63,364,605 2 8
Fxcess of Expenditure º - º tº- * e º- 507,388,401.7 21,141,183.404 || 21,141,183 8 1
- 2,028,138,924.9 | 84,505,788.537 | 84,505,788 10 9
EXPENDITURE.
-ºsºme Xdy. £ and mils. £ s. d.
Interest and Management of Debt - || 547,022,261.9 22,792,594. 246 22,792,594 4 11
Unclaimed Dividends paid -> tºº 4,157,780.9 173,240.871 173,240 17 5
Terminable Annuities - º 92,839,039.1 3,868,293.296 3,868,293 5 11
Interest of Exchequer Bonds 1854 - 5,208,000. 217,000. 217,000
99 25 Bills, Supply - || 13,455,245.7 560,635.238 560,635 4 9
99 39 ,, Deficiency 225,270. 9,386.250 9,386 5
99 39 3? Ways and
Means - 641,992.5 26,749.687 26,749 13 9
- 663,549,590. 1 ——27,647,899.588 27,647,899 II 9
CHARGES ON CONSOLIDATED FUND.
Civil List ess º º 9,517,680. 396,570. 396,570
Annuities and Pensions - --> 8,183,801.6 340,991. 733 340,991 14 8
Salaries and Allowances - º 3,904,736.7 162,697.362 162,697 7 3
Diplomatic Salaries and Pensions - 3,581,872.6 149,244.692 149,244 13 10
Courts of Justice se - dº 11,833,990.6 493,082.942 493,082 18 10
Miscellaneous Charges - º tº 4,370,851.8 182,118.825 182,118 16 6
———— 41,392,933.3— 1,724,705.554 | 1,724,705 l l 1
SUPPLY SERVICES.
Army tº- tº cº - || 349,081,416. l 4,545,059. 14,545,059
Navy - - - - || 456,352,992. 19,014,708. 19,014,708
Ordnance º - - || 231,174,960. 1 9,632,290.004 9,632,290 l
Vote of Credit (additional expenses of
war) - i º tº- - || 124,800,000. 5,200,000. 5,200,000
Miscellaneous º -> - 161,787,033.4 6,741,126.392 6,741,126 7 10
- 1,323,196,401.5 55,133,183.396 — 55,133,183 7 11
2,028,138,924.9 84,505,788.538 84,505,788 10 9
Total number of Figures by £ s. d. º - 321
Do. do. , £ and mils {-> - 334
Do. do. , Xdy. - Gº- - 322


Mr. Robert Shaw,
10th May 1856.
Saturday, 10th May 1856.
The Lord MONTEAGLE OF BRANDON in the Chair.
Mr. ROBERT SHAw examined.
205. (Chairman.) You reside at Bristol, do you not ?—Yes, my Lord, I do.
206. Have you turned your attention to the question generally of numbers as applicable
to coinage, and to the particular question of changing our present system of coinage into
the decimal system 2–Some time ago I did address very particular attention to the subject,
and I arrived at this conclusion, that the decimal system would not be so good as that
which we now have, and that in all the powers of numbers nothing can be devised at all so
good for subdivision of the pound sterling as the numbers 20, 12, and 4.
207. A pamphlet has been under the consideration of the Commissioners, entitled
“Rationale of our Present Subdivision of the Pound Sterling, with Strictures on the
Decimal Coinage.”
Is that your work?—It is.
208. What has been your occupation in life 2–I am a public accountant.
209. In your avocations as a public accountant did you possess practical means of
testing the reasoning upon which you founded the conclusions which you have already
stated?—I cannot say, my Lord, that it necessarily grows out of my vocation, but some
particular circumstances called my attention to the subject.
I conceived that an erroneous
opinion was obtaining very great ascendancy, and I thought it not unbecoming to write
this pamphlet.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 25
210. In forming that opinion your attention has been directed, has it not, to the Report Mr. Robert Shaw.
of the Select Committee of the House of Commons, and the evidence given before them 2–
I certainly have read that report very attentively. 10th May 1856.
211. Probably you have read many other publications which have also occupied the –
attention of the public 2–Only a few of them, for they seemed a repetition of the same
argument.
212. The Commissioners having this pamphlet before them, perhaps it may save some-
thing of your time, and the time of the Commissioners, if I take the liberty of asking you
whether in any respects since the publication of this treatise you have seen reason to
change the opinions which you have therein expressed, and if you have, will you state
in what particulars?—The only change that I perceive is that I have additional reasons
to confirm that essay, which, with submission to the Commissioners, I will read:—
First, I am of opinion that in the subdivision of the concrete integer the paramount
object is conciseness in expression of quantity; that, for instance, instead of writing or
uttering on all occasions 358,400 ounces, we may say at once 10 tons; or, vice versé, instead
of ++++g of a ton, we may say 1 ounce (and so of other quantities).
Secondly, I consider this, and not facility in calculation, the paramount object: because
in all transactions calculation is an operation once performed, and then done with ; but
the figures produced by that calculation are afterwards copied, perhaps hundreds or thousands
of times. For example, an actuary calculates once the premium on a life of a certain age;
but that premium is copied, I know not how often, whenever a policy on a life of that age
is effected, and afterwards every year when the premium is paid. It is not necessary to
accumulate examples from other professions or trades.
Thirdly, If we admit that this (conciseness in expression of quantity) is the paramount
object, then it follows that, having taken some quantity as the integer or highest “denomi-
nation” of measure in any substance, we are to express all minor parts of that integer in
the fewest words or figures. Now parts of anything are found by division; the perfection
then of metrical subdivision is, to recognise, as parts or minor denominations, quantities
produced from the integer by the largest possible number of divisors.
Fourthly, With a clear apprehension of this, we must perceive that a proposed system for
representing all quantities by simple notation of the minimum quantity recognised is not
the best system that can be devised; it is in fact writing, instead of 4 shillings, 192 farthings,
and so of other quantities.
Fifthly, Upon a comparison of our present system and a decimal subdivision we find
them respectively forming clean quotients, without remainder, from the following divisors,
which I will beg to hand in to the Commissioners in a tabular form :—
ić S. d. flor. cents. mils.
ll. divided by 2 - - 10 º ll. divided by 2 - 5 ºn tº
3 y 95 3 - º 6 8 55 25 4 - 2 5 *
39 22 4 ma. º 5 -> 53 23 5 - 2 - -
35 32 5 -> - 4 - 53 25 8 - I 2 5
39 33 6 - --> 3 4 33 33 10 - 1 - *
29 55 8 &º Gºmes 2 6 33 37 20 - -º-º: 5 *
29 33 10 - º 2 tºm 5? 35 25 - * 4 -
53 55 12 - - l S 35 53 40 - eºs 2 5
35 59 15 G- sº 1 4 3 y 53 50 - º 2 *
39 22 16 tº- sºme l 3 35 33 100 - * l *>
53 35 2O º º l tºmsº 35 33 125 - -> - 8
55 35 24 - º sº 10 55 53 200 - tºº - 5
35 ,, 30 - tºº tºº 8 35 3 y 250 - * - 4
3y ,, 32 - tºº sº 7% 3 y y 500 - * * 2
29 35 40 - * sº 6 22 , 1000 - g=e - 1
35 5) 48 º * gºs 5
35 32 60 - dº sº 4
25 3? 64 tº gº tºº 3#
35 33 80 - essa * 3
35 33 96 - - gº 2%
39 ,, 120 - º *sº 2
35 35 § º Qasm. sº #
39 25 * - º gºsº 4.
55 25 240 º º gº I
5 y 25 320 cº tº sº #
29 33 480 -> e- tºº #
33 y 960 - *º- tºº #
Divisors 27. - Divisors 15.
Giving quotients— Giving quotients—
Of 1 denomination of money º - 16 Of 1 denomination of money - - 12
Of 2 denominations tº tº- - 11 Of 2 denominations cº tº sº 2
Of 3 denominations gº wº l
27
15
The result of this table is that the pound sterling, subdivided into shillings and pence, may
be divided by 27 different numbers, giving for 16 of those divisors quotients of only 1
denomination of money, and ll quotients of 2 denominations of money, there being no
D
26 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. Robert Shaw.
gººmººse
10th May 1856.
remainders: but divided into florins, cents, and mils, it will divide only by 15 numbers, 12 of
them with quotients of 1 denomination of money, 2 with quotients of 2 denominations of
money, and 1 with a quotient of 3 denominations of money. It thus appears not only that our
present system is far superior to the decimal plan; but on examination of the divisors, in their
number and adaptability to the usual wants of society, it is the best that can be devised.
213. Is that the close of your memorandum ?—Yes; that is what I may call the text.
214. You have stated the great importance of conciseness of expression, and you have
illustrated the inconvenience of the decimal system by the expression of the weight in
ounces; I think it was in parts of a ton. Would there be any greater necessity, say,
of using a number of mils so expressing the coin or the value of the coin, than there is now
of expressing a pound by 960 farthings? Would there be any necessity of expressing a
pound by 1,000 mils, and using four figures constituting 1,000, than there is now in
expressing a pound by three figures, 960, constituting the number of farthings?—There
would be one figure more, if taken simply on that ground.
215. But my question is this:—Unless it be necessary now, by reason of the division of the
pound sterling into 960 farthings, to express it by 960 farthings and not £1, how
would it be more necessary to express a pound sterling by 1,000 mils, and not by the
item £1 sterling? Would not that inconvenience or that disadvantage be common to
both systems?—In either way we should state a pound by a figure l ; but, in our
consideration as to various parts of a pound, we may be very sure that whatever name is
given to those parts of a pound, or whatever proportion they may bear to the whole pound,
people will buy exactly the same quantities of the same things, and tradesmen will
require exactly the same quantity of silver or copper for them; and our question, if I
understand it rightly, is, in what form may those quantities of silver and copper be most
conveniently expressed ? I believe that in those purchases in shops in which money is
paid, probably three out of four consist of the subordinate parts of a shilling, i.e. some number
of pence. At present we represent all numbers of pence, except 10d. and 11d., by one
figure. Under the decimal coinage we must use, for a penny the figure 4, and for twopence
the figure 8, and for all other numbers of pence two figures where we now use one. *
216. Do you not think that the present mode of buying has a reference to the coins
in which commodities are to be paid for; and that if a new system of coinage was intro-
duced the market would adjust itself to the new coins, upon the ordinary principles upon
which the free exchange of commodities, with unlimited variation in point of price, now
adjusts itself to the purchases and sales of articles?—I have no doubt that the same
quantity of tea or any other thing would be sold for the same quantity of silver; but I also
perceive that the parts of this pound of tea, being supposed to cost the same portion of a
shilling, there must be more figures used to represent the value of that which actually
changes hands, than there are at present.
217. Does that assume that the quantity sold will continue unaltered 2 If the party
buying is in possession of a coin on Saturday varying from the coin which he had in his
hands on the Monday, do you not think that the quantity of the article bought will adapt
itself to the Saturday coin, to enable the exchange to take place between the buyer and
seller, with as much facility in the one case as in the other ?—I do not, and for this reason,
that the quantity of goods bought must be measured by some recognized legal weight,
and this recognized legal weight will not divide pari passu with any decimal subdivision of
money, and therefore you will very rarely be able to meet exactly with your new coin the
quantity purchased according to the legal and standard weights of the tea, or whatever it is.
218. Then you think that it is the immutability, as it were, the fixity of the weights and
measures, that would prevent the adaptation of the quantity purchased and sold to a varia-
tion of the denomination of the coin 2–Certainly, if our present weights and measures are
retained we come to a most perplexing difficulty indeed, because, unless a pound weight
of tea, or whatever it is, comes to exactly 8s, or some multiple of 8s. unless that is the case,
you will always have a remainder from it. Suppose the exact value of an ounce to be 3d.,
4d., 5d., or any other sum but 6d., you would always have a remainder; that is to say, the
quantity purchased will cost so many cents and mils, and a part of a mil, if you retain the
pound and the ounce weight.
219. Is there no other way of adjusting the price than that of varying the quantity; is
there not also a mode of adjusting the price by varying the quality of the article bought or
sold?—There certainly is; and if I mistake not there is at present a Committee actually
sitting to inquire into the adulteration of food, and a glorious scope would then be given
to those who commit that offence.
220. But independently of any question in our hypothetical case of the adulteration in all
the articles of first necessity, especially of those to which you refer as illustrations of your
argument, tea and sugar, and produce of that description, is there not, at lesat within certain
limits, an infinite variety of qualities, all representing different values, and capable of repre-
senting the variations of price, and the variations of coin in which that price is represented,
between buyer and seller?—Unless you depart from your pound and ounce weight you
can never make it meet exactly, for the reasons which perhaps your Lordship has observed
in page 32 of this pamphlet. There are, in that page, 16 prices, which are commonly
every day charged for a pound weight of various articles. Those prices are set forth in
shillings and pence, and likewise in a supposed decimal coinage. If your Lordships will
for a moment look down those decimal figures, you will find that there is not among them
one price that will divide by 16, the divisor for an ounce, without leaving a remainder. Only
one, the first of them, will divide by 8 or even by 4, and only 4 of them by 2 without
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 27
leaving a remainder. The shopkeeper cannot afford in all these cases to lose that remain-
der, and the poor man or the poor woman must.
221. But the question that was put to you was, how far it was or was not true, taking
that scale of your own in page 32, that either by the prices of the articles represented there,
or by the mixture of those very articles so as to produce intermediate prices, or proportionate
prices, in proportion to the mixture, of a higher or a lower denomination, you had the
absolute power of adjusting the price by the variation of the qualities to suit any possible
scale of money that could be devised in those limits 2—Certainly, that may be done. For
instance, we may make something that is now 3}d. a mil better in quality, or something
else a mil worse in quality, but the mixture of different qualities opens a wide door to
adulteration.
222. But, taking that into account, would that increase the power of or the motive for
adulteration, and add to those which now exist?—It would, in my opinion; but what is
much worse, it would afford, under the sanction of the Legislature, some palliation for
what in itself is a heinous crime.
223. If you take into account the variations in price in wholesale commodities, how is
that variation of the wholesale price, by the pound we will say, or by the chest of tea,
distributed in the retail sale of that tea by the ounce to the poorer classes 2—A small
variation in the wholesale price must absolutely vanish when you come to the ounce.
224. In that case, if it vanishes altogether, who gets the benefit of it?—It seems to me
to be a toss up; sometimes the wholesale vendor, and sometimes the retail dealer.
225. In that case, on that rough principle of adjustment, that sometimes the fraction
goes in one way, and sometimes the fraction goes in the other, is not the tendency of the
whole, upon the average, to bring the rate of profits of the parties selling to the average
rate of profits which can be made in other trades of the same description and the same
amount of risk 2–Certainly the rate of profit will be that determined by competition ; but
I cannot perceive how, if there is an arithmetical impossibility in the price so ascertained,
it can be made to adjust itself in the purchase of minute quantities. If, for instance, you
want to divide the figures 157, the price of 1 lb., by 16, there must be a remainder; then
the thing does not adjust itself; and whenever there is a remainder I take it that the
shopkeeper will charge it as a whole mil, and the poor man will lose it.
226. In page 7 of your pamphlet you state, “The humbler classes in this country
“ purchase their supplies of tea, sugar, and other necessaries of life in small quantities, by
“ the ounce, quarter pound, &c. Now the price of the pound of these articles is fixed
“ by competition, so that it cannot be more or less, and it is such that with the help of the
“ farthing the price of the minute quantity required is in almost every case exactly defined.”
In what respect do you think that the retail prices vary from the prices which you state
here, which are fixed by competition, so that they cannot be more or less; why is it that
the same principle does not apply to purchases of the smaller articles?—It does apply to
the purchases of small articles.
227. The same principle of competition ?—Yes.
228. (Lord Overstone.) If I understand you correctly, your view is, that competition
would regulate the price of articles, both in the gross and in the retail; but that the
operation of that principle of competition is necessarily affected or influenced by the state
of the coins, inasmuch as the price must be adjusted in coins, and when you come to the
smaller retail prices the difficulty arising out of the state of the coins will interfere, and in
a greater or less degree modify the great principle which would determine the price of
things according to competition?—No ; that is not my view. I consider it certain that
competition will regulate the shop price at which anything is sold, and that at present our
coin meets the small fractional parts of ounces, and so on, without leaving any remainder;
but if we have a decimal coinage then the exact equivalent of the price of the pound weight
consists of such a figure that you cannot divide it by 16, or generally by 4, without a
remainder; that remainder the shopkeeper cannot afford to lose, and the poor man
must.
229. If I understand your answer correctly now, it is really a statement of the principle
which in my preceding question I wished to set before you, therefore I have failed to
make myself understood. If I understand your last answer, it amounts to this, that in the
endeavour to adjust the price of the retail quantities under the decimal coinage you would
meet with difficulty and obstruction, in consequence of the coins not adjusting themselves
to the smaller variations of price, as they do adjust themselves under the existing coinage?
—I did not say that they would not adjust themselves to the variations of the price, but
they would not adjust themselves to the small quantities required.
230. The price must adjust itself to the small fractional quantities?—That is exactly
my meaning, as to the coins paid for the small quantities.
231. (Chairman.) Are those inconveniences peculiar to the decimal, or do they not
exist under the present system, as, for instance, if I find that an article of which the cost is
23d. per pound gives to me per ounce a price of 13 d. plus # of #d., that an article of 11d.
per pound gives to me per ounce #d., plus # of 3d., and that an article at 7d. per pound
gives to me per ounce 4d. plus 3 of #d, how are those compound fractions, which are not
represented by any given coin whatever, now to be paid by the purchaser of an ounce?—
I believe that the poor rarely, if ever, purchase Jess of an article than is met by a farthing;
but if we are to have the operation of what is stated in page 32, in 15 cases in 16, where a
poor person goes to buy a small quantity of something that he would now buy for 1%d.,
Mr. Robert Shaw.
10th May 1856.
28 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. Robert Shaw.
10th May 1856.
13d., or such small sums, there would be a remainder, which must be lost either by the
tradesman or the purchaser.
232. According to the decimal system ?—Certainly.
233. But in the cases that I have put merely as illustrations every one of them is under
the present system, and in every one of those cases low-priced articles by the pound cannot
be worked out by the ounce by anything but a coin which it is impossible to pay. I want
to know how the question of price is adjusted now under those circumstances ?—That is a
question for people who deal in those articles to decide; but I am informed by persons who
have a good deal of purchasing at those shops, that they never saw, in fact, a case in which
a poor person came to a huckster's or a grocer's shop in which a farthing did not exactly
meet the amount required; in such a case, for instance, as 11d. per pound, they would buy
2 ounces instead of 1, or something like that.
234. Would not those facilities likewise of so adjusting the quantity bought apply likewise
to the decimal coinage, it being always understood that in, using the words “decimal coin-
age * it is proposed to retain the 6d, the 1s., the half crown, the 2s., the 5s., the 10s.,
and the 20s., as at present?—On that, my Lord, I may speak with some confidence. If the
price of the quantity bought was, in present money, anything below 6d. in the price of that
quantity in decimal coinage there would be a remainder.
235. In all cases whatever?—Yes; if the price of the quantity bought was in present
value below 6d. there would be a remainder.
236. But there being, in the cases which have been put to you of purchases at 23d, per
pound, 11d. per pound, and 7d. per pound, a remainder which it is impossible to represent
in a coin at present, in what respect would the provision which is now made for the pur-
chase of those articles be inapplicable to the purchase of articles under the decimal system
of coinage, there being a remainder in each of those cases?–In the simple fact that the
cases which your Lordship states have been selected, and are extremely rare cases, if they
ever occur; but in a decimal division of the pound, where the price of the quantity bought
is less than 6d. of our present coin, there must always be a remainder.
237. Do you think practically that the cases of 23d. per pound, 11d. per pound, and 7d.
per pound, which are taken by way of example, are so rare in the transactions of human
life?—I do not say that they are rare, but I mean that I think it is a very rare thing to
hear of a person wanting an ounce of any article at those prices.
238. In this passage to which I have referred in your book you state, “The price of the
“ pound of these articles is fixed by competition, so that it cannot be more or less, and it is
“ such that with the help of the farthing the price of the minute quantity required is in
“ almost every case exactly defined.” Is the farthing much used with respect to the pur-
chases of the poor in tea, sugar, coffee, and in articles of that description to which you have
referred?— I am informed that it is. My daughter purchases these things for me, and she
informs me that it is.
239. I think you refer with perfect accuracy to the fact that the proposal made to give
a more minute subdivision by the actual creation of half farthings was rejected, and not
used, and therefore you infer that the farthing is the lowest division that we require?—Just
so. I certainly understood so, and firmly believed it, till very lately; but one gentleman, who
has taken some pains with the subject, informs me that he knows instances in which the
half farthing is required, and if this often occurs I should certainly say have an issue of half
farthings. This gentleman informs me that the impediment to the circulation of those half
farthings is, that they are only allowed to go from the Mint in, I think, the quantity of 25l.
to one person. With great submission I would suggest that they be allowed to go from
the Mint in such quantities as 5s, worth rather than the poor should suffer by the other
practice. &
240. I think I collect from you now, as well as from your book in page 8, that where
a remainder of some portion of a mil takes place, “this portion of a mil the tradesman
“ cannot afford on every purchase of 1d, or 2d. in value to lose; he must therefore charge
“ it as one mil. But to subject for ever the millions of deserving people who form the
“ humbler classes in this country to loss such as this, a loss of about 1s. in 15s. of their
“ scanty means, would be monstrous. The farthing, therefore, of 1960th of the pound, is
* indispensable.” Do you consider, even if that loss was assumed to take place, that that
loss could by possibility be permanent, as it is here stated ?–Arithmetically so. If there
is truth in arithmetic I conceive that it must be so, unless indeed the tradesman chooses
to increase a little the total price of one article, and diminish a little the total price of
another, so as in those transactions to make the price of each article some multiple of
16 mils.
241. Supposing that took place, would it not add four per cent. to the profits of those
tradesmen so taking the benefit of the fractional part of a mil?—Yes, upon those
transactions.
242. In proportion as it was a loss to the poor, which you value at 1s. in 15s. of their
scanty means, must it not necessarily be so much in addition to the previous profits of the
tradesman?—The tradesman has, we suppose, transactions large and small. His large transac-
tions it does not affect; but the sting of it is this, on every twopennyworth or onepenny-
worth of everything that he sells, where the ounce comes to a halfpenny or 1d. or 1%d.,
or some such small sum in actual value, there is in a decimal division of money a loss on
the average of half a mil to the poor person who buys, and that certainly is gained by the
tradesman; the poor would lose after a rate which I estimate at 1s. in 15s, upon those
G
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 29
purchases, or, upon every 16., 1}d., or 2d., on the average half a mil. . To the tradesman
that would be a comparatively small addition to his total gains, because he has much larger
transactions in which his gains remain the same as before.
243. But to whatever proportion the price is augmented to the poor in consequence
of that cause to which you have referred, must not the price received be augmented to the
tradesman 2–The price is augmented only in those very small driblets of quantity that
he sells to the poor.
244. In whatever proportion, be it great or small, that the price is augmented to the
poor, must not the receipt in that same proportion upon that class of transactions be
augmented to the tradesman 2–It must be augmented only in those minute transactions.
245. Practically speaking, in such a great city as Bristol, and the metropolis of London,
are not the shops of hucksters and the chandlers' shops, where the poor chiefly make their
purchases, a particular class of shop; are there not large shops and large warehouses in
which the transactions of the poor for the most part, though not exclusively, take place?—
Perhaps there are. I have not sufficient experience in those matters to say.
246. (Lord Overstone.) Have you the means of forming a judgment as to the relative
number of transactions with the poor which take place in shops, or which take place in open
markets?—None whatever.
247. (Chairman.) If the result of inquiry should show that the purchases in the grocers'
or what are called chandlers' shops comprehend almost all the dealings of the poor of the
kind that we have been talking of, in whatever proportion they are exclusively or generally
for the purchases of the poor, would not the supposed profit which you have pointed out
as arising out of the fractional parts of the mil raise the profits of that class of tradesmen
above the other class of tradesmen in which the transactions were of a larger kind?—
It would.
248. Would not the tendency of that immediately be to produce more shops of that
description, if it were found that they had a greater profit upon the transactions?—That is
a nice question. There might be in a certain town a profit, we will say, for 20 of those
shops, but if there were 25 probably they would all starve. But after all, the arithmetical
difficulty is incurable. Either the new competitors must sell at a loss, or they must charge
the “remainder ’’ as a mil.
249. Is there not a very active competition, for instance, in the poorer parts of every
great town, in the sale even of such an article as bread? A halfpenny variation perhaps takes
place in the price, either raising or lowering it; and do you not constantly see “cheap
bread,” and “bread at the old price,” or the price marked upon the actual loaf in the
baker's window, proving that there is an active competition even in such an article as
bread?—Certainly, I see that particularly in bread.
250. (Lord Overstone.) The questions which have recently been put to you had
reference to this principle ; first, that in subdividing into minute quantities the price of
an article under the proposed decimal system of coinage you will be driven to the necessity
of giving a small turn to the wholesale dealer or to the retail purchaser, and that it cannot
be given to the retail purchaser, because in that case a loss would fall in a multiplied form
upon the wholesale dealer, which he could not bear; therefore it is inferred that the benefit
mast fall to the wholesale dealer, but the consequence of that benefit would obviously be
an increase in his profits; therefore it would follow that competition will compel that
wholesale dealer to resort to the same course by which that increased rate of profit would
be brought to its legitimate standard. The difficulty appears to be this, that he could not
reduce his price accordingly, in consequence of the difficulty in regard to the smaller coins,
and therefore his only mode of bringing his profits to their legitimate level would be an
alteration in the quality of his articles. Hence it is inferred that the difficulty already
alluded to, arising out of the imperfect divisibility of decimal coins, would rather compel
the wholesale tradesman to alter the quality of his article where the coinage would not
admit of his altering the price. Do you feel the force and truth of that argument, or
do you not ?–-I perceive exactly the effect of it. It assumes that the purchaser is a very
exact judge of the quality of what he buys It leaves a sort of vague uncertainty about it.
The improvement of an article to the exact nicety required is, to be sure, possible, but
whether that improvement would be discerned and understood by every customer I think
is very doubtful. -
251. Assuming that a rectification, which could not arise through an alteration of the
price, might be brought about by an alteration of the quality, do you consider that it is a
recommendation of any proposed scheme for the improvement of the coinage that it
involves the necessity, for the sake of rendering that coinage convenient, that the trades-
men should alter the exact qualities of their commodities?—I think, on the contrary, it
is leaving an opening for a wide vagueness in transactions. But, with great submission, it is
not an improvement of the coinage that is proposed; it is an alteration, which would be
attended with most distressing consequences to persons who have much to do with
accounts.
252. (Chairman.) You referred just now, did you not, to the question of weights and
measures?—I did. - -
253. You have stated the great and leading distinction between coins, and weights and
measures, in page 21 of your book where you state, “While money is of cosmopolitan
“ interest, and is used by all individuals in all nations, weights and measures are instru-
“ ments technically used by different dº in trade. They are for use, and therefore
3 -
Mr. Robert Shaw.
10th May 1856.
30 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. Robert Shaw.
15th May 1856.
“ must be such as best suit the quantities commonly required of the goods sold by those
“ who use them. In weight the ounce and the pound; in length the inch and the foot,
“ the yard and the mile; in liquids the pint, the quart, and the gallon; in land measure
“ the acre and the perch, are quantities so interwoven with the natural wants and
“ accustomed demands of purchasers, that to prescribe in these articles any other measure-
“ ment, however scientific, would be to invert legitimate order, and make science the
“ mistress instead of the handmaid of man.” Is it from that supposed necessity of
adjusting weights and measures to articles which are sold, that one finds in the markets
recognized by law, but still more by custom, such a vast variety of different weights and
measures applicable to different things, such as the avoirdupois, the troy, and the apothe-
caries' weight, the ale and beer measure, the wine measure, the cloth measure, the dry
measure, and different kinds of long measure, solid measure, square measure, and all the
customary measures; and do you think that that is a proof of the correctness of what you
state as to weights and measures specially adjusting themselves to the articles that are to be
sold?—I am not au fait with the weights and measures question, but a few things have fallen
within my observation. A wine merchant told me, that in that business the higher measures
of wine were adapted to those of the principal countries from which our wines are imported.
I was speaking to a grocer about the decimal division of weights and measures, and he
seemed to be absolutely frightened at the idea of it. He stated that the teas from China
all came in packages of which 7 is the pivot number, 21, 42, 84, and 112, but 7 is the
pivot of all those numbers. . In like manner I can suppose that in different trades they
have adopted different weights and measures to conform to the quantities in which goods
of foreign production are imported. I do not speak from knowledge, but I only guess
from those two examples that it is so.
254. The general tendency is that the weights and measures should adapt themselves to
the convenience of the parties selling the particular articles to which those weights and
measures are applied ?–Exactly so.
255. Then, there being a vast variety of weights and measures now existing, is it possible
to consider, comparing those different articles with the constant quantities of our coins,
that our present subdivision of coins can be in harmony with all, those different weights
and measures 2—Certainly they cannot. If there is any necessity for different sub-
divisions in different weights and measures, no division of coin can be in harmony with
them all.
256. (Lord Overstone.) Is it not a striking characteristic of all our varying systems of
weights and measures, that they are subject to the binary principle of subdivision ?—It
appears to me to be an ineradicable system founded in nature and the human mind; and you
will never get the generality of people, let them be as highly educated as they choose, to
resort by choice to any other than the binary subdivision in their ordinary purchases. It
is the most easy form of calculation, and will therefore be preferred by all persons.
257. Is it not the fact that our present system of coinage, and all our varied forms of
weights and measures, are eminently subject to the binary system of subdivision to a degree
and an extent, which would not be applicable to the decimal system of coinage?—
Undoubtedly. -
258. Does not that then constitute a harmony or an adaptation between our present
system of coinage and all our varied forms of weights and measures which would not exist
between the decimal system of coinage and our present forms of weights and measures?
—Most certainly.
259. (Chairman.) Take the ale and beer measure. If you were dealing with three
kilderkins or with nine gallons, how would you apply the binary system without fractions?
—It is in the purchases of the humbler classes, or rather of the middle and humbler classes,
by retail, which form nineteen times in twenty that the scale is used, that the binary
division is so prevalent. You will find in retail purchases invariably that the mind vibrates
towards the binary subdivision ; and in wholesale purchases I take it that the merchant
and importer of foreign goods follow the scale of packages or the size of casks that is
adopted by the nations with which they deal. -
260. You stated, did you not, that it would be impossible to apply to weights and
measures the same subdivision, however excellent, which is used in coins?—Certainly;
unless by some unwise exercise of power. gy
261. (Lord Overstone.) Next to the binary principle of division, do you consider that
the most important with regard to practical convenience is the division into three parts?
—I consider that our present system, combining the numbers 2 and 3 and their multiples
up to 960, is the very perfection of mathematical science in the subdivision of money.
We have the binary division carried up to its fifth power, 64; as twice 2 =4, twice 4=8,
twice 8 = 16, twice 16=32, twice 32=64. In the decimal system you cannot carry the
binary division further than to its second power, 8. Twice 2 =4, twice 4=8, and there
it breaks down. That is one great point which has excited my notice. But besides that
combination of 2, 3 and 5 up to 960, you have the capabilities of dividing the pound into
various parts, having coins so adapted to the various parts, which you could not have
under any other combination of numbers whatever. t
262. Do you not consider, speaking practically rather than scientifically, that the divisi-
bility into halves and into third parts, both of material things and of coins as instruments
for paying for material things so subdivided, is eminently conducive to public requirements
and convenience?--Of other things besides money there is such a great variety that I could
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 31.
hardly venture to apply the same principle to them all. In some cases it might be very
desirable, but in others it might not. -
263. Do you not think that our varied system of weights and measures is characterised,
not without exception, but by a very strong predominant tendency, to facilitate the sub-
division into halves and into third parts?—The table of weights and measures which is
most frequently used is avoirdupois; there we do not find it so. But in the larger quantities
of liquid measure (both wine and beer) and in some others 3 is e pivot number.
264. Do you not, in the avoirdupois weight, find the binary principle strongly developed 2
—Yes; but not into thirds, certainly.
265. Do you not think that our present system of coinage affords corresponding facilities
for division either into halves or into third parts, and much greater facility than could be
obtained by any system of decimal coinage?—Undoubtedly. Decimal coinage renders
division into three impossible. You must always have a remainder.
266. (Chairman.) Can you reconcile with the opinions that you have expressed this pas-
sage from Aristotle, that “it seems a law of nature that 10, 100, and 1,000 should be adopted,
“ otherwise it would be impossible to explain their universality, and this not only among
“civilised but amongst uncivilised nations”?—There seems to be no difficulty whatever in
reconciling it with every word that I have said. Aristotle, I presume, is speaking there
of cumulative quantities, something like our national debt, perhaps. We are speaking of
the subdivision of a certain definite quantity into the most convenient parts. Aristotle,
when he mounts up to 1,000, is talking of something like our national debt.
267. (Lord Overstone.) Are you aware that very high authorities may be quoted for
the opinion that we have made a great mistake in adopting the decimal instead of the
duodecimal system for our arithmetic 2-—I am not aware of that.
268. Are you of opinion that it is a clear case that in adopting the decimal rather than
the duodecimal process for our arithmetical system we have acted wisely, and in a manner
productive of the greatest amount of public good?—Decidedly I think we have ; but there
I speak of large quantities, cumulative quantities, and not of the subdivision of an integer
into parts. -
269. But looking at the whole result, remembering that when you adopt an arithmetical
system you adopt it necessarily both for the purpose of multiplication and division, and
looking at the subject comprehensively in both respects, are you still confidently of opinion
that the decimal system is as good as would have been the duodecimal system, had it been
adopted instead of the Arabic system 2–It is a very deep question, which I have not con-
sidered. It seems to me that a duodecimal series, while it expressed large numbers in fewer
figures, would require figures (representing 10 and 11) of so much higher power than we now
use, that in the work of addition and multiplication the labour would be much increased.
270. (Chairman.) You have turned your attention specially, have you not, in your
publication, to the present integer of the pound sterling 2–Yes.
271. What is your opinion with respect to the expediency or inexpediency of departing
from that integer ?—That it would be, looking either upwards or downwards, a false step.
Looking upwards it would derange all contracts of an enduring and extensive character;
but looking downwards, either you must vary the farthing, or you must lose our excellent
system of subdivision, 20, 12, and 4. If I may be excused a digression of a minute or two,
I would remark, that since this pamphlet of mine was printed some things have come to my
knowledge which perhaps are not universally known. It is commonly known that the
pound sterling was divided by twenty shillings in the reign of the Conqueror (before that
the pound = 12 cz. of silver was divided into 48 shillings, the shilling into 5 pence); in the
year 1505 we had the coinage of shillings, in the reign of Henry the Seventh ; and William
the First and Henry the Seventh were considered wise princes. In the reign of James the
First is the first example of the copper coinage of halfpence and farthings, which put out of
circulation that inconvenient piece, the silver penny. I have been questioned as to how it
came to pass that the Americans, the French, and other nations on the continent adopted
the decimal coinage, and I think I now trace the introduction of the decimal coinage into
Europe in a rather curious way. In their War of Independence the Americans succeeded,
Mr. Robert Shaw.
15th May 1856.
and at the time when this war began their coinage was in a very irregular state. The .
piece most in circulation amongst them was the Spanish piece of eight, equivalent to the
present dollar. In order to have some arrangement and settlement that they could
understand, they took, I suppose, as a symbol of independence and republican institution,
a decimal system of coinage. We very well know that in that American war a great
many French officers took part. Soon after it came the Revolution in France, with all
its dreadful consequences, and almost the first thing that the French did was after
the American example, to establish a decimal coinage. Soon, as they advanced into other
countries, right, left, north, and south of them at the point of the bayonet, they carried
with them republican government, and with it, at the point of the bayonet, decimal coinage.
Such I humbly conceive to be the origin, and such is the modern history of decimal coinage
in Europe. If I am correct in my conjecture, it is very clear that it was not from any
mathematical or scientific discoveries that it was ever adopted. In our day it certainly
was so under the impulse of political passion, and political passion is certainly not a thing that
should have influence in a measure of great, indeed of universal application, which deeply
affects commercial interests, and is a legitimate subject of mathematical consideration.
272. Then you consider the decimal system as a comparatively speaking modern inven-
tion.—In Europe it is ; and I believe that it prevails in China.
I) 4
32 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. Robert Shaw.
15th May 1856.
273. And in India. Was it not an ancient system introduced from India into Arabia,
and thence into Europe?—I have never inquired into those things; but I can understand
that under a despotism, where the practice is to cut the Gordian knot, so delicate a question
as metrical subdivision evokes no study.
274. With respect, practically, to the pound integer, you state, at page 7, “ In England
“ the integer of money is the pound,’ of the value nearly of four ounces of silver; and this,
“ it is agreed on all hands, ought always to remain the integer.” And at page 42 you
state, “ To alter the value of the pound would be to unhinge all settlements and contracts
“ of an enduring character. It is doubtful even whether the National Debt could legally
“ be exempted from the alteration. ... To abolish the farthing would be (infinitely worse) to
“subject the millions to that standing confiscation which we have explained. These on
“ either side are evils of which no wise man would face the consequences. But no system
“ in which the two values of ll. and #d. are retained can be decimal.” You are of that
opinion?—Decidedly; the pound of its present value, I mean.
275. You refer to the inconvenience that results from the adoption of a small integer by
the multiplication of figures used to express a given sum. It occurs in your pamphlet, at
page 16, in reference to the franc, the rouble, and the dollar; and you state, with regard
to all nations using a low integer, “All these nations, in expression of any quantity of
“ money, labour under disadvantages which may be avoided. For large sums, the integer
“ being so small, a greater number of figures must be used; as, for 534l, in France
“ 13,350f, in Russia 3372-63 roubles, and in New York 2563-2 dollars, must be uttered
“ or written.” These are the inconveniences which you conceive must result from the use
of a small integer?—Certainly. -
276. (Lord Overstone.) You have stated, have you not, that you have been engaged
as an accountant?—Not very long ; for the last five years.
277. During your experience, either as an accountant or in the previous occupations of
your life, have you found any real practical inconvenience arising from the present system
of coinage in this country?—None whatever.
278. You are not aware of any circumstances which would lead you to think that a
revision of that system, with a view to placing it upon some new principle more calculated
to promote the public convenience is necessary, or desirable?—Quite the contrary.
279. Have you ever found that our present system of coinage is defective in convenience
as regards paying and receiving fractional sums?—Never.
280. You do not think that in any respect the existing coinage of this country requires
revision or modification?—Not as to its subdivision. I should say that if the fourpenny
silver piece were excluded it would save some trouble.
281. Your impression is that our present very peculiar mode of subdividing the pound
sterling is conducive to the public convenience as regards the coinage?—Certainly; I
consider it an advantage of incalculable estimation, in so much as this forms a part of com-
mercial interests. -
282. You consider that the subdivisions continually into halves and subdivisions into
third parts are eminent requisites of convenience in coinage?—Certainly.
283. Do you think that the present system of coinage facilitates the subdivision of the
pound sterling in that respect in an eminent manner, namely, into 10S., the half of that, 5s.,
the half of that, 2s. 6d., the half of that, 1s. 3d, the half of that, 74d., the half of that, 33d,
the half of that, 1%d., leaving out the #d., which of course cannot be subdivided ?–I think
that the best division that can be obtained. -
284. You think that no system of decimal coinage would afford the same facilities of
subdivision in harmony with the public convenience 2—Certainly not; in a decimal series
you cannot carry the division by 2 lower than to 2s 6d.
285. Do you think that the power of subdividing a pound sterling into a third part,
namely 6s. 8d., is conducive to public convenience in a degree in which the decimal coinage
would not be 2–Very materially so indeed.
286. Taking again that 6s. 8d., do you think that the subdivision of that into continual
halves, under our present coinage, into 38. 4d., the half of that, 1s. 8d., the half of that, 10d.,
the half of that, 5d., the half of that, 2%d., and the half of that, 1}d., is upon the same
principle more conducive to practical convenience in the transactions of the market than
any decimal system can be rendered?—Certainly.
287. You spoke of the division of the shilling under our present system. I think I
understand you to consider that by dividing the shilling into its 12 parts or pence you
get those sums represented more conveniently as regards the figures which represent it,
and also with fewer figures, than there would be under the mil system 2–Most certainly.
288. Some evidence has been taken upon the subject of the adaptation of com-
modities, either by change of quantity or change of quality, to meet the altered value which
coins of lower denominations would necessarily assume if the decimal system were intro-
duced; do you think that it is a recommendation of any proposed improvement of the coinage
that it should compel, for the purpose of adapting itself to the coinage, an alteration either
in quantity or quality of the articles which are to be sold —I think it would be a great
evil.
289. Suppose an ounce of tea or of sugar is now sold for #d., under the decimal coinage
the nearest equivalent of #d, would be three mils; to adjust the price to three mils there
must be an alteration in the quality of the article?—Certainly.
290. If an ounce of Sugar is now sold for #d., a pound will be sold for 1s. ?—Yes,
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 33
291. If the same ounce of sugar, by an alteration in the quality to meet the altered value Mr. Robert Shaw.
of the coins is sold for three mils, the pound will be sold for 48 mils?—Certainly.
292. For that 48 mils there would be no coin to represent its value under the decimal 10th May 1856.
system ?–No.
293. Consequently, if the sugar now selling at #d, an ounce and at a shilling a pound will,
under the proposed decimal system, be sold at three mils an ounce and 48 mils a pound, which
change will necessitate an alteration in the quality of the sugar, it will also reduce you
to the inconvenience of having a new coin in which to express the value of the 48 mils?—
Certainly ; but I do not see that that is an argument that weighs on either side, because
the prices of things consist almost invariably of two denominations of money, pounds and
shillings, or shillings and pence, at present, and it would only be transferring the difficulty
to another sum of money.
2.94. The proposed system is to be judged of by its tendency to increase the con-
venience of the community. The question is, looking at those articles in which the poor
deal in retail quantities very extensively, whether the convenience of the market would or
would not be increased. I put the case of sugar, first of all, sold at an ounce, and then trace it
up to the sum at which we suppose it to be sold in the pound; and I wish to ascertain
whether the present system of coinage, or the proposed decimal system of coinage, will give
the greatest facility and convenience, and convenience and facility in saving time and
facilitating calculation. Under the present system, where the ounce is #d. and the pound is
1s., will not payments for those two quantities, and all the intermediate ones, be made with
much less trouble and with fewer coins than under the supposition that the price became
three mils and 48 mils?—Yes, for the pound of sugar, because there is no one coin of
48 mils, or of 24 mils, for half a pound, or of 12 mils for a quarter pound.
295. Cases have been put to you of articles selling for 7d. a pound and 11d. a pound, as
involving the same difficulties of subdivision as are supposed to be involved in the proposed
decimal coinage; will you state whether if an article is sold at 7d a pound there will not be
considerable convenience from the fact that the half pound will sell for 3%d. and the quarter
of a pound will sell for 1; d. 7—Certainly.
296. The nearest equivalent to 7d. in the decimal coinage would be 29 mils; but assuming
that 30 mils is more likely to be the convenient coin, will that subdivide into a half pound
and into a quarter of a pound with the same facility as the 7d. ?—No ; it will not sub-
divide for the price of a quarter of a pound at all.
297. Taking again, 11d. ; the half pound will be 5%d., and the quarter will be 23d. ; the
nearest equivalent of 11d. in mils is 45 ; will the 45 mils divide with the same facility into
half a pound and a quarter of a pound as the 11d. P-Certainly not ; it will not divide so
as to meet even half a pound.
298. No reference has hitherto been made to the comparative facility which the two
systems, the present system and the decimal system, would afford for mental calculations,
for those operations in the mind which the lower orders of people especially must make,
hastily and in great confusion, whether in a crowded shop or tumultuous market; will the
calculation in mils be equally easy for the common people to make in those cases in which
calculations are now made in shillings and pence 2—I can hardly form an idea of the trouble
and delay, and the squabbles that there will be between shopkeepers and the poor people,
when they come to take “parts” of things at the prices given in decimals; but even if the
question is not of the parts, as ounces, quarters, or half pounds, but the various quantities
of numbers, as, say so many yards purchased across the counter, there are very few persons
whose mental calculations would do it; they must have slates.
299. Having expressed a very strong opinion in favour of our present system of coinage,
and against the introduction of a decimal system of coinage, will you state whether you
have turned your attention to the operation of decimal systems of coinage in other countries
in which they have been introduced ?–I have not be able to turn my attention to the
operation of it, because I have no practical information of what passes there ; but I can very
easily understand how the decimal system may be convenient there when it would not be
here. In France the integer of account is 10d., and the purchases by retail almost always
include some pence. There the number of pence is expressed in one figure, a franc being the
value of 10d., 9d. is 9 dimes, 8d. is 8 dimes, and so on. Thus they have no trouble; but
with us 9d., 8d., or any number of pence will involve two figures.
300. (Chairman.) Is not the French system of account to put down the franc and the cen-
times or 100th parts marked by two figures, and not by one 2–Yes; but I suppose there are
never less than 10 or at least 5 centimes passing there ; 5 centimes would be #d, nearly.
301. If you have to write 25 centimes you use two figures —Yes; that is where the
transaction involves exactly that sum.
302. Or any sum involving more than nine centimes?—The actual values paid are
generally the same number of pence, and that number of pence is denoted by the simple
figure 8 or 9 in the column next to the francs; at least it may be done so.
303. Is it the fact that you have seen a French account, and know how it is kept 2–
Yes, I have.
304. (Lord Overstone.) Is it not the great distinction between the proposed decimal
system in this country and the decimal system which exists in other countries, that we have
at the present time, arising from our higher integer of account, a subdivision in our coins
very different from that which previously existed in other countries, and which in your
judgment is a great advantage to this country g- consider the system that we have, with-
t E
34 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. Robert Shaw,
10th May 1856.
out inquiring into what other people have, to be far superior to the decimal or indeed any
other system whatever. If we have the pound sterling of its present value, our System of
division under it is incomparably superior to the decimal System. If we alter the pound
sterling, either we must derange the numbers 20, 12, and 4, or we must alter our farthing,
which I consider it is a capital point to retain. . In all cases, I think anything that alterstä.
value of the smallest coin, of the coin which is the business coin of the millions, is, I may
Say, the most perilous experiment a Government can undertake,
305. Your opinion is, that our integer of the pound sterling enables us to avail ourselves
of the subdivision of the fractional parts of coins in a way very superior to that which
exists or has existed in other countries?--Decidedly, excepting that in Holland and Ham-
burgh they had nearly the same subdivision; they had not the farthing. I think they
divided the fenning at Hamburgh into six parts, and in Holland into eight, 12 fennings
or pennings making a schilling, and 20 schillings making a pound. Such was the sub-
division of those two republics, which were the most advanced in commerce in ancient
times, and who I dare say had wise information upon the subject.
306. Have you considered whether the same circumstance, the high value of our integer
the pound sterling, if it be made the basis of the decimal system, would involve incºn-
veniences, as compared with the decimal systems of other countries which are based upon
a lower integer of value?—I have considered that particularly, and I see it most clearly
that with such a high integer the decimal subdivision would be extremely inconvenient, in
at least three fourths of the transactions that take place.
307. Are you of opinion that if we introduce the decimal system into our coinage,
founded upon the pound sterling, we shall necessarily have a decimal system of coinage less
convenient than that which other countries now enjoy 3–Very much less convenient than
we now enjoy.
308. The object of the question is not to consider whether the decimal coinage introduced
into this country will be less convenient than our present coinage, but whether the decimal
system of coinage, which, if we retain the pound sterling, we must introduce into this
country, will or will not be necessarily less convenient than the decimal system of coinages
which have now been introduced into other countries?—It will be decidedly less convenient
than the decimal system that is used in France and America and other countries.
309. The decimal system of coinage means taking the lowest money of account, Say a
mil, and increasing that money by regular steps of 10 in constant succession ?–Yes.
310. Our present system of coinage consists of taking the lowest money of account a
farthing, and increasing that by varying steps of progression ?—Certainly.
311. Do you not think that there is something obviously reasonable in varying the
space between those steps or monies of account in proportion as those monies of account
assume a higher value, namely, taking the farthing, and that being a very low value, when
you have arrived at four of that quantity, instead of continuing to enumerate onwards in
farthings, you take a new money of account, namely, 1d., which consequently is sub-
divisible into a half and into a fourth part, namely, a halfpenny and a farthing. Having so
got the 1d. as your next money of account, but that money of account being of a con-
siderably higher value than a farthing, you multiply it onwards to a greater extent, until
you arrive at 12 of those pennies, and having done that you now take a new money of
account, the Is. . Having taken 12 of the preceding money of account, because you are
dealing with a higher value, the shilling again affords great facility of subdivision into
6d., 3d, 1}d, and #d. Having now arrived at money of account of a still higher value
than the 1d., you take still more steps in that money of account before you take your last
step, namely, the pound. Upon that principle you take 20s, to the pound, increasing the
number of steps as you rise to monies of account of a higher value. Having thus arrived
at a pound, you again obtain that remarkable capacity for subdivision into continual halves
to which we have already alluded, namely, 10s., 5s., 2s. 6d., 1s. 3d., and so on to the
lowest stage. Is it, or not, in those characteristics that you consider the advantages of the
division of our pound sterling consists?—Your lordship stated very nearly the opinions that
I entertain. -
312. Will you have the goodness to state any point in which you do not entirely agree?
—I consider the advantages to lie chiefly in the arithmetical properties of the numbers
20, 12, and 4; 20 is divisible by 4 and by 5, as the 12 is by 2 and by 3; thus
you will embrace with the multiples of those prime numbers as nearly as possible all
the divisions which can be required by business. The advantage which your Lordship has
just pointed out in the number 20 is another very material one in my estimation in
accounts. It is this:—You add up a certain number of shillings, and a very large number
of shillings it may be, with half the trouble that you would have in adding the same
number of shillings if they were set out in figures not admitting of the figure I as 10.
You reckon up, say in other figures in the nine digits, to about 200 shillings, and you
have perhaps 200 more by simply counting twenty I’s in the column. That I consider
a very great advantage, which would be entirely lost in the decimal expression of the same
values; for with the nine digits equally in both systems, in every odd sum of shillings you
have in decimals a figure 5 in the column of cents annexed to the florins. Besides, for
the purposes of division into what I call clean quotients without any remainders, the
numbers 20 and 12 are perfection itself; but inasmuch as small quantities are required for
the farthing, it is the most valuable selection, the number 4; it is capable of binary
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. - 35
division, and it enables usin our books of considerable accounts, such as those of merchants,
bankers, and public institutions, to dispense with very small coins, the farthings.
313. In all the decimal systems which at present exist, the space between the lowest
money of account and the highest money of account is divided into 100 parts; if the
decimal system be introduced into this country, with the pound sterling as the highest
nteger, that division must necessarily be into 1,000 parts?—Yes.
3I4. Have you at all considered in what way it would probably work; would it or not
be necessary to introduce one or two intermediate stages of monies of account between
the lowest and the highest denomination?—There certainly must be between the mil and
the pound two monies of account, and that certainly would add very much to the trouble
of book-keeping and calculations.
315. You think that it would greatly diminish that facility and that accuracy, both in
the keeping of accounts and in mental calculations, which is found to attend decimal systems
which are differently circumstanced 2–Certainly.
316. (Chairman.) In dealing with ordinary calculations and accounts is there any
greater facility, or any less facility, or any greater security for accuracy, or any less security
for accuracy, in dealing with the portions of accounts which represent pounds, or those
which represent shillings, pence, and farthings 2—There is certainly greater facility in deal-
ing with monies which are only of one denomination, whatever it may be, than those which
are of several denominations.
317. Is not the notation used and the arithmetical operation effected in the stating of
the pound sterling precisely the same, to all intents and purposes whatever, as those arith-
metical operations which would arise out of the statement of the account in the decimal
system 2––It is the same, if you merely have to do with adding up the figures, but it is not
the same in the great business of account.
318. It is the same in the addition; is it not the same in the subtraction likewise, and is
not the principle the same, that each column of figures differs from the preceding right-hand
columns in decimal proportion?--That is certainly true; but the thing that is latent that requires
to be brought to light is this: You have twenty-three times in twenty-four more figures to
copy in your books, or higher figures to trouble you, in arithmetic; besides which, you must
have three columns of money denomination, instead of two, which you have now. In business
it is necessary, I suppose, in three places in four, to enter sums of money very quickly, and
having to enter the minor denominations in three columns instead of two, there would often
be a figure placed in a wrong position, and a mistake would arise, which would give a great
deal of trouble; but besides that, the mind, in copying figures, carries them, the sums of
money, in pounds, shillings, and pence, and easily sets them down correctly by once looking
at them. If, instead of our present arrangement, you had a high value, say 17s. 4d.,
expressed in significant figures in decimals, the mind does not carry them so easily and
correctly. A clerk must either look twice to the thing that he copies from before he
copies it, or in the haste of business he will misplace his figures, which is to be avoided. If
he looks twice at the copy that he takes it from, it is very likely that copying a column of
figures from one book into another he looks the second time at the line above or at the line
below the proper one, and so makes another mistake.
319. Have you any experience, either of the accounts of America or France, which will
enable you to say that those inconveniences are inconveniences that do result from the
decimal system; or have you any experience in foreign countries where the decimal system,
though not applied in the exact mode in which it is proposed by the parliamentary com-
mittee to apply it, is applied, to enable you to say that those inconveniences do occur 2—I
have not sufficient experience of those things to say anything about it; but as their integer
of account is so much less than ours there is no analogy between the cases.
320. If you find that in those important accounts of the dividends payable at the Bank
of England which are payable to 300,000 persons, all the calculations of dividends, and all
the fractions, are brought up to three decimal places, and that no such inconveniences as
you have supposed are stated to have occurred from that system of notation, would that
alter the opinion you have just now expressed ?–Those calculations are, Î understand, for
a peculiar purpose; that fractions of the penny, accruing on dividends but never inserted
on dividend warrants, may be ascertained, and the sum of them, plus the sum of the
dividend warrants, proved to balance the sum of the half year's interest on the public debt.
A calculation of this kind, during which the stock accounts are closed for several weeks,
may be performed by the numerous officers of the Bank with a degree of leisure which
cannot be hoped for in those transactions between man and man, in which payments of
money are going on at the rate of thirty thousand every minute of the day.
321. (Dord Overstone.) Supposing you had an account involving only pounds and pence,
not involving shillings, would you not consider that that account afforded less chance for
error, and greater facility for general correctness, than an account that involved shillings
also 3–I understand your Lordship to mean that the shillings are extinguished; that there
happen to be none in that account. Then I should say, certainly it would.
322. Is not this the reason why shillings are introduced into our system, that to pass
from the penny to the pound would involve so high a multiple of a penny as to give rise
to great inconvenience and chance of error —I have no doubt of it.
323. And the introduction of the shilling is for the purpose of facilitating the transition
in accounts of any calculations, both written and mental, in passing from the penny up to
the pound? —I conceive it to be so. It is also for the purpose of conciseness in the
Mr. Robert Shaw.
10th May 1856.
*mºmºsº
E 2
36 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. Robert Shaw,
10th May 1856.
expression of quantity. For instance, in the case of 14s., instead of writing 168 pence you
put 14s.
324. Is not the introduction of the shilling between the penny and the pound with a
view to facility, to accuracy and to conciseness of expression, analagous to the case
we suppose of the introduction of the florin and the cent between the mil and the pound
for the same purposes?–It is.
325. But as you have already agreed with me that an account which did not
involve shillings would be less inconvenient and less liable to error than one that does
involve them, does not it equally follow that the necessity of introducing the florin and
the cent must necessarily bring with it the chances of error and inconvenience which
would not exist, and do not exist, in decimal coinages that do not require the introduction
of such steps between the highest and lowest integer?—It certainly does; although what
has principally fixed itself upon my mind is, in reference to our own system, the great
value of being able to divide by four, by five, and by three, and by their multiples. The
point that your Lordship has just mentioned has not excited my inquiry so much as to be
able to speak upon it.
326. It appears from your evidence that the practical working of the decimal system,
involving 1,000 places between the highest and the lowest money of account, and the
arrangements necessary to meet that difficulty, has not been carefully considered by you ?
—What has most seized upon my mind is the advantages which we possess for expressing
quantity in all its varieties above every other system, decimal, or any other that can
be contrived. And it has seemed to me to be an indisputable point that the great object
of any subdivision, either of weights or anything else, is to express quantity in the smallest
ossible language, written or oral.
327. With the greatest variety and the greatest conciseness?—Yes; that that is the para-
mount object; because the calculation is once made and then done with ; but the figures
produced by that calculation are copied perhaps 1,000 times. . . Then, as the parts of
anything must be found by division, that series of numbers which enables you to divide
the concrete integer by the greatest variety of numbers affords the greatest possible
facility for describing the varieties of quantity in the most concise language. A great
deal has been said about some supposed advantage in calculating the price of articles
bought in numbers by decimals. If the price of everything that was calculated consisted
only of one denomination of money, there might be that advantage; but when we consider
that prices consist generally of more than one denomination of money, and that all
sums forming some proportion of the pound will consist generally of two, sometimes of
three figures, and that the quantity to be bought will consist of an arbitrary number,
and that those two or three figures of decimal subordinate values are to be multiplied
by that number, there are very few, I believe, that could do it by mental arithmetic.
In that case, the poor, many of whom cannot write or even read, would find it impossible
to make their calculations. Therefore I think the proposed decimal plan would be a
very great evil.
328. (Chairman.) You come then to the conclusion expressed in your pamphlet at
page 13, that in England, with regard to the subdivision of the integer, “Mathematical
“ science has evidently made in this cause exertions worthy of her most earnest studies.”
And again continuing, in page 14, “For the construction of money and the subdivision of
“ the integer, the pound sterling of its actual value, subdivided by 20, by 12, and by 4,
“ displays the perfection of mathematical science.” Again, in page 19, you say, “To
“ spread over the world this unrivalled system, to carry to all nations what is no feeble
“ help in commercial activity, and to have in what most occupies them one common
“ language, these are aims of which ambition may be proud.” Do you adhere to that
opinion?—Most unquestionably.
329 It has been suggested that in proportion as mechanical science and the cheapness
of production extend in any country, in that proportion ought the integer to be lowered for
the purpose of facilitating the purchase of commodities which by the hypothesis are lowered
in price; is it your opinion that as they continue to advance you ought to lower your
integer ?—No.
330. Is it your opinion that in a rich, advancing, and highly improving commercial
country it would be more natural to find the integer rising than falling 2—I would never
disturb the integer; that would produce such confusion in accounts, and in the value of
long subsisting contracts, mortgages and the like, that there would be perpetual discord.
331. (Mr. Hubbard.) You have laid a great deal of apparent stress upon the advantages
of the harmony which exists now between the progression of our weights and measures
and the progression of our coins in their divisions —I beg pardon; I was not aware of any
connexion between our weights and measures and our coins. It is a scientific supposition
that there ought to be some sort of relation between the weight of the coin and the weight
of the ounce; but I do not see any necessity for it.
332. I mean in this respect, that the binary division being applicable both to weights
and measures and to coins, and to the calculations, particularly of the lower classes, in their
dealings, affords a degree of facility which would not exist if the coinage were decimally
divided ?—That is my opinion. *
333. The advantages of the division of coins must be taken, I apprehend, with reference
to the purpose of coins, that purpose being the payment for quantities of commodities 2—
That is a material element in the case; but the division of coins I take to be more a thing
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 37
of mathematical inquiry, as to what will express the various quantities in the smallest
compass. It happens at present that the farthing is peculiarly and more exactly the coin
for the service of the humbler classes than can possibly be invented in any other way.
That being the case, and the divisional numbers 20, 12, and 4 being of such value, the
integer will mount up to the pound of its present amount.
334. I quite concur with the advantages which you seem to attach to the existence of a
coin of the value of a farthing, and I suppose you would infer from that, that if the farthing
were disused, and a coin substituted for it, say worth a farthing and a half, the poor would
lose the advantage that they now possess, by having in fact a larger minimum coin 2–Yes.
335. If, on the other hand, you substituted for the farthing a coin not a little more but a
very little less in value, do you apprehend that the new coin would have any inconvenience
in its use, as compared with the farthing?—Yes; it would have this inconvenience, that if
the farthing exactly meets the generality of the purchases of the poor, you would very
rarely be able to commute a certain number of your new coins for any other number of
farthings.
336. Now we will assume that the prices of commodities are accommodated to the new
coin, and assuming that to be practicable, I would call your attention to the amount of
variations in prices under the value of 8s of our present coinage, and under the value
of four florins of the new coinage, which would give to the poorer classes an opportunity
of buying at the lowest price per ounce, that of which the price per lb. can be introduced as
under 8s. in the one instance, or four florins in the other ? Between 8s. and four pence
there are 24 prices at which the pound can be divided exactly by 16. On the other hand,
between four florins and one cent and six mils there are 25 prices at which the pound is exactly
divisible by 16 —But then what has appeared to me all through is this; it is very easy
to imagine things, now sold at certain prices, to be sold at other prices; but these things
must be sold at the same price still.
337. Supposing the prices could be so adjusted, there would be the same facility of
division ?—Certainly. It is an arithmetical consequence, that where there would be 24 in
our present system there would be 25 in the new system ; but you must then alter the
price of the pound weight.
338. The price per pound would have to be slightly varied; but the price of a pound
would be rather more varied than you seem to anticipate. If you refer to the note in
page 8, you will see that the variations must be much wider than you perhaps think?
—The variations cannot be less than one twenty-fifth part, or four per cent. ; but that
ºth part of the gross price of the thing is so much deducted from the profit of the trader.
At this present state of competition in trade, the 25th part of the whole price of an article
is a very material object.
Adjourned to Tuesday next, at 12 o'clock.
Mr. Shaw has since addressed the following letter to the Right Hon. the Chancellor of
the Exchequer in illustration of his evidence —
DECIMAL COINAGE.
Right Honourable Sir, 2, Old Park House, Bristol, 27th Feb. 1857.
Observing in your speech last night allusion to the effects of a Decimal Coinage “on the eapen-
diture of the working classes,” and being one of the witnesses examined particularly on that point
by Her Majesty's Commissioners, I think it my duty most respectfully to convey to you one very
material remark, which the questions put to me by the Commissioners did not tend to elicit.
It appears in my evidence (q. 217, 218, 219, 220,) that the same prices now commonly charged
per lb., &c., for tea and other necessaries of life are, in a Decimal Coinage, represented by num-
bers which very rarely indeed will divide by 16 or 8 or even by 4, so as to make the price of an
ounce (or the small quantity usually bought by poor persons) without leaving a “remainder "-
some part of a mil; and that the tradesman must charge this “remainder” as a mil; to the
frequent loss of the poor.
Now it is supposed—perhaps universally—that if, as well as a Decimal Coinage, we had Decimal
Weights and Measures, this discrepancy would be removed. But this is altogether a mistake ; for,
in the close run of competition to sell at the lowest possible rate, the price of the 1b. &c., would
nine times in ten have mils annexed (as tea at 3s. 8d. = 1 fl. 8 c. 3 m. ; butter at 1s. 4d. = 6 c. 7m. ;
and so of other things); then, dividing the price of the lb. by 10, there would be a remainder, so
many tenth parts of a mil.
It is quite impossible to subdivide the English Pound Sterling in decimal gradations without
this inconvenience generally occurring. Where the “integer” is of lower amount, as in France,
Russia, &c., the case may be different ; and the great beauty of our subdivision is that the
“ shilling,” so far removed from the integer, and the coin most frequently used, is divisible by 48
(farthings); i.e. by 2, by 3, by 4, by 6, by 8, by 12, by 16, and by 24. The same value in
Decimals is 5 c. divisible only by itself and by 2.
It is a deep sense of the value of your Honours time, that restrains me from showing other
excellences of our system; but perhaps I may, without falling into that error, most respectfully
suggest that in the answer to question 212 I endeavour to give, concisely, the theory of metrical
subdivision.
I remain, &c. -
To the Right Hon. Sir G. C. Lewis, Bart, M.P., ROBERT SHAW,
Chancellor of the Exchequer, &c. &c.
Mr. Robert Shaw.
10th May 1856.
38 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Pr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
Tuesday, 13th May 1856.
The Lord MONTEAGLE OF BRANDON in the Chair.
Dr. JoHN EDWARD GRAY, examined.
339. (Chairman.) You have turned your attention, have you not, to the present system
of British coinage, and to the various propositions that have been made for its improve-
ment and alteration?—I have ; I am the author of “Decimal Coinage, what it ought and
what it ought not to be, by One of the Million,” and of several papers on the subject, in
the “Times,” “Spectator,” “Economist,” and other papers; and since the publication of
my pamphlet I have collected together all the works and papers scattered in periodicals
and other publications on all sides of the question, connected with the subject, that I could
procure, from the commencement of the discussion in 1775. This collection I have placed
at the disposal of the Commissioners, and I now see part of it on the table. I have also
made a collection of the smaller coins now current in different countries, both under a
decimal and a mixed system of coinage.
340. Have you formed a determinate opinion with respect to the present state of the
coinage, how far it answers its general purposes, or how far it requires re-consideration and
amendment?—My own impression certainly is that it is as perfect a coinage as we possibly
can have; our present system combines the greatest amount of advantages, as far as the
small trader is concerned, and seems also to offer every desirable facility for keeping
aCCOuntS.
341. So that in both points, as furnishing coins of circulation, and as furnishing coins of
account, you consider that it is a coinage with which the public have reason to be satisfied?
—I am decidedly of that opinion. I speak from practical knowledge of the coinage of
various countries, having travelled repeatedly on the continent in countries where the
decimal coinage is in use, and having had considerable experience in commercial transactions
with various countries, leading to much commercial correspondence.
342. That being the case an inquiry into the preferableness of one alteration or another
would be superseded by the prior question of whether any alteration was expedient —I
I should think so; it is one of the most important points which I look forward to with
reference to the commission, that it will fully and dispassionately enter into the question
whether it is desirable that any alteration should be made or not.
343. Will you be so good as to state to the Commissioners the characteristics of the
present coinage, which in your judgment establish its merits and its preferableness, dis-
tinguishing the question of circulation from the question of account 3–The divisions by 20,
by 12, and by 4, offer so many more divisions and subdivisions than any other system of
coinage that it appears to me to be the best for all purposes, especially for passing from hand
to hand, and also very superior to any other for the purposes of accounts, as the breaks
between the several divisions afford good resting-places for the mind. The current coins of
this country represent the whole, #, 4th, 4th, Tºth, ºath, Hºrth, Path, ºath, Hºth, 24th,
5 GTO 5 TS O 5 T5 TO
++rth, ###th, and the Hºth part of a pound. The whole, the +, +rd, 4th, 4th, Tºth,
4 S () 5 9 GTO I () 2 ()
+lºth, ºrth of a shilling. The whole, the #, 4th, 4th of a penny, and for some of our colonies
they have also coins struck at the Mint represented by #rd and rhyth of a penny ; that is
independent of the non-decimal and decimal coins struck at the Mint, entirely for the
colonies or dependencies of the Crown.
344. Do not those considerations which are involved in the reply with which you have
now favoured the Commissioners apply rather to the question of coins and their use for the
exchange of commodities than to the question of the record of payments 2—I understood
that the question before the Commissioners was the decimal coinage, not decimal accounts.
I have always looked upon coins to represent the money which was required in buying and
selling by retail in our daily transactions. In all other cases when you have large accounts,
as in wholesale or the higher commercial transactions, you have bank notes and bills, and
other materials for carrying on the currency. I think this is proved by the fact that we
have no coin in actual circulation larger than a sovereign ; there are five-sovereign pieces,
but they are scarcely in circulation. It appears to me that coins are made more for the
smaller or retail transactions of life, and are, therefore, chiefly important to the mass of the
people, and not to the bankers and wholesale dealers. A banker well observed to me, “We
do not care about gold or silver, as far as we are concerned; we would rather there was not
any ; cheques and notes answer all our purposes, coins are only required for retail traders.”
For this reason I cannot but regard the opinion of bankers on the subject of decimal coinage
as only of a secondary importance.
345. Do you consider it is possible to consider the state of the coinage of any country,
without considering as well the question of the payments and the exchanges for the
purposes of circulation, and the record of those payments as matters of account 7–It
appears to me that the present system affords under the best form all the necessary
materials for satisfactorily and easily reckoning of large accounts, and at the same time the
greatest possible facilities for the common trader.
346. The object of the question was to ascertain whether, in considering coins, it was
not necessary to have a relation also to the facility of recording the transactions for which
the coins were used, and whether, in considering the question of accounts, or the records of
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 39
transactions, it was not necessary also to refer to the coins which were used in those
transactions 2–It appears to me that the present coins afford every facility for that record.
Indeed, looking at the various systems of decimal coinages proposed, I am satisfied
that it affords much greater facilities than the system which has been recommended by the
Committee of the House of Commons for the purpose.
347. In stating the almost infinite number of divisions of which our present coinage is
susceptible, and which you have already put in evidence, is not it rather a matter of
possible advantage in the use of coins as instruments of exchange than in the use of coins
as leading to the record of the transactions themselves —The subdivisions I referred to
have no effect on recording transactions. Our system for that purpose is the most simple
possible; we have only to record pounds, shillings, and pence, and occasionally you may
say farthings, all which we have as coins of circulation as well as coins of account. The
advantages gained by the multiplicity and varied subdivision of our coins do not in the
least interfere with the simplicity of our system of recording accounts, while they afford
great facilities in paying various sums, so it appears to me, and in computing the prices of
articles mentally.
348. Taking into account that our fractional coin has a column in which even the
ordinary principle of reducing fractions to a common denominator is not adopted, but you
have two, and taking into account further that in the column of pence you have a different
principle, for there are two columns in the pence, and you have a different relation
between the two columns themselves as inter se and the carrying over from the second
column to the shillings, and taking into account that the same arises in the shillings,
namely, that it is a decimal proportion between the two columns of shillings, but a different
proportion where you carry it to the pounds, is not that a complication that will give a
preference to the decimal system 2–I think not; and I do not express only my own feeling
upon the subject. I have never had any difficulty, and I have never heard of any
difficulties in adding up the shillings, pence, and farthings. By all the information that
I can gain from others on the subject, speaking of commercial people, they have a strong
feeling that the result produced by these varied divisions is far less wearying than that
eternal numeration of 10, 10, 10, and is much less liable to error. But it would appear
that this is not a matter of necessity. Until a comparatively recent period, even in this
country there was no coin to represent a pound sterling (the nearest coin being a guinea),
while in several countries abroad, especially in Germany, as at Vienna, and even in the
trading towns, such as Hamburg, accounts are kept in “imaginary coins,” very different in
value and division from the current coins. There is no reason why those who prefer it
might not even keep their accounts in decimals of a pound, without any alteration in our
present admirable and convenient coin.
349. You stated, did you not, that your attention had been turned not only to the
British system of coinage, but to the system of continental coinage 2–Yes.
350. That being the case, does it appear to you that our system of coinage in England
is more or less, or equally convenient with that of the franc and the centime which
prevails in France?—I should think that they were equally well understood by the people
who are in the habit of using them ; but I wish to draw the attention of the Commissioners
to the fact that the dollar and the cent, or the franc and centime system, are not the decimal
system which has been urged forward in England by the advocates of the change, by the
witnesses before the parliamentary committee. They have urged forward another system
which bears no relation whatever to any continental system, at least, I cannot perceive any
similarity, and that is one of the fallacies by which many of the people, who do not object
to a change, have been deceived. I am quite sure that people have been deceived by the
experience of the French coinage, into thinking that therefore another decimal coinage,
though based on a different system, would afford the same facilities; but I am satisfied
that it would not be found so in relation to a system so fundamentally different as that
proposed; although there might possibly not be any great difficulty in mercantile transactions,
where the greater part of the sums were measured by pounds, it would produce such
immense difficulties in the pecuniary transactions of the smaller traders, which form nine-
tenths or even a larger proportion of the dealings of the whole population, that I do think it
would inflict an enormous evil upon the public themselves.
35i. The object of the question was to obtain information from a witness who, like you,
has turned his mind to the comparison of the British system of pounds, shillings, pence, and
farthings with the continental system; can you state whether, taking the question of comparison
between the franc and the centime system and our own system of pounds, shillings, pence, and
farthings, you consider that they are either equal or that there is a superiority on the one side
or the other ?—I think in practical use, in the countries where people are used to each, they
are pretty nearly equally well understood, what appears to me to be a far Superior system to
the franc and centime, is the dollar system of America; but for general purposes I do not see
the great superiority of one or the other. But in our case we are to consider that to
induce us to make a change there should be a decided superiority, as there is a great evil in
any change of the kind, which will produce very considerable difficulty, confusion, and
consequent want of confidence in the mass of the people.
352. I need not ask you whether the possible evil resulting from the change must not be
increased or limited by the further consideration, whether that inconvenience is the temporary
inconvenience, which always results from laying down one long acknowledged system and
adopting a new one, or whether it is inherent in the nature of the change, and therefore of a
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
E 4
40 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray, more permanent nature?—The change which has been proposed by the Committee of the
House of Commons and supported by the Decimal Association, is such as no country has as
13th May 1856. yet attempted; no country has as yet adopted the decimal coinage, except under peculiar
circumstances, such as a most depreciated and confused state of its currency, or as imme-
diately following a revolution or some other violent alteration, when the public mind Wà.S
prepared for great changes, or else it has been forced upon them by a conquering army;
but even then how have they proceeded? Every country that has adopted a decimal
system has based it on the small current coin of the people ; they have never altered the
smaller coin, analogous to our penny, in the least. Thus, in France the sous become five
centimes, and the halfpenny of the United States, became the cent or 100th of the
dollar. The livre of France became the franc, with only an alteration of one-eightieth,
whereas, if the system proposed by the committee is carried into effect here, it will
alter the value of all the coins below sixpence, destroy the poor man's unit of all his
purchases, the penny, and so break up and destroy all his previous notions and habits, that
I cannot but believe that it will take an exceedingly long time for the transition, and cause
most serious confusion in all our daily commercial dealings.
353. (Lord Overstone.) You state that it would alter the value of all coins below six-
pence; will it not also alter the value of all the denominations involving the multiples
of a penny above sixpence 2–Yes; undoubtedly it will, and it will also change the name of
every coin that exists except the pound.
354. (Chairman.) You have stated as a general law the circumstances under which a
change like the decimal change has been adopted in countries in Europe and America, how
does the change which has taken place in Switzerland bring it within that category 2–The
change that has recently taken place in Switzerland is merely the revival of a former
change. Napoleon, in 1803, forcibly introduced the decimal coinage into Switzerland,
which in 1803 formed a part of the French Empire, and therefore had the same coinage;
whom she declared her independence she went back to her old coinage, but the multitude
of travellers in that country generally going from France took with them French money,
and the consequence was, that the hotel-keepers kept all their accounts in French francs;
in fact, however, the change in Switzerland, going back to the French franc, was merely
going back, in consequence of peculiar circumstances, to that which had been forced
upon them many years before. From the edition of Murray's handbook for 1846,
an idea may be formed of the state of coinage before the last change. “There is hardly a
“ country in Europe which has so complicated a currency as Switzerland; almost every
‘ canton has a coinage of its own, and those coins that are current in one canton will
“not pass in the next; let the traveller, therefore, be cautious how he overloads himself
‘ with more small change than he is sure of requiring. Detailed tables of Swiss coins are
“given below, but it is scarcely worth the traveller's while to perplex himself with their
“ intricacies, since he will find French napoleons and francs current nearly all over Switzer-
“land.” The general and uniform introduction of the French system must have been a boon
to Switzerland under such circumstances; I have heard this change cited as an example that
we might follow, but we have not been prepared by the previous use of the system.
French coins do not circulate here, and we already possess a uniform and most perfect
system, as well as the most beautiful coins of any country in the universe.
355. Was not the state of things antecedent to the late assimilation of the decimal
coinage throughout the whole of the federal states, wholly independent of anything but
the free will of the people of Switzerland themselves, and the adoption of what they
considered a better thing for a worse?—The last change may have been, but it was the
adoption of a system which, by reason of travellers continually carrying the French coinage
thither, had been made quite consistent with the habits of the people; at the same time, the
change in Switzerland is not so perfect as one would expect; even now postage stamps
are sold in Battzen, and it is much disliked and resisted, especially in the German
cantons. I have already stated that in all the countries where such a change has
been made, it was always where there has previously existed a confused and complicated
state of the coinage, or a depreciated currency, or both, or the people had been forced to
adopt it by the will of a conqueror; these circumstances were all combined in Switzerland;
there was a different currency in almost every little state, and it was a great boon to them
to obtain a uniform state of currency, instead of a depreciated and varied state, hence the
change was more easily made in Switzerland.
356. How would you apply your general reasoning, upon the causes of the adoption of
decimal coinage, to the State of Sardinia?—Equally with Switzerland, Sardinia formed,
at the period of its first introduction, a part of the French Empire. I will give you a
French account of the introduction of the decimal coinage into Sardinia. “Lorsgue le
“Piemont fut occupé par l'armée Française, il prit le nom de Nation Piemontaise; ensuite
“ celui de Gaule Subalpine ; enfin, cette contrée de l'Italie fut réunie à la France.
“ Pendant le temps ou le Piemont a €té connu sous le nom de nation Piemontaise on y a
“fabriqué des demi écus a la méme taille que les monnaies précèdentes, plate 5* No. 15.
“Les monnaies qui ont été fabriquées a l’époque, ou ce pays commença a porter le nom de
“ Gaule Subalpine, sont la pièce de 20 francs (pl. 3, No. 26) et celle de 5 francs (Pl. 5. No. 16)
“C'est une loi de la commission executive qui à ordonné la fabrication de ces deux pièces.
“La pièce de 20 francs dite Marengo, est au titre de 0.9 decimes du poids de 5 deniers
G
G
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 41
“ 0.19, et la pièce de 5 francs au mème titre et poids que celle de France. Aujourd'hui
“ (1806) le systeme monétaire de l'empire Français est établi dans ce pays.”
357. At present is the law with respect to the coinage of Sardinia identical with that
which Napoleon introduced 2–Exactly, quite identical; the French franc even passes in
Sardinia; and I have some coins of Sardinia here. The decimal system of coinage was
introduced into Venice in 1800; Sardinia (La Gaule Subalpine) in 1802, and here Napoleon
named the piece of 20 francs the “Marengo,” in memory of the battle of that name, which
reduced the Piedmontese to French subjugation; in Switzerland (Helvetic Republic) in
1803; Holland in 1806, (Holland, including Belgium, being a part of France from 1810 to
1814;) Westphalia in 1809, the king Joseph Bonaparte having coined gold and silver
pieces in 1808, 1809, 1810, and 1812; yet this country at the peace returned to its old
mixed currency. The extension of the decimal system on the continent of Europe is almost
entirely owing to its having been overrun by Napoleon, and the desire of Napoleon by means
of French coins to perpetuate his personal glory, and also to satisfy the vanity and desire
for universalism so prominently exhibited by the French nation at the time of the revolution,
a feeling by no means extinct even now. For this purpose the French Emperor carried
with him a mint, and as soon as any country submitted to his arms, he “reformed” the
coinage, imposing on it the French decimal system. Indeed it is curious to observe the
uniformity and pertinacity with which this idea was carried out. At Baden in 1808
Napoleon made it an article in a secret treaty that a coin should be struck with his head, as
Emperor of the Bund; a five-franc piece was consequently struck, which is valued in a
French numismatic work as worth 20 pounds sterling; indeed it is believed that the
Grand Duke only struck a single example, and the die was then broken. (See Bonneville,
Ency. t. 1, f. 3.) The system certainly eventually took root in several of these countries,
but then we must recollect that many of the difficulties experienced at its first introduction
had passed away by length of use, and that the recurrence to the old system after the peace
would have been a recurrence to fresh difficulties and confusion affecting a new race of
men; so that when we speak of the French system having been adopted by Belgium,
Holland, Switzerland, Sardinia, referring to the latter (not the former) period of this
adoption, we should recollect that these countries were once a part of the French empire,
and consider the circumstances under which it had been previously introduced, the length
of time that they had been previously inured to it, and in most cases also the intricacies
and disadvantages of the confused and complicated system which had preceded its intro-
duction. On this head Mr. Adams observes, “During the conquering period of the French
“Revolution, the new system of French weights and measures was introduced into those
“ countries which were united to the empire. Since the severance of those countries from
“France it has been discarded, excepting in the kingdom of the Netherlands, where by two
“ ordinances of the king it has been confirmed, with certain exceptions and modifications,
“ particularly with regard to the coins.” P. 21.
358. On the whole you consider that it would be most expedient to adhere to the
present system of coinage in England; but if a decimal coinage was adopted, such objections,
in your judgment, apply to what is commonly called the pound and mil scheme, that viewing
it in itself you consider that it would be inexpedient and imperfect?—Exactly so, and
exceedingly injurious. I have drawn up a statement of my opinion of the two systems,
which I beg to lay before the Commission. It was first issued in September 1854.
A Decimal Coinage, as distinguished from our present mixed duodecimal and vicesimal
one, requires that all the coins of account should proceed in a regular decimal progression;
the one being equal to ten of the next below it, so that, when accompanied by a decimal
system of weights and measures, all sums will only have to be performed by simple instead
of compound arithmetic. To induce the people in general to make so important a change
in their habits, all unnecessary complication, and all change in the value of the existing
coins, ought to be sedulously avoided, so as to let the new system work its way by its
simplicity and evident advantage.
Two systems have been proposed, the one dividing the pound into 1,000 farthings or
mils, the other counting the pence by tens, and having coins of one or more ten-pennies.
The advantages and disadvantages of these systems may be thus summed up :—
The Pound and Māl Scheme.
1. It alters the value and name of all the
The Penny and Tenpenny Plan.
It does not in the least degree alter the
coins below the value of sixpence, and the
name of the shilling and sixpence.
2. It doubles the amount of the coin of
account next to the pound, and more than
doubles the value of the coin of account next
below that; hence it requires, in all accounts,
attention to the lowest coin of account, mak-
ing the third column of decimals, and will
have the effect of increasing the price of all
articles of common consumption.
3. The lowest coin of account is not suf-
ficiently small for the purposes of trade, and
F
present value of a single coin now in circula-
tion, and requires no alteration of names.
It reduces the amount of the second coin
of account by one-sixth ; and as it does not
alter the value of the lower coins of account,
it does not necessitate any change in the
manner of keeping accounts.
The penny may be divided into cents, or
tenths of a penny; it may be divided, in
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
42
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
especially for exchanges; and it cannot be
divided without a very large number of
figures.
4. It requires the immediate withdrawal
of all the copper coins, of the three- and
four-penny pieces, the crown, and the half-
crown among the silver coinage, and event-
ually requires an entire change in the whole
silver and copper coinage.
5. It requires the introduction of several
new copper and silver coins, as the 1, 2, 3
and 5 mils in copper, and the 10 and 20 mils
in silver.
6. It requires four coins of account, or the
system is not decimal, but millesimal.
7. It requires an abstruse decimal system
of notation, difficult to be comprehended by
the less informed, and involving great risk
of error in its use.
8. The accounts being kept in farthings or
mils (which are farthings reduced in value),
it often requires more figures than the
present system to express it.
9. It requires that all duties, tolls, stamps,
postages, and the wages of soldiers, sailors,
and others, and indeed all contracts between
man and man which are estimated in pence or
farthings, should be adjusted (that is, altered)
by Act of Parliament or private agreement;
and it alters the present price of bread, meat,
sugar, vegetables, soap, calico, and of all arti-
cles of universal consumption; as they cannot
be accurately or correctly represented by the
proposed new coins.
10. It retains the pound sterling, which
is proposed to be divided into 10 florins, 100
cents, and 1,000 mils. Indeed some of the
advocates of this system propose to change
the name of the pound to a unit sterling
(Pasley, Obs. 145); others recommend that
the pound should be altered to l pound and
10 pence; and others that the pound should
be abolished, and its place taken by the half-
Sovereign. -
11. It necessarily leads to an alteration
in the gold standard of value, inasmuch as
the present price of an ounce of standard
gold cannot be expressed by it with fewer
than five places of decimals. It also requires
the debasement of the gold standard more
than one and one-half per cent, and a depre-
ciation of the copper coinage four per cent.
12. The new coins offer no facility of
comparison with those of other countries
that have adopted a decimal system, as not
a single foreign coin of those countries bears
any approximate relation to the florin, cent,
or mil; and as the value of the smaller coins
of account is changed, it requires an entirely
different plan (and set of tables) to calculate
the exchanges between the English and
foreign moneys.
13. It does not afford the means of accu-
rately computing sums, so as to enable any
one to balance accounts calculated by it, with
sums calculated by the present English coin-
calculations, into mils (or 100ths of a penny),
so as to offer advantages in calculating profits
and exchanges not to be ſound in any other
coinage in Europe.
It does not require the withdrawal of a
single coin now in use.
It will only require the introduction of two
coins, viz. a five-penny and ten-penny coin
in silver; and these need only be added as
the old and worn shillings and sixpences are
called in to be re-coined.
It only requires two coins of account,
agreeably with the universal currency of all
countries in which a decimal system is in
llS6.
It does not require a decimal rotation,
except when a sum less than a penny is
indicated; and then that may be marked by
a vulgar fraction, except where it is wanted
in a calculation.
The accounts being kept in pence, it does
not require more figures than the present
system.
It does not require the alteration, by Act
of Parliament or otherwise, of any toll, &c.,
or of the price of any article of consumption;
as the value of the penny and farthing, or
any other coin, is not altered.
It does not involve the throwing out of
use of the pound sterling; it only renders
it no longer a coin of account, like our
present half-sovereign, crown, half-crown,
and florin. There can be no reason why
the pound should not be as much used in
conversation and commercial transactions as
those coins, or as the napoleon among the
French, the eagle and half and quarter
eagles among the Americans, &c.
It does not change the present gold
standard of value, as the sovereign will be
equivalent to 24 tenpences. It leaves the
subject of the currency untouched, as alien
to the question at issue. See my “Decimal
Coinage, what it ought and what it ought
not to be,” p. 26.
The tenpenny coin affords the greatest
facilities for comparison with the coins of
other countries having a decimal system,-
the franc of France, Belgium, Switzerland,
and Italy being nearly equivalent to one, the
florin of Holland and Germany to two, and
the dollar of America to five of these coins:
and as the value of the penny and its tenth
is not altered, the method and even tables
now in use for calculating exchanges and
averages will not require any alteration.
It affords a correct and easy means of
computing by simple arithmetic the sums
required in commerce, and especially the
computation of interest and exchanges; and
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 43
age, or by any foreign system of currency.”
This evil might be partly avoided by using
more than three places of decimals, as has
been the custom with actuaries and others
who have used the common tables of deci-
mals for the purposes for which Mr. Babbage
recommended the decimal coinage; but the
advocates of this system restrict all their
tables to three places only, discarding all
lower decimals, which on small sums make
an important per-centage.
14. It must be suddenly introduced by
Act of Parliament and Proclamation, and
cannot be used concurrently with our present
system, as the small coins of the proposed
enables the accounts kept by it to be balanced
with accounts kept by the present English
coinage, or by any foreign system of cur-
rency. Indeed it presents the most perfect
decimal (or, if Mr. De Morgan prefers it,
all ten) system of coinage and accounts.
It may be used concurrently with the
present system, as the coins all work per-
fectly together, and may be gradually
introduced as found advantageous.
and present system will not work together
without creating great confusion and loss,
producing general distrust.
This statement makes it quite clear, that there is no difficulty in the way of having a
simple system of decimal coinage and accounts, without any compulsory change whatever,
individuals being allowed to present their accounts either in tenpences or in the £ s. d. as
at present. I believe there is no disinclination on the part of the Government to allow this
experiment, which has been recommended by the leading commercial journal (see Times,
April 21 and Sept. 20). On the other hand, the Government, having before their minds
the public excitement at Athens in the time of Aristophanes, and at Dublin in the time of
Swift, when only a slight alteration in the coinage was undertaken, and being aware of the
numerous legislative changes required “to adjust’’ the taxes, tolls, wages, outstanding bills,
and promissory notes, &c., to the altered coinage, to the debasement of the standard, to the
depreciation of the copper coinage, and consequent confiscation of private property,+
will not willingly incur the responsibility of proposing the extraordinary and, I may say,
unjust changes which the system recommended by the late Parliamentary Committee
involves; which are wholly dependent on the assumption that the pound must be retained
as the unit, on the erroneous idea that it is beneficial for the richer commercial classes;
no other nation in the world, using a decimal system, having a unit of one-fourth that
amount.
Under these circumstances it is clear that the prejudice or sentiment in favour of the
pound at all cost, fostered by the one-sided Report of the Committee, and the proceedings
of the “Decimal Association ” of Merchants, now avowedly founded for the purpose of
coercing the Government into adopting the Committee's scheme, is the chief and indeed
only reason why we cannot immediately have the advantage of this so-much-desired change
in our coinage, which promises to be so advantageous to our commerce, and to give such
facilities towards the education of the people.
I consider the keeping the penny intact as absolutely necessary for the interest of the poor
and of all those interested in household economy; at the same time the penny affords the
merchant the only means of keeping his accounts in a decimal system with the accuracy
which is so essential to commercial credit; the using it as the basis of a decimal calculation
gives him easier means, without any alteration of his present system, of calculating interest,
exchanges, averages and profits, and increased facility for carrying on commerce with other
countries using a decimal currency; and thus it appears that the interest of the poor, the
housekeeper, and the “merchant prince” is identical in advocating the penny scheme. Under
these circumstances it is surely not necessary for the Government, as required by the
Association, to use “a slight exertion of arbitrary power” to bring the question to a satis-
factory settlement.
P.S. The late Mr. Laurie, the author of “Universal Exchange Tables” and several other
commercial works, the only witness before the late Parliamentary Committee practically and
commercially acquainted with the decimal system,--whom they employed to prepare tables
on their plan, which occupy several pages of the folio report, after having calculated the
tables, when he was examined a second time, ventured to suggest as the result of the
experience he had thereby acquired, that a smaller unit than a pond would be more useful;
and shortly after the publication of the report he was so convinced of the advantages of the
tempenny unit, which I had suggested to the Committee, but which they did not publish,
* This can easily be established by comparing the results of the various calculations cited as examples by the
Committee, with the table of decimals of a pound Sterling, printed at p. 64 of the report. Mr. Franklin appears well
aware of this, for he gives a perfectly correct table of the equivalents of mils and pence, but it is made so by discarding
decimals and adopting vulgar fractions, showing that by decimals it could only have been an approximation.—
Report, p. 141. g tº e & ſº e
The advocates of the mil system make light of this objection, stating that it will only be sensible during the
transition period, and that when the system is firmly established and used by all persons (if this ever should be the
case) the errors will disappear, or at least be no longer felt. But they forget that merchants who have commercial
transactions with other countries, where the mil system is not in use, will find that there is always a difference between
their accounts and those rendered by their English correspondents, and vice versá; and therefore to them this
inaccuracy will be a permanent evil, and one scarcely to be borne by a commercial country like England.
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
F 2
44 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
that he advertised a work, to be entitled “Decimals Deciphered; being decimal monies of
account, and coins of circulation, explained; showing, that if the recommendation of the
select Committee of the House of Commons be adopted, dividing the pound into 1,000 mils,
the prices of every kind of merchandise now charged by shillings, pence, and farthings, will
be changed, and only in a very small proportion will equivalents be obtained by the decimal
pound; besides, taxes, parish rates, mileages, and other fiscal assesments, would be disturbed ;
hence innumerable grievances would arise : and showing that by dividing the pound into coins
of 10d. (being founded upon the penny), a perfect decimal system is obtained, and precise
equivalents for every coin of sterling money. This division affords, more advantages than
any other that can be suggested. Also showing, that by dividing the pound into coins of
4s. 2d., 2s. 1d. and 1s. 8d., perfect decimal systems are obtained, and precise equivalents for
every coin of sterling money : with tables of merchandise per yard, piece, &c., produce per
cwt. by sterling, and equivalents in tenpennies, income tax, universal profits, &c. &c.; to
which is added pounds, shillings, pence and farthings, reduced into twenty-eight of the
principal countries of the world, the division of their monies, and value in decimals of the
pound; also one million of the integers of each, in sterling, &c. &c.”
“No division of the pound affords so many advantages as this, both for monies of account
and coins of circulation.
“Ist. It gives precise equivalents for all coins of sterling money, in tenpennies, and the
reverse, not one of which need be withdrawn, but only require to be placed, like prices of
merchandise, wages, rents, tolls, taxes, &c., in decimal numeration; thus neither public nor
private interests would suffer by the change.
“2nd. It would meet the requirements of the wholesale trade, by simple fractions instead
of the minute divisions of the penny, now indispensable, from the infinite variety of prices,
namely ºd. = 14 cent, a fraction less than 3d. per cwt.-4 cent per lb. ; thus in professions,
and every branch of trade, calculations would be immensely simplified and facilitated, Cus-
toms and Excise duties collected, and time and labour saved in the Post Office, and other
departments of the State.
“3rd. It would place our currency in harmony with the monies of those countries which
have adopted a decimal division,-France, Holland, Russia, Italy, America, &c., all of which
have their integers divided into 100 parts, two columns of figures in books and accounts,
and two figures in the fractions.
“4th. The exchange of foreign monies would be obtained by tenpennies, and the reverse
which cannot be done by the pound, in consequence of its very great value, as compared
with the coins of account of other nations. France gives 25-224 francs for £1 ; = 1.05%
franc for a tenpenny, and 95 cents of a tenpenny for a franc. Holland gives 12 florins for
£1; =50 cents of a florin for a tempenny, and two tenpennies for a florin. The effect is
reciprocal.
“5th. No new coin would at first be required except the cent, about the value of the centime
of France, and smallest coin of many other countries; which proves so beneficial to their
poor.
The poor of our country would have great cause to rejoice in having such a coin,
as they now suffer wrong in so many of their dealings.”
Mr. Laurie, a few days before his death, published “A Practical Analysis of the com-
parative merits of the One Pound, and Tenpence, as the ruling integer of a Decimal Currency
for the United Kingdom,” in which he further illustrated all the foregoing positions, and
added some new arguments from commercial experience.
We cannot have a stronger proof of the commercial value of the penny system.
vº) penny sy
359. (Lord Overstone.) I presume you consider coins to be instruments formed for the
purpose of facilitating the adjustment of retail transactions among the community at
large?—Undoubtedly.
360. That is to say, they are instruments to facilitate the processes of paying and receiving
for small quantities?—Yes; I have already so stated my opinion. For larger sums other
means, such as cheques, bills, &c., are generally used, and are more convenient.
361. Does it come within your experience, or the observations which you have heard
made by others, that our existing coins are in any respect deficient in convenience for the
general purposes of paying and receiving 2—Certainly not; I never heard any complaint.
I should say that, comparing those with the coins of any other country, they offer the
greatest facilities.
362. You do not think that any practical difficulties are now experienced which would
justify the attempt to alter the existing system of coinage for the purpose of remedying
those inconveniences?—I feel that there is no reason for it, and never have been able to
understand how any agitation of the subject could have arisen, for go where I will I hear
every body say, “I hope it will not be introduced in our time;” that is the general
feeling. Women, especially, as a body deprecate any change, foreseeing the inconvenience
it must occasion them in their daily transactions, on whom the current outlay of almost
every household in the kingdom depends. The following is a list of the articles exhibited
in a mercer's window, High-street, Islington, Tuesday, May 13th 1856, with the prices in
our present coinage, and how they will be marked should the pound and mil system come
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 45
º I can well conceive the feeling of the lady customers on seeing the goods so
marked. *
Price under Price under
Article. Price. New Coinage. Article Price. New Coinage.
S. d. jl. c. m. 30 s. d. J. c. m.
A shawl - 17 6 - 8 7 5 or '875 Silk dress, p. yd. 0 0 93 - 0 4 0 , , '040
Do. - 18 6 - 9 2 5 , .925 Do. , - 0 1 0} - 0 5 3 , '053
Do. - 19 6 - 9 7 5 , .975 | Lawn , - 0 1 0 – 0 5 0 , .050
A mantle - 14 - 7 3 7 , 737 Robe , - 0 0 6; - 0 2 8 , '028
Do. - 7 9 - 3 8 7 . .387 Do. , - 0 0 7# - 0 3 2 , '032
A shawl - 8 9 - 4 3 7 ,, .437 Do. p. dress 0 8 11 - 4 4 5 ,, .445
A mantle - 9 6 - 4 7 5 ,, .475 Silk , - 1 18 6 - 91 9 2 5 491' 925
Do. - 13 9 - 6 8 7 ,, . 687 Robe , - 0 5 11 - 2 9 5 , 295
A shawl - 12 9 - 6 3 7 , 637 Do. - 0 4 9 – 2 3 7 , -237
Do. - 11 6 - 5 7 5 ,, . 575 Do. – 0 6 11 - 3 4 5 ,, .345
A mantle - 9 6 - 4 7 5 ,, .475 Do. - 0 6 9 – 3 3 7 , 337
A parasol - 2 94 - I 3 9 ,, . 139 Do. – () 7 6 - 3 7 5 ..., 375
Do. - 9 6 - 4 7 5 , .475 Ribbon, per yd. 0 1 23 - 0 6 1 , . 061
Do. - 3 6 - 1 7 5 , 175 Do. , - 0 0 93 - 0 4 0 ,, .040
Do. – 2 11 - 1 4 5 , 145 Do. , - 0 1 0# - 0 5 3 , '053
Do. - 3 11 - 1 9 5 ,, . 195 Do. , - 0 1 0} - 0 5 2 , '052
Do. - 5 11 - 2 9 5 ,, .295 Do. , - 0 0 104 - 0 4 3 2, '043
Do. - 4 11 - 2 4 5 , .245 Do. , - 0 0 63 - 0 2 8 , .028
Do. - 6 11 - 3 4 5 ,, .345 Do. , - 0 0 73 - 0 3 2 , '032
Do. – 5 9 - 2 8 7 ,, . 287 Do. , – 0 0 84 - 0 3 6 , 036
Do. – 2 3} - 1 1 4 , 114 Do. , - 0 0 5; - 0 2 3 , '023
Do. – 5 6 - 2 7 5 , 275 Do. , - 0 0 23 – 0 1 1 , '011
Do. - 3 9 - 1 8 7 , 187 Do. , - 0 0 103 - 0 4 2 , '042
Silk dressp.yd 3 64 - 1 8 9 ,, . 189 Do. , - 0 0 4} - 0 1 9 ,, .019
Coburg , 0 83 - 0 3 6 , '036 | Feathers, each - 0 1 6 - 0 7 5 ,, . O75
Mr. Miller (Journ. Soc. Arts, 5 May 1854), declares “the penny system annihilates
everything else but the penny. The pound, the shilling, and the farthing are nowhere
visible, nor any of their combinations as represented in the coins; besides, the number
required would render it intolerable.” He might with more justice have observed, that
the pound and mil system, as proved by the preceding list, does annihilate everything
else, but the pound. The shilling, the penny, and the farthing are nowhere visible, nor any
of their combinations as represented in coins, except the florin ; and as to the number of
figures, in the very case which he has specially selected for illustration, there is only a
difference of two figures; and if his type had had another penny there would only have
been one, (viz.: 900 9 9}=216,11725), but generally the penny requires fewer figures.
363. If any alteration takes place in the existing system of coinage, it must be for the
purpose, not of facilitating the adjustment of transactions, but for the purpose of rendering
account keeping more convenient?--Undoubtedly, for no other reason; and I feel satisfied
that it would fail even in this respect.
364. Do you think that it is either a reasonable or scientific process to modify our coins
for the purpose of facilitating our accounts, or to modify our accounts in conformity
with our existing coins?--I see no reason for any change, nor do I think it desirable in
any form.
365. Coins you consider to be the fractional parts into which the integer of account is
broken for the purpose of facilitating retail transactions 2–Yes.
366. Is it not, therefore, desirable that those coins should be susceptible of division into
the greatest number of clear and clean parts?—Undoubtedly; that is the advantage of
our system, that it does afford you the means of dividing evenly into so many parts—
many more parts than the decimal coinage ever can
367. For the purpose of obtaining that result, is it not necessary to take as the basis of
our coinage that number which is capable of being divided into the greatest number of
clean parts without fractions?—Undoubtedly.
368. Bearing that principle in view, which number do you conceive best answers to
that, the number 12 or the number 10?–12, undoubtedly. You can divide it by so many
divisors.
369. The number 10 and the number 12 are equally divisible into their own Separate
units or by the number two 2–Yes.
370. But beyond that the number 10 is not divisible by 3, 4, 62–No.
371. But the number 12 is?—Yes. That is one of the great advantages. In countries
which have a decimal coinage they always measure prices by tens and fives; sometimes,
indeed, the five is halved, as in 24 centimes. I never saw an account stated in any other
number of centimes; you may have it in a merchant's bill, but in common bills you have
no other subdivision than a half and a quarter of the decime or second coin, and the
quarter being 2%, and so marked, is a vulgar and not a decimal fraction.
372. Do not you consider the shilling and the penny to be the great coins of account,
according to the habits of the lower classes ";the people?—I do consider them to be really
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
46 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
their great coins of account. When we consider that the wages of nine-tenths of the
population are far below a sovereign per week, how can it be possible to regard the pound
as an important measure to them 2 nearly everything they buy is bought at prices fixed by
the penny, bread, meat, potatoes, sugar, calico, and a variety of articles, are bought by
the penny—the penny is their fixed unit and that of the enormous majority, far more than
nine-tenths of the population. With our present coins the price of meat, bread, and other
necessaries of life increase in price by a halfpenny or even by farthings, but if the pound
and mil scheme were to come into use, the increase would be from 20 to 25 mils and so on,
every alteration in prices being equal at least to nearly five farthings and often to ten.
373. You would consider it a great objection to any alteration in the system of our
coinage if it should disturb in any respect the value of the penny ?– Undoubtedly. My
strong feeling on that point was what made me take an interest in the question. I do feel
that it would be so great a hardship upon the people that I consider it my duty to do my
best to save them from what I believe to be a great and uncalled-for infliction of hardship
upon those who are least able to bear it.
374. With regard to the point next in importance to preserving the unaltered value of
the penny, do you not consider that the preservation of the shilling, with the greatest
facility of subdivision, is of the next degree of importance to the public interests of the
lower classes?—Undoubtedly; as the penny is the basis of all the trade of the retail
traders, of household affairs, and especially of those of the poorer, and therefore the
largest class of the community, so the shilling (which according to the pound and mil
scheme is no longer to be a coin of account and to be called a half florin) is the most
important coin, indeed it may be said to be the unit of the commercial classes and
wholesale dealers, of ship-insurance brokers and stockbrokers. All the more important
articles, especially those of general consumption, such as corn, flour, sugar, tallow,
meal, butter, hemp, oil, resin, coals, salt, &c., are sold wholesale at so many shillings per
quarter, sack, cwt. or ton, as may be seen by consulting any price-current. The insurance
brokers take all risks at so many shillings per cent. (at least up to 100 shillings or 5l.),
and facts like these prove most distinctly that it is a great mistake to consider the
pound as the unit of general commerce. In the same manner the price of thefunds, shares,
&c., is always denoted on the Stock Exchange as pounds, and halves, quarters and eighths
of a pound, the two latter coins unknown to the decimal series ; and this fact proves that
the sgnatures of the chairmen of the Stock Exchange and of Lloyd's to the city petition
are to be regarded only as the individual signature of those gentlemen, and not as repre-
senting the feeling of the members of those institutions; and the same thing may be
further proved by the summoning of almost any of the members of those bodies, the great
majority of whom are, I have the strongest reason to believe, opposed to any change.
375. Applying the principles taat we have already alluded to as to the divisibility of
12 and 10 to the divisibility of the shilling, if the shilling is divided into 12 under the
present system, contrasted with the divisibility of the shilling into 10 parts under the
decimal system, will not the result be that under the decimal system the only division that
you will have of the shilling will be half or sixpence, whereas under the present division of
the shilling you have, beyond the sixpence, the third part giving 4d., the fourth part giving
3d., the sixth part giving 2d., the eighth part giving 14d., the twelfth part giving ld., the
sixteenth part giving #d., the twenty-fourth part giving #d., and the forty-eighth part
giving d. 2—Undoubtedly. And it is to be borne in mind that all those parts bear upon
our weights and measures, and the manner in which people buy and sell, and especially on
the manner in which the retail traders and people at large count the price of the articles
they purchase or sell.
The Rev. Joshua Leavitt, editor of the Independent of New York (U.S.), states to
the Committee of the Canadian Assembly in April 1855 : “I have no doubt of the
“superiority of the decimal system for the purposes of accounts. But for all the purposes
“of small circulation, in marketing, huckstering, and the like, I am persuaded that a
“ duodecimal currency, like that of England, or like that which formerly prevailed in the
“city of New York, is far preferable. These small transactions of daily life outnumber
“ the transactions of commerce almost infinitely, and it seems impossible to make a decimal
“ currency as convenient in these as the old currency. One reason is that the decimal
“ currency admits of only one aliquot division, that is, into halves. The shilling can be
“ divided into halves, quarters, thirds, sixths, and twelfths, and if it were needed a coin of
“ the value of two-thirds of a shilling would be found manageable. In all the countless
“ small transactions which I have referred to, and in which every man is employed many
“ times every day, this capability of subdivision is of great convenience. We are constantly
“buying a half thing, or a quarter, the eighth, the one-third, and so on. If the price is a
“dollar, we can make the charge for one-half, for one-quarter, and of one, two, or more
“pence, with our decimal currency; but we cannot pay the equal price of one-third, one-sixth
“one-eighth, one-twelfth, or any other fractional part. If the price is half a dollar we can
“only pay for one-half, one-fifth, or one-tenth. If the price is a quarter dollar we can pay
“for no aliquot division whatever. This is a constant inconvenience, and can be got along
“ with in no other way than by disregarding small differences.”—p. 48.
376. You feel satisfied then that the present division of the shilling into 12 pence give
facilities for breaking it into the fractional parts required for the convenience of the lowers
classes, far more varied and far more extensive than can be obtained by turning it into ten
parts or cents?—Undoubtedly. -
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 47
377. You think, do you not, that this division of the shilling has this further advantage
and convenience, from the harmony which exists between that division of the shilling and
the existing system of weights and measures in this country?—Undoubtedly. It appears
to me that if you were to change the one without changing the other you would inflict
great hardship, even if the advantages of the new system were equal to those of the old
one ; but they are not equal, but on the contrary greatly inferior.
378. You are of opinion, therefore, in addition to the general scientific and practical
objections which exist to the adoption of decimals in opposition to the present system of
coins, a further and very formidable objection arises from the existing state of our weights
and measures; and that if the decimal system of coinage be introduced, it would go far to
necessitate our grappling with the difficulty of a change in the system of weights and
measures 2––Undoubtedly ; I think nearly every writer on the subject, even those who
advocate the pound and mil system, speaks of it in that form—Mr. Watts, Mr. H. Godwin,
General Pasley, Sir John Herschell, Mr. Maslin, Mr. Jessop, &c., &c., as well as those
who advocate other systems, as Mr. Slater, and this greatly adds to the difficulty. Sir
John Herschel observes, “Although I consider the advantages of the decimal coinage as
“very great, I should not appreciate it with the same intensity, except in the belief
“ that it would be accompanied by a decimal system of weights and measures.” Even
the “Decimal Association ” seem to anticipate that such a change is to be made. In a
circular, signed “J. J. Travers,” dated 15th March 1856, it is stated, “ In due course the
“reformation of our weights and measures upon the same simple basis will be prosecuted
“with all the energy it deserves.” Let me add that in the circular Mr. Travers seems to
consider the coinage question as settled, for it proceeds as follows, -“It is understood the
“ present commissioners consider that the report of the previous commission, the discussion
“ of the parliamentary committee, and the vote of the House of Commons, have settled that
“ the pound shall remain as the unit, and that our coinage shall be decimalized from the
“ pound downwards.” I do not find that the public calls for these changes. I do not
know what party is to gain by the change. I do feel, as Mr. Gurney said, that it is not
even as if the decimal coinage were equal to our coinage, but to induce us to make a change
it ought to be far superior. In reference, however, to these changes, and the supposed
necessity for them, I will read to the Commissioners a few extracts that I have made :--
Mr. De Morgan observes that “with the present money the hundredweight of 112 lbs.
has some advantages, though 120 would do better; 24 times the price of 1 cwt. in
pounds sterling is the price of 1 lb. in pence; thus, 7 l. a cwt. is 15d a pound; and, further,
the Stock Exchange measures by eighths because half-a-crown is handy.”—Rep. Stand., 60.
Mr. Gilbert, formerly President of the Royal Society, and a great advocate for uniformity
in weights and measures, says, “Admirable as is the decimal division for all matters of
calculation, the binary is the one suited to the common affairs of life, witness the yard,
the half-yard, the quarter-yard, the mail; and even at the Stock Exchange the prices of stock
are counted in , ; }, 3, &c.”—Rep. Stand. 60.
Mr. Bate says, “ Numerically speaking, nothing can be more simple or effective in its
operation with the more intelligent classes of the community than decimal division; but
it would require a careful and lengthened legislative interference to induce the commonalty
to conform to units of 10 or 100, instead of the present half or quarter of a pound ; the
same as to ounces, or to the cwt. Ladies would still insist on buying silk or such articles
by the yard, #, 3, , or fºr.”—Rep. Stand., 58.
Mr. De Grave, the scale-maker, says, “I consider the division of the pound into halves
quarters, &c., better than any other. Generally speaking, decimals may be best for
scientific experiment, but very inconvenient for practical purposes. I also consider the
present division of measures better than any that could be devised.”— Rep. Stand 60.
Mr. Jessop, a strong advocate for the pound and mil system, very properly observes, “In
the introduction of the decimal system into practical use, the new coinages ought certainly
not to issue before the new measures; either they shoul l issue together, or the new mea-
sures should precede the new coins. The reason is obvious; the old measures could be
superseded by the new in one day, whereas it would be many years before the old coins
had given place to the new. Besides, to accommodate the new measures to the old coins
would involve much less trouble and difficulty, than to accommodate the new coins to
the old measures, and the old coins would sooner retire in the former case than the old
measures in the latter—p. vii. But in all attempts of the kind we should recollect that our
object is uniformity. Then before you change any part of our system, such as it is,
compare the uniformity you must lose with the uniformity that you may gain by the
alteration: any change whatever in the system of the one which would not be adopted in
the other would destroy all the existing uniformity. Precious, indeed, must be the
uniformity to be obtained which can compensate for the abandonment of that already
existing, so well understood by the mass of the people.
379. Have you paid particular attention to the proposed system of decimalizing our
coinage as recommended by the Committee of the House of Commons, commoniy called
the pound and mil scheme – I have, and have given my opinion on it in the paper already
laid before the Commission.
380. Have you considered in what way that system would probably work?—I do
not see how it can possibly be brought into use by the people at large. It may suit such
men as actuaries, &c. who have been used to calculate by decimals, and the merchants and
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
F 4
48 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
bankers who keep large accounts, and who do not take notice in accounts of the smaller
subdivisions; but with the mass of the people and with the small dealings in which they
are engaged, the case is widely different. I may here observe, that the way in which we
have hitherto reckoned money has been upwards: 4 farthings make a penny, 12 pence
make a shilling, and 20 shillings make a pound ; but instead of this, according to the
new proposed pound and mil system, we are to begin at the other end, and say, a pound
is divided into 10 florins, the florin is divided into 10 cents, and the cent is divided
into 10 mils. This is a great objection to the scheme, and I am not alone in feeling it to
be so. Mr. Jessop, an advocate of the sovereign and mil scheme, observes, “The inscription
“ on the new florin ‘one-tenth of a pound is, I believe, a great hindrance to its circulation,
“ because it introduces fractions, and connects them with decimals, whereas decimals ought
“ always to be treated as integers, and ought never to be considered as proceeding by tenths,
“but by tens. Besides, since multiplification naturally precedes division, it must necessarily
“ be to every mind the more elementary ; every coin therefore should be regarded as arising
“ by multiplication from the next inferior, and not by division from the next superior. The
“whole of the old system is founded on this principle, namely, the multiplication and not divi-
“sion of the unit. The crown is called five shillings, and not the one-fourth of a sovereign.”
This being true as regards the florin or tenth of a pound, what must be the effect when we
come to the hundredth or the thousandth of a pound. Only consider the wonderment of
a cabman when he is told that his fare is 25 thousandths of a pound instead of sixpence, and
apply this to all our small purchases of daily life, which make ninety-nine hundredths of
our commercial transactions. Mr. De Morgan, in his notes on Mr. Lowe's speech,
observes, after showing that Cocker and Walkinghame count moneys as I have done, viz.
4 farthings=1 penny, 12 pence=1 shilling, 20 shillings 1–pound, proceeds,” In all countries
and in all sytems of teaching, it is “ there we go up, up, up, with beginners, and “here
we go down, down, down,’ only with those who understand fractions, witness the illus-
trious Cocker and the well-thumbed Walkinghame. Take what system you will, people
will look at how many parts make a whole, and not at what fraction one part is to a
whole. With old Robert Recorde in 1540, the people of 1800 will consyder how manye
of that subtyler denomination doo make one of the grosser denomination,”’ p. 16.
381. Is it not equally possible that you may reckon upwards, and say that 10 mils make
a cent, 10 cents make a florin, and 10 florins make a pound 2–This may indeed be done,
but then you must consider the mil as a whole number, and consequently abandon the pound
as the unit of the system. General Sir Charles Pasley, who was one of the first persons to
urge the pound and mil system upon the public, has found the difficulty that I mention so
strong, that in a paper which he published in the transactions of the Society of Arts,
since his examination before the Committee, he has recommended that you should con-
sider your mil as a whole number; otherwise you must begin, if you want to write down a
penny or its nearest equivalent, as four with two noughts before it, for by itself it would
make four pounds.
382. Is it not equally the case under our present system, if you write down 4, that it
may mean pounds or pence according to the accompaniments which surround it?—That is
true with regard to writing one sum simply, but if you put down small sums in an
account, when you add up the amount you would not keep the decimal mils in their right
place in the column without the noughts to indicate their relation to the pound. The
whole value of the 4 depends upon the addition of the dot and the noughts before it.
383, Are you sure that you have sufficiently considered the probable working in that
respect? Would not the four monies of account, mils, cents, florins, and pounds range
under four separate columns as farthings, pence, and shillings now range?—It would not
be so marked, you could not so mark it in accounts ; at least that is not the custom in any
decimal system of accounts that I know. In France you always put, if you want to indi-
cate 5 centimes, a nought before the 5. I never saw it otherwise, and in France the
decimal represents only so many pence, while here the first decimal would represent
2 shillings, the second so many multiples of nearly twopence halfpenny, and the third so
many farthings.
384. Do not you think that some confusion and imaginary difficulties arise from the
fact of not contemplating the mil as a whole number 2—If you contemplate using the mil as
a whole number, then the difficulty of the decimal dot and the decimal noughts would not
arise, but your sums would be expressed in mils alone.
385. What objection is there to contemplating the mil as a whole number ?—Certainly,
if this is done, it is no longer the pound and mil scheme, but simply keeping accounts in
farthings reduced four per cent. in value, a change which no one is likely to recommend; as
you descend much lower in keeping accounts, you require many more figures than under
any other system; and if you regard the mil as a whole number, consider the confusion
that you will create on the part of the majority of the people in buying the most
ordinary articles. They buy, say, a pound of sugar at 4d., instead of that they will have
to consider it in the light of 16 or i7 mils, and it would be very difficult to calculate, Say
94 lbs. of beef at the rate of 33 or 34 mils instead of 8d. per pound, multiplying those
mils being evidently so much more difficult than multiplying a much smaller number of
pence. You will have therefore in every petty transaction of life an increased number of
figures, from the increased complication introduced by this absurd system; and mental
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 49
calculation which is now universally applied to such purchases will be rendered impossible.
I believe, however, that this will be the only way in which the pound and mil system can
be at all comprehended by the people.
386. You think that the representation of all fractional sums of a pound in the form of
mils, cents, and florins, would be more inconvenient than the representation of them at
present in the form of pence or shillings?—Certainly ; for the reasons I have given and
specifically stated in the written statement I have presented.
387. Have you observed that a great difference exists in principle between the decimal
coinages which exist in other countries of the world, and that decimal coinage which would
be introduced into this country 2–Yes.
388. Will you explain in what you consider that essential difference to consist 2–In all
the countries of the world where the decimal coinage has existed they have always taken a
small unit, that is to say, the American dollar is the highest unit, worth about 4s. 2d. or
50 pence, and next to that the highest unit that I know is the Dutch florin, worth about
ls. 8d., then the franc and its varieties, worth about 10d. English. Thus almost all the
decimal coinages I am acquainted with take ten or a near approximation of ten of our
pence as a unit or a multiple of that sum.
389. Is not it a fact that in all other decimal coinages the stages between the lowest
money of account and the highest money of account are 100 °–Undoubtedly.
390. Whereas, in our proposed decimal coinage, the stages between the lowest unit and
the highest will be 1,000?–Yes; this is a great evil. I may state that in America the
mil was proposed to perfect the system in the mathematicians' eyes, but was never brought
into use. Indeed, wherever the millesimal division has been attempted it has never come
into use, from its great practical inconvenience; but in the proposed system it would be
forced into operation, as the cent would be far too large a coin for smaller trade. Let me
add, when speaking of mils, &c., that the names usually given to decimal coins are also
very inconvenient. Several persons have pointed out this evil. Mr. Leavitt well observes:
“The American decimal currency is denominated by words expressive of the relative
“ value of the different pieces to the one which is taken as the regulating unit, but it
should be remembered that numbers are not names. No man calls his children one,
two, or three; the shepherd names his sheep, the hunter his dogs, and the little boy his
“ chickens: it is a great convenience and Satisfaction that our small coin should have names
“ of their own.”—p. 48.
Cents are of many different values; the proposed English cent is nearly 2%d.; the
American cent is a halfpenny ; that the English public are partly acquainted with the
latter term, as many cheap works published for circulation in this country and America are
marked, price “ls, or 25 cents,” meaning thereby American cents. The cent of France,
on the other hand, is the fifth of a halfpenny; and so on ad infinitum.
391. In all existing decimal systems of coinage there is no intermediate money of
account in use between the highest and the lowest. Do you think it would be possible to
work our proposed decimal system of coinage without the introduction of an intermediate
money of account between the mil and the pound?—I think not; if the pound is to be the
unit you must use the florin, if not the florin and the cent; but I doubt if you could induce
the people generally to look at the system otherwise than as so many mils or reduced
farthings.
392. If an additional money of account be introduced, between the mil and the pound,
will not that introduction of an additional money of account greatly diminish the simplicity,
and therefore the facility and the accuracy, of calculation which are supposed to be derived
from the existing decimal coinages?—I have always felt it to be so.
393. (Mr. Hubbard.) You have stated that the pound and mil scheme is founded on an
entirely different system from that pursued in France and other continental countries. In
page 9 you say, “The only requisite of a perfect decimal system of coins and accounts is
“ that the various denominations of money of account should increase by a regular decimal
“ progression, as that is all that is necessary to enable us to use a simple instead of our
“ present compound arithmetic.” That I take to be a very accurate and close description
of the advantage to be gained, namely, that in addition or calculation in decimals the
progression is always by tens from one denomination to another; it is a progression by
i0 instead of by 12, or by 4, or by 20 °–Yes.
394. Will you state in what respect this description ceases to apply to the pound and
mil scheme. Does not the progression of the mil to the cent increase by 10, from the
cent to the florin by 10, and from the florin to the pound by 10?–Yes; but it is founded
on a large unit, and it must in reality be considered as a descending instead of an ascending
scheme—a division of a sum into its decimal or rather millesimal parts, rather than a
multiplication of a sum by tens, as a decimal system ought to be.
395. I was very much struck with the description of the only requisite of a perfect
decimal system, because it appears to me to describe so accurately and so closely the
exact state of things contemplated in the pound and mil scheme; namely, the regular
progression of one decimal to another; the disadvantage which you see in the creation of
a higher unit is one which may exist or not, according to opinion, but one which is not
affected by this definition ?—Certainly not; that is merely a plain definition of what you
may consider a decimal system of coinage; it has nothing to do with the decimal coinage
recommended by the Committee of the House of Commons.
&
Ç
G
C
&
Ç
Dr. J. E. Gray
sºmºsºmas
13th May 1856.
G.
50 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Pr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
396. This is a definition of a perfect decimal system 2–Yes; I do not deny that the
pound and mil system is in theory a perfect system of decimal numeration. I only say
that it differs from any system that any country has ever attempted to introduce, and I
believe it differs in a way that will render it more difficult of introduction than any
decimal system which has yet been adopted. . I may state further, that the Commissioners
will be astonished to hear how imperfect the introduction of the various novel systems has
been in countries where we are told they have a perfect decimal system, and where the
least changes have been attempted. It is more than 60 years since the decimal system
was introduced into France, and Louis Napoleon last year issued a proclamation forbidding
people from crying their wares in the streets of Paris by the old system of coinage by
sous. I beg to hand to the Commissioners the enclosed, which I printed on the 8th
December 1855 :—
“Frequent reference has been made by writers on the subject of decimal coinage, to
the supposed facility with which a decimal system has been introduced in France, as
proving that a decimal system of coinage and accounts might with equal facility be
introduced into this country. But it appears to me that those who attempt such a
comparison must have had a very imperfect idea of the method of keeping accounts
previously in use in France, or they would have recognized, that far from furnishing a
case in point as regards England, the circumstances of the two countries in relation to
coinage and accounts, and the degrees of facility of converting the old into the new, are
so entirely different as to afford grounds of contrast rather than of comparison.
“ At the close of the last century accounts were kept in France in livres, (or francs,
for the latter name was then even frequently used), sols or sous, and deniers, names derived
from the libra, solidi, and demarii of the Romans.
“The livre, like the English pound, originally represented a pound-weight of silver; of
which the sol or sou, like the English shilling, was the twentieth part; and of this again
the denier, like the English penny, was the twelfth. But the value of the French livre
had gradually deteriorated to so much greater an extent than that of the English pound,
that in 1798 the coin of that name was worth no more than about ninepence English; its
twentieth part, the sol or sou, in value nearly equal to the English halfpenny, had become
the measure of all the smaller business transactions, and the denier existed only in name.
The system was first brought into use in France on the 24th of August 1793, when an
ordinance was issued ‘ directing the coinage of small money of a mixture of copper and
“bell metal, to replace the pieces of two sous and of one sous, of six and three deniers, by
* coins called decimes and centimes, and directing the coinage of pieces of one and five
* centimes.’ By a law 7th Germinal, an xi., (28th March 1803,) a slight change was
made in the weight and fineness of the livre, solely in order to render that coin an exact
and even weight of the new alloy: it was directed that a ‘franc' should contain 5 grammes
of silver of the fineness of nine-tenths; and by this change the value of the franc was
increased by about one-eightieth. It was also decreed that this franc should be divided
into décimes, or double sous, instead of into twenty sous as before, and that the décime
should be divided into 10 centimes. In this new system both the livre and the sous (the
actual current coins) remained as before, and bearing the same relation to each other,
with the exception of the slight alteration in the intrinsic value of the former; the former
under its previously well-known denomination of a franc, and the latter retaining in
common parlance its popular name of sou, but converted in accounts into 5 centimes.
Thus the only practical difference consisted in the sou now consisting of 5 centimes,
instead of 12 deniers as before the change; but this difference could scarcely have been
felt in the ordinary transactions of life, both centimes and deniers being simply moneys of
account, and of very trivial importance in the daily traffic of the community.
“Yet small as was this change, it was attended at the time with very considerable
difficulties; and even now, at the distance of more than half a century, it is by no means
universally adopted in France, either in accounts or still less in the great mass of ordinary
retail dealings. As long as the old livres remained in circulation, whenever they were
tendered in place of a franc it became a constant source of contention which party was to
be the loser by the bargain ; one or the other must be so, as there was no coin to represent
the actual difference, and the debate frequently ended in the weaker party giving two
centimes or one-fiftieth part of the value instead of one-eightieth) over and above the
livre : or, as a centime was a rarity seldom seen, a livre and a sou were combined to
represent a franc, and thus the receiver obtained 3% per cent, beyond the real value of the
new coin as compared with the old. Even to this day, although in Paris and other large
towns written accounts are kept in francs and centimes, (for this décime is universally
neglected,) this is by no means uniformly the case in the provinces, where accounts are
still frequently kept and presented in livres, sols, and deniers, as of old; of the existence
of which custom I have proofs in bills in my own possession. And in Paris itself, as well
as everywhere else throughout France, the prices of most of the common and smaller
articles are still constantly expressed in sous ; as must be well known to every Englishman
who has visited France. For those who have not, it will be sufficient to quote the
striking fact, that the universally read Galignani's Messenger is marked—not half-a franc,
not 5 décimes, not 50 centimes, but — price 10 sous ; and to call their attention to an
ordinance of the present year prohibiting the crying of articles in the streets by the sou.
So difficult is it to change the habits of a people, even where the change involves no real
or practical difference.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. bl
“When the Assemblée Générale in 1790 referred the question of alloy, together with
the system of weights, measures, and coinage, to the Academy, the commissioners named
by that body in their report upon these subjects recommended the universal adoption of a
decimal system, on the sole ground that the decimal scale formed the basis of the common
arithmetic; allowing, at the same time, that for practical purposes the decimal is much
inferior to the duodecimal. They feared, however, to recommend so grand an innovation
as would have been involved in the substitution of the duodecimal scale in arithmetical
calculations; although it must be admitted by all candid inquirers that this superiority of the
duodecimal scale is a strong argument in favour of those who are opposed to the change of
our present system of coinage and accounts, of which the duodecimal element forms so
essential a part. It should be observed, however, that not only was the denier in the older
French system the twelfth part of a sou, but that even after the change several of the older
coins having duodecimal values were for a long time retained; such as the coins of three or
six livres, which were decreed on the 12th September 1810 to be worth respectively 2f. 55c.
and 5f. 80c., silver coins of 6, 12, and 24 sous, which were decreed on the 10th August in
the same year to be worth respectively 25 centimes, 50 centimes, and 1 franc, and gold
coins of 24 and 48 livres. These coins gradually disappeared; but it was only by decrees,
of the dates of 10th July 1845 and 20th April 1852, that the last of those coins, which
were regarded as incompatible with a complete decimal system, such as the silver coins of 25
and 75 centimes and of 1 franc 50 centimes, were finally withdrawn from circulation. As
regards actual circulation, the sou or piece of 5 centimes may almost be regarded as the
lowest coin, for the pieces of 2 and 3 centimes directed to be coined by the decree of the
28th March 1803 have never been issued; and the single centime is so rarely to be met
with in circulation, that on a visit to France in September of the present year, I observed
a quantity of them in a money-changer's window at Boulogne, and in another in Paris,
marked ‘ centimes one penny each.” The only place, I believe, where it is possible (until
very lately) to obtain centimes as currency, is the toll-gate of the Pont des Arts; whither
the curious resort to obtain a change of four centimes out of their sou, the tariff for crossing
the bridge being one centime.
“From the foregoing observations it will be seen, that although the French system of
coinage and accounts up to the commencement of the present century was like our own,
based upon divisions by 20 and by 12, the latter divisions had for all practical purposes
almost wholly disappeared, by the deterioration of the pound to less than a twenty-fifth
part of the value of the English; and that the two practical coins of currency, the franc
and sou, continue to bear exactly the same relation to each other: and that inasmuch as
that relation was exactly 20 to 1, the conversion to a decimal system afforded the greatest
possible facilities. And yet we have seen, that with all those advantages, and with all the
weight and influence of a centralized government acting constantly and directly upon the
remotest districts as completely as upon the capital itself, in neither the one nor the other
has half a century sufficed completely to effect so simple a change. If I might be
permitted to make a suggestion to the Royal Commissioners to whom the question of a
decimal coinage is referred, it would be strongly to urge upon them, before collecting
vivá voce evidence upon the subject, to study carefully all the circumstances connected
with the change of system in France, in the United States of America, and in other
parts of the world, in order that they may be able to appreciate and to correct if
necessary the evidence given before them, as it appears to me to have been in a great
measure the deficiency of this kind of knowledge in the Parliamentary Committee which
has rendered necessary the appointment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry.
In the Times of March 18th 1856 is the following notice:—“The Moniteur publishes
an Imperial decree withdrawing from circulation the old copper coin, namely the pieces of
one liard and two liards, and those of one centime bearing the effigy of Liberty, on the
18th July next ; and pieces of one sou and two sous, and those of five and ten centimes
bearing the effigy of Liberty, on the 1st October following. Until then these coins will
be received in payment of duties and public taxes, or exchanged for other coins in the
Government offices”—showing that the non-decimal coins still hold their ground after
more than 60 years.
M. Dupuit, chief engineer of the city of Paris, observed at a meeting at Paris in
September 1855 —“It was found troublesome to reckon centimes by the head, and hence
the sou continued in use.”—Yates, Narrat. 46.
I have here a series of coins that I obtained myself in Calais, in change for a half franc, as
I came back from Paris last summer, showing that the old series of coins are still in
existence, such as half sous and liards. In many parts of France they still keep their
accounts in livres, sols, and deniers. I only point this out to show the difficulty of
introducing a new system. It is the same in America:
The Rev. Joshua Leavitt, of New York, states:–“You are aware that in our (that is,
“New York) marketing and other small transactions our business is still done in shillings
“ and pence, the shilling being one eighth of a dollar, and therefore corresponding exactly
“ in its value to the old Spanish coin of one-eight. The provincial currency of New York
“ before the revolution was framed upon the reckoning of eight shillings to a dollar, and
“when the federal currency was introduced in matters of coin, the common people still
“ clung to the old shilling as a matter of necessary convenience in their pocket payments;
“ and the experience of sixty years has not in the least diminished their attachment to this
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
G 2
52 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
“ method of reckoning in small payments.” “ * * “And not only this, but we find
“ the people of all parts of the country are learning more and more to use the vernacular
“ currency of New York in their daily chaffering from one end of the United States to
“ the other. You will frequently hear people giving you the price of things in York
“ shillings and York sixpences. I think this experiment is conclusive, and ought to be
“ satisfactory to prove that the duodecimal currency in small transactions is a great public
“ convenience. I am sure it is only this actual and felt convenience which has enabled it
“ to maintain its ground for 60 years.” ” * * “For myself I have no idea that we
“ shall ever abandon the shilling currency; the lapse of generations has only fixed it more
“firmly on us, and I fully believe that in a few years we shall have a Congress so governed
“ by common sense, and so alive to the convenience and welfare of the people, that they
“ will legalize the York shilling and sixpence as the eighth and sixteenth of a dollar, and
“ will give us from their own mint a corresponding coinage,” p. 48. The Committee of
the Legislative Assembly of Canada for 1855, after giving an abstract of Mr. Leavitt's
evidence, report:-" Your Committee are of opinion that coins representing the eighth
“ and sixteenth of a dollar are indispensable in small transactions in Canada, and that the
“ small British sixpences will continue to pass extensively as the eighth of a dollar, unless
“ a better coinage is provided,” p. 14. These coins, it is to be remembered, form no part
of a decimal system, but are repugnant to it.
So also M. Cogels, a Belgian senator, gave, in September 1855, as an instance of the
difficulties which the metrical system has had to overcome, what has occurred and is still
passing in Belgium. “The system was introduced into this country (Belgium) by the
* French Republic. It has been maintained by the Dutch Belgian Government, and by the
“ revolution in 1830, and notwithstanding this perseverance, there are still difficulties to
“ surmount.”—Yates, Narrat. 45. That is after more than half a century.
397. (Chairman.) That old system which you have described of the French coinage,
antecedent to the introduction of the decimal system, bore a very close resemblance, did
it not, to the British coinage as it now exists?—It was in its origin the same thing, but
by the depreciation of the coinage had become widely different. There existed in most
countries of Europe while under the Roman dominion, and was afterwards retained—a
system exactly similar in its divisions to that which we now have in use. For example,
the same mode of subdivision prevailed in Scotland, in France, in Turin, Geneva, Genoa,
Leghorn, Milan, Rome, Alicant, Valencia, Barcelona, Amsterdam, Hamburgh, and many
other places. But in course of time the coinage of most of these countries and places
had become so debased and depreciated in value, that a change had become absolutely
necessary, as the lower coins were too minute in value for any useful purpose. For
example, in France the livre, which originally represented one sovereign or pound, was
reduced in value to less than 10d., and its 240th part was consequently worth less than the
24th of a penny. It became therefore necessary to put an end to this mischievous state
of things, and the change made by the French National Assembly was very simple, and
apparently very easy. . They transformed the two sous piece, which originally represented
two of our shillings, into a décime, and representing the tenth part of the whole livre or
pound, which, in pursuance of the system of changing the names of everything, they called
a franc. By adding a further subdivision into centimes, they formed a decimal system; but
with all this apparent facility, after a lapse of 60 years, you still never hear the word
“ décime” used; it is never used in conversation ; they speak of 10 centimes, but they do
not speak of a décime at all so that their system is really centesimal, and not decimal.
398. In many of those countries which you have named very correctly, as having been
originally the seat of a system of coinage closely resembling our own, there has been
subsequently introduced the decimal system 2–Yes; but almost solely as the result of
great confusion or depreciation of the currency, affording motives and facilities for such
changes.
399. Practically speaking, that has been so 2–Yes; and I may add that in most cases
the changes has been introduced by force of arms, as I have before shown, or after some
great revolution which had disposed men's minds for changes.
400. Can you mention any instance in which the decimal system, having been introduced
and made the legal system of the country, has been abandoned, and the system of allowing
the use of the principles incident to our system has been introduced and adopted in
preference?—The decimal system of France was introduced in various parts of the
continent, as I have already stated, by Napoleon by his conquests, and withdrawn when
those countries regained their independence. Thus in Westphalia it was introduced by
Joseph Bonaparte, and coins were struck; but afterwards the Westphalian Germans went
back to their old coinage, and have never resumed the decimal one. I am aware it has
been often stated that no country that ever had a decimal coinage had resumed their old
non-decimal system, a statement only to be explained by a want of knowledge of the
subject, even as regards Great Britain and its dependencies. The “dollar and cent system”
with “a penny” for the 50th part of the dollar, was introduced into Sierra Leone by an
English trading company in 1791 (being the first of the more modern decimal coinages),
but that coinage has since gone out of use. A complete system of decimal coinage, founded
on the decimal multiples of the penny, long existed in Ireland, and was backed by numerous
Acts of Parliament, offering the Irish an opportunity to adopt a decimal system of
accounts. The Bank of Ireland, urged forward by the great want and the depreciated value
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 53
of the few silver coins in Ireland, under the sanction of several Acts of Parliament
(stat. 45 G, III. c. 42, 48 G. III. c. 31., 53 G. III. c. 46., 56 G. III. c. 68.,) issued coins
(tokens) of the value of 5, 10, 30, and 60 pence, Irish. These coins were ordered to be
received in payment of the public revenue in Ireland, and to prevent these and the tokens
of the Bank of England being remelted and coined into the silver tokens issued chiefly
in the West of England, about 1816 several acts of Parliament were passed (as
52 G. III. c. 157., 53 G. III. c. 114., 54 G. III. c. 4.,) declaring all other tokens to be
illegal; they were even continued as legal tender by the Act 56 G. III. c. 68. at the
period of the new silver coinage in 1816, but they were perhaps called in by the proclama-
tion of the 1st of March 1817, though they are not specially mentioned in it, or probably
they remained current until the currency of Great Britain and Ireland was assimilated, on
the 27th of June 1817. The larger coin of 60 pence is exactly like the Bank of England
“five shilling piece or dollar,” with a new reverse, Britannia and the inscription being
replaced by a figure of Hibernia, “ the Bank of Ireland,” and “six shillings.” The other
tokens were inscribed, Bank token, five (10, or XXX) pence Irish. The dates of those I have
seen are 1804, 1805, 1808 and 1813. Some of these coins were formerly rarely seen in
England, and known as Irish shillings or tenpennies. Though the system was founded on
the penny and made no alteration in the value of the current money, yet the people do
not appear to have appreciated its advantages, and it has entirely gone out of use, for
which I know of no other reason than that it was not found so convenient as the old duo-
decimal system. In the straits settlements at Singapore, they have for years had a dollar
and cent system of coinage and accounts, but they have within the last few months returned
to the mixed system of rupees and annas, like the rest of India.
401. (Lord Overstone.) You stated, did you not, just now that that was the case in
Switzerland 2–Yes; and it was also the case in Sardinia; they have oscillated between the
two systems, but in Westphalian Germany they went back entirely to the old system, and
literally have never returned to the decimal coinage again.
402. (Mr. Hubbard.) Passing from the first position which I have mentioned, that the
theory of a perfect decimal system is in harmony with the composition of the pound and
mil system, your objection is to the elevation of the unit 2-—Yes.
403. You comment in your work upon that disadvantage, as justifying you in laying
down this rule at page 20, that it should be borne in mind that there ought not to be more
than two coins of account in a system of this kind. That is of course founded upon the
assumption which I think everybody must admit, that you could not work the pound and
mil scheme simply with two coins of account —Yes; evidently.
404. But the reason by which you support that argument at the top of page 21 is this:
“It is perhaps not easy to give a better reason for this rule, than the experience of
“every country where the decimal system has been introduced.” And you there
enumerate the countries where the decimal system of coinage does exist, but only with two
coins of account; you cannot now perhaps allege any other reason than the fact, that
looking at other countries, we do find two coins of account, and two only 2—That is to say,
I believe that the experience of mankind has shown this to be the case. I would correct
a statement at page 22; I find that in China, as in Portugal, they have only one coin of
account. In Portugal it is the rei; it is the same in Russia, where they have the kopeck;
and in the aboriginal decimal coinages of China, Russia, and Portugal, they all have a very
small coin of account, which increases decimally, as the arithmetic progresses; hence it is
that they have decimal systems, but it is not a decimal fractional system produced by the
division of the unit. The milrei is evidently the accumulation of the rei, and not the unit
from which the latter are derived.
405. In each of the countries to which this reference alludes, the unit of value is con-
siderably lower than a pound sterling 3–In every country; the highest is that of the
United States, 4s. 2d., and the lowest the cash of the Chinese, worth about one thirty-
second of a penny.
406. So that in point of fact it is owing to the high value of the pound sterling that the
necessity for more than two coins of account is inevitable if the decimal system is adopted?
—Certainly ; but if you consider it absolutely necessary to keep the pound sterling as the
unit, I think that the objection to the division of the pound sterling is so great that
it would be far better not to attempt to form a decimal system. It appears to me that if
you were to keep the pound sterling as the unit you would introduce such a complicated
system as would be very difficult indeed to carry into execution; and I cannot conceive
for what purpose such a change should be made. The great advocate of the change,
and certainly almost the only active writer on that side of the question, Professor
De Morgan, in his last edition of his arithmetic, dated 1846, observes in the preface, “The
sixth (Appendix) on decimal money should be read and practised by every student with as
much attention as any part of the work. The mastery of the rules for instantaneous con-
version of the usual fractions of a pound sterling into decimal fractions, gives the possessor
the greater part of the advantages which he would derive from the introduction of a
decimal coinage; ” and, on referring to Appendix six on decimal money, I find that he
says, “Of all the simplifications of commercial arithmetic, none is comparable to that of
expressing shillings, pence, and farthings, as decimals of a pound; the rules are thereby
put almost upon as good a footing as if the country possessed the advantages of a real
decimal coinage.” “Any fraction of a pound sterling may be decimalized by rules which can
3
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
54 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
be made to give the result at once.” It is quite clear from these quotations, that even in
the opinion of Professor De Morgan you have every desirable facility for making decimal
calculations when they are specially required under our present system, without encountering
the difficulties necessarily attendant upon so great a change in the habits, thought, and
language of everyday life.
407. Have you not the advantage which you yourself state in page 9, that you have a
regular decimal progression, which makes the addition in sums stated in decimals so exceed-
ingly simple and easy, and consequently so little liable to errors —When I wrote my
pamphlet I had a much higher estimation of the value of a decimal coinage than I have now.
I have since collected all the information that I can upon the subject of decimal coinage,
and I have also collected together a large series of illustrative coins. I still adhere to the
opinion that if we are to have a decimal coinage it onght to be a very simple one. It was
upon that ground alone that I recommended the system which is put forward in my
pamphlet. I desire above all things that no change may be made; but if there is to be a
change, it is essential to even partial success that it should be the simplest possible, and that
it should not alter the value of the penny; and 1 firmly believe that most persons who would
take the same pains as I have done would come to the same conclusion, if they would but
patiently wade through and digest the mass of documents which I have collected on the
subject, and which I have placed at the disposition of the Commissioners, and which, I think.
go far to prove that in every country where the decimal system of coinage has been
attempted to be introduced, it has proved a failure, as far as coinage is concerned, and that
they have all been obliged to allow of the circulation of non-decimal coins as halves,
quarters, sixths, eighths, twelfths, sixteenths, or twentieths; thus, shillings and sixpences are
still current in the United States of America, and sous and liards in France, after a period
of 50 years, and in spite of all attempts to get rid of them by law. I am willing to allow
that with decimal accounts the system has been more successful, but that, if I understand
right, is not within the province of the Commission, and is comparatively of trifling
importance. I still retain the opinion expressed in my pamphlet: “The Government
“ have shown no inclination to throw any difficulties in the way; it has even gone the
“ length of coining and issuing a piece of money which was recommended as facilitating the
“ system, but which, although coined in large numbers, has never become popular; it has
“granted a committee of the House of Commons, which has strongly recommended the
“ adoption of the plan, and since the committee has reported, there have been several
“ meetings in Liverpool, Manchester, and some other provincial towns, and in some of the
“scientific societies of London, which have passed resolutions and sent a few petitions to
“Parliament in support of the general principle. But, certainly, the system with all this
“agitation has made no progress with the people, almost all the speakers at these meetings
“ have been a few of the witnesses before the committee, and of the members of Parliament
“who formed the Committee itself; and it appears very probable that the agitation will
“ die out as it did some forty years ago from the same cause ;” p. 21. This was true in 1854,
and I believe it is equally true now. The Decimal Association, which had a large list of
members, employed active agitators and engaged offices, after publishing a few tracts,
which have met with very little notice from the community at large, now dates its circulars,
entreating petitions and subscriptions, from a room in the “Gresham Club.”
408. You have not yet considered the possible advantage which might ensue from having
a decimal progression without the apparent confusion arising from the position of the dot or
point, which you think is inseparable from it, counting either from the mil upwards or from
the pound downwards, leaving to the dots or points the designation of the value of the
figure used; you have not considered florins and cents as you would shillings and pence, as
merely items in four denominations?–The disadvantage I consider to be this:—There is no
reason why you may not consider them as whole figures, but you introduce more figures
and greater complication than at present into the miost ordinary calculations, which is not
desirable; as well as great confusion in the daily requirements of domestic economy in
the ordinary habits of life, for what I do not consider as any advantage. One of the
advantages put forward by some of those who advocate the change, such as bankers and
men in large mercantile business, is the entire abolition in their books of figures, representing
the smallest denomination. You see that put forward in Mr. Miller's evidence, who states
as a great advantage that you will have your accounts clear of any copper, but such supposed
advantages are all in connection with large accounts of bankers, merchants, &c. What I was
referring to are the small sums of money passing from hand to hand in the common
transactions of life, which are as 100 to 1 of the large transactions.
409. A lengthened study of the question has made you think less favourably of the
decimal principle than you did when you wrote the pamphlet which is intituled “Decimal
Coinage **—Certainly ; that is to say, as a coinage of practical use ; but at the same time
I ought to state, that if any form of a decimal coinage is to be introduced I hold to all the
principles in regard to it put forth in that pamphlet.
410. You think less of its advantages and more of its inconveniences?—Yes; after I have
read all the evidence put forward with regard to its advantages before the Committee of
the House of Commons, and, as I believe, all the books, pamphlets, and letters that have
been published on the subject; and I have made it my business to study the subject in the
countries where a decimal coinage is in use. .
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 55
411. (Lord Overstone.) I think I understand that your views upon the subject of decimal
coinage have undergone some considerable change, and that the result of a more extended
inquiry and more patient investigation has rendered you less favourable to the decimal
system than you once were 2—Undoubtedly.
412. You stated, did you not, that if the decimal system of coinage proposed by the Parlia-
mentary Committee be introduced into this country, it will differ very essentially from any
system of decimal coinage which has as yet been adopted by other countries 2–Most
undoubtedly, and be introduced under entirely different circumstances.
413. I presume that the important points in which the essential difference consists, are,
first of all, the high integer of our present system, the pound sterling, the retention of
which will necessarily involve many inconveniences and disadvantages in our decimal
system. And, secondly, the inconvenience and difficulties which must attend the intro-
duction of a copper coinage which bears no equivalent value in the existing copper coinage 2
—No doubt those are the principal inconveniences; but there are other very serious ones,
which I have put forth in a paper which I printed in 1855, in the Spectator newspaper of
4th August 1855, and which I will read:—
“If it is predetermined that the proposed decimal coinage must of necessity start from
a large unit, to be decimally subdivided, and the subdivisions used as monies of account,
then, indeed, ‘the entire question respecting it may be resolved into the three points as
stated by your correspondent “H.’; but I apprehend there is a preliminary point still to be
settled, which he appears to have entirely overlooked, and which is involved in Mr. William
Brown's dictum that ‘ the question is now between the pound and the penny.”
“It is perfectly true that merchants, bankers, actuaries, and others, having large calcu-
lations to make of interest, discount, dividends, &c., frequently make use of the decimals
of a pound sterling, as they do also of the decimals of a year, a month, a hundredweight,
or a ton; but they do this not from any peculiar convenience inherent in those units, but
simply from their being the sums and quantities in actual present use, to which their calcu-
lations are necessarily adapted. I cannot admit that because it has been the custom of
large traders and others under the present system to make use of a certain existing unit,
it therefore follows that in the introduction of a new coinage, as part of a complete decimal
system for the use of the entire people, we are bound to follow the same plan, especially if
it is proved that it is attended in practice with many disadvantages and complexities, which
are not to be found in a system commencing with a smaller unit.
“In making so extensive a change in the habits of the entire people, it appears to me
that we ought to be most careful to select the most perfect system, the most convenient for
practical use, and at the same time that which is likely to be attended with the smallest
amount of disturbance, inconvenience, and distrust, to the mass of the community. Among
the many disadvantages of the scheme for taking the pound sterling as the unit, and
dividing it decimally into tenths, hundredths, and thousandths, as proposed by Mr. William
Brown's Committee, the following are some of the most prominent.
“ 1. It requires three places of decimals for its expression, and consequently demands a
larger number of figures than in the present method, or in a system starting from a smaller
unit. As Mr. Bevan's clerks justly observed, the second figure of the decimals not
descending below a coin representing the value of nearly two-pence halfpenny, it would
always be necessary, even in bankers' books, to have recourse to the third figure, instead
of rejecting it, as is now done with reference to the column of farthings.
“2. Although three places of decimals may be a sufficient approximation under this
system for entries in the ledger, they would be found insufficient even for many of the
more common calculations, in which to insure accuracy more places of decimals would be
required. There is scarcely an example, among those selected for publication by the
Parliamentary Committee, of conversion from the existing system into that proposed in
which the result is other than approximate. But as every one of these is capable of a
determinate solution by our present mixed system, it surely would be a step backward if we
were to adopt in its place a scheme requiring a far greater number of figures to arrive at
an exact result, or one which is incapable of attaining it. Actuaries and bankers are so
well aware of this imperfection in the scheme, that in calculation of interest, &c., they are
not satisfied with the use of fewer than six places of decimals; and in order to remedy it,
one of the witnesses, (Mr. J. Franklin, a warm advocate of the Committee's scheme,) in a
table, part of which is given in evidence before the Committee, actually adds a vulgar
fraction after the three figures of decimals, in order accurately to represent the required
equivalent, —a singular mode of decimal calculation, and one which can scarcely be recom-
mended as a perfect decimal system.
“3. As we have no coins in present use representing the 10th, 100th, or 1,000th part of
a pound sterling, it would be necessary to introduce an entirely new series of coins and of
names of coins into all our accounts, and in the prices of all articles bought or sold, having
no reference to any of the coins or values at present in use; and for the same reason the
smaller coins (including all the copper and some of the silver) now in use could not possibly
be allowed to circulate together with the new coins, on account of the loss and confusion
which must ensue, and which would inevitably create great dissatisfaction and distrust
among the less-informed portions of the community, which years would not suffice to
I'êl]] OVC.
“4. By the decimalization from the pound downwards, the penny, which is at present the
almost universal standard of value, as regards rates and taxes, duties, stamps, tolls, wages,
Dr. J. E. Gray
cºmmºn
13th May 1856.
G 4
56 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
and the price of nearly every article of daily and universal consumption, is entirely set
aside. Such a sweeping change would manifestly introduce great confusion into all retail
trade, and require a multitude of legislative enactments for the alteration of the present
rates of duty, tolls, &c., to adapt them to the new coinage; all of which would be looked
upon by the mass of the community with suspicion and alarm.
“On the other hand, were the penny adopted as the basis of the system, together with
its decimal multiples and subdivisions, our system of accounts would be as perfectly and
completely decimal as could be obtained by any other mode, and every one of the above
important objections would be wholly obviated.
“I. If accounts were kept in tenpences, in large accounts only one, and in smaller
dealings at the most two, places of decimals would be required; and it must be evident to
all that fewer figures would be required to keep accounts in pence than in farthings or
mils.
“2. Under the penny decimal system all sums may be calculated with equal accuracy
and with greater facility than under the present mixed system; while the advantages in
these respects over the pound and mil scheme are unquestionably greater still.
“3. As the values and names of existing coins would remain unaltered, it could by no
possibility introduce the slightest difficulty or confusion into the ordinary transactions of
trade, or the calculation of wages; while taxes, tolls, &c., would require no questionable
alteration, remaining exactly as they were before.
“4. Such a system may be introduced at any time without the risk of creating dissatis-
faction or distrust, inasmuch as the decimals and the mixed system may be used simulta-
neously side by side with perfect agreement; and it would thus be left, as it ought to be
left, to the practical good sense of the people to determine which of the two they would
adopt. It is most probable that although accounts would be kept in decimals, the great
bulk of the community would prefer for daily barter the existing duodecimal silver coins;
which would be as readily reckoned into the decimal system of accounts as the similar coins
which form the currency of Portugal in connexion with the complete decimal system of
accounts of that kingdom. This preference can, however, only be determined by experience;
but under such a system there would, at all events, be no necessity for the withdrawal of any
part of our present coins, until the necessities of the coinage rendered it desirable on other
grounds. The shilling, the half-crown, and the crown, would still continue to represent
12, 30, and 60 pence, and the practice of purchasing articles by the dozen and the half-
dozen, and of subdividing by halves and by quarters, is too strongly rooted in the habits of
the people, and too practically useful, to allow of the abandonment of threepenny, four-
penny, and sixpenny pieces. It is too much to expect that the present generation should
all at once consent to relinquish the advantages which they naturally enough believe
themselves to possess in the system of mental calculation now so universally taught in
schools, and which is more or less engrained into the daily and hourly practice of even the
poorest and least educated among us.
“As the chief advantage of the pound and mil scheme is the retention of the pound
sterling as the unit of account, so the chief objection to the penny and tenpenny system is
that the pound would cease to be a money of account, being no regular decimal multiple
of tenpence. Its conversion, however, would be effected in the simplest possible manner,
inasmuch as it is a regular multiple of that proposed coin by 24, as the guinea (altered as
proposed by your correspondent “H.’) would be by 25. As four such guineas would
exactly represent 100 tenpences, and gold pieces of the higher value of five sovereigns have
already been coined, although not put into circulation, I know of no reason why a coin of
that value might not have existence and a name, and, in fact, be the golden basis of the
system.
“It appears to me that if we are to have a decimal system of coimage and accounts, some
sacrifice must be made to secure its advantages; and the question may be shortly stated
thus.
“1. Shall we retain the pound as the unit, divided into 10th, 100th, and 1,000th parts,
and thus introduce an entirely new set of coins, with new names and of new values, together
with a complicated, and in many cases an inaccurate, system of computation, producing
much confusion, and engendering great distrust among the people at large?
“Or, 2. Shall we relinquish the pound as a money of account, retaining all our present
coins with the same names and with the same values, together with a perfect decimal
system of accounts and a simple and perfectly accurate system of computation, which
may be brought into use without any confusion or alteration in the habits of the people at
large, who may indifferently use either the present system or the new one, until they become
satisfied of the advantages presented by the latter ?
“To these observations I would only add the following considerations deduced from
experience. The chief arguments in favour of the practical advantages of the decimal
system are drawn from its use on the continent and in the United States of America. But
all the countries referred to have uniformly avoided the great evil which I have pointed out
in the committee's scheme, by choosing a small unit, which for the lowest values would
require only two places of decimals. Thus the unit of France, Belgium, and Switzerland,
is nearly equivalent to our proposed tenpence; that of Holland to twentypence; and those
of Italy, Savoy, the United States of America, Canada, Singapore, &c., to fifty English
pence. These all bear approximately a decimal relation to our penny, and the highest among
DECIM AL COINAGE COMMISSION. 57
them very little exceeds in value one-fifth of that of the proposed unit of the scheme
recommended by the committee, which consequently derives no support, but on the contrary
receives a direct reprobation, from the argument of the experience of other nations. As
regards home experience, I may observe that the pound and mil scheme is almost solely
recommended by mathematicians, bankers, actuaries, and engineers, men of high education,
familiarized by their position and by their pursuits with the use of decimals extending to
any given number of places, and constantly requiring such an extension in their calculations.
To these, of course, a scheme requiring only three places of decimals appears mere child's
play; but men conversant with the more ordinary calculations of trade (such as the late
Mr. Laurie, the compiler of a large number of the most useful practical tables in existence)
have, after long-continued trials of the scheme, fairly given it up as too complicated for
ordinary purposes, and become warm advocates of the tenpenny system, which they have
honestly declared afforded, by means of its small unit, great advantages both in point of
accuracy and facility of use. In regard to the unit of a guinea, (of a value equal to a pound
and tenpence,) divided into a thousand farthings, as recommended by your correspondent ‘H.,’
and by Mr. Headlam before the committee, its great advantage (in common with the tempenny
system) consists in its creating no alteration in the value of existing coins, or in that of
existing contracts; but it has the insuperable difficulty (in common with the committee's
scheme) of requiring an entirely new set of coins of account, with new names and new
values. . Its advantages are therefore greatly inferior to those offered by the tempenny
system, with which it coincides in the single disadvantage of abolishing the pound sterling
as a coin of account.
“I may conclude with an observation attributed to Mr. Rogers, which I believe represents
the feeling of a vast majority of the commercial classes, as proved by the little interest they
have taken in the question—‘I am satisfied with the present money and accounts, and desire
no change; but while the agitators confine themselves to the pound and mil plan I have no
fear, as that is simply impracticable: if they adopt the tenpenny, then we must look
about us.’”
To this I will only add the concluding paragraph of my pamphlet, p. 38.
“This (the penny) system might be brought into use without any confusion, and would
only require a very short declaratory act for the purpose. Indeed, any person might keep
accounts by it, without such sanction of the Legislature, but for the existence of the law
which requires that to establish a legal claim all accounts must be made out in the proper
money of accounts, viz., pounds, shillings, and pence. The law need only enforce the
following regulations:—
“1. That all accounts shall be kept in tenpences, which may be called albions and pence.
“2. That the gold now coined into sovereigns shall be divided into 24 silver tempences
or albions, each containing ten copper pence.
“3. That all contracts, where the word ‘shilling' is mentioned, shall be regarded as
implying an albion and twopence, or twelve copper pence.
“Perhaps the least objectionable course would be to pass a permissive act for accounts to
be kept either in the present manner, or in pence and albions, or by whatever name the ten-
penny coin may be designated; the Government coining albions and half albions, leaving the
gradual adoption of the decimal system to the convenience and experience of the people, and
adopting it themselves in the accounts of the Customs, and elsewhere if found convenient.
“I am aware that the permissive act instead of the obligatory has been strongly objected
to by some writers on the subject; but such objection can only be founded in want of faith
in the excellence and usefulness of the decimal system which they advocate.”
414. Considering the difficulties which you have enumerated you have come to the con-
clusion that it is inexpedient to make any attempt to introduce the decimal system into the
coinage of this country 2–Certainly.
415. But suppose that it should be the decision of the Government and of Parliament
that the decimal system of coinage shall be introduced into this country, do you think that
it would be more desirable to grapple with all those difficulties, for the sake of retaining the
pound sterling as the integer of account, or would it be expedient to surrender the pound
sterling for the purpose of obviating many of those difficulties, and incurring other difficulties
by a change in the integer of account in this country 2–You must get rid of the pound
sterling as a matter of account if you wish to introduce a practicable decimal coinage. I
thoroughly believe that if it were attempted to establish the system on the pound unit it
could never be carried into execution; 50 or 100 years would not bring it into use, and the
certain experience that we have of the difficulties of change, and of the very long period
required to bring the new system into full operation in other countries, confirm me most
strongly in the opinion which I have been compelled to form, that those advocates of change
in this country, who are continually speaking of it as the affair of a day, and as being
effected “once for all,” are very unsafe guides in a matter of such extreme difficulty and
such universal importance. -
416. In case the decimal coinage be introduced into this country, you are of opinion that
the pound sterling must be abandoned and some lower integer must be taken 2–Certainly.
I look upon that as conformable to the experience of all countries.
417. What integer ought to be taken, do you think 2–I do not recommond the abolition
of the pound, as I do not wish that any change should be made in our present system ; but
I consider the getting rid of the pound as a coin of account as of much less importance than
H
Dr. J. E. Gray.
º
5S MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
sººn
13th May 1856.
gº-ººººººº-ºº ºmºsº º-º-º-º
the alteration of the penny and of all our smaller coins, as it is only the richer and more
instructed part of the community who use pounds; and many commercial countries, indeed
I may say all countries but our own, and many parts of our own dominions, such as the
East and West Indies, appear to have experienced no inconvenience in keeping their
accounts in coins of much smaller value. Several countries, such as the United States,
Canada, and the West Indies, which formerly kept their accounts in pounds sterling, have
given up that system and adopted a smaller coin of accounts, even at the period when their
commercial importance has greatly increased.
In North and South America, Canada, the West Indies, Spain and its colonies, and
among the mercantile classes in China, accounts are kept in dollars = 4s. 2d.
In Prussia and Hanover, in thalers = 3s.
In India, in rupees of 2s.
In Austria and Holland, in florins = 1s. 8d.
In Sweden, in rixdalers = 1s. 8d.
In France, Belgium, Switzerland, Sardinia, Rome, Venice, Tuscany, Parma, Savoy,
Greece and Russia, in francs, or other coins, worth about 10d. -
From these observations it appears that the highest coin of account of these, which include
the most commercial countries of the world except our own, varies from about 4th to ºrth
of a pound sterling, and these countries find no commercial disadvantage in the low unit of
accounts. With regard to the question of an integer I take it as a rule that you should not
change the money of the people, the penny or the halfpenny. I look upon a penny as of much
more importance than the shilling. But it appears to me as a matter of very little practical
importance, whether we take the unit of 10d., or whether we take the American dollar
of 100 halfpence. For if we are to make such a change we should look at it in the broader
point of view. It would be desirable in the first place to consider what other countries have
done. It does appear that all the migratory nations who have colonized the earth, and the
Anglo-Saxon race in particular, prefer the dollar as the unit divided into cents. Go
where you will the dollar seems to be the prominent coin, wherever the decimal coinage
has been voluntarily adopted, as in the United States of America, in Canada, and in
the West Indies, where all accounts are now kept in dollars and cents. Therefore I do not
know whether, if any change is to be made, it would not be preferable that we should make
a change in alliance with them ; the dollar indeed may be regarded as the real coin of
commerce ; in France, although the franc is the coin of account, the coin of merchandise is
the five-franc piece, which is very near the dollar in value. No doubt, if you were to consider
this country alone, I should say take a coin of 10d., and its decimal multiples; but I think
the dollar has, in a coinage point of view, some advantages, and it is the second decimal
multiple of our existing halfpenny. If so large a change as that of our coinage should
ever be made, we ought to take into account every part of the question internationally as
well as in other respects. I beg to read the following paper, written some months ago, on
this subject :-- -
“From some of the discussions which have lately occurred, it would appear as if we
ought to regard a decimal system of accounts and coinage as synonymous with the adoption
of the French or, as it has been called, the ‘metrical system.’ This assumption I conceive
to be entirely at variance with the history of the subject, as I think the following outline
will explain —
“1. Certain countries, such as China and Portugal, appear to have used a decimal system
of account from their first existence as civilised communities, or at least its existence has
been traced back to their earliest historical records. In these countries, the system appears
to depend on the circumstance that, having adopted such a small unit for account as the cash
and the ree, its value is scarcely appreciable until it has been arithmetically accumulated,
and, as their arithmetic is decimal, its accumulation necessarily follows a decimal multipli-
cation. It is to be remarked, that in both these countries the coins are not decimal, but
only the accounts. In China there is no coin but cash, silver being an object of
merchandise varying in price with the state of the market, and in Portugal the coins are
generally duodeclimal, decimal coins having only been issued by the present Queen. The
Russian system, it appears, ought to be arranged under the same category; they have from
the earliest period of their history, as far as I can learn, counted their money by kopecks,
100 kopecks being a rouble ; but, until the last century, they had no coin of that denomi-
nation, the Polish and coins of the neighbouring countries being in circulation. I have
not been able to find the account of the introduction of a decimal system into Rome,
Naples, and the other smaller Italian States; I only know that it was in use apparently
long before the middle of the last century.
“The Roman decimal coinage is exactly similar to that afterwards adopted by the
American, namely a scudo (= a dollar) divided into a hundred centesimi, but in the
Roman and some other of the Italian States, the coins under the decimal system, and the
mixed duodecimal and vicesimal system, were in use at the same time.
“Very shortly after the treaty of peace between Great Britain and the United States
of America, which was ratified in 1784, the statesmen of the United States, finding the
currency of the country in a most confused and unsettled condition, recognized the absolute
necessity of placing it on a better footing. Indeed, Mr. John Adams, afterwards President,
appears to have paid attention to the subject as early as 1775 and 1776; (See Works, Vol. II.
14 and 515); and Thomas Jefferson, who appears chiefly to lave looked at it as it bore on the
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 59
work of the counting-house, believed that there were certain advantages in a decimal system
of computation. The question was referred by him to Mr. Robert Morris, the Financier of
the Confederation, and he reported to the Congress on the subject in 1782. In 1784
Mr. Jefferson replied to his statements, and communicated to Congress notes on the
‘ establishment of a money unit and of a coinage for the United States,’ in which he states
what he considers the advantages of a decimal system of accounts; and in 1786 Congress
made the ‘experiment' which he recommended, but added to his proposition while passing
through the Legislature, with the view of making it theoretically perfect, a mill (or a
thousandth part of a dollar) which he had avoided, and which has never practically come
into use ; they issued cents, with General Washington's head on them, in 1791, but I have
not seen any silver coins of an earlier date than 1794.
“In like manner as the ‘Declaration of Rights’ in America had so powerful an effect
in France, in hurrying on the French Revolution, so this change appears to have had its
influence as regards coinage and accounts ; for it was not until 1790, four years after the
adoption of the decimal system in America, that the attention of France was directed to
the subject.
“The National Assembly in 1790 demanded the opinion of the Academy of Sciences of
Paris on the propriety of fixing the alloy, and on other subjects connected with the coinage;
and ‘ also their opinion on the scale of division which they considered most advantageous,
‘ not only for weight, but for other measures and for money.’
“The Academy appointed a Commission, consisting of MM. Borda, Lagrange, Lavoisier,
Tillet, and Condorcet, who reported on the 27th of October 1790, recommending on the last
subject the decimal system, not because it was the best, but because it was consistent with
the system of arithmetic in universal use.
“This system was not brought into use in France until 1793 (An I.), when an ordinance
was issued, dated 24th August in that year, “directing the coinage of small money of a
‘ mixture of copper and bell metal to replace the pieces of two sous, of one sou, of six and
‘ of three deniers, by coins called decimes and centimes, and directing the coinage of pieces
‘ of one and five centimes.’ And on the 28th Thermidor, an ii. (1795), the National
Assembly made an ordinance for the issue of a good monetary currency, and the
‘ application to money of the new metrical system.’
“The chief practical alteration introduced was, the requiring people to count the change
of the frank or livre by ten double sous (or decimes) instead of by 20 sous, an alteration
which has not been brought into general use, even up to the present time; and this fact
fully justifies Mr. Airy's observation, that more than half a century after its introduction
“ the decimal scale seems not to have got hold of France,’ and also that of a friend who
had been used to the decimal coinage in America, who observed to me that ‘ he went to
* France with the idea that they had a decimal coinage, but somehow the sous always got
* in his way.' This historical account also appears to justify Mr. John Quincy Adam's
observation in his report of 1821, that ‘ the French themselves, in the application of the
‘ system to their coin, have followed our (the American) example.’ During the
discussion of the question in America, the Sierra Leone Company, established to
encourage trade with Africa, and to find a home for the negro soldiers who had entered
the King's service in the unhappy American war, in 1791 issued, apparently from the
Birmingham mint, four silver and two copper decimal coins, all bearing a lion on one side,
and a pair of hands (black and white) united in friendship on the other; these pieces
are called a “ dollar,’ a ‘half dollar.’ ‘ twenty cents,’ and ten cents piece,’ marked
with the numbers 100, 50, 20, 10; the copper coins are called ‘ one cent piece,’ and ‘one
penny piece, thus retaining the name of that universal coin in the decimal series. These
are amongst the first decimal coins issued and are of beautiful workmanship.
“ II. I do not know whether the meeting in favour of an international coinage in Paris is to
be taken as an attempt to flatter the vanity of the French, or as a real desire on the part of
certain persons to endeavour to make the metrical system of France universal. If the latter
is the case, I must say that I consider it a great mistake, and one only to be explained on
the supposition that it must have been taken up by persons who look upon the subject
as one interesting to them as occasional travellers, rather than for its commercial con-
Yenience and general usefulness. If we were to change to a decimal system for such a
purpose, and especially to obtain a coinage identical with that of any other country
universally current at its coined value, which I believe to be utterly impossible in practice,
it would be much more rational to make our system as nearly as possible like that of the
Americans and of our own colonies rather than like the French, when we consider the
amount of trade and commerce between these two countries,” compared with France and
the countries which have adopted the French coinage; the community of language,
common origin, and the rapid progress which the Anglo-Saxon nations are making in
extending their habits, manners and customs, and their monies, in different parts of the
world.
“In support of this view, it may be further observed that several countries (especially
our own dependencies, such as Canada, the West Indies, Singapore, &c.), have voluntarily
adopted the plan used in America :—in Singapore evidently not as an imitation, but for
Dr. J. E. Gray.
* Thus by our official returns, the declared value of the exports to the United States and Canada in 1854 was over
24 millions; and to France, Belgium, and Holland united, under 9 millions. The imports from the United States and
Canada in 1854 were over 31 millions ; and from France, Belgium, and Holland united, under 15 millions of pounds,
Q
~
13th May 1856.
*
60 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
the same reason that the Americans adopted it, the merchants finding the Spanish dollar
to be the chief coin in use among their European and native customers, and that an
hundredth part of it is a convenient coin of account, and sufficiently small to be used both
in wholesale accounts and for daily traffic among the people at large. The French system,
though it has been extended to various parts of Europe, has never been voluntarily adopted
by the people until it has been forced into use at the will of the first Napoleon during his
occupation of their territory ; and indeed some countries where it has been introduced,
and the coin even issued, as in Bavaria (edit 1809), Westphalia (edit 1807), the Duchy of
Baden (edit 1808, 1810), have refused to continue it, and returned to their old system.
“The only instance that has occurred to my knowledge of any country receiving
another nation's money as its own is in Belgium, where, on the re-adoption of the decimal
coinage the 23rd Article of the Law of the fifth of June, 1832, declared ‘the gold and
‘ silver decimal monies of France are to be received at the offices of State for their nominal
‘ value; but I never heard that France had been equally complaisant in that respect, as
I know by experience that the Belgian shopkeepers will rather lose the sale of their small
wares than take French copper money in exchange.
“Formerly, from the scarcity or total absence of any national coinage, Holland, Hamburg,
Genoa, Ireland (before the union), and other places, received silver, and especially the
gold coinage of other countries, at the intrinsic value of the pure metal they contained ;
and the United States made it a particular law, when they established their new coinage in
1792, “for the time being the gold and silver coins of Great Britain, France, Spain, and
* Portugal are allowed to be legal tenders in the payment of all debts within the United
‘States at the general rates following, to wit.” ‘’’ ‘ Provided that no foreign coin issued
“subsequent to the first day of January, 1792, shall be legal tender till samples thereof
‘shall have been assayed at the mint, and found to be respectively agreeable to the general
‘standard established by law.” When this was the case all traders were required to have
‘money scales,” as the Chinese still carry steel or rather ivory yards to determine the
weight of each coin offered, and to deduct 2d, or 24d. for each grain deficient from the
standard weight of gold coins; in fact, turning every one into “money-changers,” a state
of affairs certainly not to be desired. I believe, however, that each of these countries, as
they have gradually established their mints and coined for themselves, have abrogated this
custom of receiving foreign coins, and no longer consider any other coin than their own to
be a legal tender. Indeed, this is the less necessary as there are in every country of any
commercial importance, bankers and money-changers versed in the knowledge of foreign
coins, who exchange them for the money of the country at, or very nearly at, the value of
the pure metal they contain, and sometimes, when the exchange is in their favour, even at
a higher rate. I believe that all the promised advantages put forward by the advocates of
an international coinage would be procured by doing as was done by the American and
French, applying the decimal system to the coins now in most general use, and choosing
for the unit a coin of small value, in order that there may not be required more than one
or at most two places of decimals, and that the smalier coin shall not be too small for the
people to use as a whole number, as they undoubtedly will in their computations, and yet
not too large to be decimally subdivided, if necessary, for more minute calculations.
“ It appears to me that the penny and its decimal multiples embrace all these
advantages. Five tenpennies would be nearly identical in value with the dollar of the
United States and the scudo of Rome; and as they are subdivided in the same decimal
manner, there can be no difficulty in very quickly and certainly calculating the difference
per cent, between any number of the coins of other nations in their decimal parts.
“I believe that it is simply impossible to have a universal coinage that shall pass
current at its nominal value in other countries than that in which it is issued; for if at this
time the various countries of Europe and the United States were to come to an agreement
(which I think is very unlikely) to issue such a universal coin and its multiples, and make
them legal tender in each country, they must also agree that they will not make any difference
in the form, fineness, or standard of their coinage, such as America has several times found
it necessary to do to prevent the silver or gold from leaving the country, or the coins with
the altered value could no longer be so received, and could only be regarded as objects of
merchandise according to the value of the pure metal they contain, as at present; and this
would be such an interference with the free action of the currency of a Country as no
nation would submit to. For example, the sovereigns coined at the branch of the Royal
mint in Australia are not received as legal tender there or here.
“Secondly, If the coins were themselves of equal value, there would always be the
fluctuations of exchange, as clearly pointed out by Mr. Sumners of the United States, at
* Congress held last year in Paris. “This exchange,” that gentleman observed, “exists
‘ between different parts of the same country; it exists amongst the thirty republics of the
“ Union; it is seen in France between the great centres of population.” If this is the case
with the coins from the same mint of the same country in different parts of its dominions, how
much more obvious would be its effect as regards the coins of other countries circulating
throughout the different nations !
“Lastly. I would inquire why and for what benefit is this change to the decimal and
international system to be made.
“Our system of money and coinage is equally well adapted for the use of the largest
merchant and banker, and for the poorest of our people. It is not the “Babel of confusion,”
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. . 61
urgently requiring “renovation, like that of America and France when they adopted the
decimal system. Nor have we, thank God, the heel of the conqueror on our necks, as
when the Dutch, Italian, and Swiss accepted the change, less for the advantage of the
people than to satisfy the ambition and glory of the conqueror.
“The change is certainly not called for by the merchants and bankers, who know full
well the fallacies of the argument by which it is recommended, as is proved by the decided
manner in which they have kept aloof from any general expression of interest on the
question. It is as certainly not required by the mass of the people; for the females of all
classes, and the vast majority of the men, when spoken to on the subject, content themselves
with the expression of a fervent hope that ‘it will not take place in their time;’ and even
among the great agitators for the adoption of the decimal system, there appears to be no
sincere belief in the advantages of the decimal system in the abstract, nearly all of them
declaring that if they cannot have the special system for which they plead, no other will
suit their purpose, and they would greatly prefer having no change for the present.”
418. (Lord Overstone.) Has it ever come within your cxperience, practically, to meet
with any persons, of any class in the community, who, when taking our existing coins, for
the purpose of paying and receiving, have complained of the inconvenience of those coins,
and expressed a wish for a different system, with the view of obviating any practical
inconvenience 3–Certainly, it never has. I may state that I cannot find out where and how
the agitation of the question has grown up; it must be confined to a very few people; go
where I will I find that the number is limited, and we always have the lady part of the
population, who do not like changes, on our side. Here is a petition from the city of
London, in which I find it is recommended; but when you consider the large number of
inhabitants in London, and the few signatures to this petition, we see at once how few are
the individuals who recommend it, and how very few indeed the persons are that are
represented.
419. (Chairman.) What is the remark at the end of that paper?—If you refer to these
three small &c. &c. &c. in the corner, attach little value to them, as there is a blank in
the first column above them not filled up with names.
420. Does not that mean that there are other names than those appended to it 3–Pos-
sibly it may; but I know that in some of the firms said to sign it, as for example, that of
Morrison, Dillon, & Co., some of the partners are strenuous opponents of the system; and I
am perfectly satisfied the same is the case with many of the firms which I see there signed.
I know, of my own knowledge, some directors of the Bank of England, members of the
Stock Exchange and of Lloyd's, are opposed to the system referred to, and are decidedly
against any change.
421. You know that the number of signatures to every petition is printed by the autho-
rity of Parliament; would it surprise you to hear that that petition, which in its present
state only contains a very small number, practically contains close upon 1,000 names 2–I
only know the paper as it is sent forth by the Decimal Association, and I presumed that
they would give all the names which they considered as worth printing, as the other side
of the paper is quite blank.
422. But it ends with &c. &c. &c. *—I only know that, although a great deal has been said
about it, this petition, go where I will among the commercial men, either in London, Man-
chester, or even in Liverpool, it is a subject that they scarcely ever speak about, and if ever
they do it is to express a strong opinion against any disturbance of the present system.
423. Have you ever heard whether any one single petition, from the commencement of
this inquiry up to the present time, has been presented against the adoption of the decimal
system 2–I have not heard that there has ; and this may be accounted for by the fact
that there is no association which is trying to procure petitions against a change,
while there are two associations agitating to procure petitions in favour of a change, and it
is from those associations, and from them only, that these petitions originate. I have here
a circular, dated on the 27th of March last, from the Decimal Association, calling upon the
parties addressed to send in petitions, and we all know how easily petitions can be procured
by such means.
424. If the question has been in discussion for upwards of 10 years, if it has received the
sanction of a committee in Parliament, and a vote of two to one in the House of Commons,
and there has been a presentation of upwards of 100 petitions from different places, and
a great deal of controversy of which you are conscious, and to which you have very ably
contributed in a printed form, if the mass of the people were adverse to such a change, how
do you account for the singular silence on the part of all who object P-4Because I believe
that the mass of the people regard the agitation as one of mere theóry, and feel assured that
the change will not take place. If the people really believed there was any serious, risk.
of such a change, it is impossible to imagine that they would remain silent; but too much
weight should not be attached to the fact, that as yet no petitions have been sent in against
the change, the opponents have not yet formed societies to agitate the country. They
have carefully abstained from such a course. The difficulties of the Government will
arise when they attempt, if ever they do, to introduce the smaller coins which will foºm
no aliquot part of the existing coins, consequently will not form with them any even sum
i - ! . & . .
in either the old or the new system.
Dr. J. B. Gray.
13th May 1856.
H 3
62 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
I am aware that a majority of the House of Commons have declared “ that in the opinion
“ of this House, the initiation of the decimal system of coinage, by the issue of the florin,
“ has been eminently successful and satisfactory;” but I have never been able to obtain
from any of the members who voted in that majority, from any members of the Decimal
Association, or indeed from any one else, an answer to the question, “Who had ever used
the florin as an initiation of the decimal system,” or in any other way than as a simple two
shilling piece: or how, until the law is altered, allowing accounts to be presented otherwise
than in pounds, shillings, and pence, it could be legally used as an initiation, or in any way
help to introduce the decimal system. Fortunately, even a vote of the majority of the
great inquest of the nation cannot make things what they are not. It cannot fail to be
observed, that after passing this very questionable abstract resolution, the majority shrank
from the real question, and the mover withdrew the only practical part of his motion—the
issue of the cents and mils. It is well known that a large number of members allowed
their names to be used by an association formed to agitate for the introduction of a special
kind of Decimal Coinage, believing, as many of them now declare, that they were only
signing in favour of a decimal system generally, And, as one of the late Chancellors of
the Exchequer afterwards observed, there can be little doubt that the majority was
influenced by other motives, rather than any special love for cents and mils.
I may cite the words of Professor de Morgan, himself the greatest and most active
advocate of the pound and mil system, as conclusive evidence against the resolution of the
House of Commons, “In the name of common sense,” says that gentleman, “how can it
be objected to a system that people do not use it before it is introduced 2 Let the
decimal system be completed, and calculations shall be made in florins, that is, florins shall
take their proper place. If florins were introduced now, there must be a column for the
odd shilling.” Surely this is a complete contradiction of the resolution of the House,
which says that florins have successfully initiated the system.
425. (Lord Overstone.) You have no reason to suppose that the people of this country
generally contemplate the introduction of the decimal system as a real, practical measure
which is actually impending over them?—I certainly can say quite the contrary. Speaking
to people in commercial establishments I find that they almost universaily look upon it as
a question that is not practically impending over them.
426. You believe that the community generally look at it as a theoretical arrangement
rather than as a practical reality ?—Entirely so; even taking the Bank of England, Messrs.
Brown, Shipley, and Co., and Messrs. Morrison, Dillon, and Co., as fair representatives of the
commercial community of London and Liverpool, I do not hesitate to state, from an
acquaintance with many gentlemen connected with these establishments, that, if they were
fairly canvassed, it would be found that a vast majority of the directors, the partners, the
cashiers, and the clerks engaged in them, are decidedly adverse to any change in the coinage;
they generally express their perfect satisfaction with the present system, I will add that the
few directors of the bank, together with Mr. W. Brown, and Mr. Dillon who are the leaders
among the commercial men in the agitation for the change, are not so from any predilection for a
decimal system in the abstract, but are only desirous of obtaining the special decimal system
which they advocate, and openly avow that they would prefer that there should be no change
if the pound and mil scheme is not to be adopted. The members of the Stock Exchange
and Lloyd's, with whom I am acquainted, all assure me that they do not want any change,
and that the subject excites no interest with them, chiefly because they believe that it never
will be attempted to be carried into execution, and they cannot conceive for what interest
the change is proposed to be made. Indeed, as far as I can learn, the subject only interests
a very few persons indeed. I know from experience that pamphlets on the subject do not
sell; Mr. Ridgeway at the west end, and Mr. Effingham Wilson and Mr. Richardson in the
city, have each told me so. Mr. Ridgeway informed me he was desired by one author on the
subject to give his pamphlet away, but he doubted if the few who availed themselves of the
gift even read it; Mr. E. Wilson has repeatedly told me that he does not keep any stock
of these pamphlets, because they are not called for like other pamphlets on commercial
questions, and that the copy he has procured for me has been the only one he has sold
I know that the newspapers either refuse to insert articles on the subject, or when they
have inserted one or two refuse to continue the discussion, because they excite no interest
among the people, and this even when the editor or sub-editor themselves take some little
interest in the question, and have themselves taken a part in the discussion. The officers of the
Society of Arts, the house where first the Decimal Association, and since they have left the
International Association, have held their meetings, have repeatedly told me the public take
no interest in the question. It is the same with the meetings; I am informed that at some
of the meetings of the International Association only a very few, under a half-dozen persons,
have attended; and the Decimal Association have disbanded their staff, given up their office,
and now send forth their circular from “the Gresham Club” in the city. Some persons
believe that interest is takén in the subject because several pamphlets have been published;
but, if these writings are examined, it will be found that the greater part of them are from
persons who have paid little attention to the subject, who write on the spur of the moment
believing that they have made a great discovery, and hasten into print with so little know-
ledge as plainly to show by their want of information that they take no particular interest
in the matter; it was to assist in dispelling this delusion that I extended the list of papers,
&c., on decimal systems, printed in the Journal of the Society of Arts.
DECIMAIL COIN AGE COMMISSION. 63
427. This petition is signed by Morrison, Dillon & Co. —Yes.
428. Is not Mr. Slater a partner in that firm 2–Yes.
429. Is that the Mr. Slater who gave evidence strongly expressing his opposition to the
introduction of any decimal system —Undoubtedly the same.
430. (Chairman.) Are you not aware that Mr. Dillon is also an acting member of that
house ?–Undoubtedly the most active member.
431. Are you aware that he has been examined upon the subject, and has expressed a
strong opinion in favour of the matter?—I am not aware that he has been examined. He
went up on a deputation, of which your Lordship also formed a part, to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, I believe.
432. (Lord Overstone.) Do you know anything of the opinions of Mr. Dillon 2–Yes,
perfectly. We are old friends. But I did not intend to introduce personal considerations;
I only wished to state, generally, that I had found that many persons belonging to firms
or societies which are said to have signed that petition, are either adverse to any change or
to the system proposed.
433. (Chairman.) Are you not aware that at one of the public meetings held upon the
subject, Mr. Dillon was one of the parties who came forward strongly advocating and
recommending the decimal system 2–I am quite aware that he attended a meeting, but I
could hardly call it a public meeting. I believe, although Mr. Dillon is an active advocate
(and that I believe is very general with those whose names are attached to this petition)
for the pound and mil system of decimal coinage, he would be very sorry to see any other
system carried into execution, and would rather the coinage remained as it is.
434. Referring to the definition which you give in page 9 of a perfect decimal system
of coins and accounts, namely, that the various denominations of money of account should
increase by a regular decimal progression, as all that was necessary to enable us to use a
simple instead of our present compound arithmetic, is not that definition of a perfect
decimal system of coins and accounts realized in the mode in which we state the pounds as
distinguished from the shillings, pence, and farthings?—Undoubtedly, because our arithmetic
is decimal, and therefore the accumulations of any number of the same denomination must
be decimal, also. It is the same thing as occurs with regard to the rei in Portugal, the
cash in China, and the kopeck in Russia, as I have before stated, but it does not bear on
the millesimal division of the pound into fractions.
435. I ask you whether, with respect to the facility of the operation and avoidance of
the chances of errors, there is not a distinction in favour of the statement of pounds and
working out pounds simply, over the statement and working out shillings, pence, and farthings,
in all the more complicated systems of accounts?—There can be no doubt that there is a
greater regularity in the mode of their addition, but I believe that the breaks are useful in
diminishing the chances of error. I may observe, as an illustration of the question, that a
great deal has been said about the introduction of the decimal system in weighing gold in
both the Mint and the Bank of England; yet I am told by more than one officer in both
those establishments that they prefer the old method to the new one, as being more easy
and certain in the operation.
436. In page 22 of your pamphlet you refer to the head of the bullion department as an
authority to show “that the change had not been attended by any reduction of labour, but
“ on the contrary, by an increase; that the clerks were continually obliged to refer to the
“ table showing the two systems, and that the new system was found so inconvenient that
“two of the largest bullion brokers refused to use it.” Could you give the Commissioners the
names of those bullion brokers?—I do not consider myself at liberty to mention their names
without permission. But I give you the words exactly as Mr. Haggard used them to me
in conversation. I asked whether he had any objection to my recording it, and he allowed
me to do so; and I was told at the Mint exactly the same thing by two of the chief officers
a few months ago. And I may further add, that since the new system has come into use
at the Bank, they have found it necessary to publish “Decimal Tables as used at the
Bank.”
437. Are not the uses of the tables referred to rather for the purpose of convenience
in referring, and converting the old system into the new 2–No, they have nothing to
do with the old system. There are two other similar sets of tables lately published,
one by Mr. Slater's son.
438. They are used in the same way as interest tables, are they not ?—Yes; probably.
439. Are they in general use in commercial houses 2—If you refer to ready reckoners I
believe they are not used in commercial houses. They may be used in some private
families, but I believe there is a great objection on the part of commercial men to shopmen
who do not calculate by mental arithmetic, which is done more rapidly than by referring to
tables; whereas no doubt one of the great evils of a change of the coinage would be
that it would render the system of education by mental arithmetic hitherto followed
useless, so that all shopkeepers, retail traders, and their customers would have to learn
a new system. Mental arithmetic is one of the things which the poorer class of people
particularly attend to ; it is so useful and familiar to them that many can reckon extremely
well who cannot either read or much less write ; and the whole of that information which
has cost them many years to obtain would be rendered useless by the change.
440. You suggested, did you not, as a possible inconvenience of the decimal system, the
confusion that might arise by the use of the decimal dot, if placed erroneously 2–I did ; in
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
H 4 -
64 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Jr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
my pamphlet, I have cited a remarkable instance, see page 6, where the very clever author
of a pamphlet in favour of the pound and mil system, has made a most gross mistake of the
kind, and I could refer to others.
441. Do you think that the system of pounds, florins, cents, and mils, would require in
any shape necessarily the use of the decimal dot?—I think it would, unless you keep your
accounts wholly in mils or farthings reduced four per cent. in value; and you would have to
state your national debt, as that is the favorite example, and every other amount, in farthings,
a most useless, and, indeed, senseless change. ... e Լ
442. Suppose in the ordinary system of dividing or mode of enumeration in a common
account book, as is the case between pounds, shillings, and pence, that faint lines were
drawn between florins, cents, and mils, what would be the difference of protection or
convenience given in the one case or in the other?–It would be very well so far as books
of accounts were concerned, but when you came individually to state the items of your
account on ordinary paper, for calculations or otherwise, you would not have those lines
then, and you must put in your dot, and even with the line without the dot I fear
mistakes would be numerous.
443. Would you not have the same protection against confusion in pounds, florins, cents.
and mils, that you now have in respect to pounds, shillings, and pence 2—You might as far
as account books are concerned, but the decimal dot is more facile, and would be used on
ordinary statements of accounts as it is in most of the decimal systems now in use.
444. You stated originally to the Commissioners that the use of the decimal dot might,
from mistakes in placing it, lead to inconvenience and confusion?—Allow me to observe, I
believe your lordship is speaking of large sums; I was referring to small sums; I referred
particularly to sums of a few pence, where if you do not put before the dot the necessary
noughts, the amount would look as if it were stated in pounds instead of mils, that is where
one great difficulty is. As far as large sums are concerned you might have books all pro-
perly ruled, but the difficulty is in the small sums, which after all make up the real
pecuniary transactions of life. The small sums are what our coins are made for.
445. Are you able to tell the Commissioners whether any such confusion arises in stating
francs and cents in France?—They always use the decimal dot, and they use only two
denominations. It is a remarkable thing in France that as 05 only represents about the
value of a halfpenny, you scarcely ever have any other terminal figure than 5. If the
same rule were to prevail in the pound and mil system, as it most assuredly would in most
cases your steps instead of being by halfpence would be by nearly five farthings at a
time, and there would then be a great loss on small sums and their accumulations.
446. (Lord Overstone.) Will not the difficulty you are dealing with be increased in con-
sequence of the wider space between our highest and lowest money of account 7–
Undoubtedly; it is that which creates the insurmountable difficulty of the system of
reckoning by pounds and mils.
447. (Chairman.) So far as accounts are concerned, would it be anything more than a
representation requiring three figures according to the mil system, and in France according
to the cent system requiring two?—In France the last figure is almost always 5.
448. Is not that a matter of convenience?—It is comparatively a very small sum which
the 5 represents there; it represents as low as a halfpenny, and, therefore, accounts do not
generally require any other figures; in our case, where the cent would represent a much
larger sum, we ought to have a variety of those figures.
449. Suppose they write down 75 francs in France they employ two figures?—Yes.
450. And all the multiples of 5 up to 100 would be represented by two figures?—No
doubt of it; but the decimal figures being less numerous, only two instead of three are
much more easily comprehended, especially as the sceond column is of so small a value.
But for facility it is certainly much better to use the fractional half, as in our system, which
half, either in writing or calculation, is quite as easily made and understood as if it were
only a single figure. t
451. Have you seen any accounts kept in such a way as mechanically to guard against
a mis-statement in the pounds by putting the pounds under the wrong column, and in the
shillings a similar mistake, or mixing the shillings with the pence, and as to the pence
guarding them from mixture with the shillings?—Such things must occur. I have seem
Some accounts made out according to the pound and the mil system ; they look very heavy
and difficult to read from the sameness of the figures. I am told by persons who have
tried them they are difficult to add up.
452. I am referring to our present system. Will you just look at that account,
(an account being handed to the witness,) and see how it is guarded against the possibility of
mistakes?—It may possibly be done as regards such accounts.
453. In that account are there not faint lines to distinguish the separate places of the
pound sterling, and faint lines to distinguish the separate place of the shillings from the
sixpences, and where decimal fractions are added are there not faint lines to separate them
from the higher denominations and from each other ?–In the paper you showed me it is
so, but this consists of large accounts from the National Debt Office; the case which I
am always more particularly desirous of referring is that of the small sums, that is where
the difficulty is. In regard to large sums there is no doubt that people who are in the habit
of making out their accounts and of dealing with large numbers find no difficulty in any
system of accounts which they use; whatever the system may be is to them of very little
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 65
importance, but we must recollect that coins are for the use of the poor and uneducated,
who know little of accounts and still less of large sums.
454. But with respect to France, are not the smallest accounts made out in francs and in
centimes, without inconvenience or confusion or complaint 2–But it is exactly as if we
made out our accounts here in shillings and pence only. There are only two denominations,
the highest being less than a shilling in value, so that small sums are more easily
recollected.
455. (Lord Overstone.) Is it within your knowledge, or are you able to answer the
question, whether in France the small accounts are made out in francs and centimes without
inconvenience or confusion ?—I should say that they were as liable to confusion as a similar
system would be among ourselves. I have a relative who is very much occupied in putting
down decimal figures, and he tells me that the manner of putting down decimal figures is much
more difficult than putting down pounds, shillings, and pence, and that difficulty increases
in exactly the ratio in which these figures are lengthened. He is in a bank where they
use decimal accounts for receiving gold, and he says that in putting down a multitude of
decimal figures he finds more liability to error than in putting down pounds, shillings,
and pence, arising from the figures having no variety of relation the one with the
other. It is like the letters of the alphabet placed in confusion and in words; the one it
would be almost impossible to recollect and the other comparatively easy. I should state
that to him both systems were equally new for the purpose for which they were applied,
and that he was well versed in the use of decimals, so there was neither practice nor
prejudice to be overcome.
456. You referred a little while ago to mental arithmetic ; have you considered
the comparative merits of the decimal system and the present system as to its facility
for mental operations by the lower classes?—Mental arithmetic as now taught would
be utterly destroyed. It depends upon the varied relations between our weights and
measures and our coinage. It is in these variations that the facilities of mental
arithmetic consists and if you alter the system of coinage you entirely alter all the rules of
mental arithmetic. To show the connection of mental arithmetic with our present coinage
it is only necessary to quote a few of the common rules:—“1. To find the value of a dozen
articles, take the price in pence as shillings, and add for each farthing 3d. 2. To find the
value of any number of grosses, find the value of one dozen, and take that amount as the
value of one of another dozen. 3. To find the value of 100 articles, the price of one
being given, for every farthing take as many pence and twice as many shillings. 4. To
find what any number of pence per day will amount to in a year, take the 365 days as
pence and multiply that sum by the number of pence given. 5. To find the value of a
pound at any price per ounce, take the price in farthings as shillings and divide by 3.
6. To find the value of an ounce at any price per pound, take the shillings as farthings and
multiply by 3. 7. To find the value of a hundred-weight at any number of pence per pound,
multiply 9s. 4d. by the number of pence. 8. To find the value of a pound when the
price of the hundred-weight is given, multiply the price in shillings by 3 and divide by 7,
and you will have the value of one pound in farthings. 9. To find the interest of any
sum of money at 5 per cent. for any number of months, take the pounds as pence and
multiply by the months, 10. To find the value of an ounce at any price per pound, take
the shillings as farthings and multiply by 3, or the price in pence and divide by 4; the
answer in farthings. Almost every trade have their own rules of mental arithmetic
specially adapted to their purpose, and depending entirely on the mixed divisions of our
money, weights, and measures. These rules are well known both to the grown persons
employed in the trade and the public ; supposing a new system introduced, they will have
to learn new methods of counting, so that any change must be injurious to them, and can
only be advantageous (if at all) to those that are not yet born; hence we may very well
account for the total want of interest in the subject shown by the people at large. “In the
exclusive adoption of decimal sub-divisions, M. Hippolyte Dussard (of Paris) saw only a
moderate advantage, since the ancient subdivisions familiarize the mind with the calculation
of aliquot parts, the use of which is so frequent in actual practice.” “M. Joseph Garnier
(of Paris) agreed with M. Dussard on the necessity of making young persons familiar with
the calculation of aliquot parts. Notwithstanding the advantages of the decimal subdivision
it ought not to be adopted too exclusively. The subdivision into halves, quarters, eighths,
and into thirds, sixths, twelfths, &c., is equally natural with the decimal subdivision, and
in certain circumstances is more convenient and better accommodated to practice.”— Yates,
Narrative, p. 45.
457. As an example of comparative facility for mental calculation in the public market,
take the case of 1s. 4d. and 1s. 8d., which I presume any ordinary person would at once
know make 3s. Do you think, if the equivalent values of those two sums were taken in
mils, namely, 66 mils and 83 mils, it would be equally easy for an ordinary person in the
market to know that they made 149 mils?—Certainly not.
458. If you add to that 1s. 6d., which every ordinary person would know makes 4s. 6d.,
do you think that in the addition of the equivalent sum in mils, namely 75, would be
equally easy for an ordinary person to know that the three sums which in the one case
make 4s. 6d. in the other make 224 mils?–No.
459. Do you think that in the one case there would be a facility of saving time and an
opportunity for accuracy which would be lost in the other case ?—Undoubtedly. It refers
I
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
66 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
to all the concerns of domestic life, and I think that the difficulty of reckoning for the
eople at large will be tenfold increased. -
460. Do you think that the particular case that has been put to you is a mere sample of
endless multitudes of transactions of a similar character, which must occur in every market
and in every shop in this country daily —Undoubtedly.
461. And the inconvenience, therefore, which you think in that particular case would
clearly attend the decimal system is an inconvenience which would exist in a multiplied
number of instances throughout every market and in every shop in the kingdom 7–It would
be an enormous evil and an intolerable grievance upon the poorer classes. Then, again,
there is the difficulty of the change of value, which is a matter to which I would beg
particularly to draw the attention of the Commissioners. Now you have a penny, but
according to the pound and mil system the coin will be five farthings instead of a penny.
It is very easy to say that competition will make all these things right, but if the four
farthings produce as much as a man wants, and you compel him to spend five, it is a great
grievance. Wherever you have a decimal system you may depend upon it that the price of
all common articles will be five and not four. Though the coin is divided into ten, you
may rest assured that people will halve it; the half is a division so imprinted in the human
mind that you will always have articles sold by halves and quarters, whether your coins be
decimal or non-decimal. If your cent is 2}d., the half of which comes to five farthings,
a penny article will be sold for five farthings: competition may in some cases increase the
quantity of the article, so that you may get additional weight, but still the shilling will
only be sufficient for 10 purchases instead of 12, and practically there would be a loss of
2d. in every poor man's shilling now laid out in pence. I speak on this subject from
experience of what I have seen on the continent, and from my knowledge of the general
nature of the purchases of the poor.
462. (Chairman.) Have you heard that this loss was sustained in any of the foreign
countries where such a system was abandoned and another preferred and substituted ?—
There has been no such system brought into use during the period I have been in any
country, except in Switzerland, where much imposition is constantly practised, in charging
according as it is the interest of the seller to calculate by the new or the old coins. But
generally, my experience in all countries of Europe where the decimal coinage is in use, is
that you have always the five as the lowest denomination of accounts; that is taken as the
lowest sum, and there is never any intermediate one.
463. As you have had experience in those countries, and have taken the trouble of
investigating the consequences of those changes, has the result of your inquiry led you to
imagine that it involved a great forfeiture of the interests of the buyers, adding to the
profit and advantage of the sellers ?—I think the evil is great on both sides; I have never
been at the very time when the change has taken place, except in Switzerland; but I
judge by the uniform use of 5 as the lowest denomination, that if in this country 50 mils
are made equivalent to a shilling, you will only get 10 such denominations out of your
shilling instead of 12; and although you may say that 4 mils will more nearly make a
penny, still such is the strength of custom in resorting to a half, of whatever the account
consist of, that you will lose by it, and this by no means arises from indifference to the
loss. I have not myself had personal experience, but I have been told by Mr. Foggo, an
artist who was in Paris during the time of the change that took place in France, that the
continued battle that existed solely on account of the difference between the livre and the
franc, was something quite fearful; the difference was gºth, and there was no coin
representing ºth; they gave you a franc and a centime, but a centime was not enough,
and the battle was whether a second centime should be given or not.
464. In page 35 you state the danger that might result from the adoption of the pound
and mil system, from “the fearful amount of labour, the endless accumulation of blunders,
“ and the incalculable frauds of which the ignorant and unwary would be the certain
“ dupes.” Is that the result to which you have now come, and to which you invite the
approbation of the Commissioners?—Undoubtedly ; I go on to say that the system would
cause “injustice to the community at large, independent of the more mechanical difficulties
“in the way of its adoption, which Sir John Herschell, one of the strongest advocates of
“ the system, has so well described, as well as the gradual and cautious manner in which
“ alone it either ought to be, or could be carried out; ” that appears to me equally
important as one of the grounds on which I come to my conclusions.
465. Nothwithstanding that statement, I need not ask you whether Sir John Herschell
is favourable or adverse to the question?—His opinion, like that of many learned mathe-
maticians to whom it offers no difficulties, is favourable; but he has clearly stated it as his
deliberate conviction, that the people would require a long preliminary preparation for
the change; I think he says 20 years, and he gives the most cogent reasons for coming to
this conclusion.
466. At page 33 you state, “In the system proposed by the Parliamentary Committee,
“ the pound sterling would be preserved as the unit, an advantage it must be admitted,
“indeed the only redeeming point of the system, but one that may be purchased too
“dearly.” I ask you whether, independently of the connection of this with the pound and
mil scheme, you consider that the preservation of the pound unit as the integer is a
material point P−I consider it so far desirable that I would not make any change at all; but
if it is necessary to have a decimal coinage, it can only be obtained, so as not to be injurious
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 67
to the mass of the people, by the abolition of the pound as a coin of account; I have before
given my reasons for this opinion, in detail.
467. (Mr. Hubbard.) Not comparing the preservation of the pound with any particular
system, but taking it by itself as a great point, is it your opinion that it is better to
preserve the pound sterling than to adopt the best system of decimal coinage with which
the pound sterling would not consist as the unit of value 2–I have said that I consider our
present system as perfect as it can be. I do not see what are the advantages which we
shali derive from any change, unless you make a change for international objects; but
for our own individual purposes I do not see the advantage of a change. I would rather
remain without any change.
468. (Chairman.) Do you not say, at page 9, after your very correct definition of a
perfect decimal system of coins and accounts, “A simple system of this kind there is no
doubt would, in the words of the Committee, ‘simplify accounts, greatly diminish the
labour of calculation, at the same time that the education of the people would be much
facilitated by the introduction into our schools of a system so directly calculated to render
easy the acquirement of arithmetic,’—which desirable results would, however, certainly not
be obtained by the plan proposed by the Committee itself?”—Precisely. But I confess
that the more I have examined into the decimal system as it exists in other countries, the
more convinced am I that its advantages have been greatly overrated, and its disadvan-
tages overlooked. When I came to examine more particularly into the practical working
of a decimal coinage in other countries, and to consider the inconveniences which must
accompany a change to it, I became fully convinced that they are far greater than the
presumed theoretical advantages of a decimal system; but if it is determined that the change
is to be made, then I still advocate the retention of the penny, and making it the basis of
the system. Upon the question of the education of the people, I feel satisfied, on mature
consideration, that it would be no advantage whatever; I think, on the contrary, that the
system, teaching the people to count solely by tens, would be an absolute disadvan-
tage in education. The present system gives origin to whole series of rules of arithmetic,
which, if you reduce them to nothing but counting by tens, would generally be discarded,
and you would thereby diminish the usefulness and the perfection of the system of educa-
tion. I would say, of the exclusive adoption of the Decimal system, as to its effect on
education, what M. Janet says of the tendency of the present system of education in
general, which, by professing to make arithmetic amusing, and geography a joy, takes all
bone and muscle out of the child's character, and sends it into the world flabby in principle
and impotent of purpose. Just imagine how cramped and dwarfed must be the mind of
clerks in general, if they were condemned only to count by tens; and what a miserable
mill-horse routine they would be subjected to in their monotonous daily round. By
attempting to simplify too far, you diminish the amount of useful knowledge, and reduce
the mind too much to the condition of a mere machine.
469. If you can gain the same results by simpler means, with less danger and less risk of
inaccuracy, do not you think that any more complex system of teaching is so much time
and labour thrown away?—I have not yet found that you get greater accuracy. I dispute
that assumption, and I think that I can prove to the Commissioners that even people who
have been most strong upon that question have found reason to modify their opinions. If
you refer back to the report of the French Academy itself, on which the present French
system was founded, it distinctly tells you that they would never have recommended the
decimal system, but the duodecimal, were it not the latter would have required a change
of the system of notation,-they only took it because they found it most conformable to
the imperfect system of notation in use. A reviewer, in an able article upon that
report in the Edinburgh Review, said to have been Professor Playfair, expresses his
regret that they did not adopt the duodecimal system, and gives very cogent reasons why
that system ought to have been adopted in preference to the decimal. Professor Leslie, too,
in a most philosophical book on arithmetic, shows in detail the great advantage of
duodecimal arithmetic over decimal. And there is a modern Italian book, dedicated to the
English nation, demonstrating its superiority. I have in my hands a paper, which was
pointed out to me by one of the gentlemen connected with this Commission, containing an
extract from Napoleon's Memoirs, by Comte Montholon, in which Napoleon himself
specially points out the advantage of the duodecimal over the decimal system. The
passage is as follows:–
“Les savans conçurent une autre idée tout à fait étrangère au bienfait de l'unité de
poids et de mesures ils y adaptèrent la numération décimale, en prenant le mêtre pour unité,
ils supprimèrent tous les nombres complexes. Rien n'est plus contraire à l'organisation de
l'esprit, de la memoire et de l’imagination. * * * Il est vrai que la numération décimale
généralisée et exclusivement adapté au mètre comme unité donne des facilités aux
astronomes et aux calculateurs, mais ces avantages sont loin de compenser l'inconvénient
de rendre la pensée plus difficile. La première caractère de toute méthode doit étre
d’aider la conception et l'imagination, faciliter la mémoire donner plus de puissance à la
pensée. Les nombres complexes sont aussi anciens que l'homme, parcequ'ils sont dans la
nature de son organisation, tout comme il est dans la nature de la numération décimale de
s'adapter ā chaque unité, a chaque nombre complexe et non a une unité exclusivement.
Enfin ils se servirent de racines Grecques, ce qui augmentales difficultés, ces denominations
qui pouvaient étre utiles pour les savans n'etaient pas bonnes pour le peuple.”—“ Le
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
I 2
68 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
JDr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
nouveau système de poids et mesures sera un sujet d’embarras et de difficultés pour
plusieurs générations.” -
The originator of the decimal system of coin in America, Mr. Adams himself, and an
advocate for a decimal system of weights and measures, observes:—
“It appears also not to have been considered that decimal arithmetic, although affording
great facilities for the computation of numbers, is not equally well suited for the division
of material substances. A glance of the eye is sufficient to divide material substances
into successive halves, fourths, eighths, and sixteenths; a slight attention will give thirds,
sixths, and twelfths. But the divisions of fifth and tenth parts are among the most
difficult that can be performed without the aid of calculation. Among all its conveniences
the decimal division has the great disadvantage of being itself divisible only by the
numbers two and five.
“The duodecimal division, divisible by two, three, four, and six, would offer so many
advantages over it, that while the French theory was in contemplation, the question was
discussed whether the reformation of the weights and measures should not be extended to
the system of arithmetic itself, and whether the number twelve should not be substituted
for ten, as the term of the periodic return of the unit. * * * He (Delambre) admits
to the full extent the advantages of a duodecimal over a decimal arithmetic, but alleges the
difficulty of effecting the reformation as the decisive reason against attempting it.”—p. 70.
Mr. Adams also observes:—
“The experience of France has proved that binary, ternary, duodecimal, and sexagesimal
divisions are necessary to the practical use of weights and measures, as the decimal
divisions are convenient for calculations resulting from them, and that no plan for
introducing the latter can dispense with the continued use of the former.”—p. 93.
“Deciding from the verdict of experience, therefore, it is doubtful whether the
advantage to be obtained by any attempt to apply decimal arithmetic to weights and
measures would ever compensate for the increase of diversity which is the unavoidable
consequence of the change, Decimal arithmetic is a contrivance of man for computing
numbers, and not a property of time, space, or matter. Nature has no partiality for the
number 10, and the attempt to shackle her freedom with them will ever prove
abortive.”—p. 84.
This observation appears to me to be equally applicable to the use of coins as means of
barter for the purchase of articles. Mr. Cubitt states that the most convenient subdivision
of length appears to be the following:—
“The foot divided decimally as the unit of measure for those who pursue calculations
and investigations of a scientific nature, and divided into inches and eighths for all working
and practical purposes.”—Rep. Standard, 1841–184.
Although I do not think a change impracticable throughout the country, should good
cause be shown for a change, yet I think the good to be obtained by an extensive alteration
would not compensate the evil or difficulties in obtaining it.
A friend has sent me the following example of the disadvantages of the decimal
system :-
“1. It will be impossible to obtain a single loaf or a single candle, which are at present
bought by the retailer at 13 for the dozen, and sold to the public at one penny each, unless
at a loss of 20 per cent.
“2. It will be impossible, under a decimal system of coinage, with ll as the integer, to
ascertain precisely (far less to pay) a month's wages at the common salary of 100l. a
year.
“3. It will be impossible to pay for a day's labour where the hiring is at the common
Wages of a pound a week.
“4. It will be impossible to ascertain the exact value of one foot where the price is
ll. per yard.
* 5. It will be impossible to ascertain the value of 1 oz. troy where the amount per
pound is ll, or the value of 1 lb. at 20s, per quarter avoirdupois.”
470. (Chairman.) Was not the system introduced before Napoleon'?—Yes; the
Americans first introduced the change, and then the republic of France followed it up;
but Napoleon extended it as a badge of conquest in the part of Europe which he
subjugated.
471. (Lord Overstone.) As you are quoting various authorities on the subject of the
duodecimal system, I ask you whether you agree in the authority of the following
statement extracted from a treatise published as long ago as the year 1640:—“The number
“ 12, of all the numbers, is the most proper for money, being most clear from fractions and
“ confusion of account, by reason that of all other numbers it is most divisible, being
“ divisible into units as all numbers are, into two parts as no odd number is, into three
“ parts as no even number is but six, and numbers that consist of six; into four parts,
“ into which six is not divisible; and also into six parts?”—I entirely agree with that.
472. (Chairman.) By the duodecimal system that you refer to, of course you mean the
entire abandonment of our present Arabian or Indian system, and the adoption of a system
which should go from 10 to 12 places —I do not recommend such a change; but I mean
to say, (and this is what they say themselves,) that even the first recommenders of the
decimal system did not recommend that system as being the best.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 69
473. Has any country on earth that has yet been known ever adopted the duodecimal
system 2–I am not aware of any country having adopted it as a system of arithmetic,
but we have applied it to our coinage, and to many of our weights and measures, and thus
have obtained many of its advantages without subjecting ourselves to the mischiefs insepa-
rable from all large changes in the habits of the people. I believe that the mass of the
people would not have the smallest objection to commercial men making whatever alteration
they may consider most advantageous in the mode of keeping accounts; but it is no
trifling affair to attempt to alter the money or coin used by the people in their daily
transactions, and it certainly should not be attempted without unquestionable proof of
great and decided advantages to be derived from the change, and even then not unless it
should be unmistakingly called for by the majority of the people themselves. Now, I must
own that, notwithstanding the most extensive inquiries, I cannot find the least indication
of such a desire on the part of the people, nor any proof of the advantages of the change
recommended by the Decimal Association and the Committee of the House; a change as
far as the money is concerned so revolutionary in its plan that I doubt if America, in the
first effervescence of her independence, or France in the heat of her revolutionary fervour.
would have ventured to attempt so radical an overthrow of existing institutions.
Adjourned.
Wednesday, 4th June, 1856.
The Right Hon. Lord OVERSTONE in the chair.
THEODORE W. RATHBONE, Esq., examined.
474. (Chairman.) I believe you have been long connected with the neighbourhood of
Liverpool, and have had means of observing the general commercial and monetary transac-
tions of that place 2–Yes, I have.
475. Have you also been extensively connected with railway transactions 2—Yes, as a
director of several railways, from the first introduction of the system.
476. Have you also resided abroad and had the means of observing the monetary systems
of other countries?—Yes, decimal systems especially, and where they have been long in use.
477. You have therefore paid considerable attention to the question now before this
Commission of the propriety or otherwise of introducing the decimal principle into the
coinage of this kingdom 2–Yes, I have considered it very deeply for many years past.
478. Have you formed any definite opinion upon the subject 2—I have long entertained
a very decided opinion that great advantage would result from the safe and sound intro-
duction of a decimal system into this country, and for some time past I have been
decidedly of opinion that it is perfectly practicable so to introduce such a system.
479. What do you mean by the safe and sound introduction of a decimal system of currency?
—I think it would be only safe and sound, or even practicable, if founded on the existing coins
and monies of account. I look upon it that the penny must be the unit and basis upon which
you must and may found and practically introduce a perfect decimal system, and that you
may do so without any inconvenient interference with the other coins.
480. Are the Commission to understand that it is your decided opinion that the decimal
rinciple ought to be introduced into the coinage of this country?—Quite decided.
481. Will you have the goodness to state the grounds upon which you rest that opinion ?
—I have always found much greater simplicity, accuracy, and economy of time, with the
decimal system, both in accounts and calculations and in the use of coins, and so
many advantages arising out of a decimal, rather than a duodecimal, or any other system
with which I am acquainted, that I have come to a very decided conclusion in favour of
that principle. I believe that the immediate saving of time and labour to the public
would be, as demonstrated by the examples I have submitted, such as to reduce the figures
required in calculations from a third to a fifth of the present number, in the first place.
482. To what do you allude when you use the words “so many advantages arising out
of a decimal system”?—The first great advantage is, that in all calculations, I believe you
would require but a third to a fifth of the work, and in addition secure the further
important advantage of very much greater simplicity, accuracy, and reduced risk of error,
in every kind of operation.
483. Do you think that the decimal system has the same degree of superiority when
applied to the division and distribution of material things which it has when applied to
purposes of calculation ?—I think it would have perhaps even greater advantages in that
point of view, if carried out completely, as I propose, as furnishing us a much better and
more exact measure of value than we have at present, when applied to material things.
484. Do you think that it is the natural tendency of mankind to divide material com-
modities upon the decimal, rather than upon the duodecimal system 2–I think it is, and
that they would always find very great advantage in doing so; and if they had the oppor-
tunity fairly given them. that they would always avail themselves of it.
485. How do you reconcile that opinion with the greater divisibility of the number 12
than the number 10 °–You have certainly more useful factors in the number 12 than 10,
Dr. J. E. Gray.
13th May 1856.
Mr. T. W. Rath-
bone.
4th June 1856.
70 M1NUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. T. W. Rath-
bone,
4th June 1856.
but then you have a much simpler and more perfect and useful monetary system in that
founded on the number 10, and the same result from extending the principle of our present
decimal arithmetic, as I propose, uniformly on through our weights and measures by
advancing, in all, decimally from familar and well established units.
486. Is it not the object and purpose of all divisions of commodities, to render the
greatest possible equal number of fractional parts in a clear and complete form *- Yes.
487. I}o you think that a division by 10 will afford that equal number of fractional
parts in an equally clear and complete manner that a division by 12 will?—Looking at the
question practically, and in connection with our own monetary system, the decimal division
would carry us to a far more exact point in the fractional division of commodities than we
have at present, or could have under any other scheme with which I am acquainted.
488. How will you obtain a quarter of anything upon the decimal division, or an eighth
or a twelth part —The tenth of the penny (the cent I propose) would, in calculation, give a
far lower and more exact measure of minute values than we have on the present duodecimal
division, or than the proposed mil would furnish; two and a half cents would be a quarter
of a penny, if required, that is, the present farthing, and these cents of 10d. (the French
centime,) descend two and a half times lower in the exact measure of minute values than
either the farthing or the mil.
489. Suppose you take a pound weight of anything, or any liquid measure, or any
measure of length, such as a yard or a foot, do you think that that is divisible for practical
purposes into the same number of clear aliquot parts, if divided upon the decimal system,
as if it were divided upon the duodecimal system 2–Yes, provided you adopt the same
system and course of proceeding (as I propose) with regard to weights and measures; but
you must introduce the decimal system there also, in order to get the full benefit of it,
and I think you may do that also without any great difficulty, on the principle I have
proposed. -
490. Do you consider, in the opinion which you have given in favour of a decimal coinage,
that the accompaniment of that measure by a decimal system of weights and measures is
essential?—Not essential, but that it would be a large addition to the advantages. I think
that there would be very great gain in a merely decimal system of accounts and coinage, or
even of accounts only, and that the rest would then follow almost of itself.
491. Do you think that a decimal division of the coin would harmonize in the practical
transactions of the market with a non-decimal system of weights and measures?—It would
be a disadvantage not to have a decimal system of weights and measures as well as decimal
coins. But if that were the only alternative offered, I would greatly prefer taking even a
mere decimal system of accounts, without a legal provision for anything else, to remaining in
our present position.
492. By a decimal system of accounts do you mean a system of accounts different from
the coinage, or do you mean a coinage perfectly decimal, and therefore involving a decimal
system of accounts?—Yes, a decimal form of accounts as distinct from a perfectly decimal coin-
age. If you adopt a decimal system of accounts only, without any change whatever in our
present coinage, I think you would, if it were on sound principles, gain a very great advantage.
And when you further harmonize the coinage with such a form of account, with the change
I propose of 10 for 12 in our accounts, such a proceeding would, in my opinion, be an
enormous further gain both to this and to all other countries, and would infallibly, and easily,
I believe, conduct us in the end to all the rest of what we and they require.
493. Do you consider that the gain would consist entirely and exclusively in the saving
of time and trouble in calculation, or do you look to any other advantages that would
attend it?—Those are the principal and most obvious; but, according to my view of the
change required, you might then easily and at once obtain, and bring largely into immediate
operation, all the great and recognized advantages of the beautiful French system, through our
own pence and tenpence, our existing unchanged monies; and you would, moreover, thus
have a purely decimal instead of even the centesimal system of accounts.
494. The object of the last question was to ascertain whether you think that the intro-
duction of a decimal system of coinage into this country is recommended by any other
considerations of advantage beyond those of diminishing time and trouble in calculation ?—
I think, besides these, and the very important advantages I have already mentioned of such
greatly increased simplicity and accuracy in all figure work, there would be further very
great advantages indeed to be obtained in regard to foreign commerce.
495. Do you mean by reference to foreign commerce in relation to the calculation
of exchange transactions?—Particularly that, but also in all our commercial and social
relations.
496. If in your opinion a decimal system of coinage is evidently expedient for this
country, have you directed your attention to that system of decimal coinage which has
been recommended by a Committee of Parliament, and by other authorities, commonly
called the pound and mil scheme *—Since the issue of the Report of that Committee in
August 1853, I have done so very attentively.
497.-What is your opinion upon the merits or demerits of that plan 2–I think it in the
highest degree objectionable, both as regards the domestic and foreign objects of a decimal
system, and in its entire course of operation and results.
498. Will you state the main grounds upon which you think it highly objectionable 2–
I think the first objection to the millesimal division of the pound would be, that it would
involve a widely extended, mischievous, and altogether unnecessary alteration of our existing
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 71
accounts and contracts, of all tolls, rates, postages, stamps, &c., and of all values measured in
pence, and the lower British coinage, as well as of much of our coinage itself, when a
perfect and really decimal system might be introduced, almost without any alteration what-
ever of any moment, of either our existing accounts or coinage.
499. Will you explain more in detail what you mean by saying that it would involve a widely
extended, mischievous, and altogether unnecessary alteration of our existing accounts and
contracts?—In the first place, two of our present three monies of account would be altered, and
three new ones would be introduced, giving an entirely new form and denomination to all
existing accounts; whilst the whole of the copper coinage and the values it represents must
not only be altered in value, but replaced by incommensurable coins, values, and monies of
account, that is, by such as will not exactly and definitely measure with the existing, as
will not divide without remainder. In addition, a very large and important part of our
present silver coinage must be destroyed—the half-crown, in the first place, of which alone
we had 37,000,000 in circulation, according to the statement of the Master of the Mint,
in 1853; besides which several other of our silver coins are indicated by him, and by the
Committee, as requiring to be extinguished; these being some of our most useful coins, with
reference to foreign countries as well as our own, our old half-crown being in fact an almost
exact three franc-piece, and therefore, as well as our copper coinage, very important with
reference to foreign monetary systems.
500. You do not consider the farthing a money of account?—It does not exist in any of
our mercantile books or in accounts of any kind, and in my part of the country it does not
exist even as a coin–farthings, as coin, being wholly unknown in any part of Lancashire,
as well as in a great part of England; and it was in evidence before the Committee of 1853,
that its introduction into our accounts would be highly objectionable. I consider the only
three recognized and existing English monies of account to be pounds, shillings, and pence.
Of those three, a system founded on the mil would destroy two, and replace them with three
new denominations, requiring a new and highly objectionable form in all our accounts, as
well as the change of our monies of account, of which three would be new, and two incom-
mensurable with the existing monies of account, and with a large portion of the coinage.
501. Which are the two that are incommensurable with existing monies?—The cent and
the mil; the mil which is the foundation of the whole, the unit or basis of that system, and
the cent which is 10 mils.
502. Do you consider that the following qualities are essential to any sound and safe
system of decimal currency. 1st. That it should be free from any liability to cause injustice
or confusion among the poor and illiterate classes of the community, and thereby create a
prejudice against its use?—I have a strong and very decided opinion upon that point, and
it is upon that ground that I chiefly entertain a very strong and insurmountable objection to
the mil system, and consider it to be impracticable.
502a, 2ndly. That it should not necessitate the withdrawal of the copper coins already
in use, especially those of the lower denomination, and which from habit every one is
familiar with ?–To that position, also, I entirely and cordially assent.
503. 3rdly. That it should possess great facilities for expressing its coins in the old
money, and conversely 2—I entirely assent to that also, as most essential.
504. 4thly. That there should be but few monies of account, and those of a convenient size,
and that, if possible, each money of account should be of a separate and different metal 2–
With a strictly decimal system, there can of course be but two monies of account united
by the decimal tie, or number ten, and they must be of convenient size for the highest and
lowest monies of account in ordinary use; but I don’t see the absolute necessity that each
money of account should always be of a separate and different metal. In no decimal
system that I am acquainted with has it been found practicable long to maintain more
than two monies of account in ordinary use, and the attempt has been unsuccessfully made
both in Europe and America.
505. Do you think that there would be a convenience in having each money of account
represented by a separate metal?–Yes; I think that there would, but not any absolute
necessity for this being uniformly the case.
506. Those four difficulties correctly represent your main objections to the parliamentary
scheme as now proposed ?–Yes, in its domestic point of view.
507. To what other point of view do you allude?–To the difficulties that it interposes
to an international monetary arrangement, and generally to commercial social intercourse
with foreign countries.
508. Will you explain more in detail what the difficulties to an international monetary
arrangement are to which you allude 7–I will more particularly refer to Canada
and the United States as an example, for it is obvious, that if we had the tenpence as our
money of account, and that tenpence was precisely similar in amount of metal and intrinsic
value to the franc (and there is only about three per cent of difference between the two at
present, and we may employ without a difficulty or disturbance of any kind the less than two
grains more of silver required to render these coins identical), there would be a great and
obvious advantage in having all our silver and copper coins gradually identical and interna-
tional with those of France and Europe generally. I would wish, therefore, more especially to
call attention to an important view of this question in relation to our North American
colonies. Canada is anxious and impatient to adopt and acquire some of the benefits of
a decimal system, and the legislature is almost unanimous in wishing to adopt the monetary
system of the United States, dollars and cents. The mother country has, I believe,
Mr. T. W. Rath-
bone,
4th June 1856.
*
I4
72 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. T. W. Rath.
Bone.
4th June 1856.
ºsmº age is
vetoed that proposition, and has refused to allow Canada to adopt the dollar and cent
system, probably on political as well as commercial grounds; but the state of public feeling
and opinion in Canada will no doubt render it necessary to consent, without delay, to some
decimal system in that country. The United States appear to contemplate and have
urged on their legislature in a manner that cannot but be influential, making the dollar
an exact five-franc piece, in order that their monetary system may entirely and exactly
coincide with that of the “Système Metrique;” and the fifth of their dollar being 69-11
grains of pure silver, and the French franc of 5 grammes, 69.4, there is at present only
this very slight difference between them, and without at all abandoning the system of dollars
and cents, the two monies would thus be rendered international, and the exchange would
become an exact per-centage calculation on identical coins. If then, we let the Canadians
adopt the dollar and cent system, we should still, with our tenpenny or franc, be in perfect
correspondence with them, and ultimately all other countries; and if, on the other hand, we
require them to adopt and adhere to our system, with the tenpence I propose, they will
still not suffer the inconvenience of any isolation and want of uniformity in monetary
arrangements with their American neighbours or with the great European system. But if
we do not adopt pence and tenpence as monies of account, but the mil system, and Canada
adopts the dollar, we should be seriously impeded in our monetary communications with them;
and if we force upon them the mil system, they would be seriously interfered with in their
monetary communications with their neighbours, and the most serious consequences might
result from such an attempt. Mils and cents, and the millesimal form of account, are
necessarily incommensurable with pence and tenpence, or francs, with dollars or fifty
pence coins, and with all other existing monies, both of account and circulation, and must
therefore necessarily create the greatest intricacy, embarrassment, and difficulty in the
calculation of exchanges, and in all international monetary operations whatever.
509. You think that, in any effort to introduce a decimal system of coinage into this
country, our attention should be studiously directed to the object of rendering the coinage
coincident, or nearly so, with the existing decimal coinage of the United States, and that
which will probably become the decimal coinage of Canada. ?–Yes, as well as that of
Europe, for the franc, the florin or double franc, and the German gulden, (which, it would
appear, is in future to be struck an exact 2% franc or half-dollar piece,) would all fall under
the same category; the florin being already very nearly two francs, and the proposed gulden
of Austria, and dollar of America, becoming exactly two and a half and five franc pieces.
510. Have you formed in your own mind any opinion as to a specific scheme by which that
could be most properly accomplished 2–Yes; I think we might, without any sort of incon-
venience, concede to France, and all the other European and other nations using the franc and
its aliquot multiples, and the great metrical system generally, that all our future silver and
copper coin should be strictly coincident in intrinsic value, as that of the United States
probably will be soon, with the franc and its multiples and decimals, obtaining in return, if
possible, the general adoption of gold as the standard of value, as is now already the case
in the United States, after a long practical experience of both metals. This is what I
proposed in my scheme brought before the public in an “Examination of the Report, &c. of
the Committee of the House of Commons” in 1853; and what I could then only suggest as
probable and very desirable with reference to the half-franc or tenpence as a universal
integer, and key in every coinage, is now fast becoming a fait accompli.
511. What is the system of decimal coinage which you think ought to be introduced
into this country?—Simply and solely the adoption of tenpence instead of twelvepence as
our money of account, (the decimal point always dividing the pence and tempences when
used instead of a ruled column,) and the gradual introduction of more strictly corresponding
coins, in addition to those which already correspond, (such as in fact almost all our present
coinage, copper, silver, and gold); issuing, that is, as found convenient by the poorest classes,
one to five cent (or halfpenny) coins, and fivepenny and tenpenny, &c. So that we should
select, and permanently employ, the coinage found most convenient, from a range of cents
0-1 to 0-5 (the halfpenny), ten cents (or pence) 1 ; three, four, five, six, ten, and twetve
pence, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1-0, I-2, (the shilling); two, three, five, tenpenny pieces, &c., that is, 2.
(the florin), 3 (the English half-crown, or 3 franc piece), 5 (the dollar), 10 the double
dollar; 12" (the half sovereign), 24 (the pound), 25 (the old English guinea nearly), 50.
(the American eagle), as the gold coinage.
512. Do you mean that you would adopt a decimal system of coinage consisting of a
penny as the lowest unit, of tenpence as the first multiple, and 100 pence as the second
multiple 2–No ; that last proposition of 100 pence as a money of account in place of the
pound, is a modification of my proposal, which I think highly inexpedient, and equally that
of abruptly and compulsorily abandoning the pound altogether as a money of account; but
coins of 100 and of 250 pence, and bank notes of 1,000 pence (41. 3s. 4d.), might probably,
I think, be found very useful.
513. Will you have the goodness to state what is the decimal system of coinage which you
would recomend this Commission to sanction ?–I urge, and have always urged, simply the
adoption of the tenpence in place of the twelvepence as our money of account in place of the
introduction of corresponding coins, coincident in value with the franc, and its multiples and
submultiples, and thus ultimately with the florin, gulden, and dollar system of currency.
514. What would be your lowest money of account 2–The penny.
515. What would be your highest money of account?—In all ordinary accounts, and in
all calculations, tenpence ; but for the expression of large amounts, and to avoid abrupt and
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 73
inconvenient change and confusion in mercantile books, and in national finance, and as our
legal tender and measure of value, I should still retain the pound.
516. How do you reconcile the retention of the pound with the decimal system, the pound
not being a decimal multiple either of a penny or of tenpence?—I believe that in all ordinary
operations, and in all our calculations, we should very rapidly come to work exclusively
with pence and tenpence, and we should, of course, do so at once and entirely, with all our
smaller accounts up to 20s, or 240 pence, and we should thus at once entirely get rid of
our present duodecimal addition. Pence and tenpence being two monies of account prac-
tically demonstrated by experience (our own as to the penny, and European as to the
tempence) to be the two most useful and perfect, as highest and lowest in the scale; and
being united by the strictly decimal tie, which I conceive to be the only real and true
decimal system, must, I think, easily and rapidly come into general use to the utmost extent
found desirable. We have entirely discarded halfpence, farthings, and all monies below
the penny, in our accounts, and though additional European nations, (as all the Swiss
cantons recently) voluntarily adopt the franc or tenpence, as unapproached in convenience
and simplicity, none ever abandon it, after any large experience of its merits. Millesimal
and centesimal systems have no doubt their merits, and may, in some cases, be better than
duodecimal, but even these are not strictly decimal. A strictly exact decimal system can
of course only consist of two monies of account, united by the decimal tie, that is, 10,
not 100 or 1,000, which existing between the two ordinary moneys account, may connect
a mil unit with the pound by decimal steps, but, as only two moneys of account can
remain in ordinary use, must result in a millesimal not a decimal system. The two
moneys of account for ordinary use, would, in my scheme, be pence and tenpences; but
the use of the pound as a money of account, might I think, with advantage, still be
legal; and I should expect that it ever would be of use, and very conveniently used, as
the recognized expression for large amounts, and in comparative financial and statistical
statements; and that it would remain, as at present, the principal gold coin, and the
standard of value and legal tender in payments above forty shillings.
517. Upon the supposition of large amounts being still stated in pounds sterling, how do
you conceive that the advantages in calculations, supposed to attend the decimal system,
would be realized?—I think the practice of stating any amounts in pounds, from this very
inconvenience of having to multiply pounds by 24, for calculation, slight as this would be,
would disappear to a large extent, and gradually almost entirely ; all accounts up to the
pound would at once be in a strictly decimal form, that of pence and tenpence, that is, all
the accounts of the humbler and less instructed classes of society would be, at once, purely
decimai, and the duodecimal addition would at once entirely disappear, and all bills and
ordinary statements of amounts would soon, I think, fall into this beautiful and perfect
decimal form of pence and tenpence. The pound might remain for a time, and during
pleasure, in account books, so that you would not require to alter the forms and figures of
every description, in all the vast multitude of books and accounts all over Great Britain, &c.,
and all at once, but pounds, tenpence, and pence (£ ar. & d.), would gradually disappear,
and pence and tenpence, divided, at pleasure, by the decimal point, or by a ruled column,
would be more and more largely the sole ordinary monies of account, and the pound would
be confined to the expression of large amounts.
518. Is it not the fundamental principle of a decimal system of coinage, that the numera-
tion of all amounts will strictly correspond to the Arabic system of notation, which we
apply to pure numbers?—Yes, certainly.
519. How can you introduce into a decimal system of accounts so defined, the pound
sterling, which is not an Arabic multiple of your unit, of a penny or tenpence 2–You
certainly cannot, and in so far as the pound is retained in practical use in accounts, you
no doubt make an exception, and admit an irregularity; but I conceive that it is one which
would imperceptibly, quietly, and without any material inconvenience or disturbance,
disappear, and it would end in the sovereign becoming as a 24 franc gold coin, much what the
20 franc Napoleon is in France, the 25 franc Leopold in Belgium, and the 50 franc Eagle in
America; that is the great gold coin, and that in which large amounts might ever be conve-
niently expressed. In France prices are sometimes named in Louis, sometimes in Napoleons,
sometimes in crowns, and sometimes in the petit ecu or half-crown, although the franc
is the sole legal money of account, with little inconvenience to any one used to these
expressions of multiples of the franc, and such would be still less the case with one recognized
large money of account, such as the proposed pound of 24 francs, with all the useful factors
that number undoubtedly affords.
520. Do you mean, in the system which you propose, that all public accounts and
all private accounts in which large sums are stated, should be stated, as is the case in
France, in the tenpenny unit?—I would leave it to experience and the inclination of the
public, to decide the extent desirable in practice. I would leave both the chancellor of the
oxchequer, for instance, and whoever had to deal with monies, large or small, to act upon
their own judgment and experience, in regard to the mode in which accounts should be
stated, and stims of money expressed. I am satisfied that when you could make a calcu-
lation with less than a third to a fifth of the figures, in addition to the clearness and saving
obtained in every addition, and even, as shown by Mr. Minasi's tables, in the first expression
or writing down of figures, this would soon lead people into general use of the pure decimal
system, pence and tenpences, but it had better, I think, come about thus gradually and
tentatively.
K
Jſ. T. W. Rath-
bone.
4th June 1856.
•- ºne-º-º-
74 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. T. W. Rath- 521. I wish to draw a clear distinction between the system which you propose, as
bone.
4th June 1856.
a -ammºmºsºmºsºmsº
a desirable system, and the compulsory adoption of it. Looking at the system which
you consider desirable and expedient, am I to understand that it is a system in which a
penny would be the lowest unit, and tenpence the highest unit, and that you contemplate
that public convenience would rapidly conform to that, and that all large amounts would
be stated in the tenpenny integer of account?—No ; I think that you would always retain
the pound, to some extent, for the convenient expression of large amounts, as well as its
other objects.
522. How can the advantages of a decimal system, which consist in its strict conformity
to our present Arabic notation of numbers, possibly be obtained in a system in which the
pound sterling, which is not a decimal multiple of the penny, is still extensively used ?–
All the advantages of an entirely pure decimal system you certainly could not, for where
any use of the pound exists, and however the pound sterling is in any degree used, you
would be only able to get at strictly decimal figures by the multiplication of the pounds by
24; certainly not a difficult or troublesome operation, and which, I apprehend, would soon be
quite the rare exception, in all the ordinary figure work of the country.
523. Have you ever drawn out any account in which the existing numeration under our
present system is converted into a numeration under your proposed system, beginning with
the penny but still including the pound sterling?—I have given such examples in the first
pamphlet which I published on the appearance of the report of the committee of the House
of Commons in 1853.
524. Can you lay before this Commission any such example —Supposing a person
instead of ten guineas, as at present, were to ask me 10l.'12 (10 pounds and 12 tenpences)
I should of course at once know that he meant 252 tenpences; and if I had any calculation
to make, I should write down 252 for the purpose.
525. Is not that then the abandonment of the pound sterling in your accounts, and he
adoption of the penny as the lowest unit, and of the tempence as the highest unit?—
Practically, I think, it would come to that, and that it is most desirable that it should come
to that, in all the ordinary figure work of this country.
526. Your system then involves altogether the abandonment of the pound sterling, as a
money of account 2–Not altogether. I would leave it in that position as long as people
liked so to use it, and to the extent that they liked so to use it, and found it practically a
convenience. In practice, I do believe that our accounts certainly would, in all ordinary
cases, resolve themselves into the strict and pure decimal form of pence and tempences; but
I have observed in foreign countries, with decimal systems, inconvenience from the want
of a generally recognized expression of a larger money than ever has existed, or possibly
can exist, in strictly decimal accounts; and I think that we should find great convenience
and advantage in having one recognized well established expression in our pound (our
principal gold coin and our legal tender), whenever large sums made its use a convenience.
527. Whenever you wished to write down large sums, and to write them down one under
the other, do you think that if they are written down in pounds sterling the advantage of
simplicity in calculation to which you allude, as a merit of the decimal system, would still be
obtained 2–Not perfectly. You would then add up with the transfer of the tempences to the
pound column, which would not be a decimal step, though not one of any difficulty. You might
easily do this, and then work your calculations with perfect decimals, turning the pounds
into tempences, by multiplication by 24.
528. If the system involves, first of all, an addition, and after that a calculation, to con-
vert the sum so obtained by addition into a statement stated by some other numerical
system, will not that generate inconvenience, difficulty in calculation, and liability to error,
much greater than exists under the present system?—That operation takes place already,
with much more difficult circumstances, and with an infinitely greater number of accounts,
than we should ever then have to deal with. At the Bank, and elsewhere, all their
immensely numerous accounts both above and below the pound being so treated to get at a
less perfect decimal system, and when they have all to be again re-converted into £ s. & d.
We should never have to do this with anything below the pound in amount, on the system
I propose; and it is surely evident, that with such large inducement to use another system,
and facility in its use, monies would not generally be written down and expressed in pounds,
tempences, and pence, but in tenpences and pence, and by degrees so generally as to make
the use of the pound quite the exception.
529. Your view comes to this, that the system would be one very closely analogous to
the French system, taking the penny for the lowest unit, and the tempence for the highest
unit, and that in the great mass of cases all large amounts would be written out in the
tenpenny unit?–It probably would come to that, but we should have some important
advantages over the French; their old and established copper coin, the sou, not being decimal
relatively to the franc as our penny would be, they have had great difficulty and long delay in
carrying out their decimal system, and have after all been obliged to be satisfied with en-
tesimal monies of account. It has been a struggle of upwards of half a century to get rid
of their old copper coin, the sou, in their accounts, and the object is not yet quite perfectly
accomplished. Our transition, on the other hand, would be, to a great extent, instantaneous.
The very day that you introduced tenpence as the money of account, in place of twelve, you
would have the decimal system perfect, at all events up to the pound, and the duodecimal
addition of the pence entirely exchanged, in all cases, for the decimal. In parts of France
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 75
remote from the capital, you still meet with accounts in the old copper coin, the sou, and Mr. T. W. Rath-
even in Paris this practice has not been very long entirely prevented, though it long has bone.
been illegal; the sou being a non-decimal coin. Pºe Art
530. What do you mean by the sou being a non-decimal coin 2–A sou is not the tenth ****
of a franc, and francs and centimes are now the legal monies of account in France ; the
obstinate invincible adherence of the people to their old copper coin, the sou, and the uniform
impossibility of keeping, in ordinary use, more than two monies of account with any
decimal system, having rendered the attempt to introduce the décime or penny a failure.
531. How many centimes make a sou?—Five.
532. Therefore it is a fraction of a decimal?—Yes; but our penny is at once a ten cent
(or centime) coin, and money of account. -
533. Do you agree in the strong opinions that have been given, both by the Parlia-
mentary Committee and by high scientific authorities, of the impossibility of abandoning
the pound sterling as our highest integer of account 7–I think that they have overstated the
case. I think that we might retain all that is good and advantageous in the pound as a
money of account, and that it would be desirable to do so; but I do not think that the entire
abandonment of the pound as a money of account would be impracticable, or attended with
that extent of inconvenience which some of them have stated.
534. What is your opinion with regard to the question of introducing the decimal
system according to the recommendation of the Parliamentary Committee, or remaining
with the system which now exists. Which do you think the preferable course of those
two —I should greatly prefer to remain as we are at present. First, because I think that
such a system would be extremely mischievous; and secondly, because I think that it would
be found impracticable, and that the attempt to introduce it would bring great discredit on
the decimal system generally.
535. Do you think that the introduction of the decimal system in the form recommended
by the Parliamentary Committee would not secure to any adequate extent the advantages
anticipated from a decimal system 2–Not by any means so perfectly as a pure decimal
system, and not to a sufficient degree to warrant the inconvenience, injury, and injustice
that it would cause.
536. You think that the advantages to be obtained under a decimal system, in the
form recommended by the Parliamentary Committee, would not be sufficient to justify
attempting the change º–Decidedly not ; I think that it would be mischievous, not bene-
ficial, though I do not question certain benefits from any kind of decimal system whatever.
537. (Mr. Hubbard.) Among the objections which you have made to the system pro-
posed by the Parliamentary Committee is this—that the coins which would be introduced
would be non-exchangeable with those which we at present possess?—Yes.
538. How long do you think that that objection would weigh. Is it one which you
conceive to be of a permanent character or one which would only operate during the
transition state from one system to another?—I think it would be of a very permanent
character. The period of twenty years named by the late Master of the Mint, Sir John
Herschel, for the complete exchange from the one currency to the other, as regards the
coins, would, I think, prove much too short, though he had evidently well and carefully
considered the question. I have been very much struck with the extreme tenacity with
which people, the lower classes in particular, ever cling both to their familiar and estab-
lished coins and values. It is proposed, and necessarily on the mil system, to alter the
value as well as the coin of our entire copper coinage; and I think that extreme and
obstinate resistance would be encountered, and that the attempted change would be of a
permanently injurious character, from the impossibility of ever making it thorough and
perfect, and from existing values being incommensurably and most inconveniently dis-
turbed at home and abroad.
539. The time required for exchanging the whole of the existing currency for the whole
of any new currency does not appear to me to be an illustration of the difficulty which
undoubtedly does arise from the non-exchangeability exactly of one coin for the other. I
have assumed it to be rather in questions of payment in the new coin, of debts incurred
in the old, or of the recording under the new coinage system entries which had been made
previously under the old. That I take to be the largest and the most important application
of the difficulty to which you are alluding, and that difficulty, I presume, such as it is, you
would admit, passes away with the transition moment. When the payment of the debt is
once made, and when the entry of the sum is once made, the difficulty, however imperfectly
disposed of, is still at an end ?–It is in that one case of a specific debt, but not in that of
a toll or rate, &c, ; and the operation is wide and extensive and not confined to our own
country, and the continued inconvenience of a mixed currency, consisting of sets of coins
incommensurable with one another, is surely of itself another very serious continued incon-
venience and injury to the people having to deal with it. The loss, too, would be almost
always against the buyer, I think. The seller being the stronger party, and not being
able to give the difference, would make the buyer the sufferer. *—
540. That would depend very much upon the authority of the system under which the
exchange took place. . The Government may dictate, as they did upon the question of the
conversion of the Irish currency, the terms or proportions in which the new currency is to
supersede the old 2-A poor man wants a penny roll or any article valued in pence; and he
would receive for his shilling ten five-mil pieces, instead of the present twelve pence. He
76 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
..}/r. T. J.V. Rath.
bone.
4th June 1856.
*
offers one of them, and ought to have something out, but he can have nothing out, and I
think the seller would generally be able to make him the sufferer, and oblige him to submit
to the difference against himself; and the Government could not possibly dictate to sellers
to give out that which would not exist, and therefore could not be given out.
541. If the pennies have been called in and cents and mils are the substituted silver and
copper currency, people will hardly talk of a penny roll. It will be a four-mil roll or a
five-mil roll. The roll will be accommodated to the price charged 2–I am afraid that it
would take a very long time to accomplish this substitution and exchange. The lower
classes, in particular, cling obstinately to known established values and prices; and they
would not want the five-mil and would not like to take the four-mil articles, but would
still go to those shops where they could receive the exact value of their pennies, so long as
our 5,000 to 6,000 tons of copper coin existed.
542. Assuming that the circumstances under any change that takes place are such as
to induce the holders of the old copper coin to exchange it for the new, what would be
the result – I really do not see how this can ever be perfectly accomplished. The
period of twenty years is estimated by Sir John Herschel as the time required to ac-
complish the change; and it would, I think, require at least that to get in all the old coin
and exchange it for new ; but I should expect it to require much more to accomplish the
change perfectly and entirely, for you ever find coins and values existing for long after they
have been done away with by the law, both in the pockets and the minds of the people.
543. Then your objection is measured in its extent by the period which you attach to
the necessary process of exchange?—That one single species of inconvenience, which has
been indicated, of course, would then disappear; but all the others still remain, and as
regards all other countries, for ever.
544. Again, you objected, as one disadvantage arising from the pound and mil system,
that the half-crowns would be superseded ?–Yes; that is proposed by the Committee and
Master of the Mint, and generally by the advocates of a mil currency.
545. Do you see any reason why they should be superseded, and why they should not
still circulate, if they are found a convenient coin”—I think they would not be a convenient
coin with mils and cents; there would be an awkwardness in taking them and giving the
change out. They are a very convenient coin with the penny and tenpence, but they
would not be so with mils and cents.
546. If they were found inconvenient their withdrawal would not be regretted 2–No ;
not if you had a currency that rendered them an evil, but as they are 37,000,000 in number
it must even then take long to accomplish.
547. If they were, on the other hand, found convenient, they might be retained ?—Yes;
if found convenient, but this they obviously could not be, with 125 mils as the change;
and it would be still worse, whilst the currency was mixed, and until a suitable and uniform
new coinage was cstablished. 700,000,000 of new pieces must be coined, issued, and
exchanged, according to the undisputed evidence and estimates of the Master of the
Mint, in order to replace the old coinage; and in rates, and tolls, and all values of that
kind, measured in pence, the evil would after all be permanent and incurable.
548. In addition to the domestic difficulties which you associated with the introduction
of the pound and mil system, you stated that you conceived it would have a further dis-
advantage with relation to our exchanges with foreign countries 2–Yes; very serious
indeed.
549. Have you had much experience in exchange operations yourself?–Only as a
traveller, never commercially. I have a good deal of acquaintance with merchants, and
have learned a good deal from them on this subject, but I have no experience practically
of foreign exchanges as a merchant.
550. Are you aware that exchange operations are never made for very small sums, but
are generally made in bills of considerable amount in commerce 2–Yes, generally, I believe;
but in travelling, one cashcs very small bills sometimes.
551. What is the smallest bill that you are aware of ever having circulated as a
traveller?—I think that I have cashed a 5l. note, but I am quite certain that I have often
cashed a 10 l. note.
552. A 101 note is a very ordinary bill?—Yes, a very ordinary species of money at
home and abroad.
553. Are you aware that any difficulty is found in cashing a 10l. note in France at the
present moment?—I believe none whatever. There may be the difficulty of not always
knowing exactly what the exchange is, and being cheated by innkeepers and in out-of-the-
way situations; and if you had no calculation to make but the simple exact per-centage of
exchange on identical coins in different countries, I think you would not be so often and
so easily taken in by bankers and innkeepers, or whoever happens to cash your bill.
554. In what way would you protect yourself through any other system against the
possibility of being cheated in the negotiation of a bill?—A simple notorious per-centage
exactly marking the exchange, instead of this per-centage of exchange being as at present
mixed up with the relative value of coins, (like those especially founded on the mil, which
are not commensurable, and therefore not exactly exchangeable with any other coinage
whatever,) would be published in every newspaper, and an innkeeper or banker would not
then dare to ofter anything but the announced exact and well-known per-centage of
exchange. This can only be with coinages coinciding, and especially exchanging without a
remainder which cannot be expressed and measured. -
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 77
555. Are you aware that there is no Paris paper which does not contain, every day, the II. T. W. Rath-
quotations for exchanges of bills on London, so that any traveller can know what is the bone
rate that he ought to receive, allowing, of course, for the profit of the exchange dealer — t
Yes, as regards Paris exchanges but if you bring in the question between the mil 4th June 1856.
and the franc, or any other foreign coinage, all of which would be incommensurable ——
monies with mils, there would even there be the same difficulty as between the buyer
and seller in this country. There is a something that you cannot measure between
the two coinages, and which would be almost inevitably lost by the traveller, and
secured by the least scrupulous and honest of the two parties, travellers or merchants,
In all cases; and surely it would be greatly more simple and intelligible if all you
had to look at were a simple per-centage exactly indicating the exchange between
monies that were identical—or, at all events, exactly commensurable. The identical
community of silver and copper monies would be certain, I conceive, to lead to a common
standard of value, and that thus the gold standard of this country and of America would, cre
long, be universally adopted ; especially if we, in common with the United States and
Canada, stipulated for this concession from France and other European states, in return for
the exact adoption of their silver and copper coinage. I beg to state distinctly that the
Scheme I propose has no tendency whatever to any kind of alteration in the present gold
standard of this country; nor have those who are its advocates, even those who have sug-
gested abandonment of the pound as a money of account, or substitution for it of the
imperial of 100 pence in accounts, ever once, that I am aware of, suggested any alteration
of the present legal standard, or reduced use of gold coin. France appears quite disposed to
re-consider the metrical system, with a view to its easy general adoption, and has but to
make the gold Napoleon, instead of the silver franc, the legal tender, when there is no
premium on either, at once, and without difficulty or opposition, to place the two countries,
and a large portion of the globe, in entire and perfect international arrangement with regard
to money, and to give security, and ultimately the immense boon of universality, to our
favourite, and in many respects admirable, gold standard of value.
556. This question must be argued not with reference to what may be the course taken
by France or America, but with reference to the existing state of their coin, and their
standard?—Yes; and therefore we can at present only assume, as regards France, the
perfect practicability of international and exactly coinciding silver and copper coin.
557. The standard of value in England is gold—the standard of value in France is
silver ?—Yes.
558. Will you therefore explain how the adoption of a tenpenny-piece, which, by
approximating to the franc, makes it nearly of the same value, would assist you as a tra-
veller in negotiating your bills upon London 2–I do not propose approximation, but entire
identification ; that the English tempence and the French franc, with their multiples and
decimals, shall be exactly the same monies in regard to the quantity of silver and copper
which they shall contain, and that the corresponding form of account be legalised. There
is no doubt at present the difficulty with regard to the gold and silver standards to get over
in settling the question between England and France. But I have a strong opinion, from
all the communication I have ever had with foreigners, that this difficulty would be easily
overcome if the attempt were made, and it has already disappeared as regards America.
559. You propose for the English unit a tempenny-piece –The unit I should call the
penny.
560. That is the lower—the higher is tempence 7–Yes, these would be the lower and
higher ordinary moneys of account.
561. Do you know the exact value in England of the franc 2–I think they commonly
give you about 9%d. for it in this country, though in intrinsic value it is often equal to the
shillings you receive in payment.
562. How, therefore, will the difficulty between 9%d. and 10d. assist the operation which
you wish to effect, namely, a perfect uniformity of currency; is not it clear that a mere
approximation, leaving a margin not merely of five, three, two, but even one per cent.,
would be a greater embarrassment to travellers and exchange relations than a larger one
which is not lost sight of?—I do not propose approximation, but that our 10d. be an exact
five grammes of silver in England as in France, and the two coins, therefore, absolutely
and identically one and the same thing. Even at present our sovereigns circulate very
currently over Europe, and are a favourite coin, from the high character of our mint; and
surely silver and copper coins, identically the same, and issued by mints of high and esta-
blished character, like those of England and France, would in all countries bear exactly
the same value, as circulating coins, and only become subject to the altered value caused by
the exchange when employed in payments, as a mercantile commodity, and then of course
they would bear a defined relative value in different countries, as all other commodities and
articles of commerce. -
563. You propose not to make the tenpenny-piece a twenty-fourth part of the pound
sterling, but to make it equivalent in actual value to the francº–Still representing in value
the twenty-fourth part of the pound sterling, exactly as it does at present. It now is, and
must ever continue, a token—the gold sovereign being the only legal tender in paymcnts
of more than forty shillings. Whether our 10d. were to consist of 67.27 grains of silver as
at present, or of 69.4 grains as the French franc, it would equally represent and circulate as
the twenty-fourth part of the pound sterling in this country.
K 3
78 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. T. W. Rath-
bone.
4th June 1856.
tºº-ºº:
564. You propose to diminish, as compared with the pound sterling, the value of that
tempenny-piece; instead of its being worth 10d., the twenty-fourth part of a pound, you would
reduce it to the value of 9}d., in order to be of the same value as the French franc —No;
I propose it to be of exactly the same value as at present, relatively to the pound, but con-
sisting of about three per cent, more silver, or the European coin of about three per cent, less.
To us it is a mere question of coinage, leaving relative values quite unaltered. Our coins
would coincide in intrinsic value, and be of precisely the same metal as the French franc,
and the double-sou piece, or penny, which they actually are very nearly at present.
565. The standard of England is gold, the silver coin of England is a mere token —
Yes, no doubt; the gold, not the silver or copper coin, being the legal tender.
566. It consists only of about nine-tenths of its current value, the price of silver
being about 5s. 1d., that is, 61 pence. An ounce of silver is really coined into 66 pence,
so that our silver money passes for about one-tenth more than its intrinsic value?—Yes.
567. In France, on the contrary, silver is the standard?—Yes.
568. How is it possible for the silver token of one country and the silver measure of
value of another country to pass indifferently in either country exchangeably 2–Because
they would be identical. Whether the franc or tenpenny piece was struck in the French
Mint or in the English Mint it would be precisely five grammes of silver, and surely, there-
fore, the coins would circulate internationally, if confidence was felt in the mints of issue,
wherever situated.
569. (Chairman.) How can you expect permanently to preserve any such identity
between two independent countries?—We see it actually in operation, and strict uniformity
of coinage long and scrupulously preserved already, and if internationality was general
there would be the strongest motive for strict adherence to the established standards; and
then the coinage of a mint about which a question could arise would cease to circulate,
even in its own country, and be treated as base and bad money, and the manufacture of
money be lost to that country.
570. What permanent security could you have either for the fineness of the metal or for
the exactitude of the weight being preserved between two independent countries?—The
extreme facility of ascertaining this, and the importance and the necessity of character
to Mints. If any Mint did not strike its money of the full weight and standard fine-
ness, it would at once lose character, and its money would only pass by weight, and after
examination of its fineness; would not only cease to circulate internationally, but probably
be superseded as coin even at home. With mints of high and established character there
could be no danger from this cause, and without such character the issue of money would
be impracticable.
571. I do not refer to a fraudulent alteration of the coin of either country, but to an
alteration by public authority either in the fineness of the metal or the weight, and there-
fore an avowed alteration involving no discredit. How can any one country calculate with
confidence upon other countries not so deviating, such alterations of the coinage having been
found of continual occurrence in every country of which we have the history 2—Such
arrangements being in operation it would become most cogently and emphatically the
interest of the countries which had adopted them not to abandon them by deviating in any
degree from the agreed standard weight and fineness of the coins, nor can any sufficient
motive to do so be conceived. The United States are seeking for this exact identity of
coinage with the great metrical system, by making their dollars, in the words of Mr. Mann,
exact five-franc pieces, “la pièce de 5 francs du poids et de l'alliage actuels,” anxious to alter
their whole silver coinage in order to acquire it; and when this important result had been
also accomplished in Great Britain, and in Canada and her other colonial possessions, as well
as throughout the greater part of Europe, no country would be so insane as to throw away
such an advantage, and throw themselves out of gear with the rest of the commercial world.
No alteration has ever taken place in the weight or fineness of the French coinage since
France possessed a coinage founded upon sound principles. The franc, struck in the mints
of different and independent countries, already circulates internationally, and continues to do
so increasingly and more extensively.
572. (Mr. Hubbard.) Would not the result of the arrangement which you have
proposed be this, that with one pound sterling you would buy 25 francs, each of which
would therefore cost you 9%d. If you buy them in France and bring them over here,
according to their system they would pass for 10d., you would therefore have a large profit
upon the importation of French silver, and our own silver would of course be driven out of
circulation by it?—When francs were brought here, not only as silver bullion, but as coin
well known to be altogether identical in intrinsic value with our own silver 10d., there
could only be the exchange on them as bullion, as on all other commodities differing in
value in different countries. As coin they would be identical, but if silver was rendered
by the course of payments, &c., more valuable in France than in England, of course it
would then command a higher price there, and if not, the reverse. The coins being the
same, and therefore altogether mutually commensurable, you would simply have to consider
the exact per-centage of the exchange arising out of their different mercantile value as
commodities and instruments for effecting payments.
573. Then you must either give up passing a silver currency at a gain of one tenth, which
you do now, or you must alter your gold standard 2— The alteration which I should hope,
and fully expect, would be that the French would adopt the gold standard, as the Americans
have done already.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 79
574. With reference to America, you imagine that they would make the dollar worth
five francs?—Yes, I do. An exact five franc piece, 69.4 grains instead of 69'll grains of
pure silver. It is what I suggested when I proposed my scheme in 1853, and it
is now proposed by themselves, solely to secure a coincidence and identity between
their coin and the French and other continental nations, and would of course be still more
eagerly desired if this slight change at the same time held out a similar boon as regards
Great Britain and her dependencies, by our adoption of the tempence, or franc as it would
soon be rendered.
575. And that assimilation of the United States to the French silver currency would be
a reason for us to adopt the tenpence here?—Yes, a further most important reason.
576. Are you aware that the only legal tender now in America is gold?—Yes, and that
it has become so after a gold and silver standard had been fairly and fully tried in the
|United States.
577. And by a very recent edict, so late as 1853, they have deposed silver from its
former function of a measure of value, and have made it what it is in England, a token?—
Yes; and I consider this a most important consideration in the settlement of this question.
Previously to that edict silver was, concurrently with gold, a joint measure of value in the
United States; now they have but one, and that is gold.
578. The recent experience therefore of what America has done holds out no expectation
that they would return again to silver as a standard —I should think and hope not. What
I anxiously desire is that all other countries should adopt the one gold standard, and thus
render it a universal measure of value. The United States having already done this is a
strong additional ground to hope that the French and other European nations will, ere
long, likewise join in so important an arrangement. It requires but simply to render the
Napoleons and Leopolds, or whatever may be the gold coin of the country, the legal tender
in payments, instead of the silver coin ; and when gold and silver coins, as often, exactly
correspond in value, there is no injustice to any one.
579. If the gold standard becomes universal where is the object of assimilating the silver
value, and the silver currencies of different states?–In order to render our entire coinage
perfectly international and interchangeable.
580. Where is the advantage of that to a traveller ?—To a traveller whose course has
been the Rhine, or through the different Cantons of Switzerland, (before they all wisely
adopted, as they now have, the French coin as a common uniform currency,) and many parts
of Italy and Germany, if without a courier, or even settling with your courier, if not
delivering yourself blindly into his hands, a change of money four or five times in the
course of a day's journey will surely be found a great disadvantage, and very serious
troublesome annoyance, to say nothing of the far greater injury in a much higher point of
view, of whatever impedes and interferes with the free and unrestricted mutual intercourse
between nations.
581. What is the advantage that is to result from the interchangeability of English
silver coin with French or other continental silver coin. As no one need leave England
with more than a certain number of shillings in his pocket I do not see that he incurs any
very great difficulty or disadvantage by having to change his gold pieces into the silver
of the country which he is visiting 2–The traveller has to change his ideas and measures
of value, as well as his shillings, and although the French monetary system corresponds so
closely with our own, and all the difference is so largely in its favour, that in passing into
France the disadvantage is not so greatly felt, and rather indeed on your return, to the
mortification and annoyance of your own, it is surely not pleasant or desirable to have an
unnecessary change of money and accounts; and if we unhappily adopted a wholly incom-
mensurable coinage, such as that founded upon the mil, instead of the penny or double
sou, and tenpence or franc, even in going into France the inconvenience would be sensibly
felt.
582. Would the entire assimilation of a silver currency of the two countries maintain
an equal similarity of value in matters of exchange between their larger operations?–No,
you want the uniform gold standard; and the arrangement is not perfect without the gold
standard being generally adopted in Europe as well as America.
583. And even if the gold standard were adopted would the rate of exchange be invar -
able?—No. I hope a great deal from free trade in equalizing values and supplies of all
commodities in different countries, and such must ever be the tendency of free and unrestricted
intercourse universally; but I certainly do not anticipate so perfect a result as that of entire
absence of all variation in the exchange between different countries.
584. Unless the coins of the different countries, both the major and minor, were respect-
ively permitted to be legal tender, there would be no certainty that you would obtain an
invariable value for any exchanges that you had to make either in coin or bills; that would
depend upon the balance of payments occurring at the moment between one country and the
other?—It would no doubt always involve that consideration, but it would then come to
be a clear unmixed simple per-centage on invoices, indicative of the actual exchange, and
that only, and would not be mixed up with the inconvenience of different, above all of
incommensurable coins and values, such as mils,
585. One of the objections which you have urged against the pound and mil system in
your “Comparative Statement” is this, “that it wholly fails to afford the means of accurately
computing sums so as to enable any one to balance his accounts correctly, not only with
Mr. T. W. Rath-
bone.
4th June 1856.
K 4
SO MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. T. W. Rath-
bone.
4th June 1856.
sums calculated by the present English coinage, but also by any foreign system of currency
sums whatever”?—That is my opinion.
586. What do you mean by not being able to balance your accounts correctly with
reference to any foreign system of currency 2—I know no foreign system of currency
which is exactly commensurable with the mil, that would measure exactly with it, and
divide definitely without any remainder. If you have the penny and tempence coincident
with the franc and the ten-cent pieces and an exact five-franc dollar, the coins would all be
entirely and perfectly commensurable, and foreign and English invoices and bills would
exactly coincide and balance. But I know of no monetary system with which a mil
currency would be exactly interchangeable; and the small fractional differences which could
not be expressed, and must be lost on one side or other, (and almost always it is probable
by John Bull,) in foreign transactions, will be found to add up to very serious amounts,
even in some cases sweeping away all the profit, and they are of course wholly incompatible
with any correct balance of books and accounts.
587. Interchangeable, that is, upon a very rough estimate, because the variable rate
of exchange entirely prohibits such a thing as an invariable harmony between the two
countries 2–If the exchange is mixed up with incommensurable coins and monies of
account, there is a difference beside the exchange, which the merchant cannot possibly
express or obtain ; but if these are not so, the cents which I propose would exactly
indicate and measure with the most beautiful precision and clearness the exchange, and
nothing else, and we should have done with rough estimates.
588. (Chairman.) I wish more clearly and completely to understand your system of
blending the use of the pound sterling with the penny and tenpenny decimal system.
Will you have the goodness to look at that table (handing the same to the witness),
sº s. d. gſ' vº. d. a'. d.
27 11 7 27 13 9 66 1 - 9
16 9 || 1 16 l l 9 395 - 9
30 19 3 30 23 I 743 - 1
1 5 9 8 15 11 6 371 - 6
(; 5 2 6 6 2 150 - 2
96 15 7 96 18 7 2,322 - 7
which purports to represent sums, first of all, in pounds, and shillings, and pence on the
present system ; secondly, in the pound, tenpence, and penny system ; and thirdly, in the
tenpenny and penny system; does that correctly represent your view of the subject?—Yes,
assuming the calculations to be correct, which, as regards my own, that is, the two latter forms
of account, I can almost see at a glance that they are, and these two last I propose to render
the only legal forms of account. Pounds, shillings, and pence would be no longer a legal
form of rendering an account as regards the twelvepence or shilling; but I think it would
best consult general convenience, and promote a sound safe change to a decimal system, if
you might still legally render accounts in pounds, tenpences, and pence, or in tempences and
pence, optionally, thus leaving the pure decimal system to fight its own way on its own
overwhelming merits.
589. Would your view be to authorize two different legal systems of account 2–I should
be in favour of giving the option. There is, however, some difference of opinion on this
point amongst those who first and most cordially embraced and have most ably supported
my scheme, some advocating abrupt and entire abandonment of the pound as a money of
account, and others the substituting for it a third money of account of 100 pence; but not
one, that I know, its abandonment as our gold coin and legal tender, or even that alteration
of our present standard in weight and fineness, which seems almost involved in the mil
scheme, and which has been actually proposed by two of its most active promoters. Either
of these two modifications of my scheme could be subsequently adopted, if ever found
expedient, without the slightest difficulty.
590. If the option be left, it will necessarily involve, as a consequence, the authorization
of two legal systems of account, differing from each other ?–Yes; so far as that the one
form allows pounds, (24 tenpences,) as a third money of account, if it is preferred, and
the other form is pence and tenpence only, with but two moneys of account, as in every
other decimal system.
591. Looking at the middle column containing the representation of sums upon the
system of the penny, tempence, and pound scale, the addition, in that case, will involve the
same difficulties which attend the addition under our present system, it will not be a simple
addition according to the Arabic notation of numbers ?—No ; it will not, as regards one of
the columns in this case, but the Arabic notation will be perfect in every other respect.
592. Will not therefore an account rendered in that form altogether lose the advantage
of simplicity in calculation which is to arise from making an addition of the successive
monies of account correspond to the Arabic system of addition ?–It certainly would in
this case lose it in the addition of one column of sums exceeding a pound in amount, but
in all the multitude of sums up to the pound you would under all circumstances ever have
in perfect operation the pure decimal system, and further the ready command of a pure
and perfect decimal system for all calculations whatever, You certainly must work your
calculations by applying the multiple of 24 to the pounds, in sums above a pound, stated
DECIMAL COIN AGE COMMISSION. 81
in the middle form, but I apprehend that the great convenience and advantage of the last
form would soon lead people gradually and imperceptibly into its general use in all cases,
and that we should thus avoid the difficulties of a too abrupt and compulsory violent
change in our books, forms of account, and established habits. -
593. You think that the result of adopting an intermediate system as set forth in that
account would be the gradual abandonment of the pound and the adoption of the pure
penny and tenpenny system 2–Yes; excepting for the expression of large amounts.
594, You think therefore that for the expression of large amounts the pound sterling
would still be used in account 2–To some extent I think it would, but that the conveni-
ence of the other system would soon lead to the pound being generally banished from
accounts ; but being the gold money and legal tender of the country I think that it would
be cu rently used in conversation, and would still retain some footing even in our accounts.
595. Do you not think that the maintenance of two systems of stating accounts, whether
verbally or in writing, must necessarily lead to confusion and to inaccuracy –In writing
it will no doubt be a convenience when the one form is generally established, and intro-
duced into our all books and bills, &c., but I do not see how the other can possibly lead to
confusion or inaccuracy, and verbally I think the pound would ever be a positive con-
venience. I think that in foreign countries you find the want of not having a well-
established uniform large money like the pound, by which at pleasure to express large
amounts.
596. Does not that answer very clearly indicate the force and value of those con-
siderations which have led many persons to say that the pound sterling cannot be abandoned
as the highest integer of account 3–They have led me to the conclusion that it is not well
to abandon it entirely, and certainly not abruptly and forcibly.
597. Do you not think that a partial abandonment of the pound sterling must necessarily
be a new and a very serious source of inconvenience, and of ambiguity ?—I really have
thought very much upon that subject, and I do not come at all to that conclusion, but
directly the reverse. I think that there would be such convenience and vast advantage in a
pure decimal system, that its general use would come about of itself and without
resistance.
598. What do you conceive would come about of itself without resistance –The quite
general use of the penny and tenpence as the ordinary monies and form of account.
599. If the pound, the tenpence, and the penny be generally retained in use as monies of
account, do you not perceive, by virtue of the very table now before you, that the sim-
plicity of calculation will be lost, inasmuch as a strict adherence to the Arabic notation
cannot be maintained 2–Yes; and therefore I do not consider that there is the least risk or
chance of the middle form in the table before me (pounds, tenpences, and pence) being at
all generally retained.
600. I thought you stated in your previous answer the opposite conviction, that the
pound would be generally retained ?–No, certainly not. , I understood the question to be
whether I thought it desirable to abandon the pound altogether. I think it undesirable
to abandon the pound altogether, but I confidently believe that it would be generally
and voluntarily abandoned in all ordinary forms of account, and without any compulsory
legislation.
601. I understand the general result of your evidence to be this—that it is your con-
viction that the introduction of the decimal principle into the monetary system of this
country is desirable, provided it be introduced in the form which you have stated, of
the penny, tenpenny, and pound system, but that the introduction of it in the form
recommended by the Parliamentary Committee would involve more inconvenience and
evil than the remaining as we now are 2–Precisely ; that is the substance of what I have
to State.
602. Have you anything further to submit to the consideration of the Commission upon
this subject?—The grounds on which I think that the legal substitution of the 10d. for the
12d. in our accounts would be one of the greatest benefits that could be conferred on this
country, and would lead to the introduction of a complete and universal decimal system,
and the formidable and insurmountable objections which appear to me to exist to any
system founded on the mil, have now been long and very fully before the public, and the
substance is given in the statement I have submitted to the Commission; and my views
will I believe be fully sustained and explained in detail, as regards this country, by
mercantile and other evidence of far higher authority and weight than mine; and I only
wish therefore further earnestly to solicit the attention of the Commissioners to the foreign
view of this question; to the fact that the French monetary system extending widely and
steadily in Europe, adding whole nations, of their own free and voluntary act, to its
territory, and even nations who will not abandon their own old monies, but obtain its
important benefits by the simple course of rendering such monies coincident, (so that
florins and guldens will probably soon be the same thing as 2 and 2% franc pieces, and
the dollar a 5 franc piece); ere long the franc, or tenpence, Imust become the universal
ruling integer and golden key with all accounts, and monies whatever, and a fatal blow
will be given to the commercial greatness and social position of this country if we
should ever entirely abandon this universal decimal key for an incommensurable mil
coinage and millesimal form of account.
L
Mr. T. W. Rath-
bone.
4th June 1856.
82 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. T. W. Feath-
hone.
4th June 1856.
J. H. Turner, Esq.
*=s=sº
11th June 1856.
603. Do you consider that any great convenience now arises from the fact of the
United States having the dollar and cent for their monies of account, and France having
the franc and centime for their monies of account?–Not at present; but that very great
would from having the identity of the coins perfect, would appear from what the Americans
seem prepared and anxious to do in order to accomplish this.
604. You do not think that those two countries approximate sufficiently nearly to a
uniform system to obtain any of the advantages which may arise from a uniform system 2–
No; you want identity, not mere approximation, to secure the advantages of uniformity.
605. You think that absolute identity is requisite to secure the benefits of uniformity of
a monetary system?– Yes; absolute identity, or exact correspondence with reference to a
common ruling integer, such as the franc.
606. Do you think that absolute identity can be obtained and preserved with regard
to the value of the coin, both with reference to its standard fineness and to its weight, by
the various countries of the world?—Yes, I am strongly of opinion that that would be
the certain and well-secured result of what I propose. I do not mean to say that the
coins, &c., must always and in all countries be precisely the same coins. The French franc
consisting of 69.4 grains of pure silver, and a fifth of the American dollar being 69-11,
the dollar will it seems be made in future five times 69°4 grains, and will be an exact five-
franc coin, both as money of account and circulation. That would, and that alone will,
completely answer the purpose of identity and internationality.
607. You mean by identity a distinct and settled proportionate value not to be deviated
from?—Yes, and the convenience of which I think would prevent its being ever deviated from.
608. You think it reasonable to calculate and found measures upon the calculation that
such exact proportionate value can and will be preserved by the different nations of the
world?—I think that we may calculate upon it with confidence, and that any partial
desertion by any little state or nation would only more firmly than ever attach all others,
by the demonstration of its disastrous effects. But I beg to be understood as not resting
my scheme on this ground alone. The even stronger case I think I have clearly shown, is
that founded upon our own domestic monetary system and arrangements, and it rests on
ground entirely independant of the acts and proceedings of all other countries.
609. (Mr. Hubbard.) What is the date of that paper of Mr. Mann's to which you
referred as expressing the intention of the American Government to alter their silver
currency?—I think it was published last year, but not going so far as to say that it was yet
the intention of the American Government to make the desired change. The work is
written in excellent French, and the authorities cited, and I have quoted the exact words in
the statement I have submitted to the Commission.
610. You are aware that in our Australian colonies the standard of value is precisely
similar to our own—it is in fact the sovereign —Yes.
611. And notwithstanding the entire identity of the measure of value the exchange is
hardly ever at par?—Yes.
612. And the balance in the payments from one country to the other is so variable an
event that it almost always imposes some slight premium or discount upon the negotiation
of bills of exchange 3–Yes; I am quite aware of that fact too, and I do not apprehend
that it can ever be altogether otherwise; but that would not make it the less a
disadvantage and inconvenience that England and Australia should keep their accounts
and coinage in different, above all in incommensurable, monies, incapable of closely and
exactly balancing and useeting the values exchanged, nor the less a convenience and
advantage that this variation of the exchange should ever be a distinct, clearly defined,
unmixed per-centage on the invoices.
The witness withdrew.
Adjourned.
Wednesday, 11th June 1856.
The Right Hon. the Lord OVERSTONE in the chair.
JAMES HOVELL TURNER, Esq. examined.
613. (Chairman.) You are at the head of the post-office at Cambridge, are you not ?—
Yes.
614. Have you turned your attention to the subject of decimal coinage 2–Yes; I first
had my attention drawn to it when I was in the Excise department. Most of the Excise
calculations are made by decimals.
615. Have you formed any definite opinion as to the expediency or otherwise of practi-
cally introducing the decimal system into the coinage of this kingdom ?—I think it would
be very unpopular if there be the smallest hitch in the carrying of it out; otherwise, I
think it might be done.
616. Do you think it is desirable that the decimal principle should be substituted for
our present principle of subdivision of the integer of account P-I think so.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 83
617. On what ground do you think that it is desirable 2–Because it would facilitate
calculations.
618. You think that the decimal principle of coinage would greatly facilitate calcula-
tions ?—Yes. **
619. Do you think that it would be desirable in any other respect than giving facility to
calculations; would it also promote their accuracy;-I should say so, decidedly. For
instance, I began life in a counting-house where the invoices were very long ; there would
be, for instance, 328% yards of cloth at 4:#d. If we had had decimals the items would have
been much easier to calculate, and more likely to be correct.
620. Does your view of the advantage of the decimal principle apply equally to the
application of it to the subdivision of material things as it does to calculations of abstract
numbers in articles of merchandise, in retailing and marketing 2—That is a doubtful case ;
at present I could only recommend decimals for the larger measures of weight.
621. You are of course aware that the cases now alluded to of retail transactions in the
material commodities constitute a very large and important portion of the transactions of the
country, especially of transactions in which the convenience and interests of the lower
classes, and therefore the more ignorant classes, are concerned. Bearing these considera-
tions in mind, do you think that the application of the decimal principle to transactions of
that nature would increase the convenience of the community at large?—Yes; if it is a
good system of decimals.
622. Do you think that the decimal principle of subdivision as applied to coins, and
afterwards applied to the subdivision of material things, for which coins are the instruments
of payment, would be more convenient than the present duodecimal division of them 2–
The coins would; I do not think that measures would ; you would not get people to ask
for Tººths of a pint of ale.
623. If the decimal principle, in your judgment, could never be applied to the sub-
division of commodities, do you think that it ought to be applied to the subdivision of
coins, the instruments through which those subdivisions of commodities are to be paid
for 2–Yes.
624. Then do you think that decimally divided coins would harmonize with the non-
decimally divided commodities 2–I do not think that they would interfere at all.
625. If commodities are divided into halves, and quarters, and eighths, and sixteenths,
and under a decimal division of coinage, the integer cannot be so divided; how do you think
that there would be harmony of principle between things to be paid for and the instruments
of effecting that payment 2–I consider decimal coins and decimal measures to be quite
distinct things. But in some respects, I must say, the present coinage has an advantage
over a decimal coinage, because the present coins can be quartered.
626. Do you not think that that advantage, as applicable to the transactions of the lower
classes of society, is a very important advantage, and one which would be felt in the daily
and hourly transactions of every retail market in the kingdom 2–No, I think not ; it has
not occurred to me so; it is only a simple calculation of one article ; half-a-quartern of
potatoes at 10d. a quartern is easily calculated.
627. Take the case of any article, say sugar, or any other article now sold at Is. a
pound, can you trace the mode of paying for that pound in all its subdivisions—of the half-
pound, the quarter of a pound, the eighth of a pound, and the ounce, with the same facility
when the shilling is divided into ten parts as you now pay for it when the shilling is divided
into twelve parts? — I should say not ; that is an advantage which the present coinage
possesses over a decimal coinage.
628. What is your opinion of the proposed system of decimal coinage recommended by
the Parliamentary Committee ?—I am decidedly adverse to it; I was adverse to it in Sir
Charles Wood's chancellorship ; that was the first time that I opposed it; I saw that it
would injure the Post Office revenue; I calculated the loss at 60,000l. or 70,000l. per
annum, but it appears that I underrated it.
629. Do you perceive any other objections to that scheme, except the one which you
have stated, namely, its necessarily making some alteration in the Post Office revenue —
Yes.
630. What are the objections which you entertain to that scheme 2—Of course all
decimal plans will give trouble. I think that trouble ought to be kept out of con-
sideration as an objection to any scheme; but I have an additional objection to the
Parliamentary scheme, as regards trouble, inasmuch as the decimal system is asked for by
the educated and mercantile classes, and is not asked for by uneducated persons. The
Parliamentary plan throws all the trouble on the parties who do not ask for it, and who
would rather not have it; they do not want any alteration, and it is for us to get over those
scruples rather than to increase them. On the other hand, those plans which are based on
the penny give no trouble to the lower classes, but throw all the trouble of the change upon
those who ask for it, and who are most able by education to cope with the alteration.
631. Is it your opinion that the lower classes of society do not in any respect desire a
decimal coinage —I decidedly think that they do not; I do not think they understand it.
632. Do you think that it is from ignorance, or that it is from a settled opinion that it would
not promote their convenience 3–From ignorance and the inertness of people's minds, which
J. H. Turner, Esq.
*** ******
11th June 1856.
In 2
84 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
J. H. Turner, Esq.
11th June 1856.
dislikes any arithmetical innovation. This state of feeling exists to a considerable extent
amongst educated persons in the middle class as well as amongst the lower classes.
633. Is there any other plan of decimal coinage which you think superior in its recom-
mendations to that sanctioned by the Parliamentary Committee 2–I have proposed a plan
of my own in a pamphlet.
634. Will you have the goodness to state your view upon that subject?—I have other
objections to the Parliamentary scheme.
635. Will you have the goodness to state seriatim the objections which you entertain
to the Parliamentary scheme 2—First, I will refer to its injurious effect upon some retail
trades: for instance, a publican who now sells his beer at a penny the half pint (this is
well known to be an unalterable price), will have to sell 25 half pints for the same money
that he now sells 24 for, consequently he must lose 4 per cent upon his gross returns; as
it is also well known to those who understand the beer trade, that all the publican's loss
falls on the brewer, the brewer loses 4 per cent of his gross returns.
636. You think that the introduction of the decimal coinage in the form proposed, would
inevitably entail upon the wholesale dealer, of which a brewer may be taken as an example,
a permanent loss for which he could not be compensated?—I do think so.
637. Have you any other objection to state to the Parliamentary scheme?—There is a
tobacconist in Cambridge, upon whom Lord Monteagle called, who is in the same position
as the brewers. He is well known to be a man of sense and moderation. He says that he
sells the greater part of his tobacco in half ounces over the counter. It is a superior article
that he sells at 1%d, the half ounce: he says that he should lose 4 per cent of his gross
returns for that article, because he could not obtain more than 6 mils. for half an Ounce,
and he could not think of selling an inferior article. He attributes his extensive trade to
the goodness of the article.
638. Does not that very case which you have now stated, namely the tobacco sold at
1}d, the half ounce, show the greater convenience of the divisibility of the integer of
account when divided by 12 than when divided by 10, 1+d. the half ounce will give 3d.
the ounce, which will give 3s, the pound if you take 12 ounces to the pound, or 4s. a pound
if you take 16 ounces to the pound; does that subdivisibility of 3s, or 4s. per pound down
to 1+d the half ounce show the superior convenience and subdivisibility of the integer, be
it 1s, or any other integer ?—I think it does, but the Commissioners will see that I am now
speaking of the loss that would accrue to the retailer by the Parliamentary scheme. He
would lose 4 per cent on his gross returns.
639. Your view of the question is, that if in the case stated the decimal division of the
coin be substituted for the duodecimal, two evils would arise, namely, general inconveni-
ence from the less perfect divisibility of the integer, and absolute loss to the tradesman in
his retail transactions 2—Absolute loss to some tradesmen.
640. Is there any other objection to the Parliamentary system which you wish to lay
before the Commissioners ?—I do not mention any of the objections that were dealt
with by the Parliamentary Committee.
641. Will you state any objections which you think are valid objections?—I wish to
call your attention to the benefit societies. The Manchester Unity, which is the largest,
has 4,000 lodges, and 230,000 members. I find that most of the lodges pay every
fortnight; the subscription rising from 4d. a week to 7d. a week. If the cent and mil plan
were carried into operation, the old members will have paid in in the large pence, and they
will have to receive out in the small pence.
642. Do you consider that that discrepancy of value cannot be adjusted by any arrange-
ment which might be applied to the case?—I have not seen their books, so that I cannot
speak positively; I know that some of the members apprehend confusion.
643. Can you mention the name of any manager or accountant to any of those lodges or
societies, who could best instruct this Commission on the subject of these difficulties 2—
At home I have the name of such a person. He lives at Manchester; I have written to
him on the subject. He informs me that the subject will be brought before the
general meeting of the Manchester Unity in August. There are other societies of the
Same kind.
644. What is the scheme of decimal coinage, the adoption of which you would recom-
mend?—I will begin with observing, that all the other schemes launch into a decimal
system, but they do not provide for the completion of it. I consider this to be a most
important point.
645. Will you have the goodness to state what system you think desirable, as meeting
that difficulty 2–I should transfer the names of shillings and pounds to coins of 10d. and
100d., which are ultimately to be called shillings and pounds of the new currency.
646. What would you take as the basis?— A penny.
647. What would be your system of money account in that case ?—Pounds new currency,
shillings new currency, and pence.
648. Your decimal system them would be a penny, the tenth multiple of a penny,
and the one hundredth multiple of a penny ?–Yes; there will be, consequently, an equiva-
lent value in either currency, and nobody will be injured.
649. What is your opinion with regard to the objections that have been urged to
abandoning the pound sterling, as the highest integer of accounts in our system?—I think
the objections are made too much of.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 85
650. Do you not think that great inconvenience would arise from disturbing that which J. H. Turner, Esq.
has by immemorial and universal usage of this country become the great integer of
account in all our transactions?—There is no doubt of it. 11th June 1856.
651. Do you think that the convenience of a decimal coinage, such as you would sug-
gest, would overbalance the greater inconvenience likely to arise from an alteration in our
present integer of account, the pound sterling 2—I think that the difficulties might be
obviated.
652. In what way would you suggest that the difficulties might be obviated ?—
According to my plan, as I said before, there is an equivalent value in both the currencies;
such being the case, it would be easy to understand that 11, in the old currency is
equivalent to 21. 4s. in the new currency.
653. According to your system, every sum of money, instead of being now stated in
pounds, shillings, and pence, would be simply stated in the number of pence of which it
consists 2—Yes, that is one way of stating the plan.
654. For instance, one pound sterling would be represented by 240 pence 2—Yes.
655. Do not you think, upon that very statement, that 240 would be a much less
convenient symbol than ll. to represent that sum ?—We do not always have to do with
even pounds.
656. Take 10s, would not 120 be a less convenient symbol than 10 to represent that
value 2–Yes, but I should say that 6s. is as often used as 10s. in an account.
657. Take the case of 6s, would not 72 be a less convenient symbol than 6/. to represent
that value?—Yes, it would not be quite so convenient, but in other sums the new would
be more convenient than the old.
658. Will you state the other sums in which it would be more convenient 2––Instead of
saying 1s. 8d., I should say 2s., and there I get the advantage.
659. Instead of 1s. 8d., you would represent, 20d. ; do you think that you gain any
great advantage in that?—I should gain as much in that and similar cases, as I should lose
in the other cases. -
660. Did you ever draw out a tabular statement showing the respective symbols by
which every sum, from a penny up to a pound, would be represented under the two
systems ?—I began to do so once, but its very simplicity prevented me from finishing. It
is a thing that can be done by anybody.
661. Can you state the number of figures involved in the one system and in the other ?
—My impression is that there are fewer figures in mine.
662. Are you satisfied that your system would involve greater convenience and facility
than the existing system 2–Yes, I think so, if it were once got into work—that is the great
thing.
663. (Mr. Hubbard.) If I understand your plan it proposes to call a piece of 10d. a
shilling new currency, and a piece of 8s. 4d. a pound new currency?—Yes.
664. And thereby to retain the brevity of expression which you now have, only
applicable to a somewhat different value *—Yes.
665. (Chairman.) Looking not merely to the verbal expression, but to the mode of
writing it in figures, are there not many cases in which your system would involve more
figures than the present system 2–I expect, if it were examined narrowly, that my system
would involve fewer figures than the present one. I have incidentally given a case, in my
pamphlet, in which I use three figures instead of five.
666. The main objection to your system, of course, would be the alteration of the pound
sterling, or rather the abandonment of it, which it would necessarily involve, and the more
cumbrous statement of large sums which, of course, must occur under your system. Have
you any remarks to make with the view of obviating or diminishing those difficulties 2–
The future coinage of a 1,000d, piece, with a distinctive name, would be less cumbrous
than the present system. This piece would be worth 4!. 3s. 4d. of the present currency.
It need not be pushed into circulation, but used principally for accounts with large figures.
The present pound need not be altogether abandoned, but would be used occasionally, I
daresay, just as the guinea is, although the coin itself is not in circulation. As, however,
I propose to appropriate the term pound to my system, the use of the pound, old currency,
would be confined to few occasions.
667. (Mr. Hubbard.) You have mentioned two points as to which you apprehended
difficulty in carrying out the pound and mil scheme—the difficulty in the sale of beer, and
in the operations of friendly societies?—Yes; these are my chief points.
668. With regard to the sale of beer it is quite evident, as you stated, that, if a brewer
or a publican is to sell the same amount of beer at ºth less, he will be a considerable
loser, and that loss may tell very materialiy upon the profits either of the retailer or the
brewer?—Yes.
669. Has it not occurred to you that, as in other commodities (for instance, in the article
of tea), the price is adjusted to a convenient sum by making up the quality to a standard
which is convenient, so it might be in beer; and that, if the brewers are obliged to sell beer
at ºth less, they can meet that necessity by lowering its quality by ºth 2–I believe, if the
Cambridge people were asked, they would say that the public-house beer cannot be worse
than it is. The brewers of Cambridge apprehend a loss. I believe Lord Monteagle was
told by the Mayor of Cambridge, who is a brewer, that he apprehended a serious loss.
L 3
86 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
J. H. Turner Esq.
11th June 1856.
670. If the beer cannot be made worse than it is to the consumer, it is clear that
if the brewer reduces its strength by ºth part, and sells at a price ºr less his profits
will remain unaltered and the consumer can be no loser, according to your account of the
quality ?–It would hardly be beer at all if it was made weaker. The state of the case is
this; when malt is dear, the brewer's profit is lessened; if it be urged that the brewer should
raise his prices, I would answer that the price of bread can be easily raised, but the price
of beer cannot. When malt became dearer there was an endeavour to raise the price, but it
failed. The retail price of beer is the same now as when malt was much cheaper. It may
be said, that when malt is lower the brewer can compensate himself. I reply, “What
business have you to interfere in such an arbitrary manner with the brewer's profits 2 °
You propose to deprive him of a prospective advantage which belongs to him by the natural
course of trade, and with which he hopes to counterbalance the past. Besides, if we may
look for a fall in malt, we may equally look for a subsequent rise. When present prices,
after having departed for a season, came back again, the brewer would again feel the
deficiency in his returns which is threatened by the small penny.
671. With regard to benefit societies, the advantage of a benefit society depends, does
it not, upon the amount of subscriptions which a member has paid, and which entitle
him to certain allowances in cases of illness —Yes.
672. The interest which each member of the society has in it may I presume be made
the subject of estimate; whatever interest he has in the benefit society can be made the
subject of estimate, may it not ?—I am not sufficiently acquainted with the details to give
an answer to that question.
673. I think it is quite obvious that everything of that kind may be made the subject of
estimate, therefore the difficulty which you speak of might be disposed of by repaying to
the members one twenty-fifth part of the value of the interest which they have now under
the present currency?—It might be so; I cannot say that I am sufficiently acquainted
with the subject to give a decided opinion upon it ; my impression is that confusion
would be caused in their accounts by the incommensurability of the two systems. If
14d. were equal to 5 cents 6 mils they would understand it, but it is equal to 5 cents
8 mils and a fraction of a mil, and that I think will cause confusion.
674. That difficulty with regard to confusion would undoubtedly exist at the moment of
transition from the one system of currency to the other; but after the account had been
once transferred to its new expression, that is, when the statement of funds in pounds,
shillings, and pence had been transferred into a statement of pounds, florins, cents, and
mils, the consequent allowances from the fund would become payable in florins, cents, and
mils, and the confusion would no longer exist 3–It is impossible to say until it comes into
operation. I cannot readily divest myself of the idea that confusion will be caused.
675. You are not prepared to say that those solutions of the difficulty could not be
applied, but that they have not occurred to your mind as probable 2–I am not. The
Commissioners had better ask the Manchester Unity people. I doubt whether these societies
will like any interference with their funds.
676. Has it not occurred to you that if the idea of a shilling now represents 12 pence,
it would be an inconvenient thing under your plan to be calling a shilling that which was
only tenpence?—No, I do not think so. They have done the same thing with the gallon;
the imperial gallon was not always of the same size as it is now. I have another precedent
for applying old names to new things. When the style was altered, the names of the
months were not changed; the one is distinguished from the other by saying new style or
old style, as the case may be, just as I propose to distinguish new currency from old currency.
There is no confusion between May Day as it stands in the Almanack and old May Day,
when the cattle are turned upon the common at Cambridge. We may expect the same
facility in distinguishing a shilling new currency from a shilling old currency. The
historian will refer in his margin to the relative value of money, as he now does to the
apparent difference of date. The change of style was disliked at the time, as all such
changes are ; but if it was unpopular, it was at least successful, Hogarth's populace ask to
have their days given back to them; if their successors should say, “Give us back our
penny,” let it not be found that it has actually been taken away from them.
677. You do not apprehend that any inconvenience would arise from applying the term
pound to that which would be worth 8s. 4d. only, whereas it is now applied to that which
is worth 20s. ?–-It would require a little management on the part of Government. I can
state, if the Commissioners will allow me, how I should do it: I should circulate the 10d.
and the 100d, coins; I should say nothing at first about pounds, shillings, and pence new
currency, but I should ask the public to treat them as being worth so many pence ; I
should make out a table—it could easily be circulated by means of the post-office. If a
person had a 100-penny piece and three 10-penny pieces, he would count the number of
pence, 130 pence; he would then refer to the table and find that the coins were equal to
10s. 10d. If he had any of the old coins to add to them, say a 5-shilling piece, that would
make 15s. 10d. When the new coins preponderated in the circulation, my pamphlet pro-
poses that a day should be named by the Treasury, on which a shilling should be
deemed to mean 10d., and a pound to mean 100d., unless anything showed that the
old values were meant. The people in general wish to retain the old names of pounds,
shillings, and pence. I take advantage of this to drive the old system out of use.
It is easy enough to introduce a new system, but the difficulty is to get rid of the
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 87
old one. I am firmly persuaded that my plan would eradicate the present system. If
you get cents and mils into operation (or even imperials, albions, and pence, according
to Mr. Minasi's suggestion), still, in country places a great number of people will con-
tinue to calculate by pounds, shillings, and pence.
678. (Chairman.) In comparing the relative merits or defects of your system and the
Parliamentary system you cannot fail to have been struck with one very pointed difference
between the two systems. Under the Parliamentary system the present mode both of
symbolizing and calculating the pound sterling and all its multiples remains unaltered, and
a change would take place only in the fractional part of the pound sterling; while in your
system there would be a change involved in both cases, not only the fractional parts of the
pound sterling would be differently represented under your system from what they now
are, but also the pound sterling in all its multiples would undergo a change both in the
symbols representing them and in the mode of estimating them. I ask you your opinion
as to the effect of the difference between the two schemes 2—I am afraid that I do not
sufficiently understand the purport of your Þordship's question to give an answer.
679. The question has reference to the relative tendency of the two schemes to produce
convenience both in writing and in estimating sums. For instance, under your scheme
one pound sterling would be represented by two imperials and four albions; now take the
higher sum, say, for instance 1,900l. under your scheme that would be represented by 4,560
imperials; do you not think that a system of coinage which called upon you to represent
1,900 by 4,560 is more cumbrous, and therefore less convenient, and less calculated to facili-
tate both accuracy and expedition in account keeping than the present system 2–It would
not be quite so convenient. In order that other parts of my evidence may not be mis-
understood, I beg to remark, that the terms “imperials' and “albions” are terms which
belong to Mr. Minasi's plan. By an albion Mr. Minasi means iOd., and by an imperial he
means 100d. Up to this point our plans are the same.
680. Is not the greater convenience the entire object of any change in the present
system of our monetary subdivision ?—Yes.
681. Therefore, if your system shows itself in two important respects less convenient
than the present one, is not that a very formidable objection to it 2–If that is the case, no
doubt it is; but if we had the 1,000d. piece which I have spoken of, I should represent the
same sum with three figures instead of four; the figures would be 456 instead of 4,560;
456 is less cumbrous than 1,900.
682. But the 1,000d, piece would not be a money of account; large sums must necessarily
be stated in account keeping in a number of monies of account, and as your highest money
of account will be much lower than the pound sterling, so much so, that the one
pound sterling will be represented by two imperials and four albions, must it not
necessarily follow that all the multiples of the pound sterling will be represented by
symbols less convenient than the existing symbols?—Yes, it does; we get an increase of
figures in the pounds, but we have a decrease in the right-hand figures.
683. That is the very point to which I wish to draw your attention in your system, that
whilst you get increased convenience in representing fractional parts of the pound sterling,
you necessarily involve increased inconvenience in representing the pound sterling in its
multiples 3–Yes.
684. Balancing those two one against the other, do you think that the convenience in
the one case is sufficient to justify the inconvenience as regards the number of figures that
would attend the abandonment of our present system 2–Yes, because the masses of the
people have to do with shillings and pence, while there are comparatively few persons who
have to do with the pounds.
685. Do you think it can justly be said, that few persons have to do with accounts in
which the pound sterling or its multiples are involved 2–-Comparatively few people have
to do with accounts which have many figures in the column for pounds.
686. Do you think that few persons have to do with accounts in which the pound sterling
or some of its multiples are involved?——Few persons have to do with such large sums as
1,900l., which your Lordship mentioned. There are very few people in the country who
have accounts with four figures in the pounds. With reference to your Lordship's obser-
vation that the 1,000d. piece would not be a coin of account, I wish to observe that if
eventually it should be deemed advisable to have such a coin, there is nothing to prevent
people using it as a coin of account if they please.
687. Do you think that the desirability of introducing the decimal principle into our
coinage depends upon the adoption of it in the form you recommend with the penny basis;
or if the adoption of it in the form you recommend be deemed impracticable, do you think
it is desirable to introduce the decimal principle upon the grounds recommended in the
report of the Parliamentary Committee ?—I do not think so. I think that cents and mils
would be very unpopular.
688. (Mr. Hubbard.) You think it better not to attempt the introduction of a decimal
principle into our coinage, rather than to make the attempt in the form recommended by
the Parliamentary Committee ?—I do so decidedly. I have come quite to that conclusion.
689. (Chairman.) Is there any further observation or suggestion upon this subject
that you wish to lay before the Commissioners?—I am not aware of anything else.
Adjourned.
J. H. Turner, Esq.
11th June 1856.
*-**--—-s
L 4
88 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. F. J. Minasi.
*===
18th June 1856.
£ºmºsº
Wednesday, 18th June 1856.
The Right Hon. the LORD OVERSTONE in the Chair.
Mr. FREDERIC JAMES MINASI examined.
690. (Chairman.) You are an instructor in mathematics and in the physical sciences,
are you not ?—Yes.
691. You have turned your attention, have you not, to the subject of decimal coinage 2
——I have.
692. Is it your opinion that it is expedient and practicable to introduce the principle of
decimal coinage into this kingdom ?—I entirely acquiesce in its expediency; but I have
some doubts about the practicability.
693. Will you have the goodness to state the nature of those doubts?—They have
chiefly reference to the opposition which I fear would arise from the lower ranks of the
people; from those who by long habit have become so accustomed to our present system
of money and accounts, that they would be unwilling to relinquish it for another, the
advantages of which they do not see, or encounter the trouble necessarily consequent
upon a change, however small it might be. I think I am not in error in asserting that a
large majority of the middle classes, including shopkeepers and retail dealers, would be
opposed to it.
694. On what ground do you apprehend that the middle classes, the shopkeepers and
retail dealers, would object to it?—From reasons akin to those I have just given. From
habits of education and practice the middle classes are accustomed, in all mercantile and
traffic transactions, to think of values in relations to pounds, shillings, and pence, as at
present constituted; with such an arrangement they seem quite contented, and appear to
have no desire to undergo any inconvenience attending a change for which they have not
discovered the necessity. As a question of facility in accountancy, there appears to be much
difference of opinion even among those interested in the question; and if all the clerks
and bookkeepers throughout the kingdom were to be canvassed on this question, I should
not be surprised to find that the majority would be found to declare in favour of leaving
matters as they are. Those who are passing from the turmoil of business being prejudiced
against what they would term new-fangled notions, and new comers being unwilling to lay
aside what had just cost them so much labour to acquire. With regard to shopkeepers as a
class, I feel confident this feeling would be found very generally to prevail; they would be
unwilling to invite that which would involve alterations in their prices and books, and in
all those simple methods of computation by which they can so easily and rapidly arrive at
the value of their goods in retail transactions.
695. Do you think that shopkeepers would find any serious inconvenience in the
application of the decimal coinage to the division of their material commodities?—That
would depend upon the particular system of decimal coinage that might be adopted; and
must be discussed in connexion with the various plans offered for bringing about the change.
It would depend likewise upon the consideration whether the decimal principle is to be applied
to our weights and measures also. I am now stating what I believe is the feeling, or rather
want of feeling, on the part of tradesmen and others on the question of any change in the
money of the country. I am much discouraged in my advocacy of an alteration by the small
amount of interest that is taken in the subject, even by those who would be most affected
by it, and by the unwillingness to encounter a change on the part of the few who do at
all consent to examine the arguments of those who desire to see the reform carried out.
I have received letters from tradesmen whom I have induced to express an opinion on the
question, who state their wish to be that no change in the coinage of the country should be
attempted. I may mention in particular a letter to this effect from the head of a book-
selling firm in Paternoster-row ; and one I yesterday received from a grocer and tea-dealer
doing an extensive business in Islington, in which the writer expresses the hope that no
change may be made in our present money and system of accounts, which he says he has
used for 40 years without any difficulty, and which he considers to be well adapted to the
purposes of commerce. This is an example of the few tradesmen who take the trouble of
at all thinking on the question, the majority being both ignorant and indifferent about it.
Wishing to ascertain the opinions of the shopkeepers of my vicinity, I invited, by circular,
about 160 of them last evening to a meeting at my house, stating that I had been sum-
moned by Her Majesty's Commissioners to give evidence before them on the subject of the
proposal to alter our money and mode of keeping accounts; and that on so important a
matter I was anxious to hear their opinions. Only six persons availed themselves of the
opportunity thus offered, and these, who with but a single exception had previously talked
the case over with me, whilst generally acquiescing in the facilities of a decimal mode of
computation, expressed no decided opinion in its favour; or of any plan by which to effect
the change.
696. Do you think that the difficulties and objections to which you have alluded are
principally founded upon the inconvenience of a change from the one system to the other,
or are they in any degree founded upon the apprehension that a decimal system, when
adopted, would not be so convenient as the existing one?—I should say that the difficul-
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 89
ties and objections I allude to are founded on anticipated inconveniences of a change from
one system of money and accounts to another. There is an indisposition to entertain the
question in any shape, from an impression that it is not called for. As to decimals there is
a great amount of ignorance, and I believe arithmetic is altogether imperfectly taught in
the middle-class schools of this country.
697. Your impression, from your intercourse with shopkeepers, which I presume from
your former statement has been extensive, on this subject, is, that there does not exist
amongst the tradesmen, especially the retail tradesmen, any feeling of the necessity of
adopting a decimal system of coinage in lieu of the present system 2–Lxactly so; that
is my impression. There appears to be very little interest in the question among them.
698. Do you think that the tradesmen with whom you have communicated on this
subject, have any sense of serious and practical inconvenience from the difficulties arising
from the present compound arithmetic that is involved in our duodecimal system of coinage?
—I think that the difficulties of our weights and measures are more apparent to them
than are those of the money arithmetic.
699. By the difficulties of weights and measures to which you allude, do you mean the
inharmonious and inconsistent system of our different weights and measures, or the fact
that we have not a decimal system of weights and measures —The former.
700. Therefore that feeling of objection to our present system of weights and measures
had no reference whatever to a decimal system of coinage or a decimal system of weights
and measures, but simply to our confused and inconsistent system of weights and
measures?—Yes, precisely so. With regard to the advantages to be derived from a decimal
system of coinage, I have already observed that I do not think the question has been con-
sidered by the majority of people. I have heard of a wine merchant, in a very large
business, who called upon his neighbour to know what the question of a decimal coinage
Imeant.
701. Do you think that the question of the advisability of a decimal system of coinage
is in any degree dependent upon the question of a decimal system of weights and measures?
—I am of opinion that they are most intimately connected. I think if the question
concerned the decimalization of our coinage only, it would scarcely be worth while to
entertain the subject.
702. You think that it would not be advisable to introduce the decimal system into the
coinage of the kingdom, unless it was upon the understanding that it would be completed
or followed by a decimal system of weights and measures —That is my decided opinion.
703. Taking a general view of the considerations to which you have already alluded, is
it in your opinion a desirable thing that the attempt should now be made to introduce a
decimal system of coinage into this country 7–Depending upon the way in which it
might be attempted, I think it is both possible and desirable to attempt the change in
question.
704. Upon what ground do you think that it is desirable. Is it your opinion, under the
existing circumstances of this country, taking into consideration the various reasons which
you have already alluded to, that it is desirable that the attempt should be made to
introduce a decimal system of coinage into this country, in place of the existing one 2–
That is my opinion. Taking into account the difficulties and objections alluded to, and
which I believe to exist, I nevertheless think that, under the exercise of proper caution,
and by the selection of a sufficiently popular plan, the attempt might be made; always,
however, with the understanding that the change would extend to our weights and
Iſleå.SUll’OS.
f
705. Assuming then that the present system of weights and measures is to remain
unaltered, you are of opinion that the decimal system of coinage would not be advisable 2–
I should say that it would not be advisable.
706. In what respects do you think that the decimal system of coinage is superior to
the present system of coinage 2–The superiorityof a system of coinage based upon the
universally adopted notational law, over every other form, as a means of facilitating money
computations, seems to be acknowledged by nearly every one who has considered the ques-
tion. Whilst cordially acquiescing in this superiority, I by no means adopt some highly-
coloured statements on this part of the subject which have been put forth by enthusiastic
theorists who, in their eagerness to recommend their schemes, would reduce all arithmetic
to the first four rules. I am of opinion that the pre eminence of a decimal system of monies,
weights, and measures consists in reducing the number of arithmetical rules required under
a mixed system, and introducing a greater simplicity and similarity in those cmployed; in
presenting both to the learner and the professed computer fewer liabilities to error, less
entanglement, and in the majority of cases requiring a less amount of figures in a given
operation than at present is needed under our compound system. I think there can be
little doubt on this head; consequently there would be a saving of time, not only in the
instruction of the youth, but also in the labours of the skilled practitioner. This part of
M
Mr. F. J. Minasi.
18th June 1856.
90 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. F. J. Minasi, the subject has frequently, though not always with fairness, been illustrated by examples
taken from various processes in arithmetic. I exhibit the following:—
18th June 1856. * e & -
A CALCULATION made by Methods in ordinary use, to determine the value of
3 cwt. I qr, 23 lbs., at 1,238l. 3s. 8d. per cwt.
By Proportion. By Practice.
CWt. £ s. d. cwt. qr, lbs. Qr. £ s. d.
1 : 1238 3 8 ; ; 3. 1 23 1 + | 1238 3 8
20 4 3
24,763 13 lbs. 3714 11 0
12 28 14 || 309 10 II
gº-ººººººº. [. # 154 15 5}
297 164 127 2 + 77 7 8;
387 26 22 2 24
2080148 387 94278 7 3;
2377312
89.1492
112) 115002468 (1026807
112 12 ) 1026807
&=ºssº sºme 2,0) 8556,7–3d.
300 4278–7s.
224
º, º Ans. 4278l. 7s. 33d.
762
672
904
896
868
784
84
—— = #d.
112
On a system of decimal money and weights, the former being based upon a penny and
the latter on a pound, so that, retaining old names, 10 pence = 1 shilling, 10 shillings
= 1 pound sterling, and 10 pounds = 1 quarter, 10 quarters = I cwt., the same Question
would be the determination of 3 cwt. 8 qrs. 7lbs., at 2653ſ. 2s. 5d. per cwt., and would be
worked as follows, the proportion being,
CWt. J-
I : 2653 2
and the result obtained by multiplication,--
2653.25
3. 87
S. d. cwt. qrs, lbs.
5 t 3 8 7
1857275
2122600
795.975
*w-ºº-ºººº-
1026807 75 = 102687. Os. 7.75d.
In all my remarks on this head, I wish distinctly to be understood as including the idea
of a reform in the weights and measures as well as in the coinage, so that the advantages
to be derived from decimals may have full efficacy.
707. I think that the Commissioners clearly understand your opinion to be, that unless a
decimal system of weights and measures either is accompanied by or is immediately
associated with a decimal coinage, decimal coinage taken alone would not be an increase of con-
venience, or be attended with any other recommendation?—I think not;-that is my opinion.
There might, it is true, be some increase of facility in arithmetical operations involving
money only ; but these advantages would, I fear, be counterbalanced by inconveniences
arising from the greater dissimilarity that would then be found to exist between the money
under the new form, and the old weights and measures, than at present, when, notwith-
standing the want of it, close relations often obtain and are advantageously employed in
mental calculations; such, for instance, as that of the foot of 12 inches and the shilling of
12 pence, or of the ton divided into hundredweights, and the pound sterling of 20 shillings.
It is upon these considerations that I doubt the expediency of attempting a reform in the
coinage irrespective of the question of the weights and measures.
DECIMAL COINA GE COMMISSION. . . . 91.
708. Supposing it to be introduced accompanied by a system of decimal weights and mea-
sures, your opinion is that the principal advantage of the decimal coinage would be in
facilitating calculations?—Yes.
709. Have you considered its effects in its other great department, namely, facilitating
the retail transactions of the market, and its connection with the purchasing and adjusting
the payment for commodities subdivided in retail?–-I have not considered that so fully as
I have the previous matter. So far as I have been able to see, I do not think that there
would be quite the amount of advantage in this case as in the previous instance.
710. Have you considered the effect of the decimal system of coinage upon the mental
transactions of the lower classes, those calculations which they have to make in their head
in the confusion of a market 2—I have.
711. Do you think that the various fractions of a pound sterling stated in decimal
notation would be as easily carried in the head, and all the calculations depending upon
them as easily performed in the head, as they are now under the shillings and pence system 2
—I think not.
712. Do you not think that that is an important consideration?—No doubt that is a
very important consideration. I must, however, be permitted to observe that I by no
means agree with those who appear desirous of reducing all operations under the proposed
change to a purely decimal character; there is no reason why fractional parts should not be
employed then as now in obtaining results by mental calculation; it is more difficult to
remember '08333+ than 4, but then there is hardly the necessity for this, as it clearly is
an easier process to divide mentally by 12 than to multiply by the decimal form of its
reciprocal, and doubtless such would be the course pursued; but if calculations involv-
ing subdivisions so common in all retail transactions are to be conducted on the principle
of pure decimal fractions, then I am free to confess that such results are more easily
obtainable upon our present system.
713. In mental calculations?—Yes; there are various short rules by which results may
very easily be obtained under our present mixed system of money, weights, and measures,
which under the decimal system would be entirely abolished, and I think it is doubtful to
what extent their places would be supplied by others presenting equal facilities.
714. Have you formed any decided opinion respecting the various systems of decimal
coinage which have been suggested ?—I have, I believe, examined all the different systems
that have been placed before the public up to the present time.
715. What is your opinion of the system recommended by the parliamentary committee
which proposes to divide the pound sterling into 1,000 parts 7–I am entirely opposed to
that system.
716. Upon what grounds does your opposition rest ?—I will briefly state to the Com-
mission what appear to me to be the main grounds of objection to the plan in question.
In the first place, a very important argument against the proposal for effecting the
decimalization of the coinage by the subdivision of the pound into 1,000 mils, is derived from
the necessity of creating several novel coins which would be uninterchangeable with many
now in most popular use. I refer to the cents or hundredths, and mils or thousandths of
the pound sterling, and their multiples, which would be incommensurable with the whole of
the copper money at present in circulation, including the threepenny and fourpenny pieces.
In this table I have furnished the values in the proposed coinage of any number of pence
to 12, in which it will be seen that of twelve sums commencing at a penny, but two could
be accurately represented. The values of present fractions of a penny are also given :—
Pence. Cents. Mils. | Pence. Cents. Mils.
l - - ** - # 7 , A - - - = 2 94.
2 - - - , , 8+ 8 - - - , 3 3.
3 -> º - , 1 + 9 -> - - , 3 74
4 - - - , 1 63 || 10 - - - , 4 13.
5 - - - , 2 0# | 1 || - - - , 4 5;
6 - - , 2 5 12 or 1 shilling - , , 5 0
#d. = 1 ºr mils; #d. - 2++ mils; #d. - 2+ mils.
The same discrepancy would obtain in all sums composed of shillings, or of pounds and
shillings, with the pence here given, and it is worthy of notice that of 960 sums commenc-
ing at and advancing equally by a farthing up to £1, not more than 40 could be accurately
represented in the new money. In fact no sum of present money, unless it contain an
exact number of sixpences, could be correctly paid in the new money, which in like
manner could not be represented without fractions, in the foriner currency, as shown in
this table:—
Mils. Farthings. | Cents. Pence.
1 -> - = #4 l º ºs- ... = 23.
2 * - 2, 1}} 2 - - * 33 +
3 - * 33 2#. 3 º º * 23 +
4 º * 23 33+ 4 - - T 3.5 #
5 - tº- 52 4+ 5 tº- sº - 35 12
6 º T 3) 54%. 6 - - T 25 14%
ſ - 5 x 6 }} 7 - * - } 16+
*7 1 7
8 *e - , , 7++ 8 - - T 3.5 194.
º 9 º- - , 84% 9 tº tº T 25 213.
10 or 1 cent. - , 9} = 2; d. 10 or 1 florin se – 2, 24
Mr. F. J. Minasi.
18th June 1856.
M 2
92 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. Fte J. Minasi.
18th June 1856.
From this consideration arises a further objection to the proposal now under considera-
tion, namely, the necessity on its adoption for either withdrawing the copper coins in
circulation, inclusive of the threepenny and fourpenny pieces, or the depreciation of
their present value. There are now, I believe, between 5,000 and 6,000 tons of copper
money in use, and a large amount is, I understand, in course of addition. In the
year 1854 there were coined 270 tons of metal, forming 6,800,000 penny pieces,
12,400,000 halfpenny pieces, and 6,500,000 farthings; and a few months back petitions
were presented to the government by manufacturers in Lancashire for an increased
supply of threepenny and fourpenny silver pieces, which were stated to be found
most convenient in the payment of wages. In the event of the withdrawal of the old
copper, that change would have to be effected simultaneously with the substitution of
the new, inasmuch as the co-existence of two incommensurable moneys would be irksome
in the extreme and lead to great confusion among the people, sufficiently puzzled with
the novelty of a change; and very much tend to produce feelings of discontent in the
minds of those it would be desirable to bring over to an approval of the change. Such
an operation as this would be most difficult, if not entirely impossible, to effect, and may
be urged as a further argument against the plan. The solution that has been proposed
to meet the difficulty of the two moneys co-existing at the new value, namely, that 6d.
should be current for 63d, appears most unsatisfactory. . No amount of reasoning would
ever induce a costermonger to give 53d. in change for a sixpence on the purchase from him
of an article of the present value of a penny, but which would then be estimated at either
four or five mils. Indeed, such a method of dealing would inevitably lead the poor into the
difficulty of a shilling being equal to 1s. 0}d., a florin = 2s. 1d., or a sovereign = 11. Os. 10d.
My objections on this view of the subject are further strengthened when atten-
tion is directed to a particular coin that among others would suffer interference of this
nature; I mean the penny, which I regard as of more importance in this discussion than
the pound. Take it which way you will, as the poor man's coin, the household coin, or
the fiscal coin—the coin of which the pound and all our other money are multiples, every
consideration of the important part it plays under our present system, points out the
necessity that exists for leaving the penny intact both in name and value, and similar
considerations will show the propriety of a non-interference with the halfpenny likewise;
yet under the system I am now remarking upon, not only would these two important coins
have an altered value, but a ratio quite foreign to the familiar one they now possess is
proposed for them, viz., that of 5 : 2, so that the term halfpenny, as impossible to eradicate
as the French “sou,” would henceforth be a misnomer. I now quote from an address
published in March 1855, by the Decimal Association—a society formed for the purpose
of carrying out this plan, which says, “The five-mil piece would take the place of the
present penny ; the two-mil piece of the present halfpenny.” I think a great objection
presents itself in the obvious irregularity, and consequent confusion, that would arise in the
readjustment of the prices of all articles sold at low sums. Wholesale as well as retail
transactions must be more or less affected by this irregularity, and I imagine that trades-
men would be in a sort of bewilderment in repricing their goods. I have prepared a list of
65 varieties of shopkeepers and retail dealers, arranged under three divisions :—istly, those
who, it appears to me, would be injuriously affected in this particular by the mil system;
2ndly, those who would be influenced by it in a much less degree; and, 3rdly, those whose
calling would be little if at all affected. There are 36 in the first division, 13 in the second,
and 16 in the third.—
A List of Shopkeepers and Retail Dealers, arranged in three divisions, according to the
probable amount of interference they and their customers would experience from a
Decimal Coinage on the plan of £1 divided into 1,000 mils,
1st Division.
Bakers. Iſaberdashers.
Booksellers. Hair dressers and perfumers.
Butchers. Hawkers.
Button and trimming sellers. Herbalists.
Chandlers’ shops. Marine store-keepers.
Cheesemongers and buttermen. Milliners.
Newsvenders.
Oil and Italian warehouses.
Chemists and druggists,
Circulating libraries.
Confectioners. Outfitters.
Corn and flour dealers. Potatoe salesmen.
Costermongers. Public houses and beer shops.
Dairymen. Seedsmen and florists.
Dining rooms.
Fancy repositories.
Fishmongers.
Fruiterers.
Furnishing ironmongers.
Grocers and tea-dealers.
Silk and linen mercers.
Stationers.
Tallow chandlers.
Tobacconists.
Tool shops.
Toy shops.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 93
2nd Division.
Boot and shoe makers. Leather sellers.
China and glass dealers. Locksmiths.
Cork cutters. Music dealers.
Cutlers and hardware dealers. Poulterers.
Drysalters. Print sellers.
Gas fitters. Wine and spirit dealers.
Jewellers. w
3rd Division.
I3ottle merchants. Musical instrument makers.
Coachmakers. Opticians and philosophical instru-
Coal merchants. ment makers.
Curiosity dealers. Picture dealers.
Frame makers. Saddlers.
Furniture dealers. Silversmiths.
Furriers. Tailors.
Hatters. Watchmakers.
Horse dealers.
717. Will you give a little more in detail the process by which you would apprehend
that they would be injuriously affected ?–I have used the term “injuriously" in reference
to those shopkeepers who are comprised in the first division of my list. It will
be seen that, more or less, these persons deal in articles priced at a low rate,
say from #d. to 6d. or below a shilling. In the readjustment of such prices, many conside-
rations would have to weigh with the shopkeepers; if he priced every article at a number
of mils, just sufficient to cover the old charge, his customers would have reason to complain
of what would become sensible to them in a multiplication of purchases; on the other
hand, if he adopted a price one mil less he must be a loser by the change. His proper
course would doubtless be to charge some things in excess and others in defect; but in this,
unless I greatly mistake, his ingenuity would be seriously taxed in arriving at a result
equally satisfactory to both parties; moreover, this pricing must have some respect to the
sort of coins that might be issued under the new plan. It is to the state of things thus
contemplated that I apply the term injurious.
718. Do you consider that the prices of articles supplied by those various denominations
of tradesmen have been adjusted to the existing coinage, or that the coinage has been
adjusted to the articles?—i
in a very large number of cases I think that the article has been
adjusted to the coinage. The coin rules the price of many things.
719. Then would it not be possible, and would it not be obviously the course to be
pursued, that upon the supposition of an alteration in the value of the subordinate coins
there would be a new adjustment of the articles to the new value of the coins 2–No doubt,
in those cases to which I have already referred, a new adjustment would be necessary, in
fact, could not from the nature of the case be resisted; but I have already observed that it
would not be possible to make a new adjustment that would be devoid of injury to one
party or to another.
720. Can you explain that in a practical form?—As an illustration of my ideas in this
case, sheet glass is now advertised for sale at 2d. per square foot; under the new money
this might be quoted at 8 mils or 9 mils for the same quantity. 8 mils is a price ºrd, less, and
9 mils is ºrd, more than the present charge ; the former would involve a loss to the seller of
6s. 8d. per 1,000 square feet, and the latter a loss to the buyer of 13s. 4d. on the same quantity:
or take the case of a man who spends a shilling in pence, as beer, he is accustomed say to
have half a pint of beer on each occasion ; if the five-mil piece came to be used in place of
a penny, he would then be able to buy but ten of those half pints for his shilling, which
practically would be a loss of twopence on every shilling so spent ; even if the beer were
better, or if he had a little larger quantity of it, still he would consume his five-mil piece
where he consumed but a penny ; he would therefore, it appears to me, be a loser to the
amount of 20 per cent. On all such purchases.
721. But if the pound sterling, instead of being divided into 960 parts, were divided
into 1,000 parts, does not that by the very statement of the case show that there would be
a somewhat increased subdivisibility of the value to correspond with the values of the
articles?—Theoretically it may appear so; but I think, looking at the cases I have just
referred to, it cannot be doubted, that in the place of the present penny another coin will
come to be used, a single coin, either a four-mil piece, or a five-mil piece. If a four-mil
piece is used, when the penny value is depreciated four per cent; if the five-mil piece, then
the person who pays it away, pays a larger sum than he has been accustomed to do, in the
way I have referred to.
722. But if you had values, the fourth multiple of a mil, and the fifth multiple of a
mil value, would it not be practicable, to make the commodities shape themselves to those
values, so that you may have, whether in beer, or anything else, a quantity really equivalent
in value to the five mils, and another quantity equivalent to the value of four-mils, and so
so?—I cannot see it in that light, I am taking the more immediate effects of such a change;
and if I comprehend the proposals put forth under this system by its advocates, I do not
Mr. F. J. Minasi.
º-se
18th June 1856.
*mºnº
NH 3
94 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE (FAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. F. J. Mimasi.
18th June 1856.
*sº
think there would be a four-mil piece and five-mil piece; even if there should be these two
coins, one of them would be regarded in the place of the present penny, would in fact be
called a penny. I think that the term penny will never be got rid of, and that the coin
so selected by the people, would be used by them as they use the present penny, with all its
former associations.
723. Is not the real objection to the system this, that it would compel an alteration in
the articles themselves to make their value conform to the new values given to the new
coins 2–Doubtless were such a system of money once established, articles would be so
manufactured and arranged as to bring them into conformity with the coinage ; but my
objection has special reference to the present generation; those who with former ideas of
value would have to buy and sell things manufactured in relation to our present mode of
computation with money having no interchangeable relation to that displaced, and possibly
too with the former coins circulating at a new value.—Proceeding with my objections, I
may appropriately urge that the poor and illiterate part of the people would be much
puzzled, and exposed to imposition on the part of small shopkeepers, by this interference
with the copper money of the country, essentially the traffic money of the peasantry. I
have here the weekly expenditure of a Lancashire labourer's family, consisting of the
husband, wife, and four children, the total amount of earnings from every source being 15s.,
and therefore not an extreme Case.
2% pecks of flour º sº sº
2 lbs. of fresh meat * * sº
Yeast ºp sº ſº ſº-º: * º
2 oz. of tea a º tºº tº gº
1 lb. of sugar tºp gº tºº fºe
1 pint of milk daily * º tºº
1 pint of oatmeal sº ** gº
1 lb. of butter * º sº sº
1 lb. of cheese - g== game º
1 lb. of rice usº º tºº
1 pint of peas - sº tº- *º
Salt, pepper, &c. *- tºº *-º *
# lb. Soap * gº tº-e
| lb. candles sº- tº º º wº
1 cwt. coals {-} wº vº tºº
Sick club tºº * tº º tº
Schooling for two boys * tº gº
:
11 8
Any alteration affecting the savings of such people would beget in them feelings of
strong dislike, and even of open opposition, to what they would then regard as an uncalled-
for change. Such persons would not understand the benefits accruing to accountancy from
a decimal coinage, they would view it as a means of lowering their wages, or raising the
price of commodities. In corroboration of this view, I would refer to the opinion of Sir
John Herschell, the late Master of the Mint, in his evidence before the late parliamentary
committee on decimal coinage, No. 532, in which he says –
“It cannot be expected that it should not present itself to the lower classes under a
“ repulsive aspect; and without allowing a sufficiently long interval for preparation, and
“ duly familiarizing these classes with the expectation of a change, and giving them an
“ idea of what that change will consist in, it will be quite sure to encounter a very
“ formidable resistance.”
I have already remarked, that it is improbable we shall ever get rid of the familiar word
“ penny,” in our money nomenclature; the term, on the withdrawal of the present coin,
value, ºr of a pound, being applied with its present associations to a piece of either four or
five mils, that is, ºr or ºr of a pound; and the popular difficulty must arise of the shilling in
the one case, being equal to 12%d., or, in the other, to 100. Taking the latter substitution as
the more probable, we have the objection that even though a poor person should obtain a larger
quantity of a given substance for his five-mil piece than at present he does for his penny, it
would be often a loss to him by compelling him to purchase more than he might need.
724. I do not quite see the force of that argument, for a poor person has the power of
purchasing with his four-mil piece a quantity rather less than the value of a penny, and he
has the power of purchasing with his five-mil piece a quantity of some little greater value
than a penny, would he not then have as multiplied a power of obtaining varying quantities
as now?—Take the case of the pint of milk in the labourer's expenditure just referred to,
supposing five mils to be its price under the new coinage, 4 mils' worth would be 4 of a
pint, a quantity no shopkeeper will sell; to make the case more pointed, suppose that the
pint measure should be enlarged 20 per cent, to make it tally with the new penny; in this
case 4 of the new pint would still be an unpurchaseable quantity; half pints and quarter
pints being the only divisions current among people with every-day ideas. Even the so
much praised système métrique after many years' use had to submit to the more popular
liaives and quarters. To take another case : at present, a druggist will not sell less than a
pennyworth of any article; under the proposed system, he would either sell a four-mils’
T).ECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 95
worth or a five-mils’ worth ; there is no doubt that he would prefer the five mils, not only
from its taking the place of the penny, but from its connexion with the decimal system, the
number 5 most obviously being the fittest number for him to take. Now, at present,
supposing that a poor person wishes to purchase a drug or other article, the custom is not
to sell less than a pennyworth, which not unfrequently happens to be more than is required,
and being either thrown away, or becoming deteriorated by keeping, is an absolute loss.
If this kind of wrong exists now, it will of course be augmented by increasing the coin
which is to come in the place of the penny. If the four-mil piece is adopted in the place
of the penny, and it is received on all hands in lieu of it, then the evil I refer to would be
diminished, and the difficulty would rather be on the opposite side.
725. What do you mean by saying that the difficulty would be on the opposite side?—
By the seller having to bear a loss of somewhat less than 4 per cent. On his pennyworths.
726. I wish clearly to understand why it is you assume that a wrong must necessarily
exist. Supposing a chemist finds it expedient to sell rather a smaller quantity than he has
been in the habit of Selling for a penny, and reduces the quantity to the equivalent value of
four mils, will you explain why it is assumed that in that transaction there will necessarily
be wrong involved 8–I am quoting the practice of the present day, the practice of a retail
chemist, which is, not to sell any article for a sum below a single penny. I assume that
under the new system he would adopt the same rule, and would not sell any article at a
price below five mils, in which case the purchasers would in many instances be subjected to
greater wrong than at present, when, if half a pennyworth of a given substance serves their
purpose, the residue is wasted, and they thus suffer the loss of a halfpenny.
727. But suppose he gives a somewhat smaller quantity for the four-mil piece 2–If a
four-mil piece came to be adopted in the place of the penny to rule the price of articles, as
that coin now does, he might, and probably would, find it necessary to adopt that as
the minimum coin at his counter, and would doubtless then reduce the quantity in
bulk to tally with the value of the new penny, so as to retain the same ratio in the
profit; still that would involve an actual loss, because he loses the sale, and consequently
the profit, of the difference, small as it may be in individual instances : for, suppose that
the profit on a single transaction is at present #d., under the new arrangement it would be
# of four mils, equal to #d, which would be a loss of 1d, on every 40 sales of the kind.—
Proceeding with the arguments that present themselves in opposition, I wish further
to observe that no satisfactory solution has yet been arrived at in reference to the very grave
difficulties connected with postage and receipt stamps, with tolls, ferries, pier dues, and rail-
way fares by the parliamentary trains; with pawnbrokers’ interest also, and with a numerous
variety of questions of contracts and dues based upon the present penny. I would respect-
fully invite the attention of this Commission to the evidence, on this part of the subject, of
Mr. Headlam, M.P., before the Committee of the House of Commons on decimal coinage.
It would be well to remember also that there are not only penny stamps, &c., but twopenny,
fourpenny, and other stamps, dues, and fares of this sort. As an illustration, I will take
the case of omnibus fares. The fare of an omnibus now is 4d. ; that is the most common
fare: under the proposed system that would be exactly equal to 16; miſs; there would
be no such coin as thirds of a mil, hence we should say 17 mils—now in what coin
would this be paid 3 Not in 1 cent and 7 mils, for it is impossible to believe that
people would be encumbered with such coins. Perhaps it might be paid by l cent, a 5-mil
piece, and a 2-mil piece, or by 3 mils in exchange for a 2-cent piece; but even that would
involve the necessity of carrying about a large quantity of small copper. An omnibus
conductor has often great difficulty in giving change in copper at the present time, and you
as commonly receive two fourpenny pieces as 6d. and 2d. as the change of a shilling. Why
is it that 4d. was fixed upon as the ordinary omnibus fare ? Clearly, in this case, the price
is ruled by the coin. Had there been a coin of 3}d., then we should in all probability have
had the fares fixed at that rate. When the proprietors raised their charges a few years
back, it was from 3d. to 4d., not because 3}d, or 33d, would not have sufficed, but as a
question of convenience of traffic. Now I cent would be too low for the fare under the
new system, and 2 cents would be a robbery of the public: 2 cents would be 446., very
nearly 5d. present money. Were it customary to carry a large quantity of copper about,
it is not at all impossible that the charges might have been fixed at 3}d. or 3; d. ; but
even then, the loss of time in giving change would have proved so irksome as to necessitate
an alteration to a more practicable sum.
728. I understand your view to be something of this nature, that for various small sums,
from 2d. to 6d., the coins under the decimal system with which those sums could be paid
would be less convenient than those under the present system 2–Yes, they would, I think,
be found less convenient. From this and similar considerations, I think a larger number
of mils would be required in circulation under such a system than of farthings now. Another
question of much importance, and one that does not appear to have received the attention it
deserves, is that of piece-work—a question of great interest in connection with the pound
and mil system both to workmen and employers, and one that would be likely to prove a
difficulty to both parties.
729. Can you explain in detail the nature of your objection with regard to piece-work?
—It is, I understand, a very extensive practice for manufacturers of various kinds of
goods, as of textile fabrics and metal work, to furnish the operative with the material for
his labour, and pay him at a stated rate, according to the quantity and quality completed,
in the same way that the needlewomen are employed at the ready-made linen warehouses.
Mr. F. J. Mimasi.
18th June 1856.
*.
M 4
96 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
M. F. J. Minasi.
*
18th June 1856.
730. I do not quite understand how a decimal coinage would work more inconveniently
as to piece-work than the present system 2–It appears to me that difficulties are connected
with this, similar to those I have already referred to. Assuming, for example, that a penny
per given length of work done, say a yard, were to be the remuneration of a workman for
a particular kind of work, then if the 5-mil piece should come in its place under a new system
of coinage, the workman would naturally expect to receive that rate as his right, although
the employer would be a loser to the amount of 20 per cent by it; and any attempt on
his part to reduce the price to 4 mils per yard would raise the opposition of operatives,
who would immediately complain that their wages were less for the same amount of labour
by 3s. 4d. on every 1,000 yards of work completed.
731. Suppose we were to take an inversion of the prices, and that we had now a coinage
which gave us the fourth multiple and the fifth multiple of the lowest unit, and that work
had been habitually served out upon the piece-work principle to be paid for in those coins,
and suppose that a new coinage was introduced, abolishing the fourth and fifth multiple of
the lowest unit, and substituting one denomination of monies something between those
two, do you not think that the complaint would then be raised that we were diminishing
the facility of adjusting prices to labour or to piece-work?—No doubt there would be less
power of adjusting, but still there would be an alteration, of the same character I am
objecting against.
732. Then your objection is merely to the transition, and not to the permanent state?—
Merely to the transition; until all classes had forgotten the old, and had got into the practice
of the new system. All that I have said in reference to the uninterchangeability of the
lower coins under the pound and mil system with those in present use, must be understood
as having special reference to the period of transition ; but that period would, I fear, be
extended through many years.
733. Considering the objections which you have stated seriatin), to the proposed system
of Decimal Coinage in the form recommended by the Parliamentary Committee, is there in
your estimation any other system of Decimal Coinage by which those objections could be
avoided ?–Before I proceed to answer that question, I wish to state three more objections
to that plan. The first of these has reference to the chief unit of account being divided into
so large a number as 1,000 parts. I fear that the majority of persons would experience
much difficulty in rapidly forming an estimate, in relation to the pound, of any sum ex-
pressed in mils; to say nothing of mental addition, as for example; 87.9 mils + 768 mils.
In those countries which have adopted a system of decimal monies and accountancy, the
unit is divided into 100 parts only. I have here a list in illustration.
Belgium, 1 franc = 100 centimes.
France, l franc = 100 centimes.
Greece, 1 drachma = 100 lepta.
Holland, 1 florin F 100 Cents.
Naples, 1 ducat = 100 grani.
Rome, 1 scudo 100 bajocchi.
Russia, 1 rouble I 100 copeks.
Sardinia, 1 lira - 100 centessimi.
Sweden, 1 riksdalar = 100 Gr.
United States, 1 dollar = 100 cents.
Where a further decimal subdivision has been attempted, it has been rejected in practice.
Now, if the pound sterling were thus centesimally divided the lowest denomination would
be of the value of 2:4d., a coin far too large to remain without further subdivision to
meet the wants of the poorer class. In fact, complaint is sometimes made that we have
not coins of a value sufficiently small to meet all the requirements of traffic. It was to
supply this want that half farthings were coined about twelve years back; an expe-
riment, by the way, that has been quoted as a failure, overlooking the fact that the
poorer classes never got hold of them, the small shopkeepers, whose interest it is to keep
them out of circulation, not providing a supply from the Mint, and the poor being utterly
unable to do so, C5 worth being, if I am correctly informed, the lowest amount supplied by
the Mint regulations. I am opposed, then, to the pound as the chief money of account, as
being of a value too high to admit of its hundredths, beyond which I would not advance,
being represented by coins of a value not higher, at most, than the present penny.
734. Do you consider that the decimal coinage would work practically with more than
two monies of account, namely, the highest and the lowest unit 2–It is difficult to say to
what form any particular system would be reduced in practice. In the case of a centesimal
division of the chief unit, I think when the system was fully received, and in perfect opera-
tion, that two monies of account, the highest and lowest, would be the preferable form ;
but supposing a millesimal division, such as that proposed, I do not think such a course
would be adopted in general traffic.
735. Do you know any instance where such a system is in operation ?–In Portugal
accounts are kept in milrées or 1,000 rees; but the lowest coin in circulation is of the
value of five of these units. In China, likewise, accounts are kept in cash, 1,000 cash being
called a tael,
736. Do you not think that in case you have a division of 1,000 steps between the
highest and lowest unit, you must necessarily take altogether three, if not four separate
monies of account 2—I think so, especially for the convenience of retail traffic,
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 97
737. Do you not think from that that there must inevitably arise a considerable degree Mr. F. J. Minasi.
of inconvenience in calculation and liability to error 2—I think there would be some
increased liability to inaccuracy, particularly in mental calculations, consequent upon having 18th June 1856.
so large a division of the chief unit as 1,000.-Another objection presents itself in the fact
that under this plan a greater number of figures would be required in accountancy than
under that in present use, or others that have been proposed for a decimal coinage. This
must be evident from the consideration, that it proposes to keep accounts in 1-1000ths of a
pound, or a value less than a farthing; whereas at present it is not usual to enter any
sum less than a penny. I have made a calculation in reference to this question which
I beg permission to submit to the Commission.

rººm In the proposed " ºhe Advantage Advantage *;
All Sums of Money rising evenly in the following system of £1 syß. ed of present of a Penny || “... º
Pence. tºº divided into upon the system over basis over present
§iº 1000 Mils. Penny. Mils. Mils. system.
£ s. d.
From la, to 3 2 2 2 O 0 0
33 3.2 10 9 16 9 7 7 0
39 99 2 0 39 44 37 5 7 2
2 * * * 8 4 203 272 189 69 83 14
33 35 1 0 0 627 692 609 65 83 18
33 35' 4 3 4 3393 3732 2889 339 843 504
33 33 10 0 0 8547 9332 8489 785 843 58
33 3 * 41 13 4 43973 47332 38889 3359 8443 5084
95 35 100 0 0 109347 117332 108889 7985 8443 458
33 39 41 6 13 4 539973 573832 48.8889 33359 84.443 51084
39 52 1000 0 0 1333347 1413332 1328889 7.9985 84.443 4458
5 y 2 4.166 13 4 63999.73 6733332 5888889 333359 84.4443 51 1 084
39 y 3 10000 0 0 I 57.33347 16533332 15688889 79.9985 844443 44458
33 35 41666 13 4 7399.997.3 77.333332 6888.8889 3333359 84.44443 51 i 1084
92 35 100000 0 0 181333347 189333332 180888889 799.9985 84.44443 444458
y? 33 416666 13 4 8399999.73 87.3333332 78888.8889 || 33333359 84444443 51111084
99 ,, 1000000 0 0 2053333347 2133333332 | 2048888.889 || 79999985 | 84444443 4444458
My concluding objection is one which has reference to difficulties which, I believe,
would be found to exist in arithmetical operations during the period of transition from the
old to the new system of 1,000 mils. to the pound. It seems admitted on all hands that
no attempt to force people suddenly to adopt the language of a decimal coinage would be
successful in this country; that it must win its way as it did in the United States, where
merchants and tradesmen continued to use the old system of pounds, shillings, and pence
long after dollars and cents had become the only legally recognized money of account.
No doubt a similar latitude would be necessary in this country, the freedom of whose
institutions renders improbable the idea that its money system, established for so many
generations, could be swept away at a blow. It is in accordance with this idea that an
advocate for the pound and mil system, Mr. Jellicoe, in his examination of objections
against that plan observes, “It is not denied, but that during this transition state some
“ embarrassment will arise, nor can any change whatevor be made without ; it is the
natural penalty to be paid before a better order of things can be attained, and for the
purpose in question the payment of such a penalty is well worth the while. The prin-
cipal inconvenience, however, will arise in accounting. Thus, bankers and others will,
no doubt, receive coins of the old and new denominations at the same time, and will have
to pay cheques and bills drawn in both currencies. But a little management will suffice
to remedy in a great measure any complication which may arise from these sources. It
will be necessary only to add in account books as now constructed one column for the new
system of coinage, and make the entries accordingly. Such an arrangement as the
following, for instance, would meet any temporary difficulty of this kind:—
Q &
& 6
& &
6 G.
6 &
& G
& Cº
66
6 º'
:9 S. d. £ f. c. m.
A. B. - - - || 25 6
C. D. - º º - gºe - I00 - 7 3 O
E. F. -º - gº 16 8 6
G. H. - * º - * tº- 50 - 6 8 2
I. K. tº- * gms º gºes - 75 - 3 5 0
152 16 0 226 - 7 6 2
“The totals in each case being ascertained, the shillings and pence can be easily converted
“ into corresponding values in the new system, and the sum of the whole then taken in that
“character.” From these considerations it appears to me that difficulties will unavoidably
arise whenever a computation made in reference to the one system is transposed to the
form of the other. I submit the following instances in illustration: a person with, let us
suppose, a strong predilection for old terms, agrees to the purchase of 5,000 yards of wire
fencing at “2}d.” per yard, which he calculates would come to 521. 1s. 8d., whereas the seller
keeps his books on the new system, and taking 11 mils as the representative of 2%d, would
consider himself entitled to 55l.
N
s -
Mr. F. J. Minasi. .
18th June 1856.
98 MINUTEs of EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Or suppose it desired to calculate the value on the new system of 54 tons 12 cwt. 1 Qr.
at #d per lb., one person might work it thus:–
tons. cwt, qrs.
54 12 1
20
1092
4.
4369 #d. = 1 mil by the tables.
28
34952
8738
122332 lbs at 1 mil – £122-332
A second might proceed thus- -
#d. per lb. = 2s. 4d. per cwt. = ′ 116 mils.
and 54 tons 12 cwt. I qr. = 10923 cwt.
• 116
6552
12012
29
Ans. 3126.701
Or, a third might work the same question as follows:–2s. 4d. per cwt., as above, - 21 6s.
8d.per ton = 2i. 333 mils, hence,— - -
10 cwts. = } 2 * 333
54
9 332
116 65
1 166
233
29
2 9 J
1 qr.
~-
i
Ans, £127 .410
Here then is the same question worked in different ways with a different result in each
case, and those results incorrect, the precise value being 127 l. 429 mils. Instances of
this kind, I think, would not unfrequently occur in the case of the unskilled computer,
tending to produce feelings of dislike to a system that he would look upon as involving
uncertainty in its arithmetic. Even when made acquainted with the method of correction
to be employed in such cases he would in all probability object to the additional labour
involved. Under such a state of things it is not difficult to believe that old ideas and
methods would be had recourse to, and the period of change indefinitely lengthened. In
support of my ideas on this head I adduce the following:—At the general examination of
training schools at Christmas 1854 two sections of the questions in arithmetic for the “males”
were, by Professor Moseley, H.M. Inspector, devoted to the subject of decimal coinage on
the pound and mil system. From complaints made in a publication of the time, the result
seems to have been unsatisfactory, the candidates being “plucked.” It subsequently came
to my knowledge that several certificated masters who had met together were equally per-
plexed by the contradictory results they obtained. The questions in one of the sections I
now refer to were as follows:—“Section III. Express the sums of money mentioned in
the following questions, in the decimal coinage; work the sums decimally, and reduce the
answers to the present currency : - - -
“1. A spoon costs 7s. 9d., how many dozen can be bought for 44l. 8s. 3d. P
“2. A man who owes 2,348l. pays 12s. 9%d. for every pound which he owes; how much
does he pay in all? •
“3. What sum of money is that which being lent at simple interest will in 8 months
amount to 297l. 12s., and in 15 months to 336l., and at what rate per cent. ”
Concerning these questions I beg leave to append a short extract from my letter on the
occasion, published in the “Liverpool Mercury” of Feb. 2d 1855 —“In question I we have
to determine how many dozens of spoons can be purchased for 44l. 8s. 3d. at 7s. 9d. for
one spoon; the correct answer to which will be found to be 94.94 dozen, or 9'551075+
Now let us proceed to obtain a solution on the pound-and-mil system : 7s. 9d, expressed
decimally is exactly £3875, that is a sum between 387 and 388 mils, one of which must be
determined on as the fived representative of 7s. 9d in the Committee's plan. In like manner
44l. 8s. 3d. (= £44'4125 exactly) would be represented by either 441. 412 mils, or 441. 413
mils. Let the question now be worked out with these values, and it will be found that the
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 99.
results of four solutions will be four different answers and all of them incorrect. The
second question proposed is as follows:—‘A man who owes 2,348l. pays 12s. 9%d. for
every pound he owes; how much does he pay in all?” The correct reply to this is,
1,50ll. 14s. 10d., but worked on the proposed system we obtain l,500l. 7s. 5%d., or
1,5021. 14s. 5d., according as we take 6 florins 3 cents 9 mils, or 6 florins, 4 cents to repre-
sent 12s. 94a., the exact value in decimal fractions of which is 639513, where the last
three is to be repeated ad infinitum, and by the use of which, of course, a correct result
may be obtained, but at such an additional expense of labour that the friends of the
Decimal Association have not attempted to exhibit so awkward an illustration of their
‘labour-saving’ plan in those examples which have been brought forward by them.”
738. Will you now have the goodness to state whether you think there is any other form
of decimal coinage which could be introduced into this country, exposed to fewer objections,
and involving greater advantages than the proposed Parliamentary scheme?—I believe I
have examined all the plans that have been proposed for effecting the change, and have
come to the conclusion that a decimal system of coinage may be introduced into this
country with fewer objections than belong to any other method, on the basis of the present
penny, either by creating a new coin of the value of 10 pence as the chief money of account,
similar to the plan of the French system, involving, of course, the subdivision of the penny
into 10 cents; or, as I prefer it, and in the form I have advocated the plan, by advancing
another step to a coin of 10 tenpennies for the prime unit of account, producing a system
analogous to the United States dollar of 100 cents, of which it would be very nearly the
double. The former of these plans would produce a system of decimal coinage for the
United Kingdom of the form—
1 tempenny = 100 cents;
and the latter might be quoted as —
1 imperial = 100 pence.
I have read papers on this subject before the Statistical Society and the Society of Arts,
to which I respectfully solicit the attention of the Commission. From a lecture deli-
vered before the Metropolitan Society of Schoolmasters at Westminster last year, and
published in the “Journal of the Society of Arts,” I beg to make the following extract,
as more fully explaining my views on this head:—
“For some years past I have been a humble advocate for a decimal coinage. As to the
plan to be adopted, I did not think any was more desirable than that which seeks to sub-
divide the 11, sterling into 1,000 parts—a plan supported by men ranking high in science
and mercantile matters; a plan that would render perfect that very simple method for the
transposition at sight of shillings and pence to three decimal places of a £, so common in
use among actuaries and others; a plan which seems to require a shaving only from every
farthing, restored as an additional coin in the sixpence, which would count 25 instead of
24. The result of a somewhat careful consideration of the subject has, however, shown
me that it is not a question of accountancy only, but one in which numerous important
interests are concerned—interests that would be best consulted and advanced by a decimal
system founded upon the penny. The conclusions I then arrived at were:—
“I. That the new system should be one free from any liability to give rise to injustice
or confusion among the poor and illiterate classes of the community, thereby creating a
prejudice against its use. -
“2. That it should not necessitate the withdrawal of the most useful and popular coins
already in circulation, and with which, from habit, every one is familiar.
“3. That it should possess the greatest possible clearness in expressing its coins in the old
money, and vice versä.
“4. That there should be but few coins of account, and those of a convenient size; and, if
possible, of different metals. -
“5. That it should be an experiment which might be withdrawn without difficulty if found
inconvenient in practice.
“6. That the unit of account should be a gold coin of moderate value. And,
“7. That its lower denominations of account should range in value as nearly as may be
with the units of currency of such foreign states as we have most important relations with.
“In accordance with these requirements, I advocated the tenpenny plan just explained,
with the modification of making the unit of account a gold coin” of the value of 10 ten-
pences, the effect of which would be to advance the unit of account nearer its present value,
and thus aid in getting rid of the maudlin feeling which some have relative to reckoning in
tenpennies, and the fears of others about a silver monetary standard. This imperial unit,”
or imperial, as I have termed it, might then be put forth as the olive branch by which to
reconcile the two chief contending elements of this question, the penny and the pound,
between which it seems now acknowledged this questio vewata rests. The penny would
remain intact, and the pound, also unaltered and uninterfered with as a coin of currency,
numerically represented by 2-4.— It will be seen how this plan fulfils the seven conditions
previously laid down :
* It would not be necessary to coin all our gold in this form,-2 or 5 imperials might be issued for ordinary use.
Mr. F. J. Minasi.
18th June 1856.
N 2
100 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. F. J. Minasi.
tº-sº
18th June 1856.
“ 1stly. No confusion or mistrust would arise among the lower classes of the people, since
the new coins could be represented in the old, while the penny would remain unaltered in
name and value.
“2ndly. The old coins might continue in circulation for any length of time that might
be found necessary. © © • * e -
“ 3rdly. The two systems are obviously convertible with great simplicity, and all the
old coins easily represented by the new, and the reverse, thus-
Coins of the present System. Value in proposed System.
Value
in pence. Imp. temp. p. Imp.
The penny - º tº - 1 0 0 l OT • Ol
The three-penny piece - – 3 O O 3 5 5 • 03
The four-penny piece - - 4 O 0 4. 55 • 04
The sixpence ſº ** – 6 0 O 6 55 • O6
The shilling ce - - 12 O I 2 55 • 12
The florin tº- º- tº-e – 24 O 2 4. 55 • 24
The half-crown º – 30 0 3 0 55 • 30
The crown ſº º - 60 O 6 O 95 • 60
The half-sovereign - - 120 l 2 O ,, 1 ° 20
The sovereign tº - – 240 2 4 O ,, 2' 40
“4thly. There would be but three coins of account, whereas the Committee names
four,f so that two places of decimals would represent tenpennies and pence, or simply
pence, if preferred, and thus the absence of a third column of figures would materially
lessen the labour of addition. Also the new coins would be of different metals, and of a
convenient and, at the same time, a different size, thus precluding all chance of mistake
in their use. The imperial would be a little smaller than the present half sovereign, and
the tenpenny somewhat less than a shilling piece.
“The 5th and 6th requirements are also equally fulfilled. And–.
“Lastly. It will be observed that great facilities would be afforded to travellers and others
in more easily effecting exchange operations. The half-imperial would represent the United
States dollar, and the hard dollar of Spain and the South American States; the tenpenny
would equally approximate to the French and Belgian francs, and other foreign coins of the
same value ; while the Dutch guilder, and the florin of Zollverein, &c., would be indicated
by two tenpennies. For this and other reasons it would doubtless be found convenient to
coin such pieces as— S. d.
The half-imperial, or dollar, value in present money tº- º - 4 2
,, forty-penny piece º-> -> tº- º - {- - 3 4
, twenty-penny piece, or guilder tº º º º - I 8
, five-penny piece -> -> sº º tº- º – 0 5
“Those could be struck in silver, and would eventually supply the place of those at
present in circulation.
“A victoria, equal to ten imperials, or 1,000d., answering to the double eagle of the
United States, would likewise be found useful, and might be made a handsome comme-
morative gold coin, considerably smaller than the present crown piece.
“The plan, then, which I respectfully advocate, may be popularly termed that of the
double dollar with the double cent.”
739. The adoption of the penny as the basis, or the 10 penny and the 100 penny,
necessarily involves the abandonment of the pound sterling as a coin of account, does it
not ?—Yes, as a coin of account; but it might remain current unaltered in value for any
length of time.
740. You are aware, are you not, of the very strong opinions that have been expressed
as to the necessity of not abandoning the pound sterling as a money of account —I am.
741. Do you concur in those opinions?—Not entirely. I think that if the difficulty
were looked full in the face, it would not be found so formidable as the advocates for the
pound-and-mil plan have represented it. It is not to be denied that it presents a great
difficulty in the way of a system of decimal coinage based upon the penny, that there
would be much unwillingness on the part of traders and monied men of all ranks to throw
overboard the pound, and reckon in imperials, still more in tempennies; but then if we are
to have a decimal coinage in this country, we must meet this sort of difficulty at one end
* Elsewhere I have stated that when the old system of money had ceased to be used, it might be well to restore the
familiar names of pounds, shillings, and pence, in accordance with Mr. Tate's suggestion in the Times of December 11th
1853, who proposed “4 farthings = 1 penny ; 10 pence = 1 shilling ; 10 shillings = 1 pound.” Mr. J. H. Turner,
of Cambridge, in his pamphlet entitled “The Penny Considered as the Foundation of a Decimal Currency,” agreeing
with this idea, says, “I propose that a silver coin of ten pence shall be, and shall be called, “a shilling new currency.’
and that a gold coin of 100 pence shall be, and be called, ‘a pound new currency.’”
f It would, I think, be better to ignore halfpence and farthings in account as is done at present, but they should
still be current for the use of the poorer classes; if found desirable, the farthing might be withdrawn and the penny
divided into ten mites. -
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. l,01
of the scale or the other. There is no help for it; either the pound or the penny must be
displaced from account; and I respectfully contend that those whom the change would
more especially benefit are not only better able to cope with this difficulty of the pound
than are the mass of the people with the still greater one of the penny, but, as a matter of
justice, ought to bear the chief burdens of the change. It was upon this principle that the
alteration was effected in the United States, when pounds, shillings, and pence were
changed to dollars and cents—the pound being entirely abolished.
742. Would there not be a very great inconvenience in stating sums of money, large sums
of 11. and upwards, in the new form in which they must be stated, if you dealt with 100d.
as the highest unit of account 2–I do not apprehend that the inconvenience would be so
great as might be anticipated ; such sums of money would be represented in the proportion
of 2:4: 1, the operation of conversion being essentially that of reduction to pence.
743. Considering that the whole object of the adoption of a decimal coinage is to give facility,
and to save time and labour in account keeping, would not the fact of having to render
large sums in the number of pence instead of rendering them in the number of pounds tend
materially to increase the labour, and to occupy more time?—It would at first, but the
same difficulty applies to the other system.
744. How does it apply to the other system, in which the pound sterling, and multiples
of the pound sterling, are retained as they now exist?—The operation of reducing shillings
and pence to mils would prove as difficult to the ordinary class of persons; perhaps even
more so, for every schoolboy knows how the one is to be done, whereas the rule for the
other is known only to a few. Moreover, the number of operations of this kind relating
to the pound would bear no comparison with those that relate to small sums of shillings
and pence: I am looking at the question as affecting the great masses of the people.
745. If you alter the pound sterling, and substitute a new form of representation which
involves more figures, will you not, in the representation of the pound sterling and all its
multiples, be letting in an increase of time and trouble, while you are endeavouring in the
statement of fractional parts of the pound sterling to introduce a saving of time and
trouble?—To those who would have to deal with the pound, and, of course, they are very
numerous, there would be simply the increase of labour necessary to express that money in
the new denomination; when the system came to be fully established, this extra labour
would be no longer necessary, any more than would be needed the reduction of pence to
mils in the other case. As to there being permanently an increase of labour, on the Sup-
position of more figures being needed under a system based on the penny, the fact is quite
the other way; and I refer to the table I have already laid before the Commission in a
former reply (No. 737), in which is shown that the number of figures required in account-
ancy and a decimal coinage founded on the penny is less than under either the pound-and-
mil plan, or that in present use. It is there shown that the number of figures saved upon
the sum of all figures below 100,000l., by the use of the plan I advocate, would be some-
what less than + per cent, over that now used; while the additional figures in the
pound-and-mil system would amount to about 4% per cent. On smaller sums, such as may
be supposed to be entered in the books of tradesmen generally, the sum of all figures below
100l., would give a saving of a little more than 3 per cent for the penny, and an increase
of nearly 74 per cent. for the mil system. On still smaller sums, representing the dealings
of retail traders, the sum of all figures below 10l. would give for the decimal pence a saving
of rather more than 3 per cent, and for the pound-and-mil plan an increase of nearly 9% per
cent. Whichever plan is adopted, there must, I conceive, be a certain amount of difficulty
to be met during the period of transition. The question is, whether the ordinary people
should have that difficulty thrown upon them, or whether it should be made to rest upon
those who, by education and practice, are better able to cope with it.
746. What do you consider to be the great predominant advantages of the penny or the
tenpenny scheme over what is now termed the pound-and-mil scheme *—The advantages of
a decimal system of coinage rising from the penny over one descending from the pound,
particularly in the phase I have ventured to advocate it, may be summed up in its freedom
from those objections that have been raised against the latter in the course of this exami-
nation, and in its agreement with the conditions given in the extract from my Westminster
lecture, which it is permitted me to include in this evidence. I will state under five heads
what appear to me to be the predominant advantages of the penny basis:–
1st. It is a more popular method of introducing the decimal system into this country
than that by the subdivision of the pound sterling into mils ; concerning which scheme
I entirely agree with the forcible remark in the “Times” leader of June 15, 1855, that “it
is deficient in that element of popularity which goes for so little in devising a scheme, and
for so much in carrying it out.” This greater popularity attaching to the penny basis may
be viewed, under two aspects:—a greater simplicity in presenting the question to the
understanding of the common people, and a less amount of disturbance in their habits and
prejudices. I may quote as a singular proof of the former, the case of an article which
appeared a short time back in the “Household Words,” where the writer, whilst advocating
the pound-and-mil system, finds it necessary, in order to bring the subject to the com-
prehension of the general reader, to use at some length the illustration,-ten pence make
one shilling, and ten shillings one pound.
2nd. Its freedom from uninterchangeable coins, and, consequently, from the necessity
for depreciating or appreciating the existing values of copper money,
Mr. F. J. Minasi. .
18th June 1856.
N 3
102 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. F. J. Minasi.
18th June 1856.
3rd. The facilities offered in the penny for further subdivision by actual coins if found
desirable, to meet minute and subdivided values.
4th. The greater similarity with the money of countries with which we have important
commercial relations; and, -
5th. The smaller number of figures that would be required in accounts.
747. Do you think it more desirable to retain the present system of coinage than to
adopt the decimal principle in the form recommended by the Parliamentary Committee —
I do.
748. You think it desirable to remain as we are, rather than to adopt the recommendation
of the Parliamentary Committee, with the objections to it which you have stated to exist?
—Having respect to the objections which I believe to exist, that is my opinion.
749. But in case of the adoption of the penny or the tenpenny basis, you think that the
decimal system will be superior to the present?—Yes. I think that a system of money
formed on the principle of a decimal progression would, when established, be found
superior to that now in use in the country; and that a plan based upon the penny is the
only proper way of introducing it into the United Kingdom.
750. Is there anything else that you wish to submit to the Commissioners as bearing
upon this subject?—Perhaps I may be permitted to remark that I have turned my attention
to the question of the conversion of the old to the new money, and vice versä, that would
during the period of a change be found necessary—the supposed system being that of the
penny, and I furnish rules for the purpose :—
1st, to convert the old money into the new. *
Double the number of pounds in the given sum ; repeat the same operation with this
latter, and place it underneath the former one figure to the right, and under these two place,
also one figure to the right, the number of pence in the odd shillings and pence—the sum
of the three lines will be the total number of pence in the whole sum :
Example. Convert 871. 15s. 9d, to pence.
Operation 174 (= twice 87)
348 (= twice 174)
189 (= 15s. 9d.)
Ans. 21,069 pence = 2106.9 tenpennies = 210-69 imperials.
So 13!.-
26
52
3,120 pence.
2nd, to reduce new money to the old.
Cut off the last two figures for pence, then one-half of the remaining number as pounds
diminished by + of itself, will, with the addition of the pence, be the sum required.
Example. What is the value of 210-69 imperials, or 2106.9 tenpennies, or 21,069
pence?
Operation 105 (=% of 210)
Subtract 17 10 (=# of 1051)
87 10
add 5 9 (=69 pence)
Ans. g?87 15 9
This operation would be greatly facilitated by committing to memory the following
table:—
- One sixth of
#3 s. s. d.
0 10 is 1 8
1 0 , 3 4
1 10 , 5 0
2 0 , 6 8
2 10 , 8 4
3 0 , 10 0
3 10 , 11 8
4 0 , 13 4 {2
4 10 , 15 0
5 0 , , 16 8
5 10 ,, 18 4
Those who have not tried these methods are not aware how much less difficult such
processes are than might at first appear, and I may mention that in a single lesson, a class of
boys were enabled to perform them with rapidity, and in many cases, after a little practice,
even mentally. Tables might, if preferred, be formed for the same purpose. To pave the
way for this system of decimal coinage, it would be desirable to cause the amount of all
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 103
invoices and accounts to be written in pence, below their present totals, and subsequently Mr. F. J. Minasi.
to extend the same rule to each item. This would prove a means of familiarizing the
public with such representatives of value, and lead them to discover the advantages to be 18th June 1856.
derived from the adoption of the decimal coinage. I subjoin three tradesmen's bills, each
made out in the present system, and those of a decimal form derived respectively from the
penny and the pound.
An actual Butcher's bill—present system.
s, d.
2 lbs. 11 oz. Beefsteak at 9%d. per lb. - gº 2 0}
9 ,, 7 , Round of beef at 8d. 39 º tºº 6 3%
6 , 2 ,, Loin of mutton at 9:#d. , tºº gº 4 10
9 , 14 , Leg of mutton at 9d. 99 tº tº 7 5
# 2, Suet at 8d. tº 53 tºº tº 0 4
#31 0 11
The same with the Imperial of 100 pence.
. d.
2 lbs. 11 oz. Beefsteak at 9:#d. per lb. Eº sº 24%
9 , 7 ,, Round of beef at 8d. 95 * tº * tº 75%
6 , 2 ..., Loin of mutton at 9:#d. , gº tº 58 -
9 , 14 , Leg of mutton at 9d. 55 tºº tºº 89
# , Suet at 8d. 55 º sº 4
2 51
The same with the Pound of 1,000 mils.
g 772.
A 2 lbs. 11 oz. Beefsteak at 39m, per lb. gº gº 102
9 , 7 , , Round of beef 33m. 55 gº tºº 314
6 , 2 ..., Loin of mutton, 39m. , gº sº 241 t
9 , 14 , Leg of mutton, 37m. 35 * sº 370
# 2, Suet, 33m. -: 55 - * 16
I 043
A Grocer's bill—present system.
- s, d.
1 lb. Mixed Tea at 3/4 per lb. tºº º sºme 3 4
# 59 do 53 4/ 8 39 tº nº fºs 2 4
2 , Coffee ,, 1/8 33 " tº i- gº 3 4
4 , Sugar , 5%d. 5.5 " *-*. * ſº I 10
1%, Currants , 10%d. , - * gºe ſº-> 1 3%
3 , Raisins , 7d. 32 T sº gºe sº | 9
13 10;
The same with the Imperial of 100 pence.
d.
1 lb. Mixed Tea at 40d. per lb. fº tº tº 40
# 55 do. 55 56 55 gº tº * -º 28
2 ,, Coffee 2, 20 95 " sº iº tºº 40
4 , Sugar » 5% 55 gº * tº- 22
1%, Currants , 10% 32 * ſº gº gº 15;
3 , Raisins , 7 *22 * tº- * - gº 2]
1 66;
N 4
104. MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN.BEFORE THE
Mr. F. J. Minasi. The same with the Pound of 1,000 mils.
18th June 1856. 1 lb. Mixed Tea at 166m. per lb. tº wº tºº I66
# 55 do. 55 233 39 wº º tº l 16
2 93. Coffee 55 83 35 " -" – , gº 166
4 55 Sugar 95 23 35 Gº * º 92
1%, Currants , 43 , , - * sº &= 64
3 , Raisins , 29 2, sº gº º 87
691
An actual Linendraper's Bill (which shows that the practice prevails at present of quoting
the prices of such goods in pence).
S. d.
24 yds. Flannel at 21%d. {º tºº tº sº 4 5%
3 , ditto , 18% tº gº - - 4 84
1; , Alpaca , 11% sº * sº gºe 1 5;
4} , ditto , 16# ſº sº tºº gº 6 24
4 , Calico , 7% * gº dº º 2 6
16 , Plaid , 12% sº * - - 17 0
9 , Lining 2, 2% ſº $º * tºº 2 0#
l; 55 ditto 55 6# sº sº * = º 0 10+
4 pair Hose ,, 18% tºº tº gº &º 6 3
2 , ditto ,, 16# gº tº- * * 2 9%
£2 8 3}
The same with the Imperial of 100 pence.
d.
24 yds. Flannel at 21%d. * * sº & ºn - 55%
3 , ditto ,, 18% *º- tº º &ºe dº 56+
1%. , Alpaca », 11% sº * tº &=º 17;
4} , ditto , 16% gº tºº &=& wº- 74}
4 , Calico , 7% tºº * * &=º 30
16 ,, Plaid , 12% tº-º sº - 2 4
9 , Lining ,, 2% gºs *se * £º 24;
1} , ditto , 6% sº gº * -º e-º 10}
4 pair Hose ,, 18% tº- * - * - $º- 75
2 ,, ditto , 16} - {-- sº - 33}
5 79%
The same with the Pound of 1,000 mils. 772.
# yds. Flannel at 89m. ſº sºme tº- * 223
234
2
3 , ditto , 78 *- * *gs gº
1} , Alpaca , 49 sºme sº º * 74
4} , ditto , 68 -. * * sº 306
4 , Calico , 31 ignº -º-º: &= - sº 124
16 , Plaid , 53 * sº *-*. * 848
9 , Lining , 11 *º º --- * 99
1} , ditto , 28 &- gº &= - sº 42
4 pair Hose ,, 78 *º gº * &º- 312
2 , ditto , 69 sº * * gº 138
£2 400
These examples likewise show the difficulty I have referred to, of so pricing goods under
the pound-and-mil plan as to avoid loss on one side or another.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 105
Tuesday, 17th February 1857.
The Right Hon. the Lord MONTEAGLE OF BRANDON in the Chair.
T. C. MOSSOM MEEKINS, Esquire, examined.
751. (Chairman.) YoU are a member of the Bar 7—Yes.
752. Have you had occasion to turn your attention to the question of coinage, and,
above all, to the suggested changes from the present system to a decimal system 2–Yes.
753. You are the author of a little pamphlet” which has been laid before the Com-
mission ?—Yes.
754. Do you consider the present state of the British coinage to be satisfactory for the
purposes of exchange and of account 3–0uite the reverse.
755. Will you state the objections which you consider to exist to the present system of
our coinage 3—I think it is unnecessarily complex, that it leads to great inaccuracy in
accounts, and that it needlessly lengthens the period necessary for education. Under a
decimal system there need be no compound addition, compound subtraction, compound
multiplication, or compound division.
756. In those respects do you consider that there would be any considerable advan-
tages from a change, any greater simplicity, and greater absence of error?—I think that
commerce would derive very great advantages from the adoption of a decimal system,
and that it would give a sensible impetus to education.
757. On what is that opinion founded ; on the theory of the case, or upon any obser-
vations which you have had the means of making in countries where decimal systems
prevail?—Mainly on the theory of the case ; for instance in exchanges, in case of an
international decimal system being adopted there would be no such thing as the “par of
exchange;” under such a system the calculation of the “cross exchanges” and the “arbi-
trations of exchange” would be very simple operations.
758. (Lord Overstone.) Under the supposition of an international system —Yes.
759. (Chairman.) The terms of the Commission under which we are appointed do not
allow us to enter into the consideration of an international scheme. Upon what facts do
you rely in support of these conclusions ?—I think it must be obvious to all who have
perused any books in which a decimal system is adopted, the great facilities it affords for
rapidly arriving at results, as compared with our own system. When one is reading a
book in which the English system obtains, one finds it necessary very frequently to lay
down the book, and enter into a calculation ; whereas, under a decimal system, one can
continue to read and yet carry on considerable mental calculations, whereas there is the
greatest difficulty of doing so under our system.
760. Do you consider that mental operations would be more easily carried on as appli-
cable to decimal numbers than they are according to our mixed system at the present
time !—Clearly. It would very materially facilitate mental calculation and diminish the
liability to error. That was I believe given in evidence before the Decimal Coinage
Committee which sat in 1853.
761. Can you give us any examples in which, for the purposes of facilitating arith-
metical operations, a decimal system is more or less adopted, in preference to the mixed
system now in use, in relation to the British coinage 3—I believe at the Bank of England
they have adopted a decimal system of computing gold, and I have been told by an
actuary of one of the largest insurance companies, that he uniformly adopts the decimal
system ; of course, being a barrister, my observations in respect to mercantile matters are
limited ; they rarely come under my own cognizance.
762. Suppose it conceded that obviously in the higher use of numbers for calculation,
such as enter into the calculations of actuaries in many instances, the decimal system
might be more advantageous, more simple, and less liable to error, do you think it would
necessarily follow that in the simple operations in which figures, in relation to coins are
used, the decimal system would necessarily be productive of benefit, or do you think that
the same rule would apply to the higher and to the lower use of figures?—I think in the
lower and more ordinary course of usage of figures it would apply with perhaps tenfold
force. In retail dealings, I believe meat in London is sold at perhaps sums varying from
8d. to 11d. a pound. ; take it at 9%d ;-nine pounds thirteen ounces, at that rate, would
puzzle most men, I think, to answer what the sum was off hand; whereas, if we had a
decimal system in retail dealings, the most uneducated man, of the most ordinary
capacity, would have little difficulty in making most of calculations which occur in retail
transactions. -
763. Do you not consider that amongst the class you refer to there may be certain
conveniences arising from the simple process which is, more or less, connected with the
system of numbers capable of binary division, by which a half, and a quarter, and half
quarters are more easily taken under our present system than under a decimal system 2–-
* “Decimal Coinage, should it be International *—London, Bell and Daldy, 1856,
O
Mr. T. C. Mossom
Meekins.
7th February 1857.
106 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE, TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. T. C. Mossom. It might be so; but the divisions in our system of weights and measures go beyond a
Meekins,
7th February 1857.
half quarter; they go to +, and even beyond that. When you come to +', it is a very
different thing, or Tºr. * * * : *
764. (Lord Oversione.) Will you explain what you mean –I think, if you carry out
the duodecimal system, you must carry it out as a whole ; you cannot adopt one system
for numerical notation, another for weights and measures, and another system for monies.
Our present system of money is a medley of three systems. If we adopt a duodecimal
system we should have, 12 farthings one penny; 12 pence one shilling; and 12 shillings
one pound. When you mix up two systems, you make “confusion worse confounded.”
765. Will not that be the state of things if we introduce a decimal system of coinage,
retaining our present system of weights?—I think, unless the introductiou of a decimal
system of coinage was followed by a decimal system of measures and weights we should
lose nine tenths of the advantage.
766. You think that a decimal system of coinage, unless it is accompanied by a decimal
system of weights and measures, would rather increase the confusion than diminish it 3–
I think it would very materially diminish the confusion; at the same time I say that we
shall lose nine tenths of the advantages that we might derive if we do not adopt a
decimal system of weights and measures at the same time that we adopt a decimal system
of monies.
767. From your view of the advantages of a decimal system of coinage do you consider
it with reference to account keeping, or do you consider it with reference to coinage 7–
Principally with reference to account keeping and mental calculation.
768. The advantage of a decimal system in mental calculation, I presume, will depend
upon what that decimal system is. Do you approve of the proposed decimal system,
the pound and mil scheme —I believe that any decimal system would be preferable
to our present system. I would prefer any decimal system to the present ; but I
think there are objections to the pound and mil scheme which in my mind are
insuperable.
769. Have you ever compared the present system of our coinage with the proposed pound
and mil scheme, with reference to the comparative facility of enumerating the different
sums in the mind, and not in writing 3–My objections to the pound and mil scheme, as
far as the enumeration of sums in the mind is concerned, is, that it has three decimal
places; I think that is an superable objection. All decimal systems that have been
adopted hitherto have had but two decimal places.
770. With respect to the facility of mental calculation, are you prepared to state to
this Commission any system of decimal coinage which shall be equally ready and
convenient for the expression, say of 10s., 58., 2s. 6d., and 1s. 3d. ; or can you state any
decimal system which will represent those sums in a form in which it will be more easy
to add up a total sum than they can be added up in the present form of our coinage —
I think, for instance, under the American system, that those sums could be added up
with infinitely more facility than under our system.
771. Can you state what would be the form in which they would be represented under
the American system —I have a Table of the American system that I should wish to
hand in. It shows that all our present coins can circulate under the decimal system,
with the exception of the threepenny and fourpenny pieces.
A Table was handed in. See Question 797.
772. Do you think that this Table sets forth the numerical representation of the given
sums in a form more easily added up than they are under our present system 3–I should
say so, unquestionably. Men who have gone to America, after residing in this country,
uniformly say that they have had no difficulty whatever in coming into the American
system, and even the most uneducated affirm that they find infinite facility in the
American system as compared with our system.
773. You have stated in your evidence, that, according to your judgment, the decimal
system of almost any country will be more favourable for mental operations in arithmetic
than is our present system. I again ask you whether you can lay before this Commission
any decimal system in which the coins of our system are represented numerically in a
form more easily to be added up in the mind than they are under our present system —
Although it might be well, if we adopted any decimal system, to alter to some extent
the coins at present current in this country, still I believe when we are laying down a
system to last throughout all ages, we ought to adopt the very best system we can lay
our hands on ; a little trouble which there might be perhaps in altering coins, or with-
drawing them from circulation within the next five, ten, or twenty years, should not
prevent us from adopting the best system, one that would confer infinite benefits on
mankind in perpetuity.
774. My question referred, not to the inconvenience attending a period of change, but
to the comparative convenience for mental operations of a permanent character of
the two systems?—I can only say that in France, when I have been there, I found it
infinitely more simple to add up sums in francs and centimes, withdrawing my attention
entirely from their value in English money, incomparably more easy under the French
decimal system than under our system. It is a mere question of experience. There are
certain sums that you may pick out that it would be very difficult to express. I should
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. I07
imagine that it would be utterly impossible to pay in our coins the value of three Mr. 7. C. Mossom
quarters of a pound of meat at 9%d. Our present coinage could not give that value, and Meekins.
that constantly occurs. &=ººms
775. Under a decimal system of coinage would not this inconvenience necessarily 7th February 1857.
arise that you could not state the price of a third part, of a sixth part, of a twelfth part,
or of a sixteenth part of any commodity ?—I might say, that under the present system
you could not calculate the fifth part. -
776. Do you consider that in the practical transactions of the market, fifth parts are
as much required, or are as convenient for the retail transactions of the lower classes, as
the divisions successively by two, by continual halving, or the divisions by three or by
six 4—There are hundreds of cases in which one system will give advantages in one way,
and another system will give advantages in another way; that is, I believe, unques-
tionable. At the same time, on the whole, I think the balance of advantages greatly
preponderates in favour of any decimal system over our present system.
777. Do you not consider that the first requisite of a good system of coinage is to give
the subdivisions of the integer in the greatest possible number of clean fractional parts?—
It would be, provided our system of numbers corresponded with that system; our present
System of numbers is decimal. In case they corresponded with any given system, then,
I think, that system would be the very best. If we had a duodecimal system of numbers,
and the digits were 11, I think that the very best system of coins you could adopt
would be the duodecimal system. That system of coins is the best that corresponds with
our system of numbers. Now our system of numbers is decimal, therefore all the
divisions of our money in my opinion should be decimal.
778. My question had no reference to any particular system of arithmetic, or of
numbers, but simply to the practical form ; whether or not the primary requisite in a
good system of coinage is not that the integer should be broken into the greatest number
of clean fractional parts, and those parts represented by corresponding coinage %–In my
opinion the primary requisite in a good system of coinage is, that it should correspond
with our system of numerical notation. We have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. If it went
on to 10 and 11, and we had 11 digits, then I believe that the duodecimal would be the
best system. If we had only 7 digits, then I believe octaval would be the best system.
But as our system of numbers is decimal, I believe that the divisions of weights and
measures and coins should clearly be decimal.
779. Are not coins made for the purpose of facilitating the adjustment of the retail
transactions in the market 2—They are.
780. Is it not necessary for the greatest convenience of the retail transactions of the
market that there should be a facility in dividing the commodities into the greatest
Inumber of clean fractional parts —Unquestionably there would be very great advantage
in that,
781. Does not it follow, necessarily, that the great desideratum in a good system of
coinage is, that the coins should similarly be divisible into the greatest number of clean
fractional parts of the integer ?—Provided they correspond with our system of numbers.
I believe that is a capital thing. Everything must turn upon it; whatever be the system
of numbers the coinage must follow it.
782. Then do you consider that it is necessary that the division of commodities, and
therefore the division of coins, should all bend to a decimal system of numbers ?—I
think so.
783. Then, in that case, I presume it is your opinion that the system of weights and
measures should be formed upon a decimal scale 3—I think so.
784. But you still hold that it is desirable that the system of coins should be deci-
malized, although the system of weights and measures be not decimalized ?–I have no
doubt that in the long run we shall obtain a decimal system of money, weights, and mea-
Sures, and that decimal coins would be a step in the right direction ; but, bating that, I
think, on the bare ground of convenience and of facility in calculation, that a decimal
system of monies would greatly facilitate calculations.
785. Of course you are aware that the number of divisors of 10 is much fewer than
the number of divisors of 12?—Yes.
786. Therefore, it follows, does it not, that the decimal system cannot give the same
number of clean fractional parts, whether applied to the division of commodities or applied
to the division of coins, which a duodecimal or binary system would give 2–I think it
would give a fewer number of parts into which it could be divided, that is beyond all
uestion.
Q 787. Then is not that finally conclusive against the superiority of a decimal system
over a duodecimal system, whether applied to weights and measures or to coins ?—I
think not.
788. Why do you think it is not, if you admit that it would give a much fewer number
of clean fractional parts than the duodecimal system —When you are dealing with these
matters you must deal with them as a whole. Look first to see what is the basis of your
system of numbers, and then I think the clearest principles must lead you to make your
system of monies, weights, and measures on that basis, on the same basis on which
your system of numbers is founded. The system of notation is the basis of all our
monies, weights, and measures; we must number and count by it. That is the thing which
O 2
I08 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. T. C. Mossom
Meekins.
7th February 1857.
should determine our system of measures, weights, and monies. If we are going to adopt
a new system of numbers, and we adopt a duodecimal system instead of a decimal system,
then I concur with your Lordship.
789. Under our present system of numbers, and under Gux present system of coins,
weights, and measures, is it not a fact that we divide the pound into twelve, and into
sixteen ounces, that we divide the foot into twelve inches, and that we divide the shilling
into twelve pence; and does it not necessarily follow, from what you have admitted
already, that under that system of division we get a capacity and power of obtaining a
greater number of clean fractional parts than we can obtain if we divide the foot, the
pound, and the shilling into ten decimal parts 3–But we sacrifice, in point of simplicity,
if we gain in point of power of dividing into a greater number of parts.
790. Then you think that the abstract numerical simplicity is of greater value than the
practical convenience of greater subdivision ?—I believe that under a decimal system of
notation, as we have it, the practical advantages resulting from a decimal system of
coinage would very much exceed those resulting merely from the facility of dividing into
a greater number of parts.
791. Can you show practically how that will arise ?–From my own practical expe-
rience. In France I found much greater facility; and in the same way, when I was at
school, at arithmetic, I found that decimals were very simple indeed as compared with
compound arithmetic.
792. (Chairman.) A question has been put to you with reference to a foot being
divisible into twelve inches, and the convenience of that foot being divisible into a
greater number of equal parts than ten; are you aware that for a variety of important
measurements public convenience has induced the use of a foot divisible into ten
parts rather than into twelve 3–I believe all our great engineers use it divided into
ten parts; that in all the scales laid down for railways all the sections are laid down in
tenths of a foot and in hundredths. All levelling is made exclusively on this division
of the foot.
793. Is not the difference clearly marked in this way, that the division into ten parts
is invariably resorted to where you want to make abstract calculations, and the division
into twelve parts is retained where you have to deal with material subdivision ?–I
think it is seldom divided into twelve, except when you come into contact with the great
bulk of the people ; in that case engineers sometimes adopt the division into twelve, but
among themselves I believe they universally adopt the tenths.
794. If there be an advantage in the division of commodities by the application of a
system of numbers that is capable of a greater number of divisions, do you think the
same principle would apply where the objects of the market are obtained by multiplica-
tion rather than by division ?—I think when you come to multiplication the facilities
afforded by the decimal system are very much greater. When you use multiplica-
tion instead of division I think the facilities afforded by the decimal system are
incontestable.
795. Do you think that the operations in the markets generally depend more upon
division or upon multiplication –-I think in all the largest retail transactions they
depend more upon multiplication ; perhaps in Smaller transactions on division.
796. (Lord Overstone.) Is it not the very nature and purpose of coins to deal with
subdivision ? Are not coins the subdivision of the integer of account into its fractional
parts, and have they not therefore exclusive reference to questions of division, and
not of multiplication ?—Whether multiplication or division comes into operation in retail
transactions entirely depends upon what is the integer quantity (if I may use that
expression) adopted in those transactions. Now if in the sale of tea to the lower classes
the integer weight adopted be the ounce, and most purchasers are in quantities above an
ounce, it is obvious that in the retail of tea multiplication comes into more frequent
operation than division. The same rule holds in regard to coins when the price of a
commodity is always expressed in that denomination of coin or its multiples which
measures one integer quantity ; thus sugar is said to be 6d., not half a shilling, per
pound ; but, in my opinion, if we had a system of decimal coinage whose lowest denomi-
Ination was as low as the lowest ever used in retail transactions, and had at the same
time a decimal system of weights and measures, division could rarely, if ever, enter
into the calculations involved in retail transactions, and even if it did, the fractions
would all have a common denominator, 10, which would itself immensely facilitate cal-
culation even in the most uneducated mind; but I am decidedly of Opinion that in
retail transactions practically division would be almost dispensed with under a decimal
system of measures, weights, and coins, and that the great bulk of retail transactions
would involve multiplication exclusively, and multiplication of the most simple kind;
viz., in the first place, no multiplier would rise above nine, and in the second place, no
multiplicand would be compound. Just take an instance; suppose under the French
system the price of Sugar were 1.90 francs per kilogramme ; now if a customer wanted
three hectogrammes, he would see at a glance that a hectogramme would be 19 cen-
times, which he would multiply by three and get 57 centimes.
797. (Chairman.) Have you turned your attention to any particular mode of divi-
sion of coins that you would prefer to the pound and mil scheme, to which you have
stated your objection ?–In answer to that question, with the permission of the Com-
missioners, I beg to hand in this paper.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. |09
The following Table was handed in :--
A TABLE showing how ENGLISH COINAGE can be adapted to the UNITED STATES DECIMAL
Mr. T. C. Mossoms
Meekins.
SystEM of DoILARs and CENTs, in case that Country would lower its $5 piece by 7th February 1857.
6.6 pence.
Sovereign contains 113:001 grains of fine gold, worth - - 20s, sterling.
Half Eagle ($5), 116:100 35 Jy tº - 20s. 6' 6 ,
Sovereign would circulate at º wº † : - $5.00
Half Sovereign - - tºº ſº ſº - 2' 50
Crown Gº º tº e &= } * > - 1 - 25
Dollar º gº tº-p º sº • * - I 00
Half-Crown sºme º * † º wº - 0.62%
Florin (or Half Dollar) sº tº - º tºº – 0 50
Shilling (or Quarter Dollar) º tºº tº - O - 25
Sixpence tºº 3- tº º ſº gº º - 0: 12%
Fourpence gº º tº ºt wº tºº - 0.08%
Threepence tº tºº tº º tº tº º « » - 0.064
Penny tº “º º º tº- tº - 0 . ()2
Halfpenny tº * - tº tº - - 0:01
Farthing gº wº tº < * tº ę - 0.00%
The copper coinage is here lowered in denomination four per cent.
The coins which, under this system, it would be requisite to withdraw from circulation
are the same as those suggested to be withdrawn by the pound and mill advocates; viz.,
the fourpenny and threepenny pieces, and perhaps the half-crown, and coin $0. 1 = 5d., and
.30' 05 =2#d. I would add, that our sovereign and the half eagle of the Americans differ
only from each other by 6; d., and that the Americans having three times altered the
value of their half eagle within the last seventy years, it is not improbable that they
might bring it into exact accordance with our coinage by going a step further, and
lowering it 6%d.
798. You do not suggest that any alteration should be made in our own gold coinage 2
—None whatever, I think it necessary to keep a gold standard, as the Americans have
recently practically adopted a gold standard.
799. (Mr. Hubbard.) In a paragraph, at Article 30 of your pamphlet, which was laid
before the Commissioners, you state :-" The progress of the empire in wealth and
“material well-being, when regarded in relation to currency, seems to take two opposite
“ and apparently inconsistent directions,—monetary transactions so vast and unex-
“ampled in amount would appear to demand a higher integer, and, therefore, if any
“change be made,” (that is in the currency of this country) “the pound should be rather
“raised than lowered in value. On the hand, the great and increasing cheapness
“resulting from the unparallelled progress of manufacturing industry seemingly demands
“ the adoption of a unit considerably lower than the pound, adequately to secure to the
“people the benefits of this cheapness; thus, at the wholesale prices a #d, would
“purchase 14 pearl shirt buttons, or 5 yards of tape, or 1% reels of sewing cotton, or
“24 sewing cotton balls, or 27 needles, or 40 pins.” If you contemplate any change in
the value of the pound it will be of very little use asking the Americans to meet us at
the present time !—I would only propose to alter the subdivision and multiples of the
pound, not the value of it. I said, what is in the pamphlet, with reference to the adop-
tion of the French system of francs and centimes to meet the objections of persons who
said that the franc was too low. I propose that we should restore the pound to its former
value, and make it 4l., and then we would divide the old English pound into 100 francs,
and the francs into 100 centimes.
800. What do you mean by restoring the pound to its former value ; Originally
it was four times its present value, as will be seen in page 15, the next paragraph :—
“The pound sterling, as everybody knows, is now only one fourth of its former
“value (v. Smith's ‘Wealth of Nations,’ by McCulloch, p. 484) : by adopting the old
“ pound sterling, that is, making it equal to 4 sovereigns, and at the same time
“introducing the franc and cents of the metrical system, we should secure such a system
“ as would satisfy the demands of progress. The old pound sterling would then contain
“100 francs (or we might, as the ‘Times’ suggests, call them shillings), the franc 100
“cents. Francs might be indicated by the decimal dot as in France, thus, 624'86,
“ and the old pound sterling by the double dot, thus, 6: 24.86; this would, as Pro-
“fessor De Morgan wishes, keep us in, or rather restore us to, connection with our
“history. We could readily coin a piece of gold equal in value to our old pound, and
“equivalent to the French coin of 100 francs. 1 old English pound sterling = 100
“francs = 10,000 cents.”
801. (Lord Overstone.) If you had a pound sterling of four times its present value for
your highest integer, what would be your lowest number of account —A centime.
802. Do you propose to take 100 steps between the £4 and the centime 2—No ; 10,000.
I said before at paragraph 7: —“The pound and mil and Mr. Headlam's farthing
“schemes differ essentially from every decimal system adopted in any country: the
O 3
1 10 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE
Mr. T. C. Mossom
Meekins.
7th February 1857.
*
“integer has never hitherto been divided into more than 100 parts, the dollar has 100
“cents, the franc 100 centimes; the intermediate step, the dime and decime, are never
“used, if they are not utterly unknown to the working classes of the United States and
“ of France. There are practically but two denominations. But in these schemes the
“integer is to have 1,000 mils. There are obvious reasons against this rejection of what
“experience has recommended. Will not mental calculations be hopelessly embarrassed
“when sums rise above 100 mils? Can the mind grasp several quantities bordering on
“ 1,000 : Under this system the difficulties that impede mental calculation must be
“ enhanced ninefold. But, it is said, there will be three denominations,—pounds, florins,
“ and mils; if so, to make the systems scientifically symmetrical, and we will add
“practically useful, they should be separated by equal steps or breaks; each ought to
“contain 100 of the denomination immediately below it, then it would be, mils, florins,
“ and ? of the value of 101. ; this would ‘crack the coinage’ at both ‘ends.’” If we
divide our integer into more than 100 parts, we should go a step further and divide it
into 10,000 parts, because the breaks should be separated by equal steps; that is to say,
we should have 100 centimes in a franc, and 100 france in the old English pound.
803. How would you write that down : Have you ever drawn out a table repre-
senting the amounts of our present coinage in your proposed system of coinage —Yes.
I will put in a table showing that. This is one with regard to the French system, which
I will hand in with your Lordships' permission.
The following Table was handed in :—
A TABLE showing how ENGLISH Corns could circulate under the FRENCH SYSTEM of
FRANCS and CENTIMES.
Sovereign contains 113:001 grains of fine gold, worth 20s, sterling.
Twenty-five francs , 112'009 » ,, 198. 0-822,
Francs and Centimes.
Sovereign would circulate as - gºe gº sº - 25 00
Half-sovereign º tºº cº º tº s gº - 12 50
Crown (606.) - * * *g tº gº gºe ſº 6 : 00
Half-crown (30d.) - tº- sº º wº gº 3:00
Shilling (12d.) - q : * tº tº tº tº tº I 20
Sixpence (6d.) ſº gº * * tº - wº 0 - 60
Fourpence ( wº tº tº ºng wº tº 0 °4()
Threepence iº dº tº tºº gºs tºº tº- 0 °30
Penny (decime) * tºg tº ( * * tº * * O I 0
Halfpenny tº tº cº- tºº * > º tº () - 05
Farthing tº º º tº J. : tº gº 0.02%
Half-farthing tº tº º * gº gº tºº 0-014
Thus by lowering the denomination of our token coinage four per cent. all our present
coins could circulate under the French system at their present number of pence. The
only new coins that would be required would be the franc and centime. A half farthing
might be called a centime, and the farthing a double centime. Under the French
system, if we lowered all our silver and copper coinages 4 per cent, every single coin
would circulate at its present number of pence. There would be 25 francs in the pound.
804. If I understand you correctly, you think it is very desirable to introduce a
decimal system of notation in this country, on account of its convenience in account
keeping and calculation ?—Yes. -
805. If all our present sums of money were written in the number of pence they
contain, how would that depart or deviate from the decimal system you wish for 2–I
think you could have a decimal system out of that.
806. Would not that be the simplest form of obtaining your object, as it would not
necessitate an alteration in the value, or in the name, or in the use of any one coin that
we now have 2–It would be very simple, but I should like to adopt the French or the
American system.
807. If the simple process of writing down all our sums of money, not in pounds,
shillings, and pence, but in pence only, would give the same facility of calculation that a
decimal system would give, can you explain to me why it is that that process is never
resorted to ?—One reason would be, I think, that if you adopted that system you would
require to have an integer say of either 10d. or 100d., because we cannot imagine that
the French could ever say they had 1,734 centimes, it would be much easier to Say
17 francs and 34 centimes; but I can conceive that if you had merely one denomi-
nation, that is to say, pence, it would make it very much more complex; you would
require to have the integer separated from your lowest denomination by at least 100.
I think that all decimal systems hitherto adopted have shown that.
808. Comparing our present system with that system, and with the pound and mil
system, the pound is now represented by the figure I. Under that system it would be
represented by the figures 240; under the pound and mil system by 1,000. Is there any
respect in which that system would involve difficulties which are not equally involved in
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 111
the pound and mil system —I do not think that under a proper decimal system the
pound would be represented by 1,000. I think the decimal dot must in all cases
determine the value. I think it is utterly impossible that we could think of adopting a
decimal system in which the decimal dot did not determine the value.
809. Does not a decimal system really mean this, merely writing down in ordinary
Arabic notation the number of a money account of the lowest value that is contained in
any given sum ?—No, I think not. The best systems require something more.
810. Will you state any decimal system in which that is not the case ?--For instance,
whenever in the American system they put down 5 dollars, they put down “5,” not 5:00;
and in France, whenever they put down 5 francs, they put down “5,” and not 5:00;
and when they want to put down 87 centimes, they put a dot, and 87 after it, thus, '87.
811. That is merely omitting the cipher ?—But it saves two figures using the decimal
dot, which is a great thing. I wish to say, that I do not think it is very essential to
keep the sovereign intact, for the value of gold in this country varies every hour. I think
in any decimal system that we may adopt it is not very desirable, and it is not of primary
necessity to keep the sovereign intact. I think that a decimal system would afford
infinite facilities to commerce, and would greatly facilitate the operations of foreign
merchants. I think also that it would effect an incredible saving of valuable time and
labour. It has been found that even in great commercial houses few clerks are to be
found who are able to audit and correct accounts that come from countries where the
decimal system has not been introduced, whereas almost any clerks can audit and correct
accounts which come from foreign countries in which the decimal system is adopted.
812. Have you made any estimate of the number of figures that would be required in
rendering a calculation of account under our present system of coinage, and under any
proposed system of decimal coinage that you would recommend?—I have seen calcula-
tions of that description, but I cannot say that I have personally made such ; I do not
doubt the correctness of those that I have seen.
813. Are you aware that a commercial account, rendered under the pound and mil
system of notation, would involve 10 per cent, more figures than under our present
system 2–I cannot speak from my own knowledge, but its advocates strenuously
assert not.
814. You have not examined into that part of the question ?—I have seen calculations
on the subject, but I have not gone through them myself. I would add, that it is my
opinion that a decimal system would singularly simplify the study of comparative statistics,
it would also incredibly facilitate the generalization of mental assimilation, and many
schoolmasters say that it would shorten the period of education by at least two years.
Most political economists are in favour of it.
The witness withdrew.
Adjourned.
Mr, T. C. Mossom
Meekins,
7th February 1857.
APPENDIX.
114
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 1.
Table of Schemes,
No. 1.
SYNOPTICAL TABLE of the several Schemes proposed for a DECIMAL CornAGE, which are
based on the PRESENT COINAGE.

Designation of Scheme Value in present Mong of the principal Decimal Proportion
W e - e. O1I].S. e * 1 - ? ... l.
from its simplest Proportion of highest
Relation to the present of lowest Unit to
Coinage, Lowest Unit. Second Unit. Third Unit. | Fourth Unit. Unit. £ sterling.
d S. d s, d. 36 s. d. | to Farthing.
1. Pound and mil - O' 24 O 2* 4 2 O 1 O O # l
2. Farthing - º O' 25 0 2 - 5 2 1 1 O IO 1 #
3. Halfcrown gº O' 3 O 3 2 6 1 5 O # #
to Halfpenny.
4. Four-shilling - || 0:48 () 4'8 4 0 # f
5. Halfpenny gº O' 5 O 5 4 2 l #
6. Crown - * > O'6 O 5 0 # }
to Penny.
7. Eight-shilling - || 0'96 O 9'6 8 O # #
8. Penny tº a º l O 10 8 4 #
9. Ten-shilling - l'2 I O 10 O § #
10. Twenty-penny - O' 2 O 2 1 8 } T'g
to Farthing.
11. Guinea - º O' 252 O 2* 52 2 1 ° 2 || 1 || 0 }}}} #
Advocates of the several schemes:–
1. “Mercator,” in the Pamphleteer, July 1814.
College, Aberdeen, M.S. letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, 1817, Sir John
Wrottesley, M.P. 1824. Colonel (now Lieut. General Sir C. W.) Pasley 1831. Babbage
1832. De Morgan. Decimal Association. Commissioners of Weights and Measures 1841
and 1854. Committee of House of Commons 1853, &c. &c. &c.
2. John Watt 1837. T. E. Headlam, M. P. J. W. C., Times, 14 Sept. 1853.
A. Davidson. C. Vining. J. Alexander. T. C. Harington. *J. Crane. H. Aston.
3. S. S. Tayler, Inquirer Newspaper, 8th Sept. 1855.
4. “The British Metre,” Pamphleteer 1816.
2d March 1855.
5. “Subscriber in British Guiana,” Economist, 25th August 1855. Daily Telegraph,
4th Oct. 1855. W. Shirreffs, Spectator, 27th Oct. 1855. *P. Blackburn, M.P.
6. Mentioned by J. D. in Times of 2d Sept. 1853. S. A. Goddard, Birmingham Journal,
May 1855. *W. Mann.
7. A. Munro. *R. R. Tighe.
8. Dr. Gray, Times, 22d August 1853. T. W. Rathbone, Athenaeum, 3d Sept. 1853.
F. J. Minasi. J. H. Turner. J. Laurie. R. Slater.
9. Mentioned by Decimus Maslen (1841), p. 41.
H. A. Goodwin. “A Retired Merchant,” 1854.
of Accounts, Glasgow. *E. Major.
10. G. H. in Morning Advertiser, 13th March 1855. S. A. Good.
11. Henry Goodwyn 1816. J. S. Holland, Journal of Society of Arts, 7th Sept. 1855.
Professor Cruickshank, Marischal
E. B. Irwell, Liverpool Mercury,
E. Ryley. W. T. Thomson. Rev.
Author of Remarks on a Decimal System
* MS,
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. II.5
TABLE of the Value of the Present Current Coins, and of the Ounce of Standard Gold
expressed in terms of the lowest Unit of the several proposed Decimal Schemes
which are based on the present Coinage.
d
& .89
* e º Q) e & QD © Ounc
Designion bſ) ă à # g 80 g § 5, of e
sºme # #, : § É. à 5 .# § ; % '; Standard
à || 3 || 3 | # | 3 || 3 | # | 3 || 3 || 3 | # ; Gold.
£r. T A- E- £r. *f; UD ſº I O E. 3
Penny - - # # I 3 4 6 12 24 30 60 | 120 240 || 934 - 5
Halfpenny # | 1 2 6 8 12 || 24 || 48 || 60 | 120 240 || 480 || 1869
Farthing - || 1 4 12 || 16 || 24 || 48 96 || 120 240 || 480 960 || 3738
Ten-shilling - | # # | # 2% 3# 5 10 | 20 25 50 100 200 || 778 - 75
Crown - - | # # lá 5 6# 10 20 | 40 50 | 100 | 200 | 400 || 1557 - 5
Halfcrown - # lä 3} 10 13} 20 40 80 100 200 400 800 || 3115
Fight-shilling | # | # | 1=}r 3} | 4} | 6+ 12% 25 31# 62% | 125 250 973 ° 4325
Four-shilling # | 1=}} | 2H | 6% 8} | 12# 25 50 62% 125 250 500 || 1946.875
Pound and mil lº; 2+: 4; 12; 16# 25 50 100 125 250 500 1,000 || 3893 - 75
Twenty-penny 1} 2% 5 15 20 30 60 120 150 300 600 | 1,200 || 4672 - 5
Guinea - ###| 1}} | 3:# | 11 # 15:#| 23# 47# 95%r | 1194: 238; 476; 952; 3708-33
Present system | #d #d ld 3d. 4d 6d ls 2s. 2s. 6d. 5s. 10S. 1!. 363 17 10%
Note.—A scheme of Decimal Coinage is given when the value in our present coinage of any
one of its units, i.e., of any one of the coins in the decimal series is given, and it may be distin-
guished and designated by that value. Thus scheme No. 1 is given, when either the pound or
the florin is given as one of its units, and it might be called indifferently the pound scheme or the
florin scheme. So No. 3 might be called the halfcrown scheme or the threepenny scheme; No. 8,
the penny scheme or the tenpenny scheme.
The names given to some of the schemes in the table differ from the names given them by their
proposers ; and some schemes, treated in the table as one, are distinguished as different schemes
by their advocates, according to their views of what should be the highest and what should be the
lowest unit.
Thus, some advocates of No. 1 make the florin the highest unit, dividing it into 100 parts.
Some advocates of No. 8 make the tempenny the highest unit, and the tenth of a penny the lowest
unit; while others make 8s. 4d. the highest unit, and one penny the lowest unit, dividing it into
halves and quarters, as at present. These variations will readily suggest themselves on an
inspection of the table.
A. S.
No. 2.
COMPARATIVE TABLE of the PRESENT COINs of the UNITED KINGDOM and of the
DECIMAL COINS proposed by the Committee of the House of Commons in 1853
(retaining the half-crown and adding a four-mil piece).
No. 1.
Table of Schemes.

No. 2.
Comparative Table
Present Coins. Value in P Decimal Coins,
Value in MILs of º
º, pºlºvº d'Ivº Mººl ºf radiº, rº
Frºm * ºil. of PRESENT proposed have no corre- nº ºn.
Inext higher Pound || IDecimal Coins. CoINs. DECIMAL COINs. * Pound |next higher
Coin. Sterling. {º Sterling. Coin.
AE. s. d. £ Mils.
1 () () 1,000
# # O 10 O 500 # #
# } () 5 O 250 # #
$ # O 2 6 125 } 2
2. l O 2 O 100 * 4.
# TÜ º Tº
# * 0 1 0 50 * }
# * O' 0 0 6 25 4TO
2O 4#d. º's #
# * # O O 4
# Tº O. 12% O O 3 2
* | * | * | *
l I 4}. O O I 5 wº TJ O’
3. Tº 4 U" g
* 4. 0 ° 96d. wks #
# Hºw 21; 0 0 0}
2 O - 480. ºw *
# ºw lººr 0 0 0} T
I 0 °24d. TOUTU #
of Coins.
P 2
116 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 3.
Mr. Chisholm's
Memorandum.
Table A.
Table B.
No. 3.
MEMORANDUM by HENRY WILLIAMS CHISHOLM, Esq., Senior Clerk of Exchequer Bill
Office. Dated Feb. 1, 1856.
Conversion of Old into New Coins.
DURING the transition from the old to the new system, it will be continually necessary
to convert the fractional parts of a pound, viz.: shillings, pence, and farthings, into florens,
cents and mils, or rather into florins and mils for the sake of preserving the present method
of keeping accounts in three columns only.
In the case of one amount, the process is simple, and is thus described by Mr. De Morgan
(Com. to Brit. Alm. 1854, p. 7):—“To transfer old silver into new, throw into mils at once,
“ as follows: Allow 100 for every florin, or pair of shillings, 50 for the odd shilling, if any,
“ and one mil for every farthing left, with one mil more for sixpence. Thus 7s. 10}d. is 300
“ and 50 and 41 and 1 mils, or 392 mils, that is three florins, nine cents, and two mils.”
He proceeds to show, that although these reductions are not exact for any sum under
sixpence, nor can be made exact without introducing fractions of a mil, yet that the error
never amounts to a mil. In fact, that so many farthings as there are in excess above the
last sixpence, so many 24ths of a mil are wanting in the new money.
He argues that this error is quite immaterial in ordinary transactions, and that “although
“ fractions of a farthing or a mil will be talked about whilst the change is pending, they will
“ subside into their old insignificance before the new coins have circulated for a week.”
These conclusions appear reasonable. But it will be seen that Mr. De Morgan allows
nothing for any fractional parts of a mil, even when they amount to #4. This method has
the merit of simplifying and facilitating calculations. But it is hardly just, particularly
when many amounts have to be converted and their sum to be taken.
It would be fairer to make the conversion on the principle acted on in the 6 Goo. 4. c. 79.
for assimilating the Irish with the British currency. This Statute, which commenced on
5th January 1826, also affords a precedent for some provisions that may be expedient upon
the adoption of a Decimal Coinage.
Previously to the passing of this Act, Irish money passed for one thirteenth less than the
same nominal amount of British money, and thirteen Irish pence were equivalent to twelve
British pence. Consequently, in the conversion of Irish monies into British, certain frac-
tional parts of a penny would frequently arise; 1d. Irish would be equivalent only to
++ or 44 of 1d. British, and 10+d. Irish to 9-ºrd. or 944. British.
In order to obviate uncertainty in all monies so converted, section 5. of the Act provided,—
That no account should be taken of ºr of 1d.
That +, ++, and # should = #d.
#, #2 *, and $3. 33 - #d.
3-0. # 0. 3 #. — 3
5T2 .5 T5 T5 . 35 - 4 tº .
And +. = 1 d.
º 55 -
Here, when the fraction amounted to half a farthing, it was reckoned as a farthing, and
a lesser fraction was not taken into account.
Upon this principle, Table A. has been constructed, showing the equivalents in mils
of each fraction of the old monies from #d to 6d. It should be borne in mind, that in con-
verting farthings into mils, for every farthing so converted, ºr of a mil is wanting in the
new monies; in other words, that a farthing is equivalent to a mil and ºr of a mil. The
Table shows also the exact equivalent, both in fractions and in decimals of a mil.
Mr. De Morgan's rule may therefore be thus amended :-
“To transfer old silver into new, throw it into mils at once, as follows: Allow 100 for
“ every florin or pair of shillings, 50 for the odd shilling, if any, 25 for the odd sixpence, if
“ any, and one mil for every farthing left, with one mil more for threepence. Thus 7s. 10}d.
“ is 300 and 50 and 25 and 17 and 1 mils, or 393 mils, that is 3 florins, 9 cents. and 3 mils.”
By this rule, the conversion may be made with sufficient exactness in all ordinary trans-
actions, and even in accounts comprising a considerable number of amounts, so that the
difference in the result will be quite insignificant.
A very little practice would enable the conversion to be made immediately by mere
inspection. It might also be facilitated by the use of Table A. as well as by that of Table B.
which shows the equivalent in mils of the several sums from 6d to 19s. 6d.
For more accurate calculations, it will be necessary to take into account the smallest
fraction of a mil. In these cases, the Decimal System may be used with advantage, and for
this purpose the last column of Table A. may be seviceable.
The following is an example of a calculation of this kind:—
How much do 1,537 ounces of gold at 3!. 17s. 10%d. per ounce amount to ?
By the above-mentioned rule, 17s. 10%d. = 800 + 50 + 25 + 18 + 1 mils, or 894 mils,
but more correctly 8934+ mils, or 893-75.
£3.89,375
1,537
2,725,625
1,168,125
1,946,875
389,375 ſ? fl. mils.
49598,469,375 or 5,984 6 and 94. Being 46 figures,
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 117
Compare this with the present mode of calculation :
As 1 oz. 1,537 oz. iſ 3 17 10%
20
77
| 2
934
4
3,738
1,537
26, 166
11,214
18,690
3,738
4) 5,745,306
*
J2) 1,436,326;
sºsºmsºmºsºmºs
20) 119,693 – 104
*º-ººººmºsºme ºmºmºs-
£5,984 13 10]
Op. 600 + 50 + 25 + 1875
Op C 5984-69375
Being 85 figures.
And the simplicity, facility, and less probability of cryor of calculations by the Decimal
System are at once obvious.
Payment of Sums under 6d. with the New Monies.
In order to pay fractional sums under 6d. with monies of the new system, it will be
necessary to construct a scale of the new monies up to 25 mils, with their equivalents in
pence and farthings. A precedent for this will also be found in the Act 6 Geo. 4. c. 79. s. 13.,
which provides for the payment of sums under 12d. Irish in British currency. After recit-
ing that it was unavoidable that in the payment of several of such sums, an inconsiderable
loss of a part of a farthing must be incurred either by the debtor or the creditor, and it was
necessary that some plain rule, not liable to be misunderstood, should be applied to ascertain
upon which party such inconsiderable loss should fall, it was enacted that sums of #d., d.,
#d., 1d., 1}d., and 1%d, Irish, should be paid by the same sums in British currency,
Sums exceeding 1%d, and not exceeding 4:#d. Irish, by payments in British currency, less
by one farthing.
Sums exceeding 4:#d, and not exceeding 8d. Irish, by payments in British currency, less
by one halfpenny. -
Sums exceeding 8d. and not exceeding 11}d. Irish, by payments in British currency, less
by three farthings. - -
And sums exceeding 11}d. and liot exceeding 12d. Irish, by payments in British cur-
rency, less by one penny.
This section is the converse of the previous section 5, for changing Irish into British
currency, and the scale is calculated on the same principle of reckoning the fraction when
it amounts to half a farthing, as a farthing, and of not taking into account any less fraction.
Thus, 1%d. British currency exceeds 1}d. Irish by ºr of a farthing, and is, therefore,
reckoned necessary for payment of 1%d. Irish, the ºr of a farthing not being taken into
account. But a 1 \d. British currency is also at the same time sufficient to pay Tºd. Irish,
as it is within ºr of a farthing of the latter sum, and the difference being less than half a
farthing is not taken into account. So again, 4%d. British exceeds 4:#d. Irish by ºr of a
farthing, and is also within ºr of a farthing of 5d. Irish. It is therefore applicable for the
payment of both these sums.
Table C has been constructed from this precedent, showing a scale of mils, from 1 to 25,
with their equivalents in pence and farthings, for legal payments. It shows also the
the exact equivalents up to the fraction of farthing. It should be noticed that, although a
farthing is equivalent to a mil and ºr of a mil, yet that a mil is not equal to a farthing
by ºr of a farthing. In other words, a mil is equal to 4+ of a farthing, the difference
between the two coins being ºr of a farthing, or ºr of a mil.
In table C will be found a similar unavoidable result to that of the 13th section of the
Act of the 6 Geo. 4. Twelve mils will be sufficient for payment of a debt of 3d., whilst
13 mils will pay no greater sum.
Dividends of Public Funds.
Other provisions were introduced in the Act 6 Geo. 4. c. 79, which may be noticed. For
the purpose of facilitating the calculations of interest on the public funds in Ireland, it was
No. 3.
Mr. Chisholm's
Memorandum
Table C.
P 3
118 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 3.
Mr. Chisholm’s
Memorandum.
Appendix 2.
Appendix 3.
provided by section 6, that all pence and fractions of a penny of principal should be paid
to the proprietors when they next received their dividends, so that the capital sum remaining
to each proprietor should be thereby made to consist of pounds and shillings only. Under
section 7 these amounts, so paid and advanced by the Bank of Ireland, were directed to be
repaid out of monies at the disposal of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National
Debt.
How far a similar provision in any legislative measure to establish a Decimal Coinage
would be expedient at the present time, might be made the subject of inquiry at the Banks
of England and Ireland. A statement might also be obtained from the latter as to the
convenience or otherwise, to the Bank and the public, that resulted from the operation of
this section in the Act of 1826.
It might also be inquired whether these banks would make payments of single mils in
the case of dividends. At present they do not pay any fraction of a penny. Mr. T. Hankey,
in his evidence before the Decimal Coinage Committee, states (125), that the aggregate
variation between pence of dividends received and paid at the Bank of England is not above
300l. per annum.
Mr. Miller, one of the cashiers, states (1,138). that the number of stock accounts at the
Bank amounts to upwards of 300,000, and calculations have to be made on each of these
accounts every half year, for the payment of dividends. Supposing that by the practice of
not paying fractions of a penny the Bank of England gained on an average one farthing
upon every payment, this would amount to 625l. per annum, which must be nearly the
exact sum, as it appears that the Bank has stated the gain in a recent quarter to be 1871.
Public Accounts.
To avoid as much as possible the introduction of the fractional parts of a penny into the
public accounts, section 8 of the 6 Geo. 4. c. 79, provided, that, in the case of any annual
sum chargeable on the Consolidated Fund, and payable in Irish currency, such addition
should be made to it, upon its conversion into British currency, as should be sufficient to
exclude fractions of a penny, both from the annual sum and the several quarterly payments
thereof.
It may be here stated that by section 19 of the Exchequer Act, 4 Will. 4. c. 15., all
fractional parts of a penny are now excluded in all payments made and accounts kept under
that Act.
In the absence of any special legislative provision, accounts would be kept, and payments
made, in single mils, both with respect to public dividends, and the public revenue. It does
not appear that any complexity or difficulty would result to the accounts, although far
greater accuracy would be obtained. In the conversion from the old to the new system of
two annnal balance sheets of the public income and expenditure of 1852 and 1855
respectively, the increase of the total number of figures from shillings and pence to florins
and mils is about 8 per cent. Only.
But it is probable that in by far the greater number of cases no payments would be made
or accounts kept, of less than five mils. This practice would be found very convenient,
and would afford much facility in business. It would be in conformity with the practice
now established in all public accounts and payments, and in respect to these, might be
specially provided for by legal sanction.
This last remark does not apply to payments in detail of revenue, duties, &c. These
require a separate consideration. It would be desirable to inquire what is the present
practice, in the several departments, as to fractional parts of a penny. For instance, in
respect to the duty on eggs from British possessions, declared by the Customs Act,
8 & 9 Vict. c. 90 to be 24d. per 120, and 57 per cent. additional.
Unfunded Debt.—Evchequer Bonds
As to the unfunded debt, the interest of Exchequer Bonds being payable half-yearly by
certificates annexed to the bonds, there would be no difficulty in the conversion of their
amounts, as no fraction of sixpence is payable. This will be seen by the appended state-
ment of Exchequer Bonds now outstanding, which shows also the amounts of half-yearly
interest due on the several bonds.
Eachequer Bills.
The case is somewhat different as regards Exchequer Bills, interest on which is calcu-
lated by the day per cent. On the Supply Bills issued to the public the interest is usually
paid as nearly as may be for one whole year, when the bills are exchanged, and the date
of the exchange is fixed with the view to provide that, on the calculation of the number of
days for which interest is to be paid, no fraction of a penny shall arise. Interest on Defi-
ciency Bills, which are charged on the growing produce of the current quarter, is calculated
to the day on which each bill is paid off, and the whole amount of interest is subsequently
paid in one sum once a quarter, as is also the interest on Consolidated Fund Bills, which
are charged on the growing produce of the next succeding quarter to that in which they
are issued. Both Deficiency and Consolidated Fund Bills are taken by the Bank of
England, and are not issued to the public.
An account appended shows the number and amount of Exchequer Bills of each descrip-
tion issued in the last three years, together with the rate of interest and the amount of
interest actually paid on the Deficiency and Consolidated Fund Bills, and the date when
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 1] 9-
paid. The amount of interest actually paid on the Supply Bills is not specified, as several
amounts of these bills were paid off at various periods in the course of the years 1853
and 1854, being cancelled for Sinking Fund and Savings Banks, or exchanged for Exchequer
Bonds, &c., and interest on these amounts was paid only up to the several days on which
they were so cancelled. -
It will be seen from this account that during the three years the rate of interest has
ranged from 1d. per cent, per diem, the lowest rate ever charged, to 2%d. The highest
interest authorized by the Exchequer Bill Acts is 3}d. per diem, which was the rate
actually borne by Exchequer Bills in the year 1815. In the following year the rate was
reduced to 3}d, and in 1817 to 3d. and 24d. per diem. Since 1817 Exchequer Bills have
borne no higher rate of interest than 2%d., with the single exception of the bills issued for
exchange on 15th June 1847, to the amount of 9,138,400l., which bore interest at the
rate of 3d. per cent. per diem.
The establishment of the Decimal System would cause an alteration in the rate of interest
on Exchequer Bills, from the authorized maximum of 3}d to that of 15 mils per cent. per
diem. From a maximum of 1d, up to 23d. there would be a progressive difference, when
converted into their legal equivalents in mils, from #r to ++ of a mil respectively, in dimi-
mution of the rate per cent. per diem, whilst the higher rates of 3d, 3}d, and 3}d. would
show a progressive excess in their equivalents in mils of +}, ++, and #4 of a mil
respectively. -
What would be the effect on the rate of interest on Exchequer Bills, supposing the
change to the new system to be made immediately P *
Now the present rate is 2%d. per cent, per diem, equivalent to 3!. 16s. per cent. per
annum. The price in the market of Exchequer Bills is a little under par, although the
3!, per cent, consols are at 90, which gives an interest of 31 6s. 8d. only per cent, per
2.Ill]ll Iſl.
But it is in fact the price in the market which regulates the rate of interest on Ex-
chequer Bills, enabling the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the occasion of issues, either
for exchange or for current services, to reduce the rate on the new bills, or compelling him
to increase it. If the conversion into the new monies therefore were to take place at the
present time, it would be necessary to convert the 2%d not into 10 mils according to the
table of legal equivalents, the effect of which would be to lower the rate of interest +} of a
mil per cent. per diem, or 3s. 2d. per annum, but into 11 mils, being an increase of #4 of a
mil per cent. per diem, or 4s. 5d. per annum. This increase might, perhaps, be sufficient to
raise the bills to a premium in the market. The general result of the change to the new
system would be to give a somewhat under range to the variation of the rate of interest on
Exchequer Bills, as well as slightly to reduce the amount of each variation, supposing that
it does not exceed one farthing, by ºr of a mil. Even this small reduction would make a
difference in the total annual interest on the present amount of Supply Exchequer Bills,
(22,200,000l.) of 3,385l. 10s. which would be either saved or lost to the revenue, according
as the interest was increased or reduced.
But it is in the calculations of interest on Exchequer Bills, as in all other calculations,
especially those which involve any rate per cent. that the advantages of the Decimal System
are to be found.
Take, for example, interest on the amount of 14,000l. Exchequer Bills, brought in for
exchange, say on 9 March next, and dated 7 March, 1855, being up to and including 24
October, 1856, (231 days) at 24d. per diem, and from that day to 9 March 1856, (137
days at 2%d. per diem.)
By the old method the same would be as follows:--
£14,000 at 24d. per cent. per diem And L14,000 at 24d. per cent. per
for 231 days. diem for 137 days.
2} * 2#.
280 280
35 70
315 350
23] I37
315 6850
945 41 I
630
*mmasº ºsmºs 12)47,950
12)72,765( cº-º-º-
gº-ººººººººººº “ºmºmºmºmºm-a-sºmºrrºmes 20)399,5 10
20)606,3–9 * =s
tººsºº-ºº: - 199 15 10
#3303 3 9 gººmsºme
*m-...--º-º: Add 303 3 9
£502 19 7 being 106 figures.
No. 3.
Mr. Chisholm's
Memorandum.
P 4
120 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8. By the new system:—
*... £14,000 at 9 mils per cent, per And £14,000 at 10 mils per cent. per
gº ºn diem for 231 days. : diem for 137 days.
9 137
1260 54800
23] : 13?
13860 #9191-800 or 1911. 8fl.
2772 *
tºmºsºsº º #8 fl. mils. Add 29.1°060
291.060, or 291 0 60
3482'060 or 4821. 60 mils,
sº *- being 62 figures.
To obtain the same result by both systems it will be necessary to add ºr of a mil to the
rate of 9 mils, and +3 of a mil to the rate of 10 mils, thus :
:0291,060
Add 14,000l. at ºr mil per cent, per diem for 231 days=12-1275
£ s. d.
:0303-1875 or 303 3 9
And - £191 800
Add 14,000l. at 34 mil per cent, per diem for 137 days = 7 9916
sº £ s. d.
#3199 7916 or 199 15 10
smºsºms simmº-º *mmº-mºm.º. ººm-º.
:9502 97916 or £502 19 7
s======= * *=edºm-º.
This comparison of the several calculations also shows the advantage of the Decimal
System. Instead of 106 figures 62 only are necessary; one process alone is used, that of
multiplication, and no division is required.
It is true that in the event of any number of calculations of the amount of interest on
Exchequer Bills, tables constructed for the purpose would be used; but in by far the
greater number of cases, a separate calculation of each is made.
The following scale shows the amount per cent. per annum of each rate of interest from
#d to 3}d per cent, per diem, contrasted with similar rates from 1 to 15 mils,
Per cent. Per cent. |Per cent, Per cent.
per diem. per annum. per diem. per annum.
d. £ s. d. Mil. Mils. £ fl. mils.
} - 0 7 74 l - 365 Ol' O 3 65
# = 0 15 4} | 2 -: 730 Or O 7 30
# = 1 2 11; 3 -: 1.095 Or 1 O 95
l F. 1 10 5 4 - 1460 Or 1 4 60
1} - 1 18 0} 5 - I '825 Or 1 8 25
! }; --> 2 5 7; G - 2:190 Ol' 2 I 90
1; - 2 13 2; 7 - 2'555 Ol' 2 5 55
2 - 3 O 10 8 F 2.920 Or 2 9 20
2} - 3 8 5} } 9 - 3.285 Ol' 3 2 85
2}; - 3 16 0; : 10 - 3•650 Ol' 3 6 50
2% - 4 3 7; 11 - 4.015 Ol' 4 0 15
12 - 4:380 Ol' 4 3 80
3 &=º 4 * 1 3 { 13 = 4:745 Ol' 4 7 45
3} – 4 18 10} 14 - 5-110 Ol' 5 1 10
3% - 5 6 5% 15 - 5-475 Ol' 5 4 75
The year is here taken as 365 days, which would be at all times found convenient, so as
not to require a less payment of interest than 5 mils. In leap years this would advance
the period of the exchange of Exchequer Bills one day only, and this in the course of four
years; whilst by the present practice of taking 364 days, to avoid fractions of a penny, the
March and June exchanges have been advanced to the first week of the month in the
course of a few years only.
Ixchequer, 1st February 1856.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
121
APPENDIX I.
TABLE A.
Showing the equivalents in mils of each fraction of the old monies from #d to 6d.
Pence.
3.
l.
2
#
l
1}
1%
1%
2
2}
2%
2}
3
Mils.
1
OI’
Ol'
Ol'
OI’
OI’
OI’
Or
OI’
OI’
OT
OI’
OI’
Mils and
Fractions.
13 ºr or
2+ or
33%r or
4 ºr or
53%r Or
63%r or
7 ºr or
8+ or
93%r or
10}} or
11}} or
12}} or
==
=
... Pence.
1 : 0416... 3}
2.0833... 3,
5 ° 125 3#
4 * 166 ... 4
5-2083... 4}
6 - 25 4;
7-3916... 43
8 * 33... 5
9 - 375 5}
10° 416... 5%
11 .4583... 5;
12 - 5 6
TABLE B.
Equivalents in mils from 6d. to
l
mils. S. d.
= 275 10 6
= 300 11 O
= 325 II 6
= 350 12 O
T 375 12 6
T 400 13 O
= 425 13 6
— 450 14 O
= 475 14 6
= 500 15 O
TABLE C.
Mils.
14 Or
J.5 OI’
16 OT
17 OT
18 OI’
19 Or
2O OT
21 OT
22 OI’
23 OT
24 OI’
26 Ol'
19s. 6d.
mils.
525
550
575
600
625
650
675
700
725
750
Mils and Mils and
Fractions. Decimals.
13}} or 13 5416...
14}} or 14' 583...
15}} or 15.625
16}} or 16-66...
1744 or 17.7083...
18}} or 18.75
1943 or 19'8916...
20.3% or 20.833...
213+ or 21 '875
22#3 or 22’916...
2333 or 23.9583...
24# or 25
S. d. mils.
15 6 = 775
16 O = 800
16 6 – 825
17 O = 850
17 6 = 875
18 O = 900
18 6 = 925
19 O = 950
19 6 = 975
Showing a Scale of mils from 1 to 25 mils, with their equivalents in pence and farthings
for legal payments, together with their exact equivalents.
For Legal
Payment of
Mils.
:
=
=
=
=
:
=
d. d.
0} or 0} less ºf
0; or 0# , º,
0; or 0# , ;
l or 1 , ;
1} or 1%. , ;
1; Ol' 1; 93 #;
1} Ol' 1; 55 3's
2 or 2 s, ºr
2} or 2%. , 's
2} or 2%. , ;
2} or 2; , ; }
3 or 3 , ; }
3 or 3} , ; }
3} or 3%. , ##
3% or 3; , ;
3# or 4 , ; ;
4. Or 4} » ##
4} or 4; , ;
4% or 4; , ; }
4; or 5 , #3
5 or 5%. , #
5} or 5%. , #
5% or 5%. , 3}
5# or 6 , #
35
32
5)
35
Exact Equivalents.
s's of a farthing,
Or
Ol'
OI’
Ol'
Or
Or
Ol'
OT
Ol'
OI’
OI’
Ol'
Ol'
Ol'
Or
Ol'
OT
Ol'
OI’
OT
Ol'
Ol'
OI’
OI’
d.
0} &
0} &
0} &
1 &
1} &
1} &
1# &
2 &
2} &
24 &
2# &
3 &
3} &
3} &
3# &
4 &
4} &
4} &
4# &
5 &
5} &
5} &
53 &
## of a farthing.
º##
f
_l##
:
-&
1.###.##33.
.:
E 4.
}
#;%
:
.75
T}
's
33
No. 3.
Mr. Chisholm's
Memorandum.
6 or 6} , ; ;
6
Ol'
122
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 3.
Mr. Chisholm's
Memorandum.
APPENDIX II.
AN ACCOUNT of ExCHEQUER BONDS now outstanding, showing the Act under which
they are issued, the Date when payable, the Number and Amount of each description,
the Rate of Interest and Half-yearly Amount of Interest on each Bond, together
with the total Amount of Principal, and Half-yearly Interest of such Exchequer
Bonds.
Amon ºf mºre | “..." Total Total
Act. Pº Nººr º * gº Haitºry Aºi of #:
each Bond. per Annum. Interest on each | Principal. º: y
- Bond.
£ £ £ s. d. £ £ s. d.
16 Vict, c. 23. 1st Sept. 1894 362 1,000 2# (to 1st Sept.
(1853) – * 1864) § - 13 15 0
2% (from do. to -
1st Sept. 1894) 12 10 0
74 500 2# gº tº 6 7 6
2% - º 6 5 O
11 200 23. *º sº, 2 15 0
2# - • || 2 10 0
171 100 2# sº * * l 7 6
2} - * 1 5 0 || - - - || 5,228 15 O
— 618 * * - 418,300 5,75l 12 6
17 Vict. c. 23. 8th May 1858 900 1,000 Y (17 10 0
(1854) -
1,060 500 3% tº: º 3 8 15
1,500 200 | 3 10
1,700 100 J U 1 15
6,160 | A — *=sº 2,000,000 || 35,000 0 0
,, 1859 - || 400 1,000
1,200 500 |
2,000 200 } 3% º - || As above.
6,000 100 |
9,600 || B — * gººms 2,000,000 || 35,000 0 0
,, 1857 - 800 1,000 |
1,000 500 3# sº - As above.
2,000 200 f
3,000 300 ||
6,800 || C — *mº *e 2,000,000 || 35,000 0 0
18 & 19 Vict. | 8th Nov. 1860 500 1,000
c. 130. (1855) 3# *- As above.
1,000 500
1,500 D — *=m, * 1,000,000 17,500 0 0
24,678 7,418,300 |127,351 12 6
Viz. :— 2,962 of £1,000
4,334 , 500
5,511 ., 200
11,871 ., 100
Total Number of Bonds - - 24,678


DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 123
APPENDIX III. No. 3.
Mr. Chisholm's
AN ACCOUNT of all EXCHEQUER BILLS issued in the Three Years ended 31st December Memorandum.
1854, 1855, and 1856, showing the Number and Amount of Bills of each description,
the Rate of Interest, and the Amount of Interest actually paid on Deficiency and
Consolidated Fund Bills.

Rate of
• a ſº Interest per Total
Description. Number. k. Amount. Cent Amount of Remarks.
per Iiem. Interest.
1853 : £ s, d. d. £ s
March Exchange - 12,909 8,477,200 0 0 l }. - - || Interest increased to 2d. on
June 33 º 10,753 5,890,500 0 0 1 * º * and after 11th October 1853.
Supply Services - 3,882 3,128,000 0 0 2
Deficiency, April - 32 1,407,812 7 11 l 62 10 0 | Paid 13th July.
?? July - 99 3,205,557 15 4 l 769 15 10 ,, 15th October.
39 October 81 2,224,184 8 9 2 481 13 4 ,, 14th January 1854.
27,756 || 24,333,254 12 0
1854 :
March Exchange - 11,514 7,418,500 0 0° 2
June 53 mº- 12,561 7,434,400 0 0 2}
1,750,000l. for Sup- 2,090 1,250,000 0 0 2
ply Services - 830 500,000 0 0 2+
December Issues do. 823 655,500 0 0 2} - º ~ || Interest increased to 2%d. on
and after 25th October 1855.
Not yet exchanged.
Deficiency, January 123 3,711,201 8 9 2 2,817 1 8 || Paid 18th April.
• ? April - 179 5,852,048 I l 2 9,855 3 4 , 13th July.
y) July – 136 4,029,289 17 9 2} 4,993 8 1 , 7th November.
33 October 94 2,457,669 12 11 2 50 0 0 ,, 17th January 1855.
Consolidated Fund,
January - s 27 790,000 0 0 2 8,246 13 4 , 13th July 1854.
Ditto, April 14 500,000 0 0 2#. 2,456 5 ,, 7th November.
28,391 34,598,609 0 6
1855 :
March Exchange - 11,254 7,299,700 0 0 2} ** - Interest increased to 2%d. on
and after 25th October 1855.
June 35 sº 15,306 9,135,900 0 0 2
Supply Services (21
August 5,500 3,500,000 0 0 2
Deficiency, January 56 1,519,533 16 9 2 124 3 Paid 11th April.
33 April - 105 3,467,094 6 2 6,535 8 , 26 June.
35 July 102 3,306,433 4 2 2,676 13 ,, 27th December.
33 October 30 853,442 1.6 5 2 NiI.
Consolidated Fund,
March - - 33 1,000,000 0 0 2#. 7,518 , 26th June.
Ditto, April . - 54 1,740,000 0 0 2% 19,230 18 9 ,, 27th September.
32,440 31,822, 104 6 0
124 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 4.
Letter from
F. Hincks, Esq.
- No. 4.
LETTER from F. HINCKs, Esq., Governor of Barbadoes, to the Right Hon. ROBERT Lowe.
My dear Mr. Lowe, Government House, Barbadoes, August 27, 1856.
IT is with some hesitation that I venture to intrude on your valuable time, and I
would scarcely have ventured to do so but for your late speech on Mr. Brown's motion
regarding a decimal currency, from which I have learned that you, though theoretically
in favour of the decimal system, do not approve of the proposal of the association with
which Mr. Brown is connected. I have thought a good deal on the subject, and have
had to deal with it as a legislator, and I take sufficient interest in it to wish at all events
that my views should have fair consideration. I had looked, I confess, on the people of
England as so prejudiced in favour of the unit of a pound that there was little use in
propounding anything else, but some months ago I got a circular from Lord Monteagle,
with the printed list of questions, and I could not resist the opportunity of writing both
to his Lordship and to Mr. Thornely (the latter for Mr. Brown's perusal) my views on
the subject. 1 had by last mail a letter from Mr. Thornely, in which he informs me, what
indeed I knew before, that Mr. Brown and his associates are very strong in favour of the
sovereign as the unit, and that this would cause the least disturbance in the accounts.
Others, he says, like me (the writer of this), hold a contrary opinion. Now if my views had
been brought out in the debate I should not have presumed to push them forward again,
but neither in the argument, nor in the statement made by Sir Cornewall Lewis of the
various schemes, was the one I think best referred to. And yet I am surprised that it has
attracted so little notice, because it certainly is not without advantages. If the dictum
of Sir C. Wood is to prevail, that the pound must be the unit, of course there is no use in
going further into the question, and any minor arrangements are quite indifferent to me.
I think that both by yourself and Sir C. Lewis the evils of changing the values of
the coins in general circulation among the poorer classes were clearly pointed out. I
think that people of the higher and well-educated classes under estimate very much the
discontent that will be produced by a disturbance of the currency, and I cannot help
remarking that it is not a little extraordinary that these parties, merchants, bankers, &c.,
will not hear of disturbing the pound as the unit, although such change would involve no
real alteration of value at all, but give them a little trouble, and disturb their calculations
and interfere with their old customs, and yet they are ready to make a real change in the
value of that coin which is the basis of all the calculations of the poor. Admitting freely
that if you had an universal system the values of the coins would be disturbed by the
exchanges, I do not think that a sufficient ground for not making an attempt, more
especially when you also gain the very important point of not disturbing your existing
currency. I would adopt the crown as the unit, i. e. a new crown of the value of the
American dollar. The halfpenny would be the cent, and accounts could be kept, not in
the absurd three column system advocated by Mr. Brown, but in crowns and cents. The
crown would correspond with the dollar and also with the five-franc piece. The dollar cur-
rency is essentially that of the World. Even in countries such as that where I am now
residing, although the currency is similar to that in England, and although there are no
American coins in circulation, the money of account at the banks and in most of the
shops is dollars and cents, and the notes in circulation are five-dollar bills worth
1l. 0s. 10d. All over the American continent you have the dollar, and it is forcing its
way everywhere. The French sous, the American cent, and the English halfpenny or
cent would be of similar value. All the French coins would suit admirably, as would
the American gold ones. Gold might still be retained as the legal tender, and a gold
coin struck “Royal,” or what you like, worth five crowns, corresponding with the half-
eagle of the United States, or four crowns corresponding with the twenty-franc piece of
France. This plan would not be open to the objection regarding tolls, stamps, &c., or
the infinite objections not raised specially, but with which all must be familiar. What,
then, is the objection ? None but prejudice in favour of the pound, which is too high an
unit in my opinion. And what is the difficulty after all ? A short calculation, much less
intricate than what the poor would have to undergo, would bring any sum of pounds,
shillings, and pence into crowns and cents. I admit there would for a time be some
inconvenience in the change, but that must necessarily be the result of any change, and
the inconvenience of the system which I advocate would be of a different kind; a man
having to pay or receive 1,000l. Would have, by a very short calculation, to ascertain that
he had to pay or receive 4,800 crowns. Though I propose the multiple of the halfpenny
as the unit, which would be most convenient as the money of account, I do not think that
the crown would, as a coin, obtain any general circulation, any more than does the
American silver dollar. The half-crown would be much more convenient and more
generally adopted, and that would be worth 28. 1d. of the present money, or little over
the present florin; the name florin might be preserved. The subsidiary coins might be
adopted as convenience should dictate. The objection to a silver coin of ten farthings is
obvious, but there would be none to one of ten of your present halfpennys, which would
be of the same value as the United States dime. Although, as I have already said, even if
you had an universal System, the difference of exchanges would cause a difference in the
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 125
values of the different coins, still conventionally they would pass in the different
countries at their respective values. For instance, a traveller in the United States would
pass for every purpose that he required on steamboats, railroads, and hotels, an English
five crown piece as a half-eagle, no matter what the rate of exchange. We know as a
matter of fact that bills of other States in which there is a greater discount at the
brokers than there would be on gold freely pass in the way I speak of. A common five-
dollar bill will be readily taken at an hotel in New York, or on an American steamboat.
English gold now passes freely in Paris, but how much more convenient for all parties
if the coin were worth 20 or 25 francs exactly and it would save travellers not only
trouble, but, to use a vulgar American term, constant shaves. The standard should of
course continue gold, and if, as I think would be much preferable, the five-crown gold
coin were adopted it should be worth one sovereign and 1-24th. The crown, if issued at
all as a coin, would be a token worth 100 halfpence, and 4s. 2d. of your present money,
and it would, like all the subsidiary silver coins, be issued according to the present
standard. The copper coins would not be changed at all. The dealings of the masses
would in no way be interfered with. The merchants, who peculiarly want the change and
who would benefit by it, would have a little temporary inconvenience and no more. I
am sure that you will kindly excuse the trouble I give you in asking you to read the
foregoing remarks, which I venture to hope are not wholly unworthy of some
consideration.
Believe me,
Yours faithfully,
F. HINCKS.
No. 5.
CIRCULAR To BANKERs.
By Sir J. F. W. HERSCHEL, Master of the Mint.
GENTLEMEN, Royal Mint, November 1854.
THE Government being desirous of obtaining information on which to form a
judgment how far the introduction of the florin or two-shilling piece as an element of the
silver coinage of this country has been approved, and, if approved, how far on its own
merits as a convenient element of value in itself, and in its relations to the higher and
lower denominations of coin, and how far as a presumed stage in the transition to a Decimal
Coinage with the Pound unit as its basis, I shall be much obliged by your informing me,
at your early convenience, of your own impressions on these points, as grounded on the
experience of your transactions with the public; and in particular (as regards the half-
crown and the florin) whether it appears to you that any preference of the one over the
other of these coins is manifested in the demand of the public for silver at your hands, and
the grounds of such preference, in so far as they may have come to your knowledge.
I have, &c.
(Signed) J. F. W. HERSCHEL,
Master of the Mint.
Messrs. & Co., Bankers.
ANALYSIS OF REPLIES.
DEAR SIR, Royal Mint, 14th December 1854.
HAVING received a great number of replies to the circular which I have addressed
to all the London bankers, except those exclusively or for the most part engaged in India
or Colonial business, and to a great many of the principal country bankers (including the
chief banks of Scotland and Ireland) on the subject of the acceptance of the florin by the
public, of the draft of which circular you were pleased to approve, I proceed now to lay
before you an abstract of the substance of those replies, as ranged under heads corresponding
to those inquired into or others touched upon relating to the inquiry.
The reply of the Bank of England I subjoin in extenso, as it appears to have been drawn
up with great care, and is specific in applying itself to the points of inquiry. As regards
the others, it is not always easy to distinguish between the individual impressions of the
writer and those of the firm which he represents, or to judge how far such impressions are
individual, and how far a simple echo of the public sentiment. Of necessity, therefore, I
must assume that in each case the partners of the firm, or the directors, Sanction the replies
CºlWeL).
&D This premised, I may state the following as embodying my own impressions as to the
preponderate tendencies in a mass of opinions very far from homogeneous.
I. The florin is very generally approved by the respondents per se as a convenient
element of value, and in its relations to every other coin but the halfcrown, which it finds in
pre-occupation of the field, and with which it has to contend under every disadvantage. As
an element of the Decimal Coinage (supposing its competition with the halfcrown obviated
either by withdrawal of the latter or by a better distinction between them), its approval is
all but unanimous.
No. 4.
Letter from
F. Hincks, Esq.
*º
No. 5.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel’s Circular
to Bankers.
Q 3
126 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 5.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel's Circular
to Bankers.
2. A considerable number of banks speak of the florin as a coin generally approved
by the public, and absolutely preferred to the halfcrown. Others as decidedly disliked.
These may be balanced against each other, but the impression remains that nothing beyond
its too great resemblance to the halfcrown, its comparative infrequency, and a certain defect
of “ring” (a consequence of the proportion of its dimensions adapted for greater distinction
from the halfcrown), prevent it from being at this moment a decidedly popular coin.
3. The concurrent circulation of the florin and halfcrown is very generally deprecated as
a source of inconvenience and mistake. There is a desire all but unanimous that one or
other should be withdrawn—the preference for retention (when any preference is expressed)
being uniformly in favour of the florin.
I am, &c.
(Signed) J. F. W. HERSCHEL.
To the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Bank of England, 12th November 1854.
THERE is some difficulty in answering the questions of the Master of the Mint, on
account of the difference of opinions amongst the clerks.
The difference of opinion arises from the division of labour in the Bank, by which some
clerks have only to deal with particular classes of the public. -
In the silver offices all sums of silver above 201, are received and paid; and when we have
to deal on the one hand with the foremen and clerks of bakers, butchers, meat, poultry, and
fishmongers, innkeepers, and other tradespeople who take large quantities of silver, and on
the other hand, with the pay clerks of dock companies, builders, and railway contractors
and others who require silver for weekly wages, to some of whom halfcrowns are espe-
cially useful, when their men are paid half a crown a-day, which is no uncommon rate, it may
easily be imagined, that any innovation which would give to those persons a little extra
trouble and something to learn would not be regarded with any favour, and to this day
the fourpenny and threepenny pieces are with them a constant subject of complaint.
It is not to be cKpected, therefore, that they would welcome the florin on any account.
Its novelty alone would be a strong objection, and as an introduction to a decimal System,
of which they know nothing, and from which, as a change, they fear everything, it would
be still more repugnant to them.
In counting mixed silver, the clerk first picks out the halfcrowns and crowns, as they
do not count easily with the small silver on account of the odd sixpence in the halfcrown;
he then counts the shillings and sixpences by two shillings worth at a time, placing
his fingers upon the coins which make up the amount, which great practice enables him
to do. -
At present, he is obliged to pick out the florin with the half crowns on account of their
similarity, and separate them afterwards; were there no halfcrowns, he would count the
florins and small silver, separately, and instead of saying 2, 4, 6, &c. up to 20, he would put
his fingers on the same coins and say, 1 2, 3, &c. up to the end, and the record would be in
terms of the counting.
The questions of the Master of the Mint have been printed, and sent to the money offices
of the Bank, and afterwards returned to me. I believe I may venture to state —
1st. That generally, there is among traders a dislike to the introduction of new coins, but
that no great objection has been made to the florin.
2d. That it is not an inconvenient quantity in itself, and that as a step towards the intro-
duction of a Decimal Coinage, its value has been acknowledged wherever the subject seems
to have been understood, and for that reason, probably, the opposition it would otherwise
have had to encounter as a novelty has been small.
3d. The payers of wages prefer the halfcrown for the reason stated; but generally, the
public do not manifest any preference of one before the other.
4th. The most decided opinion is expressed by all parties that the halfcrowns and the
florins occasion great inconvenience circulating together, and those who look for a Decimal
Coinage would desire to see the halfcrown withdrawn, and coined into shillings and
Sixpences.
(Signed) W. MILLER.
December 12, 1854.
DEAR SIR JOHN,
THE preceding statement in answer to your circular letter of inquiry about the
silver coin has been prepared by Mr. Miller, after collecting the opinions which have been
gathered from all parts of the house. The time required will explain the delay of the reply.
I remain, &c.
(Signed) J. G. HUBBARD.
The Florin approved.
1. Union Bank of London-Very generally approved by those who reflect. Its use is
on the increase, and it is not objected to.
2. Lubbock, Forster, and Co-Is the florin approved? Answer, Yes, per se, and as an
element of Decimal Coinage.
3. Bosanquet, &c.—Generally approved.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. I27
4. Commercial Bank of London.—The florin is a useful coin, per se, and its value is
increased as the decimal of a pound. It was originally objected to, but the objection is
rapidly disappearing, and it would become popular were the halfcrown withdrawn.
5. Price, Marryatt, and Co.—As a new element of the coinage it has been generally
welcomed and found convenient. This on its own merits, as they do not profess to give
any opinion about it as an element of Decimal Coinage.
6. Cumberland Union Bank.-Its introduction has given much satisfaction.
7. Cunliffe and Co., Lombard Street—It is approved by the country, both per se and in
relation to coins of higher and lower value.
8. Ulster Bank.--From their experience they think the florin would become a favourite coin.
9. Gurney, Norwich—Intrinsically we think the florin is at least equally convenient with
the halfcrown, and perhaps more so.
10. Gloucestershire Banking Company.−It is generally regarded by the public as a
convenient coin, and they are inclined to think so without any reference to its ultimate use
in the Decimal Coinage. -
11, Lon’ſon Joint Stock Banking Company.—The approval given to the florin rests not
merely on its own merits as a convenient element, &c., but as a presumed stage to a
Decimal Coinage.
12. National Bank of Scotland—Generally approved by the business class of the
community, both as convenient in itself and as a step to a Decimal Coinage. We entertain
no doubt that there is a growing feeling in its favour.
13. Royal British Bank.-Our cashiers find the florin much more convenient in their
payments and receipts from the public than the halfcrown. The public would prefer that
only one of the two coins should be in circulation, and they are satisfied that the most
desirable to retain would be the florin.
14. Edinburgh and Glasgow Bank. --So far as the directors can judge, the florin is a
convenient element of the coinage, and as such has been generally approved by the public
transacting business with the establishment.
15. Old Bank, Chester.—The florin, resting on its merits as a convenient element of
value, &c., and as a presumed stage in transition to a Decimal Coinage is, we think, gene-
rally approved of
16. Lacey and Son.—Regard it as a decided improvement, looking to a Decimal System,
which they would be glad to see gradually introduced.
17. Manchester and Salford.—Our experience is not unfavourable to the florin, and we
do not think that there would be any practical inconvenience in the simultaneous circu-
lation of the florin and halfcrown, if properly distinguished.
18. Perth Bank.-Their experience leads them to believe that the florin would become
very popular were the halfcrown withdrawn.
19. East of England Bank.-The two-shilling piece would certainly be a convenient
element of value, and for computation and in relation to other coins, did it not clash with
the halfcrown. The name florin is not popular; people think of a florin as twenty pence.
20. Hanbury and Lloyd.—Were the halfcrown withdrawn, the florin would be con-
sidered the most convenient coin.
21. Newcastle Union Bank.-The florin would prove a useful and convenient coin were
the halfcrown removed, and, with a larger issue of sixpences, would make a very good
substitute for the halfcrown.
22. National Bank of Scotland.—From old habit there seems to be a lingering preference
for the halfcrown ; but the calculations by the florin are so much more easy, that it would
be a general favourite if the halfcrown were withdrawn.
23. Manchester and Salford.-Approve the florin ; but think the halfcrown will never
lose its value as an element of circulation, from its use in paying broken accounts.
The Florin disapproved.
Jones, Lloyd, and Co.—There is a general indisposition to receive it.
Smith, Payne, and Co.—Generally disliked.
Sapte. —The public evince a decided objection to it.
Robarts, Curtis, and Co.—The generality object to the florin.
. Lubbock and Forster.—Their third cashier infers that it is not liked because it is not
asked for.
6. Straham.—Seldom asked for. , Not by any means generally approved by the country.
7. Dimsdale.--Florin does not ring well; hence it is liable to be counterfeited, and is so.
8. Cunliffe and Co.—We do not like the florin ; and many of our customers decline them.
We could get up a petition to delay issuing any more. -
9. The Storekeeper at PWoolwich.-Excludes florins from his orders to the London and
County Bank. *
10. Provincial Bank of Ireland.—The florin is not approved, as the public have a strong
predilection for what exists. -
11. Dundee Bank-Not felt to be any advantage, as the public would much prefer two
shillings.
12. Gurney, Norwich.-Many persons request not to be paid in florins, but this seems
to be the effect of habit only.
13. Old Bank, Chester.—The florin is not approved, but would have been had the half-
crowns been withdrawn. Both together cause mistakes. -
i
No. 5.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel's Circular
to Bankers.
Q 4
128 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 5.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel's Circular
to Bankers.
14. North and South Wales Bank, Denbigh.—Regarded in this neighbourhood with
positive dislike, because they clash in size with the halfcrown.
15. York Union Bank.-Great objection to florin, partly as unnecessary, partly from
concurrence with the halfcrown.
16. Hallett, Robinson, and Co.—Florin seldom asked for, and not unfrequently objected
to on account of its similarity to the halfcrown.
17. National Provincial Bank of England.—The similarity to the halfcrown has
hitherto produced a dislike of the florin; but the latter would be much preferred were the
halfcrown withdrawn.
18. Hanbury and Lloyd.—The similarity to the halfcrown has hitherto produced a
dislike of the florin; but the latter would be a more convenient coin were the halfcrowns
withdrawn.
19. Ransom and Co.—Not approved, partly from causing confusion with the halfcrown,
and partly for its dull sound. -
The Florin preferred.
1. Cunliffe and Son.—The florin is much preferred to the halfcrown, and is decidedly
a more convenient and useful coin. They are not able to state the grounds of preference,
but think it arises from being a decimal coin.
2. London and County Bank.--The result of their experience is that (with exception of
orders from the Storekeeper at Woolwich Dockyard), the public prefer the florin, and that
as an element of the Decimal Coinage.
3. Herries and Farquhar.—1st. The florin has been greatly improved. 2d. It is a con-
venient coin, both in itself and in reference to other denominations. 3d. It is much
preferred to the halfcrown. . Many state their opinions to be grounded upon particular
observation, and their experience of transactions with the public. Consider that the half-
crown, and not the florin, should be withdrawn.
4. Worcester City and County Banking Company.—Consider that the introduction of the
florin has been universally approved, and that it has been judiciously selected in its relations
to higher and lower denominations, and a step to a Decimal Coinage. They cannot doubt,
from the general retention of the florin by the public, that the new coin has a decided pre-
ference, which they think would be placed beyond a doubt if the issues of the florin were
equal to that of halfcrowns. It is a simpler coin, &c
5. National I’rovincial Bank of England.—The florin would be much preferred were the
halfcrown withdrawn. The florin is very superior to the halfcrown, as containing no
fraction of a shilling, and is simple.
6. Bosanquet—One or other coin should be withdrawn; they think it should be the
halfcrown. -
7. Stride and Co.—Recommend the entire withdrawal of the halfcrown.
8. Bank of Ireland.--From experience of the public feeling, consider that were one or
other coin to be withdrawn, the florin would be preferred as a step to a Decimal Coinage.
9. Ulster Bank.-The halfcrown should be speedily withdrawn, speaking from experience
of the public feeling.
10. Commercial Bank of Scotland.—Our directors are of opinion it would be advan-
tageous to the public to withdraw the halfcrown in favour of the florin.
11. Perth Bank.-Consider that the withdrawal of the halfcrown (as clashing with the
florin) and the 4d. piece (as clashing with the 3d.) would be a great relief to the public.
12. Wilts and Dorset Bank.-The directors are of opinion that the halfcrown should be
withdrawn and the florin retained in circulation.
13. National Provincial Bank of England.—The feeling seems very general that the
halfcrown should be withdrawn, and the florin substituted.
No decided Preference to either the Florin or Halfcrown.
1. Coutts and Co.—No decided preference.
2. London and Westminster Bank.--No preference.
3. Grote, Prescott, and Co.—The florin readily taken, and no preference, or a very slight
one, in favour of the halfcrown. o
4. Bosanquet.—No marked preference for either; no feeling one way or other in the
matter on the part of the public.
6. Price and Co.—From their observation the coins are taken indifferently, and no
preference shewn.
7. Commercial Bank of Scotland—The public have treated them very much alike, never
certainly evincing any decided preference for the one over the other.
8. Edinburgh and Glasgow Bank-Finds no decided preference, and would, therefore,
retain both coins.
9. Union Bank of Scotland, Glasgow.—No decided preference of florin over halfcrown.
10. Gosling and Sharpe.—No preference. People seem to get very indifferent whether
they take florins or halfcrowns; but their older customers would not like to lose the half-
CrOWIl.
11. Chester Old Bank.-Have not observed any preference manifested; but, owing to the
scarcity of silver, any coin is readily taken. ©
12, Lacy and Son, West Smithfield,—We think no preference in favour of either.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 129
13. London Joint Stock Banking Company-Generally speaking, do not consider the No. 5.
public manifest a preference. When, the halfcrown is preferred—it is as a coin long in Sir J.F.W.
circulation. - Herschel's Circular
14 Devon and Cornwall Bank. —Have not observed any manifest preference of one over to Bankers.
the other. Both are convenient.
15. Northampton Banking Company.−The feeling is one of indifference. If there is a
preference it is rather against the florin from its resemblance to the halfcrown. It does
not seem of much importance what the coins are so long as there is a sufficient distinction.
16. Bank of Liverpool.—Are unable to say that any decided preference exists, owing to
the limited circulation of the florin.
17. Union Bank of Scotland, Edinburgh.-No decided preference exists except where
wages are paid at 2s. per day, in which case the florin is preferred.
18. Curries & Co.—Have occasionally remarked a preference for the halfcrown.
The Halfbrown preferred to the Florin.
1. Messrs. Drummond.—As far as they have any knowledge, the halfcrown is preferred:
(Messrs. D. speak to this one point.)
2. Jones, Lloyd & Co.—A most marked preference for the halfcrown.
3. Smith, Payne, & Co.—The halfcrown preferred.
4. Lubbock and Forster.—One of their cashiers considers the halfcrown to be preferred.
5. Williams and Co.—Greatly preferred.
6. Grote and Prescott.—Slightly preferred, as better known.
7. Rogers and Co.—Halfcrown is preferred, as more convenient in the various combina-
tions required.
8. Stevenson.--The public much prefer halfcrowns from being so long accustomed to them.
9. Sapte,
10. Robarts, Curtis, & Co.
11. Dimsdale.—Halfcrown preferred, owing to the novelty of the florin and its bad ring.
12. Belfast Banking Company.—We observe a preference for the halfcrown over the
florin, but probably arising from old habit.
13. Perth Bank—So long as both circulate together, the halfcrown will have the pre-
ference from custom.
14. Gurney, Norwich.-In this district, the public generally appear to prefer the half-
crown, and many persons request not to be paid in florins; but this appears to be the effect
of habit only.
15. Lloyd and Entwistle.—Have no doubt of the preference of the well known halfcrown
over the seldom seen florin.
16. East of England Bank.-Halfcrowns preferred by their customers.
17. Union Bank of Manchester—From inquiry of their clerks at the counter, the half-
crown is generally preferred. º
18. Spooner and Attwood.--The halfcrown is generally preferred, more from old asso-
ciation, perhaps, than from any consideration of commercial advantage or inconvenience.
19. Hankey, Bevan, and Trotter—Halfcrown preferred.
20. Royal Bank of Scotland.—The halfcrown preferred owing to its being familiar, and
often serving for a sixpence.
21. Willis, Percival, and Co.—Thehalfcrown is generally preferred, but probably from habit.
22. Huddersfield Bank.—The manager believes the halfcrown is more convenient, but
the difference is but little.
} Much preferred.
From eaſperience of confusion and mistake caused by similarity.
1. Coutts and Co. 20. Lloyd, Entwistle, and Co.
2. Praed and Co. 21. Gloucestershire Banking Company.
3, Tondon and Westminster Bank. 22. Gurney, Birbeck, and Co., Lynn.
4. Union Bank of London. 23. Old Bank, Chester.
5. Lubbock, Forster, and Co. 24. North and South Wales Bank,
6. Bosanquet. 25. York Union Bank.
7. Commercial Bank of London. 26. East of England Bank.
8. Curries and Co. 27. Spooner, Attwood, and Co.
9. Robarts and Curtis. 28. Hankey, Bevan, and Trotter.
10. Stride. 29. Lacy and Son.
11. Bank of Ireland. 30. Bouverie and Co.
12. Ulster Pank. 31. Strahan.
13. Belfast Banking Company. 32, Union Bank of Scotland, Glasgow.
14. Provincial Bank of Ireland. 33. Huddersfield Bank.
15. Dundee Bank. 34. Dimsdale and Co.
16. Union Bank of Scotland. 35. Cumberland Union Bank.
17. Porth Bank. 36. National Bank of Scotland.
18. Bank of Liverpool. 37. Newcastle Union Bank.
19. Gurney and Co., Norwich.
For Special Reasons.
Stevenson, Salt, and Sons.—The public dislike the inconvenience of keeping both coins,
R
130 APPENDIX TO REPORT UF THE
No. 5.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel's Circular
to Bankers.
Contrary Opinions.
Price, Maryatt, and Co.—The option of taking either florins or halfcrowns, or a portion
of both, is considered a great convenience, and one the public would now evidently be little
inclined to forego.
Edinburgh and Glasgow Bank-Would retain both.
Manchester and Salford Bank.-Would keep both in circulation, but would make a
better distinction between them.
The Halfcrown valued as a Fractional Coin, and as serving conveniently
for a 6d.
Coutts, Praed, Lubbock, Bosanquet, Williams, Deacon, and Co., Provincial Bank
of Ireland, Dundee Bank, Lloyd and Entwistle, North and South Wales Bank, York
Union Bank, Royal Bank of Scotland. The whole force of the argument is, perhaps, most
pointedly put by the Union Bank of Newcastle, as follows:– “In making a payment of 6d.
as part of a large sum, you have the only real use of the halfcrown. Neither the crown
nor the halfcrown are by any means needed in the silver coinage. The smaller denomi-
nations are the only ones which are really useful.”
Contrary Opinion as to its Value in this respect.
National Provincial Bank of England—Consider the florin, per se, superior to the half-
crown, because it does not involve fractions, and is simpler.
On the Appreciation of the Florin as a step towards a Decimal System.
1. Praed.—Consider the florin as desirable in this point of view.
2. Bosanquet.—The florin is favourably regarded as such a step by most who are capable
of entering into the question.
3. Commercial Bank of London.—The florin useful per se, its value enhanced as the
decimal of 1.
4. Herries, Farquhar, and Co.—It is very convenient as an element of the Decimal
Coinage, which they consider much to be desired.
5. Lubbock and Co.—(First cashier.) It is approved as a step towards a Decimal Coinage.
6. Cunliffe and Co.—Think the reason why the public prefer the florin is, that it is a
decimal coin.
7. Dimsdale and Co.—Consider that its introduction will facilitate the change.
8. Belfast Banking Company.—Think the introduction of the florin a most proper step
in that direction.
9. Union Bank of Scotland.—The public feeling is decidedly in favour of a Decimal
System, and of the florin as a step towards it.
10. Perth Bank.-Ditto, very judicious and important.
11. Bank of London.—Think that as a step to a Decimal Coinage the sooner the florin
can be altogether substituted for the halfcrown the better.
12. Devon and Cornwall Bank.--Distinctly of opinion that the florin is of great impor-
tance as a presumed step in such a transition, and should be continued.
13. Lloyd, Entwistle, and Co., Manchester.—As a step to the Decimal System the florin
is approved, but they complain of the absence of interest in that system, whose merits they
consider not fully appreciated.
14. North and South Wales Bank.-The florin would obtain immediate favour were the
halfcrown withdrawn.
15. Cumberland Union Bank.--Were the halfcrown withdrawn, the florin would be
looked upon with still more satisfaction as a first step to a Decimal Coinage, which is so
universally desired. Q-2
. 16. Huddersfield Bank.-Goes into the question of the Decimal System, which it con-
siders very desirable, but without stating any impression as to the reception of the florin on
that score.
17. Dundee Bank—Does not consider that the public take any interest in the question,
and do not consider the florin to be appreciated on that account.
18. Ransam and Co.—As a step to a Decimal Coinage its importance is fully appreciated.
19. National Provincial Bank of England.—As a step to a Decimal Coinage it has not
been much considered.
20. , Wilts and Dorset Banking Company—Consider it a most desirable thing as a step
towards a Decimal Coinage.
21. Coutts and Co.
22. Bouverie and Co. º * * *
23. Price and Co. Can give no opinion on the point.
24. Curries and Co.
23. Ǻon Bank of Scotland, Glasgow.—There is no great desire in Glasgow for a
Decimal System, nor for the florin as a part of it. 8->
26, ºnion Bank ºf Scotland, Edinburgh—The manager sends ascheme of a Decimal System.
27. Sapte and Co.—Would be sorry to see a change to a Decimal Coinage.
28. Hºllis, Percival, and Co.—On the contrary, think it would be an improvement.
29. Cºlton Bank of Newcastle.—Consider that no one can form an opinion of the florin
3.S. a. stage to a Decimal Coinage till tried as part of a whole system, and the sooner that is
done, in their opinion, the better. af
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
131
No. 6.
ANswers to QUERIES as to DECIMAL CoINAGE, circulated by R. HEATON and SoNs, of Birmingham,
Contractors for Copper Coinage, dated 8th June 1855.
Communicated by THOS, GRAHAM, Esq., F.R.S., Master of the Mint.
Name and Address.
Trade and
Occupation.
Qu. Has a Decimal
Coinage ever engaged
your attention ?
Qu. Please state your ideas thereon.
Answer favourable.
Answer unfavourable.
Joshua Harris, New Union Mill
Company, Islington, Birmingham.
Old Union Mill Company, Holte
Street, Birmingham.
Back Lane,
Thomas Parkinson,
Blackburn.
Jno. Darbyshire, Bank of Bolton -
John Harwood, Bolton sº tº
W. Penn Smith, 26, Hanover Street,
Liverpool.
E. Turner, 55, King Street, Man-
chester.
Henry Tibbet, 5, Orchard Street,
Newcastle-on-Tyne.
Thomas Boundy, Northampton
Place, Swansea,
David Walters, Swansea ºs tºs
Edward Adcock, 43, Dale End,
Birmingham.
J. L. Brierley, 104, Dale End, Bir-
mingham.
Hinks, Wells, and Co., Buckingham
Street, Birmingham.
Holyday, Lewis, and Co., New Street,
Birmingham.
Secretary to
New Union
Bread and
Flour Mill
Company.
Lamp maker
Bank mana-
ger.
Corn factor
Lamp maker
Gas Office
Parish over-
SC62]",
Metal refiner
Shopkeeper -
Grocer wºm.
Bookseller -
Steel pen
makers.
Drapers -
Yes
Yes
Yes
Not much
Not very
much.
Not much
Not parti-
cularly.
No *º
No tº
No - -
No. sº
No. º
No, tº-
I think it would act very well,
not only with respect to the
coinage, but also weights and
II] (23 SUlreS,
We never use smaller than
halfpence, and consider any
smaller coin troublesome and
unnecessary.
As not being required, useless.
I think it would be an improvement, if it were not that the
present coinage seems to meet every requirement.
It would be very convenient
when established.
Desirable, but not considered
so by the vast majority who
have had no experience of its
advantages in other countries.
Though I think it highly de-
sirable.
For my own part I think the
Decimal Coins much wanted,
but the trade here does not
seem to desire them.
I think the present coinage
answers all the purposes.
Not wanted in this neighbour-
hood.
It would take a great work of time to become useful.
I conceive it to be the most
easy and natural calculation ;
if adopted would be soon un-
derstood, and give great facility
to business matters. It is a
rule with me to count change
by tens, because I find that I
am always correct.
We believe it would be a great
improvement over the present
system, and give very great
facilities.
The advantages are so numerous
that time and space will not
admit of our entering on the
subject here. We apprehend
that every tradesman that has
read the evidence given before
the Committee of the House
of Commons on the subject
can have but one opinion, and
that must be in favour of the
decimal coinage.
H.
Laings and Co., 33 to 36, High Street,
Birmingham.
G. F. Muntz, M.P. for Birmingham
Thomas Pemberton & Sons, Birming-
ham.
W. Bollans, Bradford - * * >
|Drapers -
Brass foun-
ders.
Plumber, &c.
* * sº tºs
I am favourable to a Decimal
Coinage.
The present is satisfactory.
We think the change uncalled
for, because we find no incon-
venience as we are.
I think we should not get any
No. 6.
Messrs.
Heaton and
Son's Circu-
lar Queries.
benefit by it.
182
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 6.
Messrs.
Heaton and
Son's Circu-
lar Queries.
gººmº
Answers to Queries as to Decimal Coinage, circulated by R. Heaton and Sons—continued.
Name and Address.
Laurence and Robinson, Bradford -
Thomas Hale and Co., Bristol -
TE. Hollin, Dudley º * *
J. C. Cook, Dudley - tº
J. Wood, Dudley - º -
John Vickery, 84, Fore Street, Exeter
John Moody, Halifax and Hudders.
field Union Bank.
James Heron, West Riding Union
Banking Company, Huddersfield.
Thomas Attwood, Lewes - º
Thomas W. Cross and Co., Washington
Street, Leeds.
Jacob Lilley, 23, Vicar Lane, Leeds
William Richardson, Sherwood Yard,
Briggate, Leeds.
Joseph Wood and Son, 3, Sherwood’s
Yard, 42, Briggate, Leeds.
Thomas B. Hardman, 38, Regent's
Road, Liverpool.
51, Fetter Lane,
London.
Everett and Co., 51, Fetter Lane,
London.
George Jones, Nevill's Court, Fetter
Lane, London.
John Yeomans and Son, 79, Arundel
Street, London.
Hulett, 55 and 56, High Holborn,
London.
Qu. Has a Decimal
Qu. Please state your ideas thereon.
and -
Trade a Coinage ever engaged
Occupation. 85 --o
your attention? g
Answer favourable. Answer unfavourable.
Ironmongers || Yes - sº - It would facilitate business ma-
terially. Calculations would
be readily made, and correctly,
to O,
Brass foun- || Yes - º - º º --> tº- Not immediately required.
ders
Chemist - || Yes - - - I have not seen a scheme yet in which I fear the inconveniences

Ironmonger
Spirit mer-
chant.
Gas fitter -
Cashier -
Manager -
Patentee -
Brass founder
Coppersmith
Decorators
Druggist -
Oilman -
Blacking
makers.
Lamp maker
Lamp maker
Not much
Yes - || – -
Yes - I - -
Yes - | - -
Yes - I - -
º - | No - -
Yes - a *
A little | - -
Yes - I - -
Yes wº * tº-
Yes - | - -
Yes - I - ->
- cº No º
Yes - I - -
Yes - I - -
attending its introduction would not counterbalance the advantages
attendant upon its use. Could this be obviated, the use of Decimal
Coinage and Measures would be very desirable.
I think it desirable.
Consider it essential to com-
mercial interest.
I consider the benchts will not
be equivalent to the enormous
loss and confusion of the ex-
change. -
!
Cannot doubt that it is desirable, though it must produce vast in-
convenience and derangement for the time.
I think the Decimal System
would very soon be applied
and approved.
And think we ought by all
means to have a Decimal
System in both coinage and
weights. (Our Mr. Cross has
a system of his own, not yet
made public.)
The very best and simplest that
could be adopted.
The very best and simplest that
could be adopted.
Think it would be very conve-
nient.
|
Simplify our reckoning very
much ; but cannot judge if
desirable to make alteration
general.
We are decidedly in favour of
it, preserving the present
pound sterling intact.
Its introduction would be of
"great advantage, from its
greater simplicity and readi-
ness of calculation; nor do
we think that near the incon-
venience would arise from
its introduction which some
people anticipate.
I think it would be a great
boon in a great commercial
nation like England. It
would very much simplify
our calculations. I consider
the system much better in
France.
I have an idea that the very
small coin proposed in the use
of Decimal Coinage would be
inconvenient.
I do not see much advantage to
the public at large in changing
the coinage; it may suit a few
commercial men or bankers; but
to disturb a whole country in
the alteration, when everyone
understands his own coin, in my
opinion is nonsense.
I think it quite unnecessary.
T).ECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION, 133
Answers to Queries as to Decimal Coinage, circulated by R. Heaton and Sons—continued.
No. 6.
Messrs.
º Heaton and
e Qu. Please state your ideas thereon. Son’s Ci
Trade and Qu. Has a Decimal on's Uircu-
Name and Address. Occupation Coinage ever engaged r lar Queries.
º your attention? p -
Answer ſavourabie. Answer unfavourable. º
William Jackson, 59, Crown Street, Copper and | Yes - || - I consider a Decimal Coinage
Finsbury Square, London. brass ware- would be a great boon to all
house. the commercial establishments
throughout the kingdom.
Stevens and Son, Darlington Works, Engineers, Yes - || - We consider it would be most
Southwark. brass foun- desirable, and greatly facilitate
ders, &c. business transactions.
Thomas Tuck and Son, 190, Strand, Lamp ware- || Yes - || - Consider it would be a great
London. house. convenience and advantage in
trade if the scheme could be
carried out, lout it would have
imany difficulties to encounter
to remove the long-established
notions. That overcome, the
advantages, in our judgment,
would be very considerable.
John Warner and Sons, 8, Crescent, Makers of Yes - - See their answer as to Decimal
Jewin Street, London, decimal Coins, Weights, and Measures.
weights for
the bullion
trade.
Bradshaw, Blacklock, and Co., 47, Railway Yes - || - In favour.
Prown Street, Manchester. Guide Of-
fice.
George Hartlewell, 2, St. Mary's Plumber - || Yes - - I think it would greatly facilitate commercial transactions, but
Street, Manchester. would also prove very inconvenient for the working classes.
William Oxley and Co., St. Mary's Ironmongers || Yes - || - The best thing that could be
Street, Manchester. done for the country. It would
revolutionize the whole system w
of calculation for the better.
The system is now compound;
by decimals it would be sim-
ple.
Taylor and Turner, Manchester - | Wholesale Yes - | - We think something similar to
drapers. the American system would
be advantageous.
Bladen and Nash, Rugeley - i Brassfounders! - - | No - * - • But cannot see any necessity
for it.
Guest and Chinne, I&otherham - Brass and Yes - I - We think it would facilitate
iron foun- counting-house and general
ders. business transactions to an
important extent.
Charles Storey, Bank House, Iło- - º - || Yes - | - - º º - Scarcely required.
therham. . . .
Wigfield and Sons, Rotherham - Grocers - I - - | Not much - cº- º º We think our present coinage
quite sufficient for our busi-
IleSS.
Samuel Ashworth, Toad Lane, Roch- || Pioneer's Some º I think it would take a long time before they all get used
dale. St Ol' C. little. to it.
John Petrie, Rochdale --> - Iron mer- | - - | No It would be attended with ad-
chant. vantage when thoroughly esta-
blished, but great difficulty
would attend it on the outset.
Aitcheson, Stamforth, and Co., Shef- Wicker brass || Yes - || - That it would materially facili-
field. works. tate the operations of trade,
and be highly beneficial to
merchants and traders.
Henry Harely, 31, Wicker, Sheffield | - -> - * tº •º tº - - - - I think any change will be a
great inconvenience to the re-
tail trade.
Edwin Unwin, United Gas Light | Manager of | Yes - - I highly approve of the recom-
Company, Sheffield. Gas Conn- mendation of a Decimal Coin-
pany. age made by two Royal Com-
missions, and by a Committee
of the House of Commons,
Thomas Wheeler, Stockport - Tea dealer. - - | No º --> * - | Quite content with present ar-
l rangement
t

R 3
134
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 6.
Messrs.
Heaton and
Son's Circu-
lar Queries.
Answers to Queries as to Decimal Coinage, circulated by R. Heaton and Sons—continued.
Name and Address.
Trade and
Occupation.
Qu. Has a Decimal
Coinage ever engaged
your attention ?
Qu. Please state your ideas thereon.
Kershaw, Leese, & Co., Stockport -
Jaques and Knowles, Stockton-on-
Tees.
Smith and Hind, Stockton-on-Tees -
Cowley and Madely, Walsall gº
Richard P. Tallis, Walsall - tº
W. H. Dike, Wakefield and Bar-
naby Union Bank, Wakefield.
C. A. Loxton, High Street, Wednes-
bury.
George Muntz, at J. Runnell and
Sons, Tube Works, Wednesbury -
Richard Pildesly, Willenhall *
Thomas Ellwell and Sons, Wolver-
hampton.
Fred. Walton & Co., Wolverhampton
Francis Taylor, Union Banking Com-
pany, York.
Edmond Richardson, 23, Pavement,
York.
Joseph Braddick, United Gas Light
Company, York.
SCOTL AND.
Mitchell Brothers, Dalkeith - wº
E. B. Bothwell, 25, Justice Street,
Aberdeen,
Grocers -
Lamp makers
Patent Tube
Works.
Accountant
Bank mana-
ger.
Brass founder
Merchants,
&c.
Tin and Ja-
pan manu-
facturers.
Bank mana-
ger.
Clerk - -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
It has -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
A little,
and the
less the
better.
Yes -
Yes -
Ycs -
No º
Not much
Not parti-
cularly.
Answer unfavourable.
Hardly think it practicable.
We think it would make years
of confusion, and also tend to
lessen the scale of profits.
I think the inconvenience
would be greater than the
advantage.
Nor do not see the use of such
coinage. I think it would be
nonsense to have any such coin-
age. I think we should do far
better without any such coinage.
We think it would be attended
with great inconvenience, both
at home and the colonies, in
aCCOuntS.
It is not liked in this neighbour-
hood.
I think the present coinage quite
sufficient for all retail and
wholesale trade in England.
I believe it would be a great boon to posterity, but very difficult
to introduce; and ought to be based on one universal standard.
Answer favourable.
We think a Decimal Coinage
would facilitate business trans-
actions generally, and tend to
simplify the keeping of ac-
COuntS.
We think the Decimal Coinage
would be much better than the
present system.
ſº tº sº #º
It would eventually answer
well, and our successors would
thank us for it, but the present
inconvenience would be great.
The prospective benefit would
greatly preponderate over the
present inconvenience.
I think, after considerable in-
convenience, it would add
greatly to the facility of keep-
ing accounts, so much so that
the primary inconvenience
should not be taken into con-
sideration; and that the Decimal
System should not be confined
to money transactions, but
should extend also to weights
and measures.
Having lived in France I am
decidedly in favour of Decimal
Coinage.
sº
wº
tº-
wº
It is the only perfect mode of
keeping accounts, whether of
money or quantities.
We are in favour of a Decimal
Coinage, but are not clear as
to the unit that should be
adopted. Many inconveniences
would be connected with re-
linquishing the pound, but we
think that the tenpenny would
form a more useful unit of
amount.
The feeling in Aberdeen is
decidedly favourable to the
adoption of a Decimal Coin-
age.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION,
135
Answers to Queries as to Decimal Coinage, circulated by R. Heaton and Sons—continued.
Qu. Please state your ideas thereon.
Answer favourable. Answer unfavourable.
Name and Address.
Trade and
Occupation.
Qu. Has a Decimal
Coinage ever engaged
your attention?
Robert Stevens, 214, George Street,
Aberdeen.
John Wilson, 12, Catherine Street,
Edinburgh.
J. Westland, North of Scotland
Banking Company, Aberdeen.
John M'Pherson, Aberdeen - -
Farquhar & Gill, 24, Upper Kirk
Gate, Aberdeen.
John Stephen, Aberdeen
James Cowan, Dundee - - -
Thomas H. Baxter, 25, Murray Gate,
Dundee.
Robert Thomson & Sons, Dalkeith -
J. Smeall, Dunfermline * -
John Sampson, Dunfermline - -
James Bruce, Dunfermline - -
Caldwell Brothers, Edinburgh *
Alex. Mackenzie, Commercial Bank
of Scotland, Elgin.
Brass foun-
der.
Banker +-
Comb ma-
nufacturer.
Plumber and
brass foun-
ders.
Plumber -
Brass foun-
der and
plumber.
Grocer * .
Plumbers -
Plumber -
Merchant -
Merchant -
Booksellers -
Bank agent
Yes -
Yes -
It has
been
discussed
here.
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
No -
No -->
Not much
And being one who loves old
usages, &c., would prefer the
present coinage. I understand
the present coinage, and would
not like the trouble of a change.
The Decimal Coin is too small
for Scotland.
I think it would be a great im-
provement, and would facili-
tate materially the operations
of accounts. I believe that,
having regard to our existing
monetary scale, the pound ster-
ling would be the most con-
venient integer to adopt for a
Decimal Coinage.
My impression is, that while Decimal Coinage would be very
advantageous in book-keeping, it at the same time would be
inconvenient in small purchases, and in all transactions with
the working classes where wages are made up on the piece-work
principle, such as my own trade.
We think it would greatly sim-
plify business transactions.
I am of opinion that the coin
should remain as at present.
I think it would be a great
boon to the trading part of the
community.
Desirable; but am afraid the
difficulties in carrying out the
plan are almost insurmount-
able.
We are in favour of Decimal
Coinage.
It would forward business, and
be a great improvement.
It would forward business
quicker, but would have its
difficulties for a considerable
time with the general public,
who would require a great
deal of teaching and explana-
tion that they were not cheated.
I think it would expedite busi-
mess very much, and be a very
great improvement on the pre-
sent coinage.
We think it would be a very
great improvement, and sim-
plify account keeping. The
lower classes would be a little
confused in their reckoning at
first, but the inconvenience
would gradually subside, and
the benefit remain. Retailers
and merchants would be much
benefitted, it would be so easy
to calculate rapidly. The
pound sterling ought to be
the unit.
That it would facilitate greatly
the keeping of our books.
No. 6.
Messrs.
Heaton and
Son's Circu-
lar Queries
R 4
136
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 6.
Messrs.
Heaton and
Son's Circu-
lar Queries.
Answers to Queries as to Decimal Coinage, circulated by R. Heaton and Sons—continued.

-
Trade and
Occupation.
Qu, Has a Decimal
Coinage ever engaged
your attention ?
Qu. Please state your ideas thereon.
Answer unfavourable.
Lamp manu-
facturer.
Lamp makers
Glass Works
Ironmonger-
Lamp manu-
facturer.
Chandelier,
&c. manu-
facturer.
Bank
nager.
ſIl:A-
Drapers -
Ironmongers
Plumbers -
Railway
bakery.
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Slightly
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Yes -
Not much
No º
No º
Not much
No &
No sº
No -
No º
No -
|
The alteration would be at first
embarrassing.
Our opinion is, -–Not desired in
this quarter.
Would prefer the present coinage
to a Decimal Coinage.
I think the change would be
attended with great inconve-
nience as to the payment of
wages.
Would “ let well alone.” The
halfcrown piece is the most use-
ful coin we have, and the De-
cimal Coinage would do away
with it.
I think it better for retail shops
that the currency should remain
as it is.
There appears to be a very con-
siderable diversity of opinion,
and we should ratiner say un-
favourable, as it would affect
a great niany parties whose
prices, &c. do not square with
decimal divisions.
This subject has not engrossed
our attention much, but believe
that it would overturn all pre-
sent arrangements of business,
only produce confusion.
A total subversion of the present
system of calculation and book-
keeping, tending to no improve-
ment, and moreover being a
copying from the foreigner, who,
I think, should imitate us.
I think the introduction of a
Decimal Coinage would in-
crease the difficulty of reckon-
ing, and would give rise to
serious confusion among all
classes.
Name and Address.
Answer favourable.
John Neil & Co., 44 North Hanover
Street, Edinburgh.
Charles Taylor, 82,
Edinburgh.
High Street,
Smiths & Co., 1, Blair Street, Edin-
burgh.
James Couper & Co., City Glass
Works, Glasgow.
John Finlay, 46, Buchanan Street,
Glasgow.
Thomas Lockerby, Victoria Works,
Glasgow.
Stephenson and Allardice, Glasgow
Wright Brothers, 187, Argyll, Street
Glasgow.
Alexander Thomson, Greenock Bank,
Greenock.
Thomas Roden,
Greenock.
Hamilton Street,
Cowan and Lawrie, Greenock ce
John Sturroch and Sons, 1, Duke
Street, Leith.
William Logie, 2, Mill Street, Perth
Gibson and Reddie, Stirling . gºe
James M. Morrison, Commercial
Bank of Scotland, Stirling.
IREL AND.
Thomas Hudson, High Street,
Belfast.
John Magee, 32, Ann Street, Belfast
William A. Rolt, 28, High Street,
Belfast.
Bernard Hughie, Railway Bakery,
Belfast.
And would be in favour of its
being adopted.
That both coins would require to be in circulation at the
same time until the community understood the advantage of
the Decimal.
That it would be a great boon,
but would be attended with
difficulty in introducing its
operation among the working
classes.
N
With our old denominations we get on very well with what our
customers understand best.
The difficulty is to teach and re-
concile our common population to a decimal coinage.
That it would greatly facilitate
the keeping of accounts.
I think it would suit well.
I consider it would be a progressive step ; but it would be
rather difficult to introduce.
Quite in favour of it. I believe
the majority of our merchants
here are the same.
I think it would tend to simplify
money calculations, and give a
greater facility in business.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
137
Answers to Queries as to Decimal Coinage, circulated by R. Heaton and Sons—continued.
No. 6.
Qu, Has a Decimal Qu. Please state your ideas thereon.
º €C11118,
Messrs.
Heaton and
Son's Circus,
lar Queries,
Trade and s
Name and Address. dº. Cºgº
y 1On : Answer favourable. Answer unfavourable.
John Lane, 33, George Street, Cork || Lamp, &c. - || Yes • *' - I consider a very great ad-
vantage.
John Stevenson, 114, Grafton Street, Gas Com- Yes º - || That it would be attended with
Dublin. pany. great advantage and conve-
nience to the mercantile com-
munity.
J. Edmund, Sons, and Co., Dublin - Ironmongers || Yes - - A sensible plan.
Thomas Hodges, 99, Abbey Street, Brass and bell - cº- - || Favourable. (See answer.)
Dublin. - founders.
Arthur Guiness and Co., James' Gate, Brewers - | - Not much If once adopted it would be a
Dublin.
G. Sanders, Forbes Place, Dublin -
Secretary to || Yes
Hibernian
Gardens.
decided improvement, and that
most of the practical diffi-
culties of its introduction seem
ingeniously softened or obvi-
ated by suggestions already
before the public.
It would be most desirable. I
was accustomed to it in Bel-
gium, and know how to value
decimal modes of reckoning.
ANALYSIS OF ANSWERS.

A Fi Answers to Second Answers to Second An to S d
Inswer to First Query, Favourable to Query, Unfavourable to 3. . Totals.
Query. Decimal Coinage. Decimal Coinage. uery, Loubtful. -
Yes tº tºº 52 13 - 8 73
No tº a º 7 23 3 33
No Answers - sº 2 2 O 4.
Total º º 6 I 38 11 1 10
No. 7. No. 7.
7 Manufacturers.
COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNDERSIGNED MANUFACTURERS AT MANCHESTER." smºmºmºmºmº-º-º-
Manchester.
Manchester, May 1856.
TO THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE DECIMAL COINAGE.
WE, the undersigned, being millowners and employers of labour, are of opinion that,
were the coinage altered to a Decimal System, it would be of general advantage, and we
do not think any difficulty will be found to prevent its successful operation.
ELKANAH ARMITAGE & Co., Cotton Spinners and Manufacturers,
J. and N. PHILIPS & Co., Manufacturers.
RERSHAW, LEESE, & Co., Merchants and Manufacturers, and Calico Printers.
R. H. GREG & Co., Cotton Spinners and Merchants.
ASPILL and BRADLEY, Spinners and Manufacturers.
JAS. ECKERSLEY and SONS, Cotton Spinners and Manufacturers,
JAMES KING and SONs, do. do.
HOLDSWORTH, Bros., Cotton Spinners.
RICHARDSON, TEE, RYCROFT, & Co., Manufacturers of Limen, and of Mix-
tures of Silk, Wool, and Cotton. -
MARLAND and WHITCOMBE, Manufacturers.
C. A. BRIERLEY and SONS, Cotton Spinners and Manufacturers,
ARMITAGE and WARD, Cotton Spinners and Manufacturers.
RYLANDS and SONS, Cotton Spinners and Manufacturers.
138 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
*s
No. s * - - No. 8. -
Petitions to House - -
of Commons. LIST of PETITIONS TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS FOR ADOPTION of DECIMAL CornAGE.
Session 1854.
From Aberdeen. From Honiton.
Accrington. Kilmarnock.
Actuaries, Institute of. Lancaster.
American Chamber of Commerce, Liverpool.
Andover.
Leicester. Two petitions.
Liverpool. Four petitions.
Arbroath. Liverpool Architectural and Archaeological
Ashton-under-Lyne. Society.
Ayr. Liverpool Chemists’ Association.
Bingley. London Trade Protection Society.
Blackburn. Manchester. Four petitions.
Bolton. - Newcastle and Gateshead Trade Protection
Bradford, Chamber of Commerce. Society.
Burnley. Newport.
Cambridge. Newport, Isle of Wight.
Cardiff. Newry.
Clitheroe. Ormskirk.
Dalkeith. Oxford.
Derby. Preston.
Dumfries. Salford.
Dunbar. Sheffield. -
Dundee. - - - Southampton, Chamber of Commerce.
Dundee, Chamber of Commerce. Southport.
Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures, &c.,
Staffordshire Potteries, Chamber of Commerce.
Society. Swansea.
Falmouth. Tynemouth.
Farnworth. Wakefield.
Glasgow. Waterford.
Halifax. West Riding, Bankers, &c.
Hereford.
Session 1855.
From Ballymena. From Manchester, Firm of James Carlton, Walker,
Banbury. Co.
Belfast. 33 Firm of M. Philips & Co.
Bewdley. 55 Firm of Kershaw, Leeds, Side-
Blackburn. bottom, & Co.
Bradford. 92 Rylands & Sons.
Bramley. 3y Firm of Potters & Norris.
Cupar. 5 p. Oxford Road Twist Company’s
Durham. Mills.
Dublin Statistical Society. 33 Firm of Richard Johnson &
Eagle Insurance Company. Brothers.
Egerton in Turton. 52 Operatives employed in.
Epworth. 35 Firm of Joseph Whitworth & Co.
Fochabers. 35 Messrs. Fairbairn & Co.
Glasgow. 55 Chamber of Commerce.
Halifax. Newcastle-under-Lyme.
Irvine. Northowram.
Kilmarnock. Oxford.
Leeds, Mechanics’ Institution and Literary Pembroke.
Society. Pembroke Dock.
95 Chamber of Commerce. Preston.
95 Airedale Foundry Operatives. Salford.
Liverpool, Iron Merchants and Metal Brokers. Sandhurst.
55 Mechanics’ Institution. - Sheffield.
33 Teachers of Mulberry Street School. Staleybridge, Messrs. Bayley & Brothers.
59 Architectural and Archaeological 55 Schoolmasters, Teachers, &c.
Society. - 35 Mechanics’ Institution.
32 Friendly Burial Society. Sturminster.
3.5 Chamber of Commerce. Thorne.
London, Merchants and Bankers. Warrington.
Low Moor. Wetherby.
Manchester, Firm of Messrs. Callender & Co. Woodbridge.
Jy Merchants and others. Woodhouse.
35 Firm of Bannerman & Sons. Wray.
5 p. Firm of James M*Laurent
Nephews.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 139
PETITIONS TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
In favour of the Scheme of Decimal Coinage recommended by the Committee of 1853.
Ordered to be printed by the House of Commons.
SESSION 1854.
Tynemouth Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the borough of Tynemouth,
in the county of Northumberland, -
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners are of opinion that, both in an educational and commercial point
of view, very great advantages would arise from the adoption in this country of the decimal
system of coinage, unanimously recommended by the Report of the Committee of your
honourable House appointed to inquire into this subject. -
That it appears to your Petitioners that, by the adoption of the decimal coinage, the
labour of teaching arithmetic would be materially abridged, and monetary transactions
simplified, the chances of error would be lessened, and scientific and difficult calculations
rendered easier of accomplishment; and that to a nation engaged in extensive mercantile
transactions, the saving of labour in bookkeeping alone would be of great importance.
That your Petitioners do not believe that any insuperable difficulties would arise on the
introduction of a decimal coinage into this country, but that, on the contrary, the transi-
tion would be easily and readily made ; and that any temporary inconvenience consequent
thereon would be far outweighed by the superior facilities which a system of pure decimal
currency would undoubtedly afford.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased, at
the earliest possible period, to take the subject of a decimal coinage into consideration, and
to adopt such measures in relation thereto as your honourable House shall deem proper.
And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c. - .
Given under the common corporate seal of the said borough of Tynemouth, this
eighteenth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-four,
M. PopPLEWELL, Mayor.
Salford Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the borough of Salford, in
the county of Lancaster, in council assembled, -
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners are deeply sensible of the important advantages which would
accrue to the kingdom at large by the adoption of a decimal system of money and accounts,
by affording facilities to trade and commerce, which, in comparison with the present sys-
tem, can scarcely be overrated. -
That your Petitioners are of opinion that a decimal system of money and accounts would
not only be a valuable boon to the commercial, mercantile, and banking interests, both in
their home and foreign relations, but also to the mass of the industrial and working classes,
and to the multitudes of small dealers and shopkeepers, who, from the simplicity of the
system, your Petitioners believe, would speedily understand and appreciate it.
That, inasmuch as all the silver coins now in circulation, with the exception of the half-
crowns and the threepenny and fourpenny pieces, are fortunately decimal divisions of the
pound sterling, and that, inasmuch as the only change required would be in copper coins to
the small extent of four per cent., the present florin, by the adoption of the system, being
divisible into 100 cents or farthings instead of 96 as at present, your Petitioners beg to ex-
press to your honourable House their conviction that the transition from the present com-
plex system would be easy to effect, and would be attended with a cost so small compared
with the important advantages to be gained as to be unworthy of consideration.
That your Petitioners rejoice that the principle of a decimal system of money and
accounts has already been recognised by the coinage of the florin, the first and a most im-
portant step in a decimal currency.
That your Petitioners, without committing themselves to all its details, cordially approve
of the main outlines of the Report of the Parliamentary Committee of last Session on a
decimal coinage, and especially of the recommendation to make the pound sterling the
integer, as your Petitioners are decidedly of opinion that upon no other plan, so free from
difficulty and objection, could a decimal system be framed.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will early adopt
such measures as will lead to the complete establishments of a decimal system of money and
accountS. -
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
t WILLIAM Ross, Mayor.
140 - APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
Dunbar Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Provost, Magistrates, and Town Council of the royal burgh
of Dunbar,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners are much interested in every improvement calculated to simplify
the coinage, and consequently the keeping of accounts, and are of opinion that the adoption
of a pure decimal currency would be a vast improvement on the present system.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased at
the earliest possible period to pass an Act legalising decimal coinage all over the country.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
Signed for and as authorised by the magistrates and the council, and the corporation
seal is hereto affixed by me.
JOHN KELLY, Provost.
11 Jan. 1854.
Cambridge Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the borough of
Cambridge,
Sheweth,
That a Committee of your honourable House, after due examination of the question, have
lately recommended the adoption of a decimal system of coinage.
That your Petitioners believe that such a system will simplify accounts and monetary
transactions, and thereby and otherwise be found highly beneficial.
Wherefore your Petitioners humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased to
take such measures as to your wisdom may appear expedient for the purpose of introducing
the decimal system into the coinage of the kingdom at as early a period as your honourable
House may deem practicable.
Given under the common Seal of the borough aforesaid at a council holden at the
guildhall there, on the second day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight
hundred and fifty-four. (Seal.)
Accrington and neighbourhood.
The humble Petition of the Inhabitants of Accrington, Church, Oswaldtwistle,
Clayton-le-Moors, and neighbourhood,
Sheweth,
That they have seen with great satisfaction the Report of a Committee of your honour-
able House, generally known as the Decimal Coinage Committee, and most fully concur in
the plan it has suggested and recommended of taking the pound sterling as the unit of
a CCOUIIlt.
That they consider this of much importance, as their rents, leases, and engagements have
reference to the Sovereign, and any disturbance of it would cause great embarrassment.
That the simplicity of a decimal system over that now in use, in abridging the time
necessary for the instruction of youth in obtaining a more perfect knowledge of arithmetic,
and with advantage to the commercial interests of the country, is a consideration of so
much importance, your Petitioners humbly pray that your honourable House will lose no
time in passing such laws as will secure this boon to the United Kingdom.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
JOHN HARGREAVES.
HARGREAVES, BRos. & Co.
BENJN. HARGREAVES.
&c. &c. &c.
Lancaster.
The humble Petition of the Inhabitants of the Borough of Lancaster and its
neighbourhood,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners are convinced that the adoption of a system of decimal coinage
would be of great service in all trading transactions, and of benefit to all classes of the
community.
Wherefore your Petitioners humbly pray,
That your honourable House will be pleased at the earliest possible period to pass such
enactments as in your wisdom you shall see fit to legalise the immediate use of a decimal
colnage.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
JOHN S. BURRELL, Mayor.
JOHN ARMSTRONG, J.P.
T. FAULKNER LEE, M.A., Head Master of
Royal Grammar School.
&c. &c. &c.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 141
American Chamber of Commerce. No. 8.
The humble Petition of the President and Members of the American Chamber of Petitions to House
Commerce of Liverpool, of Commons.
Sheweth, * tºm-
That your Petitioners are engaged in trade with the United States of America, and
from experience can bear testimony to the advantages arising from the adoption of a deci-
mal system of coinage and accounts in that country, benefits which must be enjoyed by
every nation using that system.
That your Petitioners learnt with much satisfaction that in the last Session of Parlia-
ment your honourable House appointed a Committee to inquire how far a decimal coinage
could be adopted with advantage in the United Kingdom, or whether any difficulties
presented themselves to render it inexpedient.
That, from the Report of that Committee, agreed to after hearing the evidence of many
intelligent witnesses in various pursuits in life, it appears that the adoption of such a system
in this country would be advantageous, and that there is no practical difficulty in carrying
it into effect; that it would save time in the education of youth ; simplify and decrease the
chances of error in accounts, public or private ; materially aid engineers, architects, and
men of science in difficult and laborious calculations; and benefit all classes of Her
Majesty's subjects:—and, on these and other grounds, the Committee strongly recommend
the adoption of the system.
Your Petitioners, deeply feeling the cogency of these reasons, and the important benefits
to be derived from this system, humbly pray that the same may be established in this
country with the least possible delay.
And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c.
WM. BARBER, President.
Blackburn.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the borough of Blackburn,
in the county of Lancaster,
Sheweth,
That, in the opinion of your Petitioners, the adoption of a decimal system of currency
would greatly simplify accounts and all monetary transactions, and would therefore much
facilitate the commerce of the country.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will take the sub-
ject into your consideration, and enact such a measure as in your judgment may be most
expedient.
THOS. DUGDALE, Mayor.
Dundee.
The Petition of the Chairman, Vice Chairman, and Directors of the Dundee Chamber
of Commerce,
Humbly sheweth, -
That your Petitioners, considering that any measure which will tend to simplify accounts,
render mistakes less frequent, and abridge the time necessary for education, will be of
great value, have learned with much satisfaction that a Committee of your honourable
House was appointed last Session to take evidence as to the advantages that would arise
from having a decimal system of coinage, and that the Committee so appointed, after
examining many intelligent witnesses, unanimously and most urgently recommended its
immediate adoption.
Your Petitioners, therefore, believing it would confer a great boon, not only on the
country, but upon all classes universally and without exception, most respectfully urge its
being carried into effect with the least possible delay, and in such manner as may seem
best to the wisdom of Government.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
Signed on behalf of the Chairman, Vice Chairman, and Directors of the Dundee
Chamber of Commerce, by
JAMES NEISH, Chairman.
Bolton.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the borough of Bolton,
under their common seal,
Sheweth,
That they have seen with great satisfaction the Report of a Committee of your
honourable House, generally known as the Decimal Coinage Committee, and most fully
concur in the plan it has suggested and recommended for the establishment of a system of
a decimal coinage, the simplicity of which over that now in use, your Petitioners believe,
would be of great advantage in abridging the time now necessary for the instruction of
youth in the knowledge of arithmetic, and would be of great service in facilitating the
commercial operations of the country.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will lose no time in
passing a law for the establishment of such a system.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
P. R. ARROWSMITH, Mayor.
S 3 4.
142 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8.
Petitions to House Ayr. - - -
of Commons. The humble Petition of the Provost, Magistrates, and Town Council of the royal burgh of
tºmº ſºme sºmeºmº-º: Ayr, Scotland,
Sheweth, -
That your Petitioners consider that the adoption of a decimal coinage would be a great
public benefit, both in an educational and commercial point of view.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased to
take the matter of decimal coinage into your consideration, and adopt such measures as may
be necessary for passing the same into a law.
And your Petitioners shall ever pray.
Signed by the Provost at the council table, in our name and by our authority, and
the seal of the corporation attached hereto, this thirteenth day of February, one
thousand eight hundred and fifty-four years, *
& HUGH MILLER, Provost.
Waterford.
The Petition of the Managing Committee of the Waterford Mechanics’ Scientific
Institute,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners are charged with the management of an educational establishment,
and are therefore deeply interested in the success of every measure tending to facilitate the
business of education ; that they regard the adoption of a decimal system of coinage, and
of accounting in money transactions, as recommended by the Committee of your honourable
House, as a step eminently calculated to promote this important object.
Your Petitioners therefore respectfully but earnestly crave that it may please your honour-
able House to take the Report presented during the last Session of Parliament by the
Select Committee on Decimal Coinage into your early consideration, and to adopt such
measures in reference thereto as may in your judgment seem most fit for giving speedy
effect to their valuable recommendations, and for thus securing to the country a system of
accounting the benefits of which must be felt by all classes of the people, and especially by
those who can least afford to give the time necessary for the instruction of their children
even in the elementary branches of knowledge.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Signed on behalf of the Waterford Mechanics’ Scientific Institute, by order,
JOHN G. DAVIs, Secretary.
Waterford, 17 Feb. 1854.
Aberdeen Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Provost, Magistrates, and Council of the city of Aberdeen,
Sheweth,
That, as the decimal system of coinage and of accounts affords greater facility, and is
more clear, simple, and correct than that at present in use in this country, it is of great im-
portance to the interests of trade and commerce that it should be adopted.
That such a system will abridge the labour of the master in teaching and the scholar in
learning arithmetic ; it will simplify all monetary transactions to the humblest person in
the country, as well as to the more wealthy; it will afford advantages in vending the pro-
ducts of onr industry in the various markets of the world, where we have to meet compe-
tition, and enable engineers, contractors, men of science, and all parties engaged in similar
pursuits, to perform with more ease, correctness, and satisfaction the complicated calculations
which frequently devolve upon them.
That a decimal system of coinage has been recommended in a most decided manner by
the Committee of your honourable House appointed last Session.
Your Petitioners humbly pray that it may please your honourable House to adopt such
measures as shall appear to be necessary and expedient for carrying a system of decimal
coinage into effect in this country.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
Signed in name and by appointment of the Provost, Magistrates, and Council of the
city of Aberdeen, and the common seal of said city hereunto affixed, at Aberdeen,
the fourteenth day of February, in the year one thousand eight hundred and fifty-
four,
JNO. BLACKIE, Provost of Aberdeen.
Hereford Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Councillors of the city of Hereford,
in council assembled,
Sheweth,
That simplicity in the names and divisions and value of the coins of the realm would
greatly facilitate the rapid transaction of business, and is therefore essential to the develope-
ment of the physical resources of this great commercial country.
That the names, divisions, and values of the present coins do not fulfil this requirement,
hut on the contrary are indescriptive, complicated, and inconvenient.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. - 143
That a decimal coinage, with names, divisions, and values all in harmony, would in a
great degree attain the desired object.
That the decimal coinage recommended by the Parliamentary Committee of the last
Session should be forthwith adopted; inasmuch as it proposes to divide decimally the pound
sterling or sovereign into 1,000 mils; the half sovereign into 500 mils ; the florin into 100
mils; the shilling into 50 mils; and the sixpence into 25 mils; and the copper coins into
1, 2, and 5 mil pieces.
That a coinage thus decimalized in name, division, and value, bearing simple relations in
all its parts, would quickly be popularly understood and its advantages appreciated, not
only by men of business, but likewise by all other classes; and these advantages would be
so obvious and manifold, that the public would soon desire to see the decimal principle not
only applied to weights and measures, but also extended to the use of figures in every kind
of arithmetic.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will take the
premises into your earliest possible consideration, with a view to the speedy adoption of a
decimal coinage in gold, silver, and copper, for the use of these realms.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Given under the corporate common seal of the said city, at the council chamber in the
guildhall of the said city, the second day of February, one thousand eight hundred
and fifty-four,
CHARLES ANTHONY, Mayor.
Bradford Chamber of Commerce.
The humble Petition of the Bradford Chamber of Commerce,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners are of opinion that the introduction of a decimal system for accounts
and currency would be of much advantage to the community at large.
That your Petitioners are of opinion that it would not be desirable to disturb the
existing habits and customs of the people by the alteration of the names or weights of
coins further than is essential for the complete adoption of the decimal system, and that by
making the present sovereign the unit this end would be readily accomplished.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased at
the earliest possible period to consider the question of a decimal currency, with a view to
its immediate adoption in the United Kingdom.
And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c. W.M. RAND, President.
JOHN DARLINGTON, Secretary.
Dundee Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Magistrates and Town Council of the royal burgh of Dundee,
Sheweth,
That it appears to your Petitioners that any measure calculated to simplify accounts
and to render more easy and expeditious the transacting of the extensive and multifarious
commercial affairs of this country would be of incalculable advantage, especially to the
commercial community of these kingdoms.
That the Petitioners have learned with considerable satisfaction that a Committee of
your honourable House, appointed during last Session, after taking evidence as to the
advantages that would accrue, especially to commerce, by the adoption of a decimal system
of coinage, have been pleased unanimously to recommend the adoption of the measure.
The Petitioners, humbly concurring in the views of the honourable Committee, respect-
fully and urgently pray your honourable House to take the necessary measures for the
adoption as early as possible of a decimal system of coinage, in such way as may appear
best in the wisdom of your honourable House.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
Signed in name and by authority of the Magistrates and Council of Dundee, and the
common seal of the said burgh hereunto affixed, at Dundee, the twenty-fourth day
of February, eighteen hundred and fifty-four years,
GEO. WAUGH,
Provost and Chief Magistrate of the royal burgh of Dundee.
Falmouth Corporation
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of Falmouth,
Sheweth,
That, after full consideration of the subject, your Petitioners are fully convinced that
great advantage would result from the adoption of a system of decimal coinage.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased, at
the earliest practicable period, to pass such measures as will secure to the community the
advantage of such a system.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Given under the common seal of the borough of Falmouth, in the county of Cornwall,
the twenty-second day of February, 1854,
S W. J. GENN, Town Clerk.
4.
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
*
144 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
Derby Mechanics' Institute.
The humble Petition of the Managing Committee of the Derby Mechanics' Institution,
Sheweth, -
That the Parliamentary Committee's Report of last Session to your honourable House,
on the grounds there set forth, strongly recommended the adoption of a system of decimal
coinage, which has been followed by an order of the Committee of Council on Education,
instructing their inspectors of training schools to call the attention of schoolmasters to
instruct their pupils on the subject; and, as your Petitioners are aware of the great
national importance of a decimal system of coins, they humbly pray that no time may be
lost in giving them a decimal coinage.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
On behalf of the Managing Committee of the Derby Mechanics’ Institution,
- RICHARD STONE, Chairman.
February 25th, 1854.
Liverpool Mechanics' Institute.
The Petition of the Directors of the Liverpool Mechanics’ Institution,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners are charged with the management of an establishment in which
from fourteen to fifteen hundred pupils are receiving instruction; that they are therefore
deeply interested in the success of every measure tending to facilitate the business of edu-
cation; and that they regard the adoption of a decimal system of coinage, and of accounting
in money transactions, as recommended in the Report by the Committee of your honourable
House, as a step eminently calculated to promote this important object.
Your Petitioners therefore respectfully but earnestly crave that it may please your
honourable House to take the Report presented during the last Session of Parliament by
the Select Committee on Decimal Coinage into your early consideration, and to adopt such
measures in reference thereto as may, in your judgment, seem most fit for giving speedy
effect to their valuable recommendations, and for thus securing to the country a system of
accounting, the benefits of which must be felt by all classes of the people, and especially by
those who can least afford to give the time necessary for the instruction of their children
even in the elementary branches of knowledge.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Signed in name and on behalf of the board of directors,
R. W. RONALD, Vice-President.
31st January 1854.
Southport.
The humble Petition of the Inhabitants of Southport and neighbourhood,
Sheweth,
That they have seen with great satisfaction the Report of a Committee of your honour-
able House, generally known as the Decimal Coinage Committee, and most fully concur in
the plan it has suggested and recommended, of taking the pound sterling as the unit of
a CCOUInt.
They consider this of much importance, as their rents, leases, and engagements have
reference to the sovereign, and any disturbance of it would cause great embarrassment.
The simplicity of a decimal system over that now in use, in abridging the time necessary
for the instruction of youth in obtaining a more perfect knowledge of arithmetic, and with
advantage to the commercial interests of the country, is a consideration of so much import-
ance, your Petitioners humbly pray that your honourable House will lose no time in passing
such laws as will secure this boon to the United Kingdom.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
JAMES GLOVER, J. P.
BENJ. S. CLARKE, B. A.
SAMUEL LEES, J. P.
&c. &c. &c.
Society of Actuaries.
The humble Petition of the Council and Members of the Institute of Actuaries,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners, in the practice of their profession, are principally employed in
calculations requiring great accuracy as well as expedition, very extensive and important
pecuniary transactions being founded thereon.
That your Petitioners invariably adopt the decimal division of the pound sterling in such
calculations, most of which are so complicated that to perform them by the present legal
division of the pound into shillings, pence, and farthings, would occasion such additional
labour, as to render them almost impracticable.
Thist your Petitioners have given great attention to the Report presented to your honour-
able House by a Committee appointed to consider the question of decimal coinage, and
your Petitioners entirely concur in the opinion of such Committee, and of the several
eminent persons who gave evidence before them, that if the coinage of the empire were
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 145
based upon a decimal system it would have a most beneficial effect in simplifying calcu-
lations, and would facilitate commercial transactions, as well as the acquirement of arithme-
tical knowledge; and your Petitioners are further of opinion, that many additional advan-
tages not referred to in the Report of the Committee of your honourable House, and which
do not appear to have been suggested in the evidence laid before them, would thereby
accrue, particularly in the construction and use of tables for assisting in numerical
operations.
That, impressed with these convictions, your Petitioners have carefully considered the
various plans for the introduction of a decimal coinage suggested to the Committee of your
honourable House, as well as many others that have been published, and your Petitioners
are decidedly of opinion that the plan recommended by the Committee is the best that has
been devised.
That your Petitioners are convinced that the inconvenience apprehended as likely to
arise from the proposed change will be much less than is generally imagined, and that it
will be found in reality very slight when compared with the great advantages to be derived
from its adoption.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased to
pass, as speedily as may be convenient, such measures as may be necessary to carry the
recommendations of the Committee into effect.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
SAMUEL BROWN,
JOHN HILL WILLIAMS,
Arbroath,
The humble Petition of the Provost, Magistrates, and Members of the Town Council of
the royal burgh of Arbroath,
}Honorary Secretaries.
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners understand that a Committee of your honourable House reported
unanimously in favour of the adoption of a system of decimal coinage for the United King-
dom, and the public voice has very generally confirmed the soundness of that report.
That your Petitioners believe that a system of decimal coinage such as that recommended
for adoption would prove highly advantageous in simplifying accounts, and affording greater
facilities in all monetary transactions in the United Kingdom, while at the same time the in-
troduction of that system may be made without leading to any serious derangements of the
currency of the country.
Therefore your Petitioners humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased to
adopt and legalise a uniform system of decimal coinage for the United Kingdom,
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Signed in name and by appointment of the Magistrates and Town Council of Arbroath,
and the common seal of the borough hereunto affixed, by
ROB. LYON, Provost.
Manchester Chamber of Commerce.
The Petition of the Directors of the Chamber of Commerce and Manufactures of
Manchester,
Sheweth,
That on the 25th of March, 1852, your Petitioners addressed a Memorial to the Lords
of the Treasury praying that measures might be taken by Her Majesty's Government for
adapting forthwith the whole of our coinage to a system of decimal proportions, and for
making immediate preparation for an eventual application of the same system to weights
and measures at the earliest practicable period.
That subsequent consideration has confirmed the conviction that many important advan-
tages would arise from the adoption of such a system, and your Petitioners therefore saw
with great satisfaction that your honourable House in the last session appointed a Select
Committee to investigate the subject.
That your Petitioners concur in the recommendation of that Committee, and would
gladly see your honourable House adopt at once some measure for giving legislative effect
to it, in such manner as to the wisdom of your honourable IHouse may seem most meet, but
retaining the £ sterling as the integer.
That your Petitioners wish to record before your honourable House their dissent from a
proposition which they have seen advocated, that, before entering upon a change of system
in this country, an attempt should be made, by conference or negotiation, to fix upon a
standard of value which shall be applicable to all nations. Your Petitioners believe such
an idea to be chimerical, and, even if possible, most unadvisable as regards money, inasmuch
as this country could not have any reliable security that other countries would adhere, for
a single year, to the standard agreed upon.
That our existing gold and silver coins afford a singular facility towards making the
desired change without cost or loss to the country, inasmuch as although it would be
desirable to consult public convenience in future coinages, and the threepenny and four-
penny pieces lose much of their usefulness, yet none of them would require immediate
replacement ; but it does appear to your Petitioners to be absolutely necessary that, simul-
taneously with the change, the whole of our copper coinage should be remodelled, and
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
146 . APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
made to represent such proportionate values of the integer as may be found most useful in
preventing those losses from fractional differences which would otherwise be made to fall
upon retail small purchases.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House may forthwith
apply itself to this question, and pass such a measure as may, as soon as practicable, adapt
the whole of our coinage to a system of decimal proportions, and provide for an early
application of the same system to the weights and measures of these kingdoms.
And, as in duty bound, they will ever pray.
By order and on behalf of the Directors of the Chamber of Commerce and Manufac-
tures at Manchester, -
THOS. BAZLEY, President.
Manchester, March 21st, 1854.
Oaford Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Citizens of Oxford, in common council
assembled,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners learn with great satisfaction that the Committee appointed by your
honourable House to consider the propriety of adopting a decimal coinage have unanimously
recommended your honourable House to sanction the adoption of a plan set forth in their
report. º
º your Petitioners, fully approving of the principle of a decimal coinage, humbly pray
that your honourable House will be pleased, at the earliest possible period, to pass a law to
carry the same into effect.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, &c.
Given under our common seal the fourteenth day of March, in the year of our Lord
one thousand eight hundred and fifty-four.
(Seal)
Dalkeith Scientific Convention.
The humble Petition of the Dalkeith Scientific Association,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners, impressed with the advantages likely to arise from the adoption
in this country of a decimal system of coinage and accounts, beg leave respectfully to sug-
gest to your honourable House the propriety of taking measures for the introduction and
establishment of such a system. That your Petitioners consider the coinage presently in
use as unfavourable alike to the interests of education and of general business, as entailing
a vast amount of unnecessary labour, involving great liability to errors of computation, and
rendering the statement and calculation of accounts needlessly complex and difficult. That
the introduction of a decimal system would, as your Petitioners believe, lead to greater
accuracy, diminish the labour of calculation to a large extent, and facilitate the business of
education, by the introduction into schools of a system so directly calculated to render easy
the acquirement of arithmetic. That, entertaining these views, your Petitioners observed
with much satisfaction the appointment by your honourable House, during last Session of
Parliament, of a Select Committee, to consider and report on the subject of decimal coinage,
and, having perused the Report of that Committee, with the minutes of the evidence on
which it is founded, your Petitioners are confirmed in their opinions in regard to the de-
sirableness of making arrangements for the early introduction of a decimal system of coinage
and accounts.
May it therefore please your honourable House to adopt such measures as to your wis-
dom may seem best for carrying into effect the recommendations of the Select Committee,
by providing for the early and universal adoption in this country of a decimalised system of
Coinage.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
ROB. SCOTT MONCRIEFF, Chairman.
Dalkeith, 15th March 1854.
Dumfries.
The humble Petition of the Provost, Magistrates, and Town Council of the royal burgh
of Dumfries,
Sheweth,
That the Petitioners, observing the interest taken by the public, and particularly by the
inhabitants of large commercial towns, in the advantages and importance attached to the
subject of a decimal system of coins, weights, and measures,--especially of our currency,
and believing that such system will greatly abridge the labour of teaching and learning
arithmetic, simplifying accounts in the settlement of all monetary transactions, and mate-
rially decreasing errors in calculations, are of opinion that the time is now arrived when a
change should be adopted in this kingdom.
That your Petitioners understand the subject has already been before Parliament, and
that much valuable evidence has been obtained under the Commissions issued by your
honourable House; and that the information so obtained warrants your Petitioners to
approach you on the subject, and to beg your earnest and immediate attention to securing
T).ECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 147
the desired change by a Legislative Act, particularly in regard to our coinage, so that this
country may obtain the mighty advantages already secured by numerous nations in close
and constant connection with this country in commercial business.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
Signed in name and by authority of the Magistrates and Town Council of the royal
burgh of Dumfries, in common council assembled, and seal of the said burgh is
hereunto affixed, the seventh day of April, eighteen hundred and fifty-four years,
MILES LEIGHTON, Provost.
Liverpool Guardian Society for the Protection of Trade.
The humble Petition of the Liverpool Guardian Society for the Protection of Trade,
consisting of upwards of one thousand eight hundred persons, being bankers, merchants,
and traders,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners, from the nature of their avocations, are deeply interested in any
change having a tendency to facilitate mercantile and trading intercourse, and especially
having a tendency to simplify the monetary accounts in which your Petitioners are daily
engaged.
That your Petitioners have learnt with great satisfaction that the Select Committee of
your honourable House appointed to take evidence and report upon the practicability of
adopting a better system of national coinage, have unanimously recommended the adoption
of the decimal system of coinage, having for its integer the present pound sterling.
That, in the opinion of your Petitioners, the adoption of a decimal system of coinage is
eminently calculated to lessen the errors inseparable from the present system of accounting,
will greatly abridge the labour required for a more perfect system of book-keeping, and
economise the time of all engaged therein.
That by the decimal system the arithmetical education of the rising generation will be
greatly facilitated, the labour of the teachers will become less onerous, and the time of both
teacher and pupil much abridged.
That your Petitioners are glad to find that the Committee of Council on Education have
recognised the value of the decimal system of coinage, inasmuch as they have directed the
inspectors of training schools to call the attention of the schoolmasters to the subject of the
instruction of their pupils therein.
That your Petitioners anticipate no difficulties in carrying out the decimal system of
coinage but what may be easily overcome ; that the benefit to be derived by all classes
from its adoption will much more than compensate any temporary inconvenience arising
from the change; that as the system gradually develops itself to the minds of the industrial
population all objections to the change will disappear, and the transition from the present
imperfect and difficult system to the system recommended in the Report of your Select
Committee will be universally accepted as an invaluable boon conferred upon the present
and extended to future generations.
Your Petitioners, fully impressed with the value and importance of a decimal system of
coinage, humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased to take such immediate
steps for giving effect to the Report of your Select Committee, by the introduction of a
decimal system of coinage into the monetary transactions of the kingdom, as to your
honourable House may seem meet.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. *
WILLIAM McMILLEN, President.
Manchester Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Citizens of the city of Manchester, in
the county of Lancaster, in council assembled on the 19th day of April, 1854,
Sheweth,
That a Select Committee of your honourable House, appointed in the last Session of
Parliament to consider and report on the practicability and probable effect of adopting a
decimal system of coinage, having, on the convincing facts and reasonings set forth in their
Report, strongly urged the introduction of such a system into this country; and the Com-
mittee of Council on Education, in furtherance, it is presumed, of this recommendation,
having directed the inspectors of training schools to give particular attention to the instruc-
tion of scholars in decimal arithmetic, your Petitioners, deeming a decimal system of coins,
weights, and measures of great national importance, are encouraged by the circumstances
to which they have referred to state their approbation of the system, and humbly to pray
your honourable House to apply it with the least possible delay to the coinage of the
realm, having every confidence that an experience of its advantages in that respect will
lead to its adoption hereafter as applied to weights and measures.
And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c.
(Seal)
Liverpool.
The Petition of the undersigned Inhabitants of Liverpool,
Humbly sheweth,
That, setting a high value upon any measure that will simplify accounts, render mistakes
less frequent, abridge the time necessary for education, and save labour to both master and
e No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
T 2
148 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
scholar, your Petitioners have learned with great satisfaction that a Committee of your
honourable House was appointed last Session to take evidence as to the advantages that
would arise from having a decimal system of coinage; and that the Committee so appointed,
after examining many intelligent witnesses, unanimously and most urgently recommended
its immediate adoption.
Your Petitioners, therefore, considering that it would confer a great boon not only on
the country, but upon all classes universally and without exception, most respectfully urge
its being carried into effect, as to the wisdom of government may seem best, with the least
possible delay.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
F. SHAND, President of the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce.
THOMAS BOUCH, Vice-President.
EDWARD HEATH.
&c. &c. &c.
Gateshead and Newcastle Trade Protection Society.
The Petition of the Newcastle and Gateshead Trade Protection Society,
Humbly sheweth,
That the society is composed of upwards of 500 manufacturers, merchants, and traders,
carrying on business in Newcastle and Gateshead and neighbourhoods.
That your Petitioners, being deeply interested in any change a having tendency to
facilitate mercantile and trading intercourse, have learnt with satisfaction that the Select
Committee of your honourable House, appointed to take evidence and report upon the
practicability of adopting a better system of national coinage, have unanimously recom-
mended the adoption of the decimal system.
That your Petitioners anticipate no difficulties in carrying out the decimal system of
coinage but what may be easily overcome, and that the benefit to be derived by all classes
from its adoption will more than compensate any temporary inconvenience arising from the
change; that, as the system gradually develops itself to the minds of the industrial popu-
lation, all objection to the change will disappear, and the transition from the present im-
perfect and difficult system will be universally accepted as an invaluable boon conferred
upon the present and extended to future generations.
Your Petitioners, impressed with the value and importance of a decimal system of coinage,
humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased to take such immediate steps for
giving effect to the Report of your Select Committee as to your honourable House may
seem meet.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Signed for and on behalf of the society,
DANIEL OLIVER, Chairman.
London Trade Protection Society.
The humble Petition of the London Trade Protection Society, 170, Regent Street, con-
sisting of upwards of one thousand five hundred members, being bankers, merchants,
traders, and others,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners are greatly desirous of effecting some change which may render
more easy and expeditious trading and other intercourse, and particularly so as respects
accounts in money.
That your Petitioners have been informed that the Select Committee of your honourable
House, appointed to take evidence and report upon the feasibility and propriety of using a
different system of coinage, have advised the using of the decimal system, the pound sterling
being its integer.
That your Petitioners have no doubt that by adopting a decimal system of coinage, there
would be far less difficulty in accounting, less labour required in bookkeeping, and that a
great deal of the time of all so occupied would be saved.
That by the use of the decimal system arithmetic would become more simple, easier of
attainment, and far less likely to be forgotten.
That your Petitioners know that the Committee of the Council on Education approve
of the decimal system of coinage, and have taken steps to cause instruction to be given
therein.
That your Petitioners see little difficulty in carrying the decimal system of coinage into
effect, and that in the present day, with the knowledge generally possessed by the indus-
trial classes, they would soon become reconciled to and approve of the system recommended
in the Report of your Select Committee.
Your Petitioners, knowing the advantages of a decimal system of coinage, humbly pray
that your honourable House will be pleased to proceed as early as possible to carry into
effect the Report of your Select Committee, by introducing a decimal system of coinage
into the pecuniary transactions of Great Britain and Ireland, as to your honourable House
shall seem meet. -
And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c.
PETEE GRAHAM, Chairman.
15th June, 1854.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 149
Liverpool Archaeological Society.
This Petition of the undersigned Members of the Liverpool Architectural and Archaeological
Society,
Humbly sheweth,
That your Petitioners have learnt with much satisfaction that the attention of your
honourable House has been directed to the revision of the anomalous system upon which
the coinage, weights, and measures of this country are at present based, as they have
frequent experience of the great inconvenience which is thereby occasioned in land sur-
veying, in the measurement and valuation of artificers' work, and in the application of
science to practical architecture and construction.
That your Petitioners find that the present system, or rather the absence of any system
which now prevails, renders all extensive calculations cumbrous, unnecessarily laborious,
and liable to error: to so great an extent are these inconveniences experienced, that many
of your Petitioners endeavour to simplify the process by the reduction of existing denomi-
nations to decimals, which, after the calculations are completed, are restored to the original
form ; and your Petitioners humbly submit that this is very strong evidence that the pre-
sent arrangements of coinage, weights, and measures is highly objectionable, and quite
unworthy of a commercial nation.
That your Petitioners have occasionally to compare English with foreign coins, weights,
and measures, some of which are arranged on a decimal basis, and in the increasing inter-
course between this and other countries it seems very desirable that all useless impediments
to freedom in that intercourse should be removed with as little delay as possible, and that
efforts should be made to establish an unity of denomination with the more important
of other nations, to serve as a standard in the conversion of the moneys, weights, and
measures of one country into those of any other.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly but earnestly pray that your honourable House will
be pleased to promote the requisite proceedings for securing the great boon of the decimal
system to this country.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
CHARLES WERELST, President.
JOHN HAY, Vice-President.
FRAs. HOMER, Treasurer.
&c. &c. &c.
Society of Arts.
The humble Petition of the Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures, and
Commerce,
Sheweth,
That there are at present time in union with the society 357 of the literary and scientific
institutions and mechanics’ institutes throughout the United Kingdom.
That, at a conference of the representatives of these institutions with the council of this
society, held at the society's house on the 4th day of July instant, the following resolution
amongst others was unanimously passed.
“That this conference earnestly desires an early adoption of the decimalisation of weights,
measures, coins, and accounts.”
That your Petitioners entirely concur in the views expressed in the foregoing resolution.
Your Petitioners therefore pray that your honourable House will please to take mea-
sures for a speedy introduction into the United Kingdom of a decimal system of weights,
measures, coins, and accounts.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
EBRINGTON, Chairman of the Council.
SESSION 1854–5.
Liverpool Chamber of Commerce.
The Petition of the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce,
Humbly sheweth,
That on the 11th day of November, 1852, their president addressed a letter to the right
honourable the President of the Board of Trade stating that they felt the great importance
of adopting a decimal currency, and most respectfully calling his attention to the subject,
and saying that it would greatly facilitate all calculations in keeping accounts, would save
labour, and decrease the chances of mistakes, and that since the florin had come into circu-
lation its adoption would be greatly facilitated. They further remarked that it was not
desirable to disturb the existing habits of the people by altering the names or weights of
coins further than is essentially necessary to the adoption of a complete decimal system.
Since the letter above alluded to was written, much discussion has taken place through
the press as to what would be the most desirable unit to adopt. Your Petitioners see no
reason whatever to alter their views of the pound sterling being the unit which would be
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
T 3
150 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8.
productive of the least disturbance and greatest advantage. When your Petitioners' opinion
Petitions to House on this important subject was given, they were not aware of the two Royal Commissions,
of Commons.
s ºr mºr-sº- -
who strongly recommended the pound sterling unit, and the Decimal Coinage Committee
of your honourable body was not then, appointed, but which has since made a Report
strongly corroborative of the opinion of this chamber; º e ©
Your Petitioners therefore pray that no time may be lost in carrying the recommendation
of the Royal Commissions and the Committee of your honourable House into effect, and
which will confer an important and lasting benefit on the nation.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
Signed on behalf of the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce,
THOMAS BOUCH, President.
Ballymena.
The humble Petition of the undersigned Inhabitants of Ballymena and the neighbourhood,
Sheweth,
That a Report of a Committee of your honourable House clearly points out the advan-
tages that would arise in the education of the people from a decimal system of coinage, as
recommended by them; as it would lessen the time necessary for the education of youth.
Every step taken in this direction is of national importance.
We therefore pray that no time may be lost in carrying out their suggestion; and also
that of decimalizing our weights and measures.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
W.M. GIHON & SONS.
JAS. & ROBT. YoUNG.
JAS. YOUNG & Co.
&c. &c. &c.
Dated at Ballymena, the 30th day of January, 1855.
Warrington Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the borough of
Warrington,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners highly approve of the recommendation of a decimal coinage made
by two Royal Commissions and by a Committee of your honourable House.
Your Petitioners therefore pray your honourable House that no time may be lost in
carrying that recommendation into effect. º
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will every pray, &c.
Sealed with the common seal of the said borough by order of the council,
JNO. F. MARSH, Town Clerk.
Liverpool Metal Brokers.
The humble Petition of the undersigned Iron Merchants and Metal Brokers of Liverpool,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners have had under consideration the desirableness of an alteration of
our system of currency to a decimal system.
That your Petitioners are firmly persuaded that it would be the means of a great saving
of time and labour in keeping their accounts, and that it would, by its simplicity, prevent
the commission of many errors.
Your Petitioners believe that a change to a decimal coinage can be easily carried into
operation, and will not be productive of any inconvenience to any portion of the population,
except the little which may arise while the change is being carried into effect.
Your Petitioners approve the plan for a decimal coinage which retains the sovereign or
pound sterling in its integrity, by which all disturbance of our monetary relations with
other countries will be avoided; and they submit that a decimal coinage should be
effected by the division of the sovereign into 1,000 parts or mils, in accordance with
the recommendation of a Committee of your honourable House, and of two Royal
Commissions.
Your Petitioners therefore pray your honourable House that no time may be lost in
carrying the above recommendations into effect.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray, &c.
WILLIAMS, PARK, and Co.
WILLIAM Fox and SON.
MORECROFT and EDGCOMBE.
&c. &c. &c.
Liverpool, 17th March, 1855.
Bewdley.
The humble Petition of Inhabitants of Bewdley and the Neighbourhood,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners experience great inconvenience from the present system of keeping
accounts, by reason of the pound sterling being divided and subdivided into shillings,
pence, and farthings.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 151
That your Petitioners find that the decimal system of keeping accounts is much prefer-
able to that now in use, not only on account of its simplicity, but inasmuch as great time
and trouble would be thereby saved, and the liability to error much lessened.
That the decimal system cannot be adopted advantageously without the pound sterling is
divided into 10 florins as at present, but also each florin divided into a coin of 1-10th its
value, and that coin subdivided into another coin of 1-10th its value, such last-mentioned
coin being equivalent to our present farthing, within 4 per centum
That in order to bring the decimal system into use, none of the present coins need be
withdrawn from circulation, except the fourpenny piece; but, for convenience, it would be
better if the half-crown and threepenny pieces were withdrawn also ; and the copper
penny constituted of the value of five farthings.
Your Petitioners therefore pray your honourable house that no time may be lost in
carrying this into effect.
And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c.
SLADE BAKER, Justice of the Peace
for the County of Worcester.
C. P. BANCKs, Mayor.
JOHN BEDDOE, Justice.
&c. &c. &c.
Sheffield Corporation.
The Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the borough of Sheffield, in
the county of York, in council assembled,
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners are of opinion that the present system of coinage used in this country
is cumbersome, inconvenient, and intricate, and that it would be of great advantage in all
monetary transactions if the decimal system were adopted in the place of the present
complicated system.
Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your honourable House will be pleased, at the
earliest opportunity, to take such measures as to your honourable House shall seem expe-
dient to introduce a decimal coinage, by means of which the monetary transactions of the
country may be more readily carried on, and the inconvenience of the existing system be
obviated.
And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c.
WILLIAM FISHER, Jun. Mayor.
Irvine.
The Petition of the undersigned Inhabitants of the royal burgh of Irvine,
Humbly sheweth,
That your Petitioners, believing that the introduction of a decimal coinage would be of
great advantage to the country, inasmuch as it would simplify an important branch of
education, and facilitate the keeping of accounts and commercial transactions, are desirous
of seeing such a coinage introduced.
Your Petitioners think that the hundredth part of a pound should not be called a cent,
that name being already appropriated to an American coin of a different value. They are
also of opinion that the name farthing should be retained for the thousandth part of a
ound.
p May it therefore please your honourable House to take measures for the introduction of
such a coinage.
And your Petitioners will ever pray.
THOS. CAMPBELL.
JOHN GILFILLAN.
W. M*FARLANE.
&c. &c. &c.
Banbury Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the borough of Banbury,
in the county of Oxford,
Sheweth,
That the adoption of a decimal or simple arithmetic system of coins, weights, and
measures would save a large amount of labour in the daily business of banks and mercantile
establishments, and would greatly diminish the liability to error in all calculations of
quantities and value.
That there is no practical difficulty in the way of the immediate establishment of a
decimal system of coins and accounts.
That the first step to such a system has been already taken by the issue of the florin,
Imarked one-tenth of a pound.
That to complete the system there is only required the issue of two new coins—a silver
coin to be called a cent, and to be stamped one-tenth of a florin, and a copper coin to be
called a mil, to be stamped one-tenth of a cent.
That the introduction of this system does not require any change in our existing gold
COIIlS.
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
T 4
152 - APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
That the pound would still continue to be the first coin of account.
That the half-sovereign would remain, as now, a coin of change for the pound.
That the shilling, important for its use in quotations of prices and wages, would also
remain a coin of change.
'That the sixpence would remain, and would be important in change as the half-shilling.
That your Petitioners are of opinion that any other mode of decimalizing our currency
than from the pound downward to the mil is altogether impracticable.
That the pound constitutes an English national fixed idea of value and position, and is
associated with every existing contract, and every comparison of past revenue, expenditure,
and price, and must be retained.
That the decimalization of our coinage from the pound has the support of the highest
scientific and commercial authorities.
That its importance has been urged upon successive Governments by the Royal Com-
missions of 1838 and 1843, and by the Committee of your honourable House in 1853.
That America, France, and nearly the whole of the nations of Europe have already
adopted decimal systems of money and accounts.
That, whatever changes have been made in the gold, silver, or other coins of those coun-
tries, there has in no instance, been any departure from the proved convenience of the
decimal system.
Your Petitioners, therefore, humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased to
take such course as may lead to the early issue of the required coins to complete the
decimal system of moneys of accounts from the pound.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
Done at a meeting of the Council of the borough of Banbury, held the 7th day of
April, 1855,
RICHARD GOFFE, Mayor.
Durham Corporation.
The humble Petition of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Citizens of the city of Durham,
in council assembled,
Sheweth,
That the adoption of a decimal or simple arithmetical system of coins and accounts would
greatly diminish the amount of labour in all monied and mercantile transactions, and
materially lessen the complication of the present system.
That the practicability and facility with which our existing coinage may be rendered
decimal has been, in the opinion of your Petitioners, established by the Royal Commissions
and the Committee of your honourable House, by which the question has been fully
discussed and advocated.
That the adoption of the pound sterling as the unit appears to be the most advantageous
and least difficult mode of effecting this desirable national change.
That your Petitioners, therefore, pray that your honourable House will be pleased to
forward such measures as may give full effect to the recommendation of those Commissions
and of the Committee of your honourable House.
And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c.
MARK STORY, Mayor.
Blackburn Commercial Association.
The humble Petition of the Directors of the Commercial Association established at
Blackburn, in the county of Lancaster,
Sheweth,
That the general adoption of a decimal system of coins, weights, and measures would
save a large amount of time and labour in the daily transactions of manufacturing and
mercantile establishments.
That the first step to a decimal coinage has been already taken, by the issue of the florin,
marked one-tenth of a pound.
That, to complete the system, two new coins only are required, namely, a silver coin, to
be called a cent, and to be marked one-tenth of a florin ; and a copper coin, to be called a
mil, and to be marked one-tenth of a cent.
That no change in the existing gold coins will be required to complete this system.
That a decimal coinage, from the pound downwards to the mil, is supported by the
highest scientific and commercial authorities, and its importance has been urged upon
successive Governments by Royal Commissioners of 1838 and 1843, and by a Committee
of your honourable House in 1853.
That in America, in France, and almost in every nation in Europe, a decimal system of
money and accounts has been already adopted, and that whatever changes have been
made in the coins of those countries, there has not in any instance been any departure
from the proved convenience of the decimal system.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased to
take such course as may lead to the early issue of the required coins to complete the decimal
system of moneys of account from the pound.
And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.
ROBERT HoPWOOD, President.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 153
Manchester Chamber of Commerce.
The Petition of the Directors of the Chamber of Commerce and Manufactures at
Manchester.
Sheweth,
That your Petitioners repeat the conviction which they have expressed to your honour-
able House in previous Sessions that the adaptation of a decimal system to the coins,
weights, and measures of the United Kingdom would greatly increase facilities in mental
and manual operations, not only in matters of commercial concern, but in those of daily
life. r
That your Petitioners are not insensible to the difficulties which may attend this
change ; but they believe that such inconvenience will be but temporary, whilst the
advantages to arise from it will be important and lasting.
That your Petitioners approve of the recommendation of the Select Committee of your
honourable House contained in their Report of the 1st of August, 1853 (Sess. No. 851),
and especially of the retention of the pound sterling as the integer; they therefore humbly
and earnestly pray,
That your honourable House may forthwith proceed to initiate such measures as may
establish throughout these realms a system of decimal proportions in coins at the earliest
practicable period, to be followed, with as little delay as may be compatible with due con-
sideration, by a similar arrangement in regard to weights and measures.
By order and on behalf of the Directors of the Chamber of Commerce and Manufac-
tures at Manchester,
THOS. BAZLEY, President.
City of London Merchants, Brokers, &c.
The humble Petition of the undersigned Merchants, Bankers, and others, of the city of
London,
Sheweth,
That the adoption of a decimal or simple arithmetic system of coins, weights, and
measures would save a large amount of labour in the daily business of banks and mercan-
tile establishments, and would greatly diminish the liability to error in all calculations of
quantities and value.
That your Petitioners are of opinion that any other mode of decimalizing our currency
than from the pound downward is altogether impracticable.
That the pound constitutes an English national fixed idea of value and position, and is
associated with every existing contract, and every comparison of past revenue, expenditure,
and price, and must be retained.
That the decimalization of our coinage from the pound has the support of the highest
scientific and commercial authorities, and has been urged upon successive governments by
the Royal Commissions of 1838 and 1843, and by the Committee of your honourable
House in 1853.
That America, France, and nearly the whole of the nations of Europe have already
adopted decimal systems of money and accounts.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that your honourable House will be pleased to
determine that the needful measures shall be taken to prepare the way for the introduction
of a decimal system of coinage and accounts.
T. M. Weguelin, Governor of the Bank of England. Bremner & Till, 9, Billiter Square.
S. Neave, Deputy Governor of the Bank of England. Wm. Field, 27, Mincing Lane.
N. M. Rothschild & Sons, New Court. J. C. Im. Thurm & Co., 24, Lime Street.
Morris, Prevost, & Co., Gresham Street. T. C. Rohweger, 7, Fen Court.
W. W. Scrimgeour, Manager, Union Bank of London. A. & E. Rosselli, 22, Mincing Lane.
Geo. Pollard, Secretary, London Joint Stock Bank. E. Fontanella, 11, Lime Street.
M. Cutbill, Manager, Commercial Bank of London. H. Schmidt, 2, Lime Street Square.
H. Luard, Secretary, London and County Bank. Castendieck & Schlutow, 37, Mincing Lane.
London and Westminster Bank, per J. W. Henderson, Jomas Simonson & Co., 4, Savage Gardens.
Manager, 41, Lothbury. C. Moller, 2, Muscovy Court, Tower Hill.
Matheson & Co., 3, Lombard Street. James Vanhouse & Son, 37, Mincing Lane.
Palmer, Mackillop, Dent, & Co., 11, King’s Arms Yard. | Edwd. Wackerbarth & Co., Ratcliff.
Rew, Prescott, & Co., 55, Old Broad Street. |Parker, Son, and Pritchard, 131, Fenchurch Street.
Travers & Sons, 19, Swithins’ Lane. Fairrie Brothers & Co., Church Lane, Whitechapel.
Moffatt & Co., Fenchurch Street. C. A. Jonas & Co., 52, Gracechurch Street.
W. J. Hall & Co., Custom House Quay. Smith, Sundius, & Co., 76, Cornhill.
Martinez, Gassiott, & Co., Mark Lane. Andw. Maris, 3, Abchurch Lane.
Finlay, Hodgson, & Co., St. Helen's Place. Th. Merry & Son, 139, Fenchurch Street.
Sinclair, Hamilton, & Co, St. Helen’s Place. G. M. Vadelson, 21, Mincing Lane.
R. M. Holborn & Sons, 39, Mincing Lane. Wm. Turck, 34, Broad Street Buildings.
Wm. Edwd. Franks & Sons, 35, Fenchurch Street. Price, Gifford, & Co., 5, Mincing Lane.
Jas. G. Clark, 27, Mincing Lane. Richd. Quincey, Billiter Street.
Chas. Sutherland & Co., 24, Mincing Lane. Hecht Brothers, 35, Seething Lane.
J. T. De Jonge, 71, Mark Lane. Crawford, Colvin, & Co., 71, Old Broad Street.
Andw. Lange & Co., 54, Fenchurch Street. J. Thomson, S. Bonar, & Co., 7, Austin Friars.
Straith & Co., 11, Great Tower Street. J. Pattison & Son, 57%. Old Broad Street.
Barber, Nephew, & Co., 36, Fenchurch Street. Saml. Dobree and Sons, 6, Tokenhouse Yard,
U
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
154
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
Geo. Peabody & Co., 22, Old Broad Street.
Arbuthnot, Latham, & Co., Great St. Helen’s.
Jas. Watt & Co., 18, London Street.
Anthy. Gibbs & Sons, 15, Bishopsgate Street.
Forster & Smith, New City Chambers.
Small & Co., 8, Old Jewry.
Heywood & Co., 4, Lombard Sreet.
Thomson Hankey & Co., 7, Mincing Lane.
W. S. Lindsay & Co., 8, Austin Friars.
Wood, Field, & Hanbury, 25, Mark Lane.
Nic. Breebaart, 15, Commercial Sale Rooms.
Cornely & Co., 50, Lime Street.
G. B. Jennings, 2, Dunstan Court.
H. P. Rouquette & Co., 5, Lime Street Square.
Jno. Goddard & Co., 14, Mincing Lane.
S. Carroll & Son, 37, Mincing Lane.
W. Halls, 14, Mincing Lane.
Chas. Roberts, 38, Mincing Lane.
John Rains, ll, Great Tower Street.
Patry & Pasteur, 38, Mincing Lane.
Drolenvaux & Co., 14, Mark Lane.
Albert Dummler, 11, Mark Lane.
John Chapman & Sons, 8, Commercial Sale Rooms.
L. B. Schroeder, 45, Commercial Sale Rooms.
Moul & Sons, 106, Fenchurch Street.
Schafer & Brown, 48, Fenchurch Street.
Jno. Hardcastle, 22, Eastcheap.
E. W. Heckscher & Co., 53, Church Street, Minories.
J. H. Goetze, 90, Great Tower Street.
S. Cahn & Co., 3, Copthall Chambers.
W. Phippen, City Road Rice Mills.
Dav. Taylor & Sons, 76, Mark Lane.
J. Maurenbrecher, & Co., 11, Mark Lane.
Taylor & Whalley, 16, Mincing Lane.
Wilson, Rose, Graham, & Co., 74, Old Broad Street.
Peek Brothers & Co., 21, Eastcheap.
F. W. Roller & Co., 3, Love Lane.
H. S. Samuel, 133, Fenchurch Street.
Jas. Cullen, 34, Mark Lane.
Cuylits, Simond, & Co., 14, Cullum Street.
Rehder & Boldemann, 14, London Street.
Thos. Brumleu, 30, Rood Lane.
E. Fermi, 32, Leadenhall Street.
Justus Eck, 8, Philpot Lane.
Morrison, Dillom, & Co., Fore Street.
Wm. Hawes, Size Lane.
Foster, Porter, & Co., Wood Street.
J. & R. Morley, Wood Street.
B. Salomons & Sons, Old Change.
White, Son, & Co, 108, Cheapside.
Llewellin, Truman, & Hitchcock, 23, Wood Street.
Hanson, Smiths, & Stevens, 31, St. Martin’s-le-Grand.
Caldecott, Sons, & Wilcox, Cheapside.
M'Alpin & Nephew, 63, Broad Street.
Hocking, Hitchcock, & Co., 2, Gresham Street.
Ellington & Ridley. Newgate Street.
Thos. Evans, 10, Wood Street.
Lindsay & Matthew, 11, Wood Street.
Lee Brothers, 27, Wood Street.
Hancock & Humphrey, 37, Wood Street.
Bennock, Twentyman, & Rigg, Wood Street.
Vyse & Sons, Wood Street.
Munt, Brown, & Co., Wood Street.
Ward, Sturt, & Co., Wood Street.
Sturt & Sharp, Wood Street.
Dent, Allcroft, & Co., Wood Street.
Copestake, Moore, Crampton, & Co., Bow Church
Yard. -
John Wreford & Co., Aldermanbury.
Faudel & Phillips, Newgate Street.
J. B. & W. Nevill & Co., Gresham Street West.
Smith & Dewey, Wood Street.
Luckman & Cotching, 33, Wood Street.
J. T. Basset, 34, Wood Street.
Edward Bradley, 38, Wood Street.
Taylor, Rositer, & Plumb, 75, Wood Street,
G. Parker, 12, Addle Street.
Smith & Co., 5, Fell Street, Wood Street.
Phillips, Faithfull, & Palmer, Watling Street.
Brett Brothers & Co., 74, Wood Street.
Westron, Dignam, & Co., Watling Street.
Stuart & Taylor, 46, Old Change.
Fishers & Robinson, Watling Street.
Dollfus, Mieg, & Co., 50, Friday Street.
P. Inglis & Wakefield, 40, Cannon Street West. “
Howse & Mead, 19, St. Paul's Church Yard.
Cook, Son, & Co., 22, St. Paul’s Church Yard.
Hatton & Hardie, 6, Wood Street.
David Leslie, 11, Wood Street.
Hugh Jones & Co., 108, Wood Street.
J. Tracy, 56, Wood Street.
E. M. Morland & Co., 43, St. Paul’s.
hº Wollen, and Weston, 66 and 67, Wood
treet. &
Rob. Curwen & Co., 6, Gutter Lane.
Headland, Kearsley, & Okell, 42, Gutter Lane.
Storar, Fortescue, & Co., 138, Cheapside.
Jas. Prescott, 4, Cripplegate Buildings.
J. & J. Stevenson, 9, Cripplegate Buildings.
Jonas Brothers & Co., 51, Aldermanbury, City.
Ovington, Jeffreys, & Welch, 137, Cheapside.
Rob. Bentley & Co., 136, Cheapside.
Rogers & Wroe, 134, Cheapside.
John Dick, Sons, & Co., 53 and 54, Aldermanbury.
Field & Sons, 114 and 115, Fore Street. -
Thos. Mabyn, 2, Aldermanbury.
Gregory, Blenkinsop, & Co., 20, Aldermanbury.
Josh. Stephens, 64, Aldermanbury.
W. Hubbard, 64, Aldermanbury.
E. & H. , 10, Trump Street.
Gilbert & West, 4, Russia Row.
Bailey, Fox, & Co., 5, Russia Row.
Watts & Mouat, 2 and 3, Russia Row.
S. Farden & Co., 6, Russia Row.
James Hutchinson, Chairman of the Committee of
the Stock Exchange.
Fº Son, & Wood, Warnford Court, Throgmorton
Street.
John Norbury, Deputy Chairman of the Committee
of the Stock Exchange.
Geo. Webb, Secretary, Committee, Stock Exchange.
Watson & Bennett, Royal Exchange.
Mihill Slaughter, Secretary of the Railway Depart-
ment, Stock Exchange.
Linton & Clarke, 2, Royal Exchange Buildings.
David Salomons, Alderman of London.
Turner & Akroyd, 2, Royal Exchange Buildings.
Horace Wilkinson, Threadneedle Street.
Lowndes, Surgey, & Woolley, 1, Royal Exchange
Buildings.
H. & G. Towgood, 33, Throgmorton Street.
George Gandell, 1, Royal Exchange Buildings.
Bragg & Stockdale, 6, Throgmorton Street.
Clem. Uzielli, 21, Threadneedle Street.
A. Gooch, Official Assignee, Stock Exchange.
J. W. Lockwood, 3, Crown Court, Threadneedle
Street.
Henry Tudor & Son, Stock Exchange. -
W. A. Bradock, 3, Hatton Court, Threadneedle
Street.
John Powell, 41, Threadneedle Street.
P. W. Thomas, Sons, & Co., 50, Threadneedle Street.
John R. Pike, 41, Threadneedle Street. . . . .
Robt. Peake, Stock Exchange. -
Alex. Lamond, 21, Royal Exchange.
H. C. Peake, Stock Exchange.
Jas. Sutton, 22, Royal Exchange.
Chas. Creppen, Stock Exchange.
Josh. Lawrence, Auction Mart.
A. C. Stratton, Stock Exchange.
Sims & Hill, 3, Bartholomew Lane.
W. T. Gooch, 3, Bartholomew Lane.
G. B. Herbert, 15, Angel Court, Throgmorton Street.
J. H. Butler, Stock Exchange.
Langdale & Son, Stock Exchange.
Geo. Duthy, Stock Exchange.
Marsden & Shaw, Stock Exchange.
John Smith, Stock Exchange.
Geo. E. Seymour, Stock Exchange.
Josh. Clissold, Stock Exchange.
John Guillemard, Stock Exchange.
David M'Neil, Stock Exchange.
O. W. Price, Stock Exchange.
J. B. Brize, Stock Exchange.
Chas. Bennett, Copthall timbers.
Hosier Morgan, Stock Exchange.
Geo. Hazlewood, 15, Angel Court.
F. Wetherby, 15, Angel Court.
J. F. Tidcott, 10, Warnford Court.
C. Canceller & Son, 68, Old Broad Street.
Josiah Bates, Stock Exchange.
Arthur Ballantine & Co., No. 4, Austin Friars.
Thos. Upton, Stock Exchange.
J. C. & C. W. Morrice, Stock Exchange.
Levi A. Crawley, Stock Exchange.
Carr & Waller, Stock Exchange.
E. L. Hayward, Stock Exchange.
Geo. Lawford, 5, Warnford Court.
Geo. H. Jackson, Stock Exchange.
J. S. Yeats, 9, Warnford Court.
Forbes Mosse, 65, Old Broad Street.
John Watson Knight, 7, Throgmorton Street.
John Hutton, 11, Warnford Court.
Thos. Wile, 18, Throgmorton Street.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
155
Archd. Macnicoll, 12, Throgmorton Street.
Fox & Taylor, 19, Throgmorton Street.
Haes & Sons, 15, Throgmorton Street.
J. J. Arnull, Stock Exchange.
Chas. Winsdale, 17, Throgmorton Street.
Jas. G. Clarke, Stock Exchange.
A. Hudson, 4, Austin Friars.
Geo. McDonald, Stock Exchange.
, Francis Austin, Stock Exchange.
M. O. Scott, 5, Bank Buildings.
R. S. Maitland, Stock Exchange.
J. G. Bone, 5, Bank Chambers.
S. Smith & Son, 7, Bank Chambers, Lothbury, and
Stock Exchange.
Robt. Davidson, 5, Bank Chambers.
Wm. Sharpe, I, Bank Chambers.
Ball Harrison, 8, Bank Chambers.
F. E. C. L. Crofton, l, Bank Chambers.
A. C. Simpson, 23, Tokenhouse Yard.
H. Druitt, 23, Tokenhouse Yard.
T. L. Thomas, 3, Copthall Buildings.
Johnson, Longden, & Co., 22, Tokenhouse Yard.
Alfred Whitmore, 17, Change Alley.
Ewart & Bell, 3, Copthall Buildings.
W. Rickard, 3, Bank Chambers.
Forbes & Fielding, 3, Copthall Buildings.
O. Raymond, 6, Bank Chambers.
Holderness & Fowler, 23, Change Alley.
T. Myall, 3, Bartholomew Lane.
Eykyn Brothers, 22, Change Alley.
Herbert Scott, 16, Throgmorton Street.
Barry & Co., 7, Birchin Lane.
E. Routh, 16, Throgmorton Street.
Lyon & Co., 2, Birchin Lane.
John Cherry, Change Alley.
Crosley Brothers, 30, Cornhill.
Henry Caldecott, 28, Cornhill.
H. & C. Beardshaw, 6, Bank Chambers, Lothbury.
Theodore Lloyd, 57, Threadneedle Street.
Huggins & Rowsell, 14, Austin Friars.
Scrutton & Son, 81, Old Broad Street.
Wm. Morris, 80, Old Broad Street.
Geo. Harris & Sons, Change Alley.
Wm. Froom, jun., 20, Change Alley.
R. Milson, Stock Exchange.
Westropp & Foote, 75, Old Broad Street.
Chas. W. Lodge, Stock Exchange.
L. J. Baker, 75, Old Broad Street.
W. H. Bishop, Stock Exchange.
John Havelock, Stock Exchange.
Jno. Heseltine, Stock Exchange.
Baruch Castello, Stock Exchange.
Hill & Castello, Stock Exchange.
T. C. Mundey, 75, Old Broad Street.
Borthwick & Wheeler, Stock Exchange.
Wollaston & Son, 3, Adams Court.
H. G. Tatham, Stock Exchange.
M. Harman & Sons, 2, Warnford Court.
John Inchbold, Stock Exchange.
Fred. Warner, 12, Copthall Court.
Chas. W. Stokes, Stock Exchange.
Albert H. Petre, 9, Tokenhouse Yard.
Edwd. Cazenove, Stock Exchange.
Henry White, 7, Tokenhouse Yard.
H. Akroyd, Stock Exchange.
Jas. Robertson, 5, Tokenhouse Yard.
R. E. Griffith, Stock Exchange.
Alfred Bingham, Stock Exchange.
John O’Neal, Stock Exchange.
H. J. Meadows, Stock *...*
Roger Mortimer, 77, Old Broad Street, London.
Geo. Batten, Stock Exchange, and 26, Throgmorton
Street.
J. Halse, Stock Exchange.
J. P. Temple, 11, Royal Exchange.
Aubrey Browne, Stock Exchange.
J. B. Balcombe, 19, Royal Exchange.
Albert Cohen, Stock Exchange.
Chas. Jellicoe, the Crescent, New Bridge Street.
Jas. Jno. Downes, Economic Life Assurance Society.
J. M. Terry, 1, New Bridge Street, Blackfriars.
T. R. Edmonds, Legal and General Life Association
Society.
D. MacGillivray, 45, Cheapside.
Thos. W. Farnell, Legal and Commercial Assurance
Society.
Thos. Robinson, 67, Fleet Street.
Saml. Ingall, Imperial Life Insurance Company.
John Pope Cox, 67, Fleet Street.
Peter Hardy, London Assurance Corporation.
Fredk. Hendriks, Globe Insurance, Cornhill.
Jno. Goddard, Rock Life Office.
Archibald Day, London and Provincial Law Assurance
Society.
W. Lewis, Family Endowment Society.
Benj. Henderson, Liverpool and London Fire and
Life Office.
Rob. Tucker, Pelican Life Insurance Office.
Chas. Ansell, jun., National Life Assurance Society.
Jenkin Jones, National Mercantile Office.
C. J. Bunyon, Norwich Union Life Office.
W. S. Gover, British Equitable Assurance Company.
Geo. Grant, Scottish Provident Institution, London.
John Laurence, London Assurance Corporation.
J.E.C. Koch, Scottish Amicable Life Assurance Society.
W. Ratray, Victoria Life Assurance Company.
Sam. Brown, Guardian Assurance Office.
John Reddish, Royal Farmers and General Insurance
Company.
W. B. Hodge, General Reversionary and Investment
Company.
Jeremiah Lodge, Palladium Life Office.
Edwin Jas. Farren, Gresham Assurance Company.
Edwd. Cheshire, Institute of Actuaries.
G. H. Pinckard, Clerical, &c. Life Assurance Company.
Jno. Browne, Westminster Fire Office.
J. Hill Williams, jun., Hon.Sec. Institute of Actuaries.
Thos. Cave, Anchor Insurance Company.
Wº: Hepper, Assistant Secretary, Manchester Fire
Ce.
C. Ingall, Mutual Life Assurance Society.
John Beadnell, Protector Endowment Loan and An-
nuity Company.
B. Massey, Professional Life Office.
Edwd. P. Clark, Accountant to General Annuity
Endowment Association.
Joseph Marsh, National Provident Institution.
W. B. Baker, Temperance and General Life Office.
Chas. Stuart Cansdell, Solvency Guarantee Company.
Thos. Fraser, Life Association of Scotland.
H. B. Taplin, Achilles Life Office.
E. Osborne Smith, Pelican Life Assurance Society.
Geo. Thomson, Merchants’ and Tradesmen’s Life
Assurance Society.
W. S. Downes, Law Life Assurance Society.
Edwd. Fredk. Leeks, City of London Life Office.
F. A. Engelbach, Alliance Assurance Company.
J. Baker Gabb, Alliance Marine Assurance Company.
Geo. Clark, Argus Life Office.
Wm. Emmens, Church of England Assurance Insti-
tution.
J. Hobson, National Guardian Life Office.
J. J. Williams, Magnet Life Assurance.
Wm. Salt, Magnet Life Office.
W. E. Hillman, Star Life Office.
J. W. Hampton, Alfred Life Office, 7, Lothbury.
James Bennett, Provincial Insurance Company.
H. S. Davis, Alfred Life Office, 7, Lothbury.
Wm. Eykelbosch, jun., Birkbeck Life Office.
Geo. Cole, Birkbeck Life Office.
Henry Smith, Colonial Life Office.
W. T. Robinson, Minerva Life Assurance Company.
Henry Thomson, jun., Scottish Provident Assurance
Company.
John Newton, Anglo-Australian Life Assurance Com-
pany.
H.' Chris. Eiffe, General Indemnity Assurance
Company.
Henry Leigh Cox, General Indemnity Assurance
Office.
E. Daniels, Phoenix Life Assurance Company.
A. H. Bailey, 3, Crescent, New Bridge Street.
Thomas Barlow, 3, Princes Street, Bank.
Charles Mallendar, Cannon Street West.
H. W. Porter, Alliance Assurance Office, 1, Bartho.
lomew Lane.
Geo. H. Float, Monarch Life Office.
Ralph P. Hardy, Eagle Insurance Office.
Jas. Dix, National Provident Institution.
J. B. Haycraft, Unity Office, 40, Pall Mall.
S. O. Bishop, 13, Old Jewry Chambers.
G. I. Oldfield, Albion Life Office.
C. T. Racine, Victoria Life Office.
J. B. Allan, Victoria Life Office.
Charles Rouse Brown, Westminster Fire Office.
W. Howe Preston, Equitable Fire Office.
Henry Marshal, Metropolitan Life Office.
F. Allen Curtis, Mentor Life Assurance.
Wm. J. Vian, Railway Passenger Assurance.
Henry Cooke, North of England Insurance.
Chas. James Thicke, British Mutual Life Assurance.
Saml. Green, National Industrial, &c. Company.
James Godfrey, Property Protection Society.
Chs. Wm. Roe, Wellington Life Assurance Society.
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
-**
U 2
156
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
M. Saward, Promoter Life Office.
Henry Cross, Law Fire Office.
Richd. Hodson, Householders’ Life Office.
James Henry James, Middle Temple. &
Richd. Coultard, Safety Life Assurance Society.
John Thompson, New Equitable Life Assurance Com-
pany.
John Cuff, 449, Strand.
Jno. Hooke, Palladium Life Office. g
H. Membury Wakley, New Equitable Life Office.
W. C. Urquhart, St. George Assurance Company.
W. Cleland, Industrial and General Life Office.
J. Berwick, United Kingdom Life Office.
Hirsch Strother & Co., 3, Great St. Helens.
Henry Woods, 60, Mark Lane,
L. Fischel, 5, Langbourne Chambers, Fenchurch
Street.
Johnston, Taber, & Co., 32, Crutched Friars.
T. Stidstone, City Road and St. Swithin’s Lane.
Charles Dames, 30, Rood Lane, Fenchurch Street.
M.J. & R. P. Keighley, Little Tower Street Chambers.
Fredk. & Edmund Godsell, Great Tower Street,
J. R. Hook, Cullum Street.
F. P. Wilson, l, George Yard.
Wm. Roberts, 6, Idol Lane.
Wm. T. Lay, 28, St. Mary at Hill.
C. Julius Meran, 15, Bishopgate Street.
T. H. Elmenhorst & Co., 20, Mark Lane.
Kleinwort & Cohen, 4, Cullum Street.
A. & G. W. Alexander & Co., 40, Lombard Street.
Fred. Harrison, 21, Threadneedle Street.
Saml. Thos. Hill & Co., l, Royal Exchange Build-
ings.
Keeling & Hunt, Monument Yard.
Trower, Lawson & Trower, 32, St. Mary at Hill.
Hill & Underwood, 25, Eastcheap.
Henry Harvey, 77, Great Tower Street.
Ferguson & Forster, 23, Eastcheap.
Henderson & Constable, 90, Great Tower Street.
Finnis & Fisher, 79, Great Tower Street.
Pinto, Perez, & Co., 36, Crutched Friars.
Castle Theakston Stait, 64, Lower Thames Street.
H. & S. Donaldson, 35, Mark Lane.
Allan & Blake, 11, Mark Lane.
J. Copplestone, ll, Miark iane.
Osmond & Co., 60, Femchurch Street.
Henry Butler & Son, 110, Fenchurch Street.
John Lidgett & Sons, 9, Billiter Square.
Fred. Giesler & Co., 32, Fenchurch Street.
Marshall & Edridge, 34, Fenchurch Street.
Barnett Meyers, Mill Lane, Tooley Street.
Geo. Ross, Church Lane. -
H. Bade, Moorgate Street.
Wattenbach, Heilgers, & Co., 14, Mincing Lane.
Gray & Clark, 91, Great Tower Street.
Robert Hunter, 173, Fenchurch Street.
R. Thornton Brown, Old Broad Street.
Gray & Co., Mincing Lane.
C. T. Detmold, Mincing Lane.
J. A. Detmold, 20, Mincing Lane.
Geo. Rühl & Co., 23, Crutched Friars.
C. Bremer, jun., 19, London Street.
John Scott, St. Swithin’s Lane.
Litchfield & Gronsund, 2, John Street, Minories.
Chas. Avery, 135, Fenchurch Street.
Danl. Harrison, 3, Great Tower Street.
Jacob Cuocarlo, 4, Cullum Street.
Andrew Lusk & Co., 62, Ferīchurch Street.
J. K. Elay, Colonial Coffee House.
W. Baither, 23, Cullum Street.
Brand & Roser, 3, New London Street.
George Chapman, 40, Mincing Lane.
J. W. Hart, 60, St. Mary Axe.
Edwd. S. Winser, 3, St. Mary Axe.
Turck, Barclay, & Co., Broad Street Buildings.
Thomas Lloyd & Co., 2, Austin Friars.
C. Tennant, Sons, & Co., 101, Upper Thames Street,
J. & E. Williams, 137, Fenchurch Street.
Gerrit Van Houten, 12, Copthall Court.
W. Northcott, 13, Rood Lane.
'I'hos. T. Wall, 2, Great Prescot Street.
Wm. Townend & Co., 3, Brabant Court.
P. F. Maire & Co., 14, Mark Lane.
A. B. Thompson, 21, Cullum Strreet.
Warre Brothers, 32, Fenchurch Street.
G. W. Berridge, 22, St. Swithin’s Lane.
J. S. Smith, Eagle Office.
M. A. Black, 30, Essex Street.
Geo. Scott, 40, King William Street, City,
Jno. Coles, 73, Cheapside.
Jno. Parke, Phoenix.
Henry Fache, 3, Church Road.
Edward Laing, 15, Victoria Road, Holloway.
Wm. Lethbridge, St. Paul’s School, London.
J. H. Q. Brown, 70, Grosvenor Terrace, Horseferry
Road, Westminster. *
W. P. Clirehugh, Scottish National Life Office.
Wm. A. Guy, M.B., 26, Gordon Street.
Wm. Goring, Accidental Death Insurance.
John Henry Doyle, Deposit Life Office.
John Madden, Ark Life Office.
"à Henry Smabridge, Scottish Equitable Life .
Ce.
R. W. Roberts, Saxon Life Assurance Office.
Fredk. Hodge, Saxon Life Assurance Office.
John Kelday, Defender Insurance Office.
Alexr. Scott, London and Country Defender Insurance
Office.
James Francis Quartley, Brunswick Life Office.
J. Anderton, West of England Insurance Office.
J. S. Barr, Manager, National Loan Fund Society.
A. Blondel, National Loan Fund Society.
Alexr. Richardson, National Loan Fund Society.
Wm. Hulme Beeman, Accountant, New Equitable Life
Office.
R. Henry Ryland, 44, Charing Cross.
J. Graham Lowe, Agriculturist Insurance Company.
J. V. Hansley, Palladium Life Assurance.
W. P. Pattison, 7, Waterloo Place.
Henry Mortlock, 7, Waterloo Place.
Lacy Avame, United Kingdom Life Company.
Josh. Owen, 8, Waterloo Place, Pall Mall.
A. J. Russell, United Kingdom.
J. J. Smith, 19, London Street.
Tho. Whitmore & Co., 14, Mincing Lane.
Messrs. Broadhurst, 25, Cullum Street.
Robt. Carter, 14, Philpot Lane.
Wm. Loeder, l, New Broad Street.
Betham, Cerito, & Co., 4, Cullum Street.
Thomas Bowmas, Harton, Northumberland.
Edwd. Barber, 36, Fenchurch Street.
Cahlmann Brothers, 13, Austin Friars.
John Barnett, 37, Mincing Lane.
W. Adolph & Co., 9, Bury Court.
C. Devaux & Co., 62, King William Street.
Baum, Sons, & Co., 58, Lombard Street.
Samuel & Montagu, 21, Cornhill.
J. L. Simmonds, 54, Lime Street.
Fredk. Claudet, 6, Cannon Street.
Murton & Webb, 25, Mincing Lane.
Sterry, Sterry, & Co., 23, Cannon Street.
Ruck, Fenwick, & Ruck, 19, St. Dunstan’s Hill.
Octavius Phillips & Co., 91, Great Tower Street.
S. F. L. PeFeira, 91, Great Tower Street.
Farley & Boyes, 79, Great Tower Street.
Messrs. Brownings, 37, Mark Lane.
Aders & Hogg, 32, Crutched Friars.
John Bonus & Son, 18, Cannon Street.
Wyatt & Young, 10, Mark Lane.
Magalhaens, Reay, & Co., 75, Mark Lane.
Jerram & Williamson, 14, Fenchurch Buildings.
Devitt & Moore, 9, Billiter Street.
Jas. & Hy. Goss, 9, Billiter Street.
James Wardrop, 19, Little Tower Street.
Grant, Hodgson, & Co., 34, Fenchurch Street.
Henry Hall & Co., 34, Fenchurch Street.
W. Smith & Co., 9, Rood Lane.
E. Bernoulli, 4, Austin Friars.
M. Levin, 13, Trinity Square.
Syers & Co., 25, Cullum Street.
R. Polhill, 15, Mark Lane.
J. C. Quick & Co., 148, Fenchurch Street.
Geo. Croshaw, 166, Fenchurch Street.
M. F. Montz Van Swyndregt, 25, Mincing Lane.
J. P. Thol & Co., 5, Fen Court.
C. F. Pellas, 34, Fenchurch Street.
G. Waterworth, 2, Bishopsgate Street.
Sargeant & Co., 131, Fenchurch Street.
W. G. Heath, 38, Mincing Lane.
Macnaughtan & Co., 2, Hammond Court.
W. M. May & Co., 123, Fenchurch Street.
W. S. Groom, 13, Rood Lane.
M. B. Veiel, 35, Mincing Hane.
Fredk. Wienholt, 31, Lombard Street.
Eyrten Brothers, 28, Mark Lane.
J. M. Wright, 6, Mincing Lane.
Thomasset & Cuffley, 2, Great St. Helen's.
Jn. Wykes, 90, Great Tower Street.
Sydney & Wiggins, 20, Mark Lane.
Robert Geo. Clements, Bethnall Green.
Wm. Martin Smith, Cross Lane, St. Dunstan’s Hill.
Long & Cornell, 65, Mark Lane.
S. J. James, 41, Lime Street.
Geo. Ballard, 21, Westbourne Street, Hyde Park.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
157
W. E. Bland, 42, Mincing Lane. &
G. H. Levinary, 2, Royal Exchange Buildings.
J. Englehardt, 9, Billiter Square.
Henry S. Neville, 131, Fenchurch Street.
Charnley & Abraham, 21, Harp Lane, Tower Street.
Geo. R. Gardner, 22, Harp Lane, Tower Street.
Moore & Wilson, 23, Harp Lane, Tower Street.
Matthews & Luff, 21, Water Lane, Tower Street.
J. Seymour & Sons, 24, Lime Street.
Henry Lloyd Morgan, ll, Langbourn Chambers.
Leighton, Williams, & Co., 110, Fenchurch Street.
D. Power, 110, Fenchurch Street.
W. G. Clinkere, Plaistow, Essex.
Henry Bois, 110, Fenchurch Street.
Thomas Melladew, 34, Great Tower Street.
Wm. Wilkinson, 34, Great Tower Street.
Edw. Coombe, 10, Mark Lane.
Hollyer & Beeman, Coal Exchange.
Hooper & Parkinson, l, Seething Lane.
T. S. Capel, Bridewell Wharf.
Mitchell & Co., 8, Cross Lane, St. Mary-at-Hill.
E. Brandeis & Co., 5, St. Dunstan’s Hill.
T. H. Hancock, 2, Idol Lane, Tower Street.
Thos. Schofield, 2, Cross Lane, St. Mary Hill.
Gowa & Co., 113, Leadenhall Street.
Bauer & Co., 113, Leadenhall Street.
Bennetts & Co., 23, Billiter Street.
Feltoe & Co., 6, Billiter Street.
Wm. Prosser, 98, Leadenhall Street.
Falconer & Mercer, East India Chambers, Leadenhall
Street.
Fredk. Desnaux & Co., East India Chambers, Leaden-
hall Street.
Barrows & Reid, East India Chambers, Leadenhall
Street.
Smith & Theobald, 115, Leadenhall Street.
Thomas Halstead, 2, Riches Court, Lime Street.
J. Wise Lawson, 50, Lime Street.
Barton, Gash, & Co., Riches Court, Lime Street.
Reid & West, 147, Leadenhall Street.
Laroche, Nainby, & Co., 147, Leadenhall Street.
J. A. Phillips, 52, Lime Street.
W. Stuart, Walbrook.
Jas. L. Bennet, 17, Brook Lane.
J. Isaacson & Co., Norfolk Street.
R. Thomas, Bishopsgate.
R. C. Williams, Wardrobe Place, Doctors’ Commons.
Lewis, Nathan, & Co., 7, Birchin Lane.
J. Hay D. Lauhenau, 2, Royal Exchange Buildings.
T. Giffalin, 31, Broad Street Buildings.
James Shields, 4, Bishopsgate Church Yard.
Barter & Co., Langbourn Chambers.
J. White, Old Broad Street.
Jas. Hosking & Co., Sun Court, Cornhill.
E. C. Tomars, 72, Old Broad Street.
Henry Hoffmann, 7, Broad Street Buildings.
Wm. Beard, 75, Old Broad Street.
Thomas Smith, 43, Mincing Lane.
Geo. Hoskins, 38, Bishopsgate Street.
Mathiesen & Ritter, 17, Gracechurch Street.
Owst & Peacock, Bermondsey Wall.
S. Odell, 65, Lower Thames Street.
J. Fatt, Hampden House, Romford.
Rislon & Moore, Worthing.
A. Barnsey, 24, Bedford Street, Bedford Row.
William Bartlett, 8, Lime Street Square.
F. H. Bishop, Bishopsgate Street,
F. W. Gerhard, Cannon House, Cannon Street.
George Belloks, 2, Wellington Street, Goswell Street.
Wm. Morrison, 23, Fenchurch Street.
W. P. Moffatt, 2, Bartholomew Close.
J. R. Wigmore, Bass, & Co., 3, Wharf, City Basin.
A. Jaclim, 4, Street.
James Silon, Thurlow Place, Bethnal Green.
E. C. Hyde, 91, Watling Street.
Edwd. Jay, 79, Whitecross Street, St. Luke’s.
D. Pooles, Chester Place, Regent’s Park.
J. Nott, Seymour Place.
Cortazze, Garland, & Co., 2, Ingrain Court, Fen-
church Street.
Alfred D. Custle, Upper Thames Street.
A. Montagu, 3, Winchester Buildings.
Edwd. Schlesinger & Co., 8, George Yard, Lombard
Street.
John Alger Worth, Bridge Dock, Limehouse.
Jos. Adams, Limehouse.
J. G. Harris, 18, Union Grove.
George Hinks, Gould’s Hill.
J. B. Vaughan, 56, Borough.
Wymark & Co., 3, Philpot Lane.
M. T. Bishop, 30, Queen Street.
Smith & Beck, 6, Coleman Street.
Toppin & Clark, 7, Coleman Street.
J. H. Page, 8, Coleman Street.
W. T. Tabernacle, 19, Coleman Street, City.
Dodge, Bacon, & Co., 22, Coleman Street.
M. Nickel & Co., 25, Coleman Street.
Richard Field, 34, Coleman Street.
Walford, Fairer, and Harrison, 27, Lawrence Lane,
Cheapside.
A. Jephroden & Co., 8, Gresham Street.
Jas. Bodger, 8, Gresham Street.
Wm. Sanderson, 7, Gresham Street.
Benjn. Smith & Sons, 8, London Wall.
Sabel & Co., 80, Coleman Street.
Alfred Hill, 35, Milk Street, Cheapside.
Grosvenor, Chater, & Co., Cannon Street West.
Millington & Hutton, 32, Bridge Row.
Baker, Tucker, & Co., 30, Gresham Street.
J. & R. Robinson & Co., 30, Milk Street.
Keyte, Gunn, & Kidd, 4, Church Court, Old Jewry.
John B. Beale, 17, Dalston Place.
Ross, Mitchell, & Co., 13, Gresham Street.
Edmunds & Rourke, 4 and 5, Gresham Street.
Kay and Richardson, 6, Carey Lane.
H. Bateman, 6, Carey Lane.
H. H. Cannan, 18, Aldermanbury.
W. Pennell, 3, Guildhall Chambers.
Isaac Nicholson, 24, Basinghall Street.
Edward Lane, 6, Aldersgate Street.
Waller, Ede, & Co., 103, Wood Street.
Rogers, Bentley, & Rogers, 103%, Wood Street.
John Paterson, 104, Wood Street.
Fenton, Son, & Co., 120, Wood Street.
Beloe & Spreckley, 124, Wood Street.
J. H. Fisken, 3, Gresham Street.
J. Homan & Co., 2, Milk Street.
J. P. Press, 2, Milk Street.
Engle & Samuels, Mumford Court, Milk Street.
J. Peet & Sons, Mumford Court, Milk Street.
Price, Coker, & Co., 16, Gresham Street West.
James J. Norris & Co., King Street, Cheapside.
Gunnell & Quarell, King Street, Cheapside.
A. McNurran, 24, King Street, Cheapside.
A. J. Worthington & Co., 8, King Street, Cheapside.
Thomas Baker & Son, 17, King Street, Cheapside.
Samuel Mullet, Gresham Street. W
M. Andrade, 8, Cripplegate Buildings.
Edwd. Tovey, 38, Noble Street.
Jno. Andrew & Co., 8, Noble Street.
Fredk. Neville & Co., 18 and 19, Noble Street.
Jno. Ross, 3, St. Paul’s Church Yard.
Walsh & Brierley, Stannary Works, Halifax, 25,
Noble Street, London.
John Finigan, 30, Noble Street.
Somervell & Burr, 35, Noble Street.
F. Brown, 26, Aldermanbury.
Castle, Jones, & Wortley, 7, Love Lane.
Hoyle & Hanson, 69, Aldermanbury.
W. & H. Edwards, 9, Aldermanbury.
A. J. Vieweg, 15, Coleman Street.
Gebhardt, Rottmann, & Co., 24, Lawrence Lane.
Robert Gardner, 46, Lime Street.
Alexr. Gillespie, 3, Billiter Court.
C. B. Harrington, 1, Lime Street Square.
Francis Lyne, 12, Mark Lane.
W. Burnley Hume, 145, Leadenhall Street.
Stephen Kennard & Co., 27, Austin Friars.
Edwd. King, 27, Austin Friars.
Block, Grey, & Block, 10, Old Broad Street.
J. Jaffray & Co., 34, Great St. Helen's.
J. Frankau & Co., 6, Great St. Helen’s.
Alf. Gibson & Co., 9, Great St. Helen’s.
G. C. Findlay, 31, Great St. Helen’s.
Hirsch, Strother, & Co., 31, Great St. Helen’s.
H. J. Smith & Co., 30, Great St. Helen’s.
Oliver & Field, 3, Great St. Helen’s.
Edwd. Higgin & Co., 30, Great St. Helen’s.
Graham, Tobias, & Co., 30, Great St. Helen’s.
T. J. Walton & Co., 30, Great St. Helen’s.
Hy. Dresser, 14, Great St. Helen’s.
Thos. Roope, 15, Great St. Helen’s.
W. T. Curtis, 17, Great St. Helen’s.
H. C. Beaton, 17, Great St. Helen’s.
John O. Moore, 25, Great St. Helen’s.
A. W. Scaife & Co., 20%, Great St. Helen’s.
R. Thurburn, 5, Crosby Square.
F. & G. Garraway & Co., 3, Crosby Square.
A. H. Novelli, 2, Crosby Square.
J. M. J. Baillie, 15, St. Mary Axe.
J. B. Moens, 15, St. Mary Axe.
D. Q. Henriques & Brothers, 2, Jeffrey’s Square,
St. Mary Axe.
Joseph Dodson, 4, Jeffrey’s Square, St. Mary Axe.
No 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
|U 3
158
APPENDIX To REPORT OF THE
- No. 8.
Petitions to House
of Commons.
J. Sparke, Prowse, & Hall, 17, Gracechurch Street.
H. Larchin, 17, Gracechurch Street.
Geo. L. Munro & Co., 33, Gracechurch Street.
P. Dickenson, 33, Gracechurch Street.
G. B. Harrison, 24, Great Tower Street.
John L. Percy, 26, Great Tower Street.
Per pro J. W. Burdon, Henry Healy, l, New London
Street, City. -
W. R. Chalmers, 7, Little Tower Street, City.
Patrick Garvey, per James Gardner, 20, London
Street, City.
David Kidd & Son, 70, Mark Lane.
R. T. Maughman & Co., 70, Mark Lane.
A. Lamb, 67, Mark Lane. .
Clode & Baker, 78, Mark Lane.
Woolner & Wylie, 79, Mark Lane.
F. Pickert, 79, Mark Lane.
Robt. Finnis & Co., 58, Fenchurch Street,
J. H. Elliott, 4, Martin’s Lane.
S. H. Day & Co., 21, Pudding Lane.
Jno. & Jas. Adams & Co., 11, Pudding Lane.
Thos. Pope & Wheeler, Coal Exchange.
Wm. Shally Page, Coal Exchange.
Wm. Falk, 5, St. Dunstan’s Hill.
Thos. Gladwish, 5, St. Dunstan’s Hill.
John Fowler & Sons, 5, Little Tower Street.
James Laughton & Son, 33, Leadenhall Street.
Jos. Acheson, 102, Leadenhall Street.
Field & Co., per John Croft, 102, Leadenhall Street.
John Janson Croft, 102, Leadenhall Street.
J. Hobson & Son, Leadenhall Street.
Hotchkin, Mobbs, & Prowse, Leadenhall Street.
J. H. Gamble & Co., Leadenhall Street.
W. Kuper & Co., Leadenhall Street.
F. D. Deare & Co., 51, Lime Street.
J. Cawood, 51, Lime Street.
James Scott & Son, Riches Court.
Stephen & Pinder, 47, Lime Street.
Henry Taylor, East India Chambers.
Caruthers & Battes, 127, Leadenhall Street.
W. Balchin, 52, Lime Street.
A. Dunn, 48, Lime Street.
Ionides Sgouta & Co., 17, Gracechurch Street.
A. Wigdahl, 65, Lower Thames Street. 'i
N. D. Zunof, 31, Broad Street Buildings.
A. Holmes, 101, Upper Thames Street.
Edma. Dowling, King Street, Tower Hill.
Saml. Bickley, Lloyd’s.
Dean Convelu & Co., New Broad Street.
B. Nolay, Lombard Street.
Richard Baker, 54, Lime Street.
A. O. Robinson, 25, Philpot Lame.
N. Zygomalas, l, Winchester Buildings.
James Clark, 25, Billiter Street.
S. Haynes Angier, Coal Exchange.
H. & J. Enthoven & Sons, 8, Moorgate Street.
Bateman & Bramwell, 36, Cornhill.
Price & Brown, 4, Change Alley.
Joseph de Yrigoyte, 13, Webbe Court Terrace, New
Kent Road.
Stephen Henry, 19, London Wall.
Denham & Smart, ll, St. Bennett Place, Gracechurch
Street.
Alfred W. Potter, Lloyd’s.
Algernon E. Sidney, 2, Woburn Place.
L. Rodomnartri & Co., 37, Finsbury Circus.
A. Sevastopulo & Sons, 9B, New Broad Street.
Schelus Nurt, 35, Street.
E. H. Tupp, Adam Court.
M. G. Lavers, 1, Mincing Lane.
Miguil Yglesias, 9, King’s Arms Yard.
Chas. Watken, Kingsland Road.
K. C. Luscombe, Westminster.
F. Redfern, 47, Ludgate Hill.
T. A. Jordan, 20, Pump Row.
Wm. Jones & Sons, Islington.
Edward Granger, 40, Wilson Street, Finsbury.
Rd. Quincey, 22, Billiter Street.
Chas. D. Solon, Dalston.
John A. Laine, Guernsey.
W. Gold, Great St. Helen’s.
John Carter, Fleur-de-lis Street.
Wm. M'Cannon, Rotherhithe.
Goodliffe & Smart, 17, Gracechurch Street.
Patrick C. Don & Co., 33, Clements Lane.
Windle & Co., 10, Gould Square.
Goegg & Beringer, 11, Coleman Street.
Thomas Nicolls Roberts, l 1, Coleman Street.
Fredk. Cutten, 21, Coleman Street.
Wm. Burtenshaw, 45, Fore Street.
Matthew Gande, 45, Fore Street.
Stauffer, Son, & Co., 12, Old Jewry Chambers.
Hill, Hudson, Brothers, 4, Lawrence Lane.
James Phillips, 8, Lawrence Lane.
James L. Hicks, 6, Gresham Street.
F. Alexander, 36, Gracechurch Street.
George Cobden & Co., 36, Gresham Street,
D. Aloos, 20, Milk Street.
Samuel Moore, 72, Coleman Street.
Chambers & Ellwood, 29, Gresham Street.
A. Hofmann & Co., 15, Gresham Street.
James Taylor, 14, Gresham Street.
R. C. Dixon, 26, Budge Row.
Joseph Bouch, 2, Milk Street.
Robert T. Lawton, 37, Milk Street.
J. & G. Johnston, 17, Ironmonger Lane.
Honey & Son, 14, Ironmonger Lane.
Charles Barrow, 52, Coleman Street, City.
Scholefield, Brown, & Co., l, Gresham Street.
Clewley & Co., 3, Buckingham Street.
Chas. W. Bourne & Co., 5, Carey Lane.
Welsh, Margetson, & Co., 17, Cheapside.
Bradbury, Greatorex, Beall, & Co., 6, Aldermanbury.
Thos. Tarsey & Co., 19, Aldermanbury.
Francis Ward, 32, Aldermanbury.
Wm. Jno. Barron, 66, Aldermanbury.
George J. Cowan, 69, Aldermanbury.
J. Gibb, 69, Aldermanbury.
Hy. Wilkinson, 70, Aldermanbury.
W. Milne, 72, Aldermanbury. -
Dufour Brothers & Co., 19, Gresham Street West.
Powell, Bridgwater, & Co., 69, Wood Street.
Crofton & Rippon, 61, Bartholomew Close.
Saxton, Waddington, & Carey,87, Bartholomew Close.
Jas. Bamford, Milk Street.
Laurie & Wilson, Watling Street.
Davis, Brothers, & Co., Milk Street.
John Edwards, Gresham Street.
Wm. Hare, 1, King Street, Cheapside.
Wm. Rider, 6, Castle Court, Lawrence Lane.
Thos. Lawes, 5, Castle Court, Lawrence Lane.
Green & Drayton, 79, Newgate Street.
Scales & Herbert, 9, Wood Street.
Jas. Savage, Sons, & Co., 40, Noble Street.
C. R. Collins, 39, Noble Street.
Alfd. Bonnet & Co., 38, Noble Street.
W. Whitworth & Son, 8, Hart Street, Wood Street.
James Clay & Sons, Sowerby Bridge.
Peyton & Iles, Noble Street.
W. Crawley, 1, Noble Street.
Horatio H. Child, 1, Noble Street.
C. Puzzie, 1, Noble Street.
Thos. Sanderson, l, Noble Street.
Waddington & Sons, 1, Coleman Street.
Ray, Glaister, & Co., 19A, Coleman Street.
Alex. Fyfe & Co., 2, Lawrence Lane.
H. & E. Marriott, 6, Lawrence Lane.
Lilwall & Poole, 7, Lawrence Lane.
H. H. Lindsay, East India Chambers.
Sherer, Waugh, & Meryon, St. Mary Axe.
D. Humphreys & Co., 29, Mark Lane.
Geo. Claridge, 10, Mark Lane.
Crimp & Ward, 7, Old Broad Street.
Glover Brothers, 34, Great St. Helen’s.
Dauglish, White, & Hankey, 34, Great St. Helen's.
Alfred Monsell, 34, Great St. Helen’s.
Idle & Pardy, 2, Great St. Helen’s.
J. Z. Lutiger, 3, Great St. Helen’s.
Edmd. Buxton & Co., 9, Great St. Helen's.
Josh. V. Mumford, 31, Great St. Helen’s.
George Drevar, 31, Great St. Helen’s.
Pegler Brothers, 3, Great St. Helen's.
B. C. T. Gray & Sons, 31, Great St. Helen's.
Tindall & Co., 30, Great St. Helen’s.
Dangar & Co., 30, Great St. Helen’s.
R. H. Leech, 8, Great St. Helen’s.
Perrin, Freeston, & Co., 15, Great St. Helen's.
E. Denny & Co., 29, Great St. Helen’s.
J. M. Stodart & Co., 29, Great St. Helen’s.
Richd. B. Tugman, 26, Great St. Helen’s.
Christiansen & Rapp, 3, Crosby Square.
J. & G. Jeffkins, 2, Crosby Square.
Richd. Buck & Co., 1, Crosby Square.
Bell, Budden, & Co., 2, Jeffrey’s Square.
Seymour, Peacock, & Co., 17, Gracechurch Street.
Peter Tindall, Riley, & Co., 17, Gracechurch Street,
Chas. Walton & Sons, 17, Gracechurch Street.
Fredk. Gregory, 17, Gracechurch Street.
Per pro F. W. Brown & Co., A. H. Malyon,
17, Gracechurch Street.
H. Nesbitt, Allhallows Chambers, 49, Lombard Street.
Ashton & Co., 39, Lombard St. -
Alexr. Plimpton, 33, Gracechurch Street. . .
Bennet, Brown, & Co., 34, Gracechurch Street.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION 159
No. 9.
CIRCULAR To BANKERs.
HER Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring how far it may be practicable and
advisable to introduce the principle of decimal division into the coinage of the United
Kingdom, having under consideration the effect of the introduction of a Decimal Coinage,
and in particular of the scheme recommended by the House of Commons’ Committee, and
known as the £ and mil scheme, on the business of bankers, are desirous of obtaining the
opinion of the body of bankers of all descriptions throughout the kingdom on the following
Ol IltS :—
º to the advisability of introducing the decimal principle, in the proposed form, so
far as it may affect the conduct of their accounts,
Is it your opinion that the proposed system will enable bankers to keep their
accounts with greater ease and convenience—as regardslabour, time, and accuracy—
or the reverse ? -
To assist in forming a practical judgment on the point, a table is annexed, which shows
the nearest equivalent value in mils of every sum from 1d to ll. By this it will be seen
that the number of figures required under the proposed decimal system to express the
successive sums from 1d. to 10s. exceeds considerably the number required for the same
purpose under the present system ; whilst to express the successive sums from 10s. to 11.
there is an excess, though a much smaller one, against the present and in favour of the
Decimal System.
With the same view a copy is also annexed of a mercantile account as kept under the
present system, and as it would appear under the proposed Decimal System.
The advantages of the Decimal System will of course consist in getting rid of the
troublesome process of converting pence into shillings and shillings into pounds, in the
elementary processes of calculation, and thus reducing the process of account-keeping to
the simplicity of the Arabic notation.
On the other hand you will observe the different form in which sums will be stated under
the Decimal System, as compared with the present system, e. g.:—
S. & mils.
O 6 - gºe {-e - 25
0 1 1 gº tº- - - 45
1 8 dº se º – 83
2 10 º gº - - 14]
6 5 # * es gº - 320
10 0 cº- sº 8- - 500
12 6 tºº gº {- > – 625
I7 II sº sº & - 895
The Commissioners are desirous of ascertaining your opinion of the effect which this
change in the form of stating different sums will have upon your account-keeping, as
regards—
1. Facility and accuracy of entering sums.
2. 55 of copying and recopying.
3. 59 of calling over.
It has been urged that conciseness of expression is more important in account-keeping
than facility of calculation, inasmuch as the same sum, it is said, is written or uttered ten
or twenty times in its transit through the banker's books, and that in this respect the
decimal is deficient as compared with the present system.
The Commissioners are desirous of obtaining your opinion as to the validity or invalidity
of these considerations:—
Do you think that all or any of them would be found practically important in the daily
working of your business P
Do you think that any difficulties arising from them would overbalance the conve-
niences you anticipate from the adoption of a Decimal System of Coinage and account
keeping?
Upon a general view of all the considerations, do you desire a change from the present
to a Decimal System, as–
1. Conducive to increased convenience in your own business 2
2. As calculated to promote the convenience of all classes generally in their retail
transactions, in their account-keeping and calculations, both written and mental,
and in their dealings with the fractional parts of the 9 sterling?
If your opinion is in favour of the introduction of the decimal principle into our system
of coinage and account keeping, -have you any observations or suggestions to offer respecting
the nature and extent of the difficulty which must attend the transition, in your accounts,
from the present to the Decimal System, and the best means of overcoming that difficulty
iastly, do you think that any other Decimal System of Coinage would be more
convenient than that recommended by the Parliamentary Committee ?
Should any further explanations be deemed requisite to assist you in forming a satisfac.
tory judgment on this subject, the Commission will at all times be ready to communicate
with you.
No. 9.
Circular to
Bankers.
sº-wº
U 4
f
!
TABLE showing the Equivalent VALUEs of all SUMS between 1a, and 11, in the PRESENT SystEM, and the £ AND MIL System, omitting Fractions of a Mil.
S. d. mils, s. d. 7mils. s. d. mils. S. d. mils. S. d. mils. S. d. 'mils. S. d. mils. s. d. mils. s, d. mils. s. d. mils.
0 l - 4 1 1 - 54 2 1 - 104 3 1 - 154 4 1 - 204 5 1 - 254 6 1 - 304 7 1 - 354 8 1 - 404 9 1 - 454
0 2 – 8 1 2 - 58 2 2 - 108 3 2 - 158 4 2 - 208 5 2 - 258 6 2 - 308 7 2 - 358 8 2 - 408 9 2 - 458
O 3 - 12 I 3 - 62 2 3 - 112 || 3 3 - 162 4 3 - 212 || 5 3 - 262 6 3 - 312 7 3 - 362 8 3 - 412 9 3 - 462
O 4 - 16 1 4 - 66 2 4 - 116 3 4 - 166 4 4 - 216 5 4 - 266 6 4 - 316 7 4 - 366 8 4 - 416 9 4 - 466
O 5 - 20 1 5 - 70 2 5 - 120 3 5 - 170 4 5 - 220 5 5 - 270 6 5 - 320 7 5 - 370 8 5 - 420 9 5 - 470
0 6 - 25 I 6 - 75 2 6 - 125 3 6 - 175 4 6 - 225 5 6 - 275 6 6 - 325 7 6 - 374 8 6 - 425 9 6 - 475
O 7 - 29 1 7 - 79 2 7 - 129 3 7 - 179 4 7 - 229 5 7 - 279 6 7 - 329 7 7 - 379 8 7 – 429 9 7 - 479
0 8 - 33 I 8 - 83 2 8 - 133 3 8 - 183 4 8 - 233 5 8 - 283 G 8 - 333 7 8 - 383 8 8 - 433 9 8 - 483
O 9 - 37 1 9 - 87 2 9 - 137 3 9 - 187 4 9 - 237 5 9 - 287 6 9 - 337 7 9 - 387 8 9 - 437 9 9 - 487
O 10 - 41 1 10 - 91 2 10 - 141 3 10 - 191 4 10 - 241 5 10 - 291 6 10 - 34.1 7 10 - 391 8 10 - 441 9 10 - 491
0 1 1 - 45 1 11 - 95 2 11 - 145 3 11 - 195 4 11 - 245 5 11 - 295 6 11 - 345 7 11 - 395 8 11 - 445 9 11 - 495
1 () - 50 2 O - 100 3 O - 150 4 O - 200 5 O - 250 6 O - 300 7 () - 350 8 O - 400 9 O - 450 10 0 - 500
s. d. mils. s. d. mils. s. d. mils. S. d. amils. s. d. mils. S. d. nils. s. d. mils. S. d. mils. s. d. mils. ºf s. d. mils.
10 1 - 504 1 1 1 - 554 12 1 - 604 13 1 - 654 14 1 - 704 15 1 - 754 16 1 - 804 17 1 - 854 18 1 - 904 || 0 19 1 - 954
10 2 - 508 11 2 - 558 I2 2 - 608 13 2 - 658 14 2 - 708 15 2 - 758 16 2 - 808 17 2 - 858 18 2 - 908 || 0 19 2 – 958
10 3 - 512 11 3 - 562 12 3 - 612 13 3 - 662 14 3 - 712 15 3 - 762 16 3 - 812 17 3 - 862 18 3 - 912 || 0 19 3 – 962
10 4 - 516 11 4 - 566 12 4 - 616 13 4 - 666 14 4 - 716 15 4 - 766 16 4 - 816 17 4 - 866 18 4 - 916 || 0 19 4 - 966
10 5 - 520 II 5 - 570 12 5 - 620 13 5 - 670 14 5 - 720 15 5 - 770 16 5 - 820 17 5 - 870 18 5 – 920 || 0 19 5 - 970
1O 6 - 525 11 6 - 575 12 6 – 625 13 6 - 675 14 6 - 725 15 6 - 775 16 6 - 825 17 6 - 875 18 6 - 925 || 0 19 6 - 975
10 7 - 529 11 7 - 579 12 7 – 629 13 7 - 679 14 7 - 729 15 7 - 779 16 7 - 829 17 7 - 879 18 7 - 929 || 0 19 7 - 979
10 8 - 533 11 8 - 583 12 8 - 633 13 8 - 683 14 8 - 733 15 8 - 783 16 8 - 833 17 8 - 883 18 8 - 933. 0 19 8 – 983
10 9 - 537 11 9 - 587 12 9 - 637 13 9 - 687, 14 9 - 737 15 9 - 787 16 9 - 837 17 9 - 887 I8 9 - 937 || 0 19 9 - 987
10 10 - 541 11 10 - 591 12 10 – 641 13 10 - 691 14 10 - 741 15 10 - 791 16 10 - 841 17 10 - 891 18 10 - 941 || 0 19 10 - 991
10 11 – 545 11 11 - 595 12 11 - 645 13 11 – 695 14 11 - 745 15 11 - 795 16 11 - 845 17 11 - 895 18 11 - 945 || 0 19 11 - 995
1 1 0 - 550 12 () - 600 13 O - 650 14 O - 700 15 O - 750 16 O - 800 17 O - 900 18 O - 900 19 O - 950 || 1 0 0 - 1,000
ld. to 10s. 10s. to 11. Total.
Number of figures required in present system }
to express all the sums from wº - 250 380 630
Do. in gé and mil system tº a * > º 335 361 * 696
:
g

DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 161
SIR, - - Decimal Coinage Commission, 5th July, 1856.
I AM directed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into Decimal Coinage,
to forward to you the enclosed paper, which has been drawn up by them on that part of
the inquiry which relates to the business of bankers, as it appears to Her Majesty's Com-
missioners very desirable that the subject should be fully investigated and discussed by the
body of bankers, and by all other parties keeping extensive accounts, whether in large or
small sums. They request you to have the goodness to submit to the Committee of
Bankers of the enclosed paper, and to take whatever other steps may appear to you
best calculated to promote this object; and they hope that you will be enabled to furnish
them with the opinion of the body of bankers with whom you may be in communication
as to the practicability and advisability of establishing a decimal in place of the present
system of accounts and coinage, and with any further observations which may be calcu-
lated to assist Her Majesty's Commissioners in forming a correct judgment on this
important subject.
I have, &c.
G. S. LEFEVRE,
To A. W. Robarts, Esq., Assistant Secretary.
Chairman of the Committee of London Bankers.
To Alderman Salomons,
Chairman of the Committee of London Joint Stock Bank.
To A. Blair, Esq.,
Treasurer of the Bank of Scotland, Edinburgh.
To the Bank of Ireland, Dublin.
REPLIES.
From the COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVATE CITY BANKERS.
SIR, Fenchurch Street, 17th July 1856.
IN reply to your letter of the 5th instant, addressed to the Chairman of the
Committee of the London Bankers, I beg to send you the following resolution :
A meeting of the private City bankers having been convened at the Clearing House,
it was resolved—
“That in the opinion of this meeting, after having considered the paper submitted
to them by Her Majesty's Commissioners on the subject of the Decimal Coinage,
whether in relation to their own accounts in particular, or regarding it as a question of
public expediency, the inconveniences of the change would so far overbalance the
advantages contemplated, that the proposed alteration is undesirable.”
-- I am, Sir,
G. S. Lefevre, Esq. - Your obedient servant,
THOS, ALEX. HANKEY,
From the COMMITTEE of JOINT STOCK BANKS.
SIR, Lothbury, February 1857.
I HAVE been in consultation with my own Board, as well as the Joint Stock
Banks associated with us, on the subject of the proposed introduction of the Decimal
Coinage, agreeably to the request of the Commissioners, and probably I cannot give better
the general tone of feeling amongst them than by quoting the resolution adopted by the
Board of the London and Westminster Bank on the subject :—“ Resolved, that it does
“ not appear that the Board collectively can give any opinion on this difficult subject.”
Of course I submitted the papers to the various banks, and from their answers I gather
that they hardly seem inclined to venture to give any decided opinion on the subject
submitted to them. I am under the impression that they have been somewhat led to
this course by feeling that the subject is now in excellent hands, being entrusted to a
Commission composed of men of high attainments, who have both practical experience
as well as scientific knowledge to guide them in the decision to which they are to come.
I may, however, venture to say, that looking at the fact that the Decimal System has
many advantages over that now in use, and that it has been adopted by many States, it
would appear to be desirable to introduce it into England also, if the change could be
effected without producing too great a disturbance in the present mode of monetary
computation. On looking through the papers sent to serve as models of the proposed
Decimal System, it appears that making the pound the unit has the advantage of being
No. 9.
Circular to
Bankers.
162 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 9.
Circular to
Bankers.
most in harmony with our present mode of computation, and would therefore cause the
least disturbance in making the change, and for that reason be more readily acceptable
to the community at large. -
I feel I have many apologies to make for the delay in sending this report, but I beg
you to believe it has arisen from unavoidable circumstances.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient servant,
G. S. Lefevre, Esq., DAVID SALOMONs,
Assistant Secretary, Chairman of the Committee
Decimal Coinage Commission. of Joint Stock Banks,
From the BANK OF SCOTLAND.
SIR, Edinburgh, 16th July 1856.
I AM favoured with your letter of the 8th instant, and I have also received a
packet of printed papers relative to the proposed Decimal Coinage.
I have forwarded these papers to the Scottish banks as you wish.
You will probably receive direct replies from the different banks, but if any communi-
cation for the Commissioners is made to me I will forward it.
I enclose the reply of the Bank of Scotland to the different queries of the Com-
missioners, and also the copy of a letter which I addressed in 1854 to Sir John Herschell
in reply to similar inquiries. +
Our opinions remain unaltered. I have received certain information that in a case
of book-keeping, in which entries of the same description were made by the two different
systems of notation, no advantage was experienced in the use of the Decimal System
above that in ordinary use, and you will observe that we not only anticipate such a
result, but also positive disadvantage.
The decimal system may be very useful in scientific calculations, and in some particular
processes connected with monetary transactions. It seems to us, however, that when no
complaint of an existing system is heard, Schemes of assimilation should be viewed with
considerable doubt and jealousy, and more especially so if they meet with opposition.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
To G. S. Lefevre, Esq., ALEX. BLAIR.
Assistant Secretary, Decimal Coinage Commission,
11, Manchester Buildings, London.
ANSWERS to the COMMISSIONERS QUERIES.
BANK OF SCOTLAND.
1st. Is it your opinion that the proposed system will enable bankers to keep their
accounts with greater ease and convenience 2
1st. As regards labour—no ; there being a larger number of figures in the mil
system ; it will consequently require greater labour.
2nd. Time—no ; besides the larger number of figures the summation will be heavier.
In a banker's books the columns are generally long, the summation of the
shillings and pence, although requiring to be converted, is lighter than that of a
like column of three figures in a row.
3rd. Accuracy—in this there appears to be little difference either way; shillings and
pence are apt to be misplaced and errors made in conversion. The mils may
likewise be placed improperly below each other in the columns.
2nd. The advantages gained in account keeping, by getting rid of the conversion of
pence into shillings and shillings into pounds, seems to be the only benefit derivable from
the proposed change, and it appears to be confined entirely to book-keeping.
In receiving or paying money at the counter a disadvantage will arise from the high
range of figures required to express a very small value; or if coins are introduced carrying
so many mils, the mental conversion of them will be more troublesome than that of pence
and shillings.
3rd. From the foregoing it is inferred that,
1st. The facility and accuracy of entering sums are not improved by the proposed
change.
2nd. In copying and recopying the labour must be greatly augmented.
3rd. The calling over will be more difficult and occupy longer time.
4th. The present conciseness of expression is more advantageous, both for book-keeping
and for counting money, than the Decimal System now under consideration.
5th. In the daily working of a banker's business it is very important that the
greatest conciseness of expression be used.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 163
A Decimal System, combining expression as concise as shillings and pence, would
perhaps be advantageous in some respects; but the difficulties expected to arise from the
system now proposed would overbalance any conveniences derivable from it.
6th. Not desirous of any change so far as this bank’s business is concerned.
It is considered very doubtful, in retail transactions, facility, accuracy, and despatch
in account keeping and ordinary calculations, both written and mental, would be
promoted by a Decimal System ; and we are of opinion that if the advantages held out
were in a degree realized, yet that the benefit would be much outweighed by the
lengthened and extensive trouble and disorder which would accompany the change.
T. A., Cashier.
|Bank of Scotland,
16th July 1856.
To Sir JoHN F. W. HERSCHEL, Master of the Royal Mint, London.
SIR,
Bank of Scotland, Edinburgh, 13th December 1854.
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter of 20th ult, addressed to
this bank.
We are of opinion that a Decimal Coinage may not be in itself undesirable, but that
in the case of this country, in which a scheme of coinage and a system of accounts are
not only established but form so important a part of our national economy, the change
would not in any degree compensate for the expense, trouble, and, we fear, prolonged
disorder which would accompany it.
In our opinion, therefore, it is neither necessary nor expedient that any change should
be attempted.
I do not propose to enter upon the arguments in favour of or against a Decimal
System. I shall therefore only observe that we should regret extremely the introduction
of any lower denomination of coin than pence into bankers' payments or accounts;
and that we should anticipate much confusion and loss from the adoption of any scheme
of Decimals with which we are acquainted.
We are not aware that any objection lies against the present florin as a coin, except
from its similarity to the half-crown, whereby frequent mistakes occur.
The public in this part of the empire have shown no preference for a Decimal Coinage,
actuaries excepted.
From the very inconvenient scarcity of silver we hope that Government will not allow
the question of a Decimal System to interpose any delay to a large and increased issue of
silver coin of the present denominations.
I may mention that I have had some communication with our Deputy Governor, Sir
George Clerk, upon the subject, and that he assents to the inexpediency of any change.
I also have permission from Mr. Tooke to send you a copy of a late letter from him
stating his opinion, which you will find in favour of the existing system. -
I have, &c.
(Signed) ALEX, BLAIR.
To ALEXANDER BLAIR, Esq.
Eastern Bank of Scotland,
SIR, Dundee, 24th July 1856.
I HAVE been favoured with your letter in reference to this matter, with its
enclosure.
The little consideration I have been able to give to the question, in regard to its bearing
on our business as bankers, inclines me to the opinion that the change proposed in the
mode of keeping our accounts from the present clear and simple method to that of the
Decimal System is undesirable ; and that, if introduced, it would lead to much incon-
venience, and, for a time, to great confusion.
It would not economise time or labour, as the number of figures required by the
Decimal System would be increased. To prove this, I have made the enclosed extract
from one of our customer's accounts, selected at random from our books, made out
according to the two systems, and as a fair specimen of a tradesman’s account.
Bankers offer great facilities to their customers in the drawing of cheques, which are
freely made use of, more particularly since the introduction of the penny stamp; any
proposition, therefore, that would tend to increase labour, is much to be deprecated.
I consider the present mode of keeping accounts to be plain, simple, and concise, and
that in these respects the adoption of the Decimal System would not be an improvement,
the advantage of the latter being more gºn in questions regarding mere calculation
2
No. 9.
Circular to
Bankers.
164 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 9.
Circular to
Bankers.
which do not often arise in the daily routine of a banker's business. Coupling this with
the proposal of introducing at the same time a Decimal Coinage which, in the practical
carrying out of the new system, would entail much mental calculation and labour, as well
as increase the risk of making mistakes, I am all the more disinclined to a change, and
I do not think it is desired by any considerable section of the community.
I am, &c.
D. SIDEY, Manager.
Bank of Scotland, Edinburgh,
To ALEXANDER BLAIR, Esq., Treasurer, Bank of Scotland.
Edinburgh and Glasgow Bank,
SIR, Edinburgh, 16th July 1856.
I HAVE to acknowledge receipt of your favour of the 10th instant, enclosing copy
of letter from Mr. George S. Lefevre, Assistant Secretary to the Decimal Coinage Com-
mission, with the printed memorandum therein referred to. Having attentively
considered the subject, both now and formerly, I beg to state that we are decidedly
against the introduction of the Decimal System of notation. But to speak more in
detail :
1. We are of opinion that the introduction of such a system would not give the ease
and convenience contemplated by its promoters, but, on the contrary, would entail greater
labour and trouble in the keeping of our accounts. The conciseness of the present mode
of expression is much preferable to the Decimal System, and the new mode would lead
to great indefiniteness in idea of value compared with the present.
2. In the table annexed to the printed memorandum, showing the equivalent values
in the present system, as compared with that proposed, the number of figures used in the
present mode is exaggerated by counting the cyphers put down to represent blanks, while
cyphers are never used in our practice.
3. Apart from the greater labour which we anticipate from the introduction of the
new system in the keeping of our accounts, we are persuaded that for a very long time
to come after the introduction of the measure great trouble would be experienced in
explaining the accounts to our customers.
4. From the knowledge we have of the opinions of the public of Scotland generally
on this subject, we are satisfied that its introduction would be most unpopular, and
would create great confusion and discontent in the transaction of business. The simple
introduction of the florin called forth a good deal of feeling, and if the Decimal System
were compulsory the public discontent would be very great.
No system has yet been proposed that we would prefer to the present.
It will be obliging if you will communicate this opinion to the Commission along with
your own.
I am, &c.
CHA. JAS. KERR, Manager.
No further answers have been as yet received from Scotland.
From the BANK OF IRELAND.
No answer beyond an acknowledgment has as yet been received from the Bank of
Ireland or other Irish Banks.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
165
ANSWER to QUERY as to Prices and Quantities of Articles of Consumption sold to the
No. 10.
Poorer Classes.—Circulated by the Commission.
No. 1.
No. 10.
Purchases by
Poorer Classes.
* * *-*.
Present Price.
Highest Price in the
Course of last Year.
Lowest Price in the
Course of last Year.
Smallest Quantity
made up with
present Price.
per lb. per Oz. per lb. per oz.
Tea, best quality - 4- 5/0 0/4 5/0
Ditto, second quality, now
most sold º - 4/0 0/3 4/0
Ditto, third quality, most
sold before April last - || 3/4 to 3/8 |0|2% to 0/23 3/4 to 3/8
Ditto, cheapest - - 3/0 0/2} 3/0
Moist sugar, best quality
very fine - - 0/5% | }lb. 0/23 0/7% #lb. 0/2
Ditto second quality - 0/5 }lb. 0/13 0/7 #lb. 0/13
Ditto, third quality - 0/4} #lb. 0/2}
Do. cheapest, good brown 0/4 #lb. 0/1 0/6% }lb. 0/3%
Coffee, best quality, very
fine - tº - 1/8 0/1} 1/8
Ditto second, nothing sold
much better - - 1/6 0/1} 1/6
IDitto third, large sale
to middle class - 1/4 0/1 1/4
Ditto fourth * º 1/2 tº- 1/2
Ditto cheapest, large sale
to the poor - - 1/0 0/03 1/0
Cheese, good, very fine - 0/9 #lb. 0/2} 0/9
Ditto, medium - tº- { % #lb. 0/2 | 0/7 to 0/8
Ditto, cheapest - - 0/6 }lb. 0/1% 0/6
Butter, good, finest - 1/2 2 oz. 0/1 1/2
Ditto, cheapest - * 0/10 | #lb. 0/2} 0/10
Pepper, good white - 1/8 0/1} 2/0 0/1}
Ditto, cheapest black - 1/2 0/1 1/2 0/1
Rice good º -> 0/4 #lb. 0/1 0/5 #lb. 0/1%
Ditto cheapest - - 0/2 #lb. 0/0% 0/3 #lb. 0/03
per lb. per Oz.
4/8 0/3% # oz. 0/1
3/8 0/23 # oz. 0/3
3/0 to 3/4 0/2} # oz. 0/1%
2/8 0/2 1 oz. 0/24
0/4} #lb. 0/23 3 lb. 0/1%
0/4 #lb. 0/1 $1b. 0/24
0/3} | }lb. 0/13 | }lb. 0/1, 2 oz. 0/0+
1/6 0/1% 1 oz. 0/13
1/4 0/1 2 oz. 0/24
1/2 --- 1 oz. 0/1, # oz. 0/0%
1/0 0/03 *
0/10 |2 oz. 0/13 || 2 oz. 0/1%, 1 oz.0/03
0/9 - #lb. 0/2+
0/7 to 0/8 #lb. 0/2, 2 oz. 0/1
0/5 #lb. 0/13
0/11 2 oz. 0/1
0/8 #1b, 0/2}
1/4 0/1 1 oz. l;
1/0 0/03 2 oz. O/1#. 1 oz. 0/1
0/3 #lb. 0/03 }lb. 0/1
0/1} | }lb. 0/0% #lb. 0/0+
Liverpool,
13th February 1856.
SIR,
HENRY ISIRKHAM,
9, Roe Street, Liverpool.
ANY trifling alteration in the first cost of the articles in bond, say from 1d to 2d. per
lb. on tea, from 1s, to 5s. per cwt. on coffee, raw, and from 1s, to 2s. or 3s. per cwt. on
sugar, would make little or no change in the fixed retail prices, but the articles would be
reduced slightly in quality, and the prices keep steady ; it is not as in the wholesale market
that the same article may be sold at different times to separate parties at different prices,
but that different articles are sold at the same price by all parties; for instance, the extent
of one man's business over another, and the competition always in the trade induces some
tradesmen to give quite the difference named above in a quiet and steady market, hence
the retail prices do not change with every turn in the first or wholesale market, but the
articles sold at different times and at different shops are not of the same quality.
I hope you will not consider me intruding by offering these few remarks, as I wish to
show that the articles are rather accommodated to the price than the price to the articles.
Any information I can at any time give you in reference to the Decimal Coinage will be
most willingly given by
A. Smith, Esq.
Your obedient servant,
HENRY KIRKHAM.
X 3
I66
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 10.
Purchases by
Poorer Classes.
cºmmº
Tea, best quality
,, 2nd do. -
,, 3rd
, cheapest
do.
Moist Sugar, best
2nd
33
cheapest
35
Coffee, best quality
,, 2nd
, 3rd
, cheapest
Pepper, good
Rice, good
, cheapest
No. 2.
Highest Price in Lowest Price in Smallest Quantity
º the Course of last the Course of last made up
Present Price, Year. Year. with present Price.
per lb. per oz. per lb. per oz. per lb. per oz.
S. d. d. s. d. d. s. d. d. d.
4 8 3}| 4 8 3; 4 4 3}| # oz l
4 0 3 || 4 0 3 || 3 8 2} + , §
3 8 2#| 3 8 2# 3 4 2} + , 14.
2 10 | – || 2 10 | – || 2 8 || – ii. 84
O 5 lb. 1+| 0 7 | }lb. 1;| 0 4} }lb. 2% i 2 3 1}
0 4} }lb. 24 — * 0 4 #lb. 1 º-
0 4 #1b. 1 || 0 6 #lb. 1 #| 0 33 lb. 1; 4 » I
1 8 1} 1 8 1}| 1 8 1} 1 oz. 1}
1 6 º 1 6 wº- 1 6 -º -
1 4 1 || 1 4 1 || 1 4 I 1 > l
1 O 03|| 1 0 0; 1 0 # 1 : 0;
1 4 1 || 1 4 1 || 1 4 l 1 > l
O 4 | }lb. 1 || 0 4 | }lb. 1 || 0 4 | }lb. 1 4 lb. I
o 2 | jib. 1 |o 2 | fib. 1 || 6 2 | fib. 1 || || "... i

SIR,
FREDERICK WELLS STRUGNELL.
109, Edgware Road.
109, Edgware Road, Feb. 15, 1856.
PERHAPS some little explanation to the enclosed is necessary. The necessities of the
poor make them keen calculators, so that when prices cannot be divided without a frac-
tional loss to them, they avoid them, if possible, either by selecting a higher or a lower
price, and such is the competition among tradesmen that they will submit to a temporary
loss, in order to make a popular price, for no price that cannot be divided without a frac-
tional loss to the small consumer can long be sustained; for instance, generally the leading
prices among them are 4s. for tea, 1s. 4d. for coffee, and 4d. for sugar.
A. Smith, Esq.
I have, &c.,
F. W. STRUGNELL.
P.S. Where the smaller quantities are not carried out, they are rarely sold.
STATEMENT furnished to the Commissioners by Messrs. DAWBARN and SoNs, Grocers and
Drapers, Wisbeach.
NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS.

Above | Above | Above | Above
Not ex- 6d. and | 1s. and 2s. 6d. 5s. and | Above | Total Total
*º- ceeding not ex- not ex- and not not ex-
ceeding ceeding exceed- ceedin
6d. ls. g 2s. 6 g ing 5s. 10s. #| 10s. Customers. Amount.
December 22, 1855. £ s. d
Grocery tº- 34 37 76 55 58 30 290 º
Drapery - 52 62 || 85 68 41 49 357
86 99 || 161 | 123 99 || 79 647 157 5 4
February 9, 1856.
Grocery º 24 24 4l 47 23 12 171
Drapery - 51 44 98 53 33 48 327
75 68 139 100 56 60 498 1 16 18 8
March 1, 1856.
Grocery wº 33 30 64 27 23 13 190
Drapery º 62 44 93 51 34 41 325
95 74 157 78 57 54 515 103 5 2+.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 167
*,
1855. DRAPERY.
Number Number Number Number
of Amount. Of Amount. Of Amount. of Amount.
Customers Customers. Customers. Customers.
.#3 s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d.
334 67 10 9 431 100 19 2 373 64 4 2 39] 100 19 O
342 69 5 9 405 98 11 7 368 52 19 2 354 92 8 2
351 52 15 9% 378 83 2 9 356 62. 1 4 350 100 1 1 2
338 65 7 3 399 100 I 5 8 4.18 7O 9 1 353 114 10 8
3O3 54 5 2 389 103 || 7 3 390 65 13 6 411 90 6 7
365 67 6 11; 394 82 2 1 296 51 1 0 305 72 12 2
349 78 11 8 418 123 7 2 256 44 4 2 367 90 1 1 2
295 57 19 9 377 73 l 4 223 39 4 0 31.1 64 5 10
305 50 5 11 414 88 O O 285 78 2 9 300 72 5 5
356 73 15 O 391 81 17 7 338 73 11 6 366 92 10 3
331 62. 13 5 385 63 9 | 316 82 2 1 286 58 11 9
367 76 16 1 382 62 12 6 408 1 19 7 O
346 77 14 4 390 84 7 3 420 122 7 8 18,506 |4018 O 1
390 79 10 6 340 62 18 9
Average of each Customer, 4s. 4d., or ‘21712.
1855. GROCERY.
Number - Number Number Number
of Amount. Of Amount. of Amount. of Amount.
Customers. Customers. Customers. Customers.
£ s. d. £ s. d. .# s. d. .# S. d.
154 26 8 6 161 3 5 8 149 27 18 11} 165 32 10 6
164 26 4 5% 154 29 5 9 132 32 13 3 17O 31 10 6
157 25 12 16; 192 26 19 3 138 33 10 6 157 30 3 4
155 24 14 10 1.59 28 7 8 152 29 14 6 168 40 7 7
141 22 14 O 155 28 11 4 129 30 12 8 1.59 43 0 2%
162 24 18 5 158 27 10 10 106 29 18 11 143 28 11 10
145 24 18 10 157 25 9 10 134 26 4 4. 153 29 9 8
141 22 13 O 144 23 18 2 I 15 24 18 O 148 25 15 2
119 16 5 6 164 29 7 6 133 31 9 7 188 45 4 3
152 27 10 3 197 35 I 5 151 36 4 8 295 64 15 1
141 28 3 8 178 29 3 3 141 30 19 O 154 31 17 O
143 31. 3 11 152 27 O 8 184 37 O 8
157 28 4 4 140 27 9 8 210 39 1 6 8,147 |1570 8 1
189 30 9 10 142 27 3 O
Average of each Customer, 3s. 10}, or 19275.
GROCERY. DRAPERY.
Number of Number of
1855. Customers. Amount. Customers. Amount.
January - tº 1,342 .#210 12 2 2,965 £828 14 8
February - tº 1,192 194 16 4 4,393 728 13 4
March gº * = 1,409 252 4 7 5, 183 926 1 11
April gº $º 1,441 228 O 6 5,481 1,068 2 11
May * gº 1,442 237 16 l 6,050 1,220 17 7
June gº sº 1,633 263 O 2 6,137 1,046 19 1
July tº e gº 1,297 254. 1 11 5, 198 799 16 34
August gº gº 1,244 278 16 9 5,211 748 17 4%
September º 1,431 277 O 2 4,627 880 9 104
October gº 1,533 283 || 8 5,856 1,256 4 10%
November tº 1,322 286 7 11 5,511 1,166 0 5
December - sº 1,732 32O 15 O 4,906 933 15 8
Total sº 17,018 £3,087 3 3 61,518 sé11,604 14 O
Average of each Customer, Grocery, 3s, 7%d., or 1814 Drapery, 3s, 9}d, or
* 1886.
No. 10.
Purchases by
Poorer Classes.


*-e


AN ACCount of the NET PUBLIC INCOME of the UNITED KINGDOM of GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND in the Year ended the 31st Day of December 1855 (after abating
the Expenditure thereout defrayed by the several Revenue Departments), and of the ACTUAL ISSUES or PAYMENTS within the same Period, exclusive of the Sums
applied to the Redemption of Funded or paying off Unfunded Debt, and of the Advances and Repayments for Local Works, &c.
–
|
|
:
INCOME. TOTAL EXPENDITURE.
.# S. d. Aft s. d. & s. d
hºw INTEREST and Management of the Permanent Debt - 22,792,594 4 11*
CUSTOMs 20,987,752 7 9 Unclaimed Dividends paid º º cº- tºº 173,240 17 5
N Terminable Annuities º - --> tºº t- 3,868,293 5 11
ExCISE - *- º - tºº * - | * * 0 || injue, Bonds, 1854 º * * 217,000 O O"
º Interest of Exchequer Bills, Supply - tºº º 560,635 4 9
STAMPS - º - --> - 6,805,604 18 O Ditto - - "Deficiency - E -9 §§§6 3 o
Ditt - tº Ways and Means - º 26,749 13 9
TAXES (Land and Assessed) º tº - - 2,945,784 4 1 1ttO ays an 3,7 27,647,899 11 9
PROPERTY TAx gº- -> - tº tº- 13,718,185 5 2 CHARGES on CoNSOLIDATED FUND :
Civil List - tº- -> tº- º -> -> 396,570 O 0
º - º Fº 2
POST OFFICE º - - 1,137,219 8 5 Annuities and Pensions - º - 340,991 14 8
* Salaries and Allowances - -> tº tº gº I62,697 7 3
CROWN LANDS – º gºs - gº wº- 280,515 15 9 Diplomatic Salaries and Pensions - ge - iº9.344 13 10
PRODUCE of the SALE of OLD STOREs, and other *} 522,138 9 7 || Courts of Justice " º - tº- tº ſº- 493,082 18 10
RECEIPTS - -> -> tºº gº - 4-4-3 Miscellaneous Charges on the Consolidated Fund -> 182,118 16 6
MONEY received from the EAST INDIA CoMPANY - - 60,000 O O 1,724,705 11 1
MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTs including Imprest and *} 402.768 18 10 - SUPPLY SERVICES:
Monies -> - tº - -> -> 2 Army - º -> º t- * - || 14,545,059 0 0
e § Navy - " - tº - tºº - - | 19,014,708 O 0
- TN * gº º º º A: 5
UNCLAIMED DIVIDENDS (received) 115,149 12 1 Ordnance & º º - º - 9, 633,290 O 1
£ 63,364,605 2 Vote of Credit (additional Expenses, War with Russia) - 5,200,000 9 O
Miscellaneous Civil Services - - dº - 6,741,126 7 10
ExCEss of Expenditure over Income in the Year 21,141,183 8 Hy
ended 31st December 1855 - - ! 3 * * * 3 55,133,183 7 11
48 84,505,788 10 9 ift 84,505,788 10 9
* EXC1 I DC d B - £ s. d. - -
5xcluding Interest on Donations and Bequests - * - 19,557 11 3 & • ‘G ‘Tº e -
And including Sinking Fund, 15 & 16 Viet. c. 23. - £6,906 14 7 93 Figures of Shillings and Pence.
No. 11.
DECIMAL COIN AGE.-No. 1.
And Interest on Exchequer Bonds, A.D. 1853
ºn-
36 11,503 5 0
18,409 19 7
#

No. 2.
AN ACCOUNT of the NET PUBLIC INCOME and ExPENDITURE of the UNITED KINGDOM for the Year ended 31st December 1855, in Pounds, Florins, Cents, and Mils.
INCOMDE. TOTAL. EXPENDITURE.
f f.c.m. £ f.c.m. £ f.c.m.
CUSTOMs tº º * . º tº - 20,987,752°388 [+3] | INTEREST of Permanent Debt º tºº - |22,792,594" 246 [+3]
Unclaimed Dividends paid - * > º 173,240°871 [+}]
ExCISE - º sº º tº - - 16,389,486 150 Terminable Annuities - º - 3,868,293°296 [+]]
Interest on Exchequer Bonds, 1854 --> - 217,000
STAMPS 4 º' º º º º -> 6,905,604'900 Do. --> Bills, Supply º - 560,635' 238 [+}
Do. 33 ,, Deficiency º º 9,386°250
LAND and ASSESSED TAXES { } º tº - 2,945,784'204 [–4] Do. 55 , Ways and Means - 26,749,088 [3]
º - 27,647,899° 589 [+3]
IPROPERTY TAx º º º --> - || 13,718, 185’258 [—#} CHARGES on CONSOLIDATED FUND :
POST OFFICE º se --> º - 1,137,219'421 [+º] | Civil List º --> tº a - 396,570
Annuities and Pensions º sº º 340,991 733 [–#]
CROWN LANDS º & # º & º -> 280,515'788 [+3] Salaries and Allowances - tº º 162,697° 363 [+3]
Diplomatic Salaries and Pensions t- sº 149,244' 692 [+3]
SALE OF OLD STORES, &C. t- º tº- 522,138° 479 [-º] | Courts of Justice - ſº- º ę 493,082'942 [+3]
Miscellaneous Charges º º º 182,118' 825
EAST INDIA COMPANY º - º 60,000 1,724,705'555 [+ #]
MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTs º tº- º 402,768'942 [+3] SUPPLY SERVICES :
Army t- Eº º tº - || 14,545,059
UNCLAIMED DIVIDENDS received tºº - 115,149' 604 [—#| Navy º - e- º tº- 19,014,708 -
- Ordnance • ºs -> - - || 9,632,290 004 [—#|
.8 || 63,364,605. 134 [+º] | Vote of Credit (War Expenses) tº º - 5,200,000
- Miscellaneous Civil Services º tº- - 6,741,126° 392 [+}
ExCEss of Expenditure over Income in the Year
ended 31st December 1855 -
l
- - ſ
...ſº
21,141,183.406 [+*}]
84,505,788' 540 [+º]
55,133,183° 396 [+º]
—w
£ | 84,505,788' 540 [+º]
Being 90 Figures of Decimals.
Notz.—The fractions in brackets mark the surplus or deficiency between this account and the corresponding account in £ s. d.
t
:
3.
gº
###
§ 3 ;
5 :- -
# 3 S
3,
No. 12.
A CoMMERCIAL ACCOUNT between NEw YoFK and LIVERPool, in the PRESENT and DECIMAL SYSTEMS.
LVT. PRESENT SYSTEM. Cr.
~. T wº { º
* tº-mºmºmº tº-ººm' Interest Columns. tº-mº games tº-ºº-ºº: — Interest Columns. gº-ººrºº
* *_
17 g t | | ..) h
1839. £ s. d. | 1839. Days. A s. d. | p s. d. | 1839. £ . s. d. | 1839. Days. A s. d. | # s. d.
| June 29 |To balance brought down || 7,752 3 11 || June 30 | 184|195 7 11 || 7,752 3 11 July 17 | By 1 bill per Brown Bros. *
July ; 2 | Transfer per . Crafts & Co. - - 229 11 4 || Sept. 18 [104 || 3 5 6 229 11 4 |
7 - & Stell - - 1,278 4 3 | Nov. 2 | 59 || 10 6 7 | 1,278 4 3 2, 22 Pt. do. - * 303 18 2 ,, 23 99 || 4 2 5 3O3 18 2
55 55 Do. do. - || 326 0 1 || Oct. 21 || 71 || 3 3 5 326 0 1 || Aug. 5 Pt. bill do. - - || 320 16 6 || Oct. 7 || 85 || 3 14 9 320 16 6
25 25 Do. do. - 2,426 17 6 Nov. 5 56 18 17 9 2,462 17 6 35 55 Pt. do. do. º- 200 18 4 ,, , ; 85 2 6 9 200 18 4
3 y 1. draft per Coates ,, 16 1 do. do. - e- 208 18 4 ,, 17 | 75 2 2 11 208 18 4
& Co. * tº- 185 O O , 7 || 54 || 1 7 4 185 0 0 || Sept. 4 Transfer per do. - || 353 15 8 June 30 |184 || 8 18 5 353 15 8
55 9 Transfer per Crafts Oct. 5 Pt. bill do. - 4,824 2 10 || Dec. 7 || 24 | 15 17 2 || 4,824 2 10
& Stell - - | 1,068 12 6 , 9 52 || 7 12 3 | 1,068 12 6 3, 16 Do. do. do. - - || 1,102 11 11 ,, 19 | 12 || 1 16 3 | 1,102 11 11
, 8 1 draft per W. B. Hug- 1840.
gins & Co. º 500 O O ,, 4 57 || 3 18 l 500 O O || Nov. 6 Do. do. do. - || 5,820 14 4 || Jan. 8 || 8 || 6 7 6 || 5,820 14 4
, 11 Do. do. -> 600 O O , 8 53 || 4 7 1 600 O O 52 23 Do. do. do. - ge 340 3 8 ,, 8 || 8 || 0 7 5 340 3 8
2, 16 Transfer per Crafts 1839.
b & Stell - sº 34() 3 8 ,, 15 46 || 2 2 10 340 3 8 , 7 Received do. cash - 600 O O | Nov. 7 || 54 || 4 8 9 600 O O
,, 20 Do. do. º 559 2 2 , 24 37 2 16 8 559 2 2 1840. a'
,, 25 DO. do. gº 676 7 7. ,, 27 | 34 || 3 3 0 676 7 7 ,, 15 Pt. bill do. - º 559 2 2 || Jan. 17 | 17 | 1 6 O 559 2 2
Aug. 10 Do. do. º 514 9 8 || Dec. 9 22 1 11 O 514 9 8 ,, 20 1 do. do. º 676 7 7 ,, 22 || 22 || 2 0 9 676 7 7
,, 14 Do. do. 190 13 7 ,, 15 16 || 0 8 4 190 13 7 1839.
2, 21 Do. do. ſº 145 18 10 ,, 20 | 11 || 0 4 5 145 18 10 32 35 Transfer do. - 171 10 O June 30 [184 || 4 6 5 171 10 O
Dec 2 Do. do. º 629 13 8 April 2 | 93 || 8 0 6 629 13 8 * e 1840.
,, 31 Interest Contra - - | - tº- - - | – || 13 1 1 0 ,, 25 Pt. bill do. º #: 9 8 || Jan. 27 | 27 | 1 18 0 514 9 8
25 25 Commission on Dec. 2 Do. do. do. - || 145 18 10 | Feb. 3 || 34 || 0 13 7 || 145 18 10
9,477 l. 3s. 6d. at 52 p 5 Do. do. do. -> 190 13 7 ,, 3 || 34 || 0 17 9 190 13 7
1 per cent. - º 94 15 5 2, 31 Interest per contra - || - ~... - {- º º 8 0 6
33 y? Do. 15,438!. 7s. 3d. 23 2 9 |Balance of interest - I - º tº gº - 209 17 10
at # per cent. º 57 17 10 33 35 Do. carried down - || 1,148 10 4 || - - || – || - - || 1,148 10 4
99 y? Charges account º 115 8 4 º
?? 5.5 Postages tº º 4 16 5
,, , ; Interest * , º 209 17 10 || - - º - tº- 482 15 10
17,712 3 3 || - - || - 268 17 8 || 17,712 3 3 17,712 3 3 268 17 8 |17,712 3 3
1839. | --------- F1 | | Dec. 31 | By balance carried to # == | 1839. M |
Dec. 31 To balance brought down 1,148 10 4 Dec. 31 || - - - 1,148 10 4 | Ledger No. 2, fol. 1230 1,148 10 4 || Dec. 31 | | - º 1,148 10 4
:

A COMMERCIAL ACCOUNT between NEW YORK and LIVERPOOL in the PRESENT and DECIMAL SYSTEMS.–comtimwed.
Dr. DECIMAL SYSTEM. Cr.
- same-s smºsºmeºmº- Interest Columns. --> -** esºmsºmºmº- -*= Interest Columns. -*-
1839. £ fis. mls. 1839. Days. 42 fis. mls. £ fºs. mls.|| 1839. 4 fis. mls. Days. & fis. mls. At fis. mls.
June 29 || To balance brought down 7,752 1 96 || June 30 |184 |195 3 96 || 7,752. 1 96 || July 17 | By 1 bill per Brown Bros. 1839.
July 2 | Transfer, per Crafts - & Co. - º 229 567 Sept. 18 |104 || 3 2 75 229 5 67
* & Stell - - | 1,278 2 12 | Nov. 2 59 || 10 3 29 | 1,278 2 12 ,, 22 Pt. do. - - 303 9 08 ,, 23 99 || 4 1 21 303 9 O8
33 y 3 Do. do. - 326 0 04 || Oct. 21 || 71 || 3 || 71 326 0 04 || Aug. 5 Pt. bill do. - º 320 8 25 || Oct. 7 || 85 || 3 7 37 32O 8 25
9) 95 Do. do. - || 2,462 8 75 Nov. 5 56 18 8 87 2,462 8 75 || , , Pt. do. do. - - 200 9 16 , , ,, 85 2 3 38 200 9 16
, 5 1 draft per Coates ,, 16 I do. do. - - 208 9 16 ,, 17 | 75 || 2 1 46 208 9 16
& Co. - - 185 O O ,, 7 || 54 || 1 3 67 185 0 0 || Sept. 4 Transfer per do. - 353 7 83 June 30 184 || 8 9 21 353 7 83
, 9 Transfer per Crafts Oct. 5 Pt. bill do. - - || 4,824 1 42 | Dec. 7 || 24 || 15 8 58 4,824 1 42
& Stell - - | 1,068 6 25 , 9 || 52 || 7 6 12 | 1,068 6 25 ,, 16 Do. do. do. - 1,102 5 96 ,, 19 || 12 || 1 8 12 | 1,102 5 96
, 8 1 draft per W. B. Hug- 1840.
gins & Co. - 500 0 O , 4 || 57 || 3 9 04 500 () () || NOV, 6 Do. do. do. - - || 5,820 7 17 | Jan. 8 || 8 || 6 3 75 5,820 7 17
, 11 Do. do. - || 600 0 0 | , 8 || 53 || 4 3 54 600 0 O 5 ° 93 1)o. do. do. - || 340 1 83 ,, 8 || 8 || 0 8 71 340 1 83
,, 16 Transfer per Crafts 1839.
Hº & Stell - - 340 1 83 ,, 15 46 || 2 1 42 340 1 83 , 7 Received do. cash - 60() O O | Nov. 7 || 54 || 4 4 37 600 0 O
} ,, 20 Do. do. * 559 1 08 , 24 || 37 2 8 33 559 1 08 1840
'S) ,, 25 Do. do. - 676 3 79 ,, 27 34 || 3 l 50 676 3 79 ,, 15 Pt. bill do. tº 559 1 08 || Jan. 17 | 17 || 4 3 O 559 1 08
Aug. 10 Do. do. - || 514 4 83 Dec. 9 22 || 1 5 50 514 4 83 || , 20 1 do. do. - - || 676 3 79 , 22 22 2 0 37 676 3 79
,, 14 Do. do. - | 190 6 79 , 15 16 || 0 4 17 | 190 6 79 1839.
,, 21 Do. do. -> 145 9 42 ,, 20 | 11 O 2 2] 145 9 42 y 5 33 Transfer do. tº 171 5 O June 30 |184 || 4 3 21 171 5 O
Dec. 2 Do. do. - 629 6 83 April 2 | 93 || 8 0 25 629 6 83 $º 1840.
, 31 Interest Contra * | * tº º º- - || 13 5 50 ,, 25 Pt. bill do. " tº 514 4 83 || Jan. 27 | 27 1 9 0 514 4 83
95 py Commission on Dec. 2 Do. do. do. * - 145 9 42 | Feb. 3 || 34 || 0 6 79 145 9 42
9,4771. If 75mls, at } } }} Do. do. do. º 190 6 79 ,, , || 34 || 0 888 190 6 79
1 per cent. - º 94 7 71 ,, 31 Interest per contra - || - tº- - --> tº- 8 O 25
29 2 3 Do. 15,438l. 3f.62mls. y 3 y 9 Balance of interest - || - - - - - 209 8 92
at # per cent. tº- 57 8 91 9.5 x 9 Do. carried down - | 1, 148 5 17 | - - tº- cº- 1,148 5 17
99 95 Charges account - 115 4 17
99 93 Postages - tº 4 8 21
99 95 Interest --> - 209 8 92 || - ps -> tº- º 482 7 92
17,712 1 61 || - - 268 8 83 || 17,712 l 61 1839. 17,712 1 61 268 8 83 17,712 1 61
1839. == | 1839. tº-mº ºmammºnsummer Dec. 31 | By balance carried to == 1839. Tºmºmºrºus I wºme
Dec. 31 || To balance brought down | 1,148 5 17 | Dec. 31 - - 1,148 5 17 Ledger No. 2, fol. 1230 1,148 5 17 | Dec. 31 tº e º- 1,148 5 17
N.B.-This account is made out to the 31st December, and the interest on such drafts on the debit side as are not then due become a credit, and, vice versá, those on the credit side become a debit. Such drafts are marked with red
ink [italic in print), and charged and credited interest per contra.
i
i
:
S

172 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 13.
Decimal Bullion
Weights.
No. 13.
DECIMAL BULLION WEIGHTS.
LETTER from THOMSON HANKEY, Esq. to LORD MONTEAGLE.
MY DEAR LORD MONTEAGLE, Dank of England, 10th January 1856.
I CAN only find one report made to me, as Governor of the Bank, by Mr. Miller,
who attended at that time particularly to the department of the Cashier’s Office in
connection with our Bullion Office, relating to the then proposed change of weights from
the subdivisions of the troy pound to the decimal fractions of the troy ounce. I send you
a copy of this report. The change was made, as you are I believe aware, because I had
ascertained beyond all question that our old system of calculation was a very complicated
one, and could be greatly simplified; the change was not made, however, without a great
deal of discussion and consideration, but this was carried on verbally between the various
authorities whom I consulted, either direct or through Mr. Miller, and I have no record of
any proceedings which would be of the smallest use to you, excepting the one I enclose.
Fortunately, I had to deal with men of ability, and who were singularly free from
prejudice; and it was owing to them, and not owing to any merit on my part, that a
change was effected, against which I have never since heard a single objection raised.
I am, &c.
The Lord Monteagle. (Signed) THOMSON HANKEY.
MEMORANDUM AND REPORT on the BULLION WEIGHTS of the BANK of ENGLAND.
February 28, 1852.
IT is the opinion of most persons connected with the bullion trade that a great
saving of time and labour would be effected if the Bank were to use only weights of the
troy ounce instead of the present weights of pounds, oz., dwts, and grs.
Such a change would render the accounts of English merchants, in reference to bullion
transactions, more easily understood in other countries where the decimal system has been
adopted.
The change would greatly simplify all the calculations to be made in assaying, melting,
reducing the gross weight of bullion to the standard weight, &c., and would greatly facili-
tate all the transactions between the Mint and the Bank, as well as between the Bank and
the public.
The change might be made without the least disturbance or trouble to the public. It
would be in accordance with the recommendations of the Commission on Weights and
Measures, and would not, so far as can be ascertained, be opposed to any law.
(Signed) W. MILLER.
Mr. Miller has consulted Sir John Lubbock, Sir John Herschel, and Mr. Shaw Lefevre,
who are all members of the present Commission on Weights and Measures. They none of
them see any reason why the proposed change should not be carried out by the Bank and
the Mint, nor are they aware of any legal obstruction.
The Government Inspector of Weights and Measures at Whitehall, the City of London
inspector, and an officer of the Founders' Company, which company is empowered by old
Acts of Parliament still in force to legalise weights and measures, have all been consulted,
and none of them are aware of any impediment in the way to the proposed alterations.
Sir J. Herschel has caused new weights to be prepared for the Mint by the same person
who made the Bank weights, and has made the other arrangements, in conjunction with
Captain Harness, for carrying out the proposition.
The Bank melters, Messrs. Browne and Wingrove, have also provided themselves with
new weights, and are prepared to accommodate themselves to the change.
Mr. Miller has prepared the tables necessary for the standarding both for gold and silver.
The gold tables are ready for use. The silver have just been corrected for the press, and
will be ready in a few days.
It should be observed, that the class of persons engaged in the bullion trade are an
educated class, familiar with calculations, whose calculations are generally made in the
decimal form, and that they are a class best of all able to meet any little difficulty which a
change of this nature is likely to bring with it.
Mr. Freshfield thinks that the legal question is one never likely to be raised, and if it
were, he is of opinion that the law would be found to be on the side of the change.
(Signed) W. MILLER.
October 6, 1852.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 173
THE Series of Troy Weights provided for the use of Her Majesty's Exchequer in pur-
suance of the Act 16 Vict. c. 29. is as follows, viz.:-
Ounces.
500)
400
300
200
I00
50
40 >Multiples of the ounce.
1 oz. the unit or standard.
0.5 T.
0.03 X-Decimal parts of the ounce.
No. 14.
BANK OF ENGLAND.
Paper showing the Calculation of Dividends and Duty carried to Decimals of
Ome Penny.
MY LORD, Bank of England, 8th April 1856.
I HAVE the honour to transmit to your Lordship the following papers : —
No. 1. A transcript of a page of the Consols Dividend Books.
No. 2. The totals of the A. section of the same.
No. 3. The making up of the A. to C. section of the same.
No. 4. The grand total of all the sections.
No. 5. The page of the Dividend Book “ No. 1” stated decimally.
This last statement is at the same time the whole of the working. There was no table nor
any other piece of paper used in its production, but the figures were set down just as they
appear. It is the actual rough statement. There are several erasures, but most of them
are due to the scratching out of the printed red line to adapt the form to the decimal mode
of statement.
I believe that this must have been worked in much less time, perhaps one third, than the
original statement done in the old mode. There are more figures in this, but there need
not have been nearly so many, as the duty column here is quite useless, being a mere repe-
tition of the “Principal,” and twice the number of figures must have been employed in
working out the original, even with the assistance of the tables employed.
I have, &c.
The Right Hon. Lord Monteagle, WM. MILLER.
&c. &c. &c.
No. 13.
Decimal Bullion
Weights.
No. 14.
Calculation of
Dividends.
Y 3
174
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 14.
Calculation of
Dividends.
º
No. 1.
207th Dividend, 5th January 1856. Consolidated 37 per Cent. Annuities.
# É
É's # 8 #| Christian and Sur-
* , 3, 2.5|name of Proprietors, Principal. Interest. Duty. Nett.
5 § 3 ||3 * viz. –
ſº. 5 ſº ſº.
# P. 3 2.
# # =
*:::: §§
3 as 2.
ſº s, d. :9 s. d. §: f s. d. # £ s. d.
l John Brown 250,000 0 0 || 3,750 0 0 250 () 0 P- 3,500 0 0
2 James Smith 163,677 l l 2,455 3 l 395 | 163 13 6 07 || 2,291 9 7
3 Edward Thompson 131,227 4 6 1,968 8 2 Ol 131 4 6 08 1,837 3 8
4. William Jones and 100,000 0 0 1,500 0 0 100 0 0 1,400 0 0
5 Henry Williams 97,043 8 S 1,455 13 0 36 97 () l () ()6 1,358 12 2
6 &c. &c. 88,847 4 10 | 1,332 14 2 07 88 16 l l O5 1,243 17 3
7 81,000 0 0 1,215 0 0 81 () 0 1,134 0 0
8 74,953 16 0 | 1,124 6 1 680 74 19 0 13 | 1,049 7 1
9 72,868 19 8 1,093 0 8 340 72 17 4 08 1,020 3 4
10 66,000 0 0 990 () () 66 0 0 924 () 0
11 65,236 13 3 978 10 l l 985 65 4 8 11 9 13 6 3
12 60,600 17 2 909 O 3 O9 60 12 O 03 848 8 3
13 60,395 6 10 905 18 7 23 60 7 10 13 845 10 9
14 60,000 0 0 900 0 0 60 0 O 840 0 O
15 60,000 O 0 900 0 0 60 0 0 840 0 0
16 | 60,000 0 0 900 0 0 60 0 0 840 0 0
17 59,900 5 4 898 10 0 96 59 18 0 838 12 O
18 57,500 0 0 86.2 10 O 57 10 0 805 O O
19 52,468 O 5 787 0 4 875 52 9 4 04 73.4 l l O
20 49,081 3 0 736 4 4 14 49 I 7 07 687 2 9
21 42,955 16 9 644 6 9 O15 42 19 1 06 601 7 8
22 40,000 0 0 600 0 0 40 0 0 560 0 0
23 40,000 O 0 600 0 0 40 0 0 560 0 0
, 24 39,961 13 2 599 8 5 97 39 19 2 11 559 9 3
25 37,994 2 7 569 18 2 865 37 19 10 08 531 18 4
1,911,711 13 3 || 28,675 12 ll 985 | 1,911 13 7 26,763 19 4
*=== — 05
6
No. 2.
A. Consol Totals.
gººmsºmºsºs Principal. Interest. Fractions. Duty. Fractions. Nett.
§ 5 §§
<5P- J. P.
Å. 3 *
f s, d. 28 s. d. £ s. d. C £ s. d. £ s. d. É's :9 s. d.
Assessed at 1s. 4d. 48,592,029 15 6 || 728,876 19 5 3 9 6 19 |48,588 7 3 3 8 8 256 | 680,288 12 2
93 11%d. 38,219 18 l 573 5 6 0 0 5 655 27 8 9 0 0 7 3.18 545 16 9
Exempt - * 450,753 3 ll 6,760 19 7 0 6 4 505 6,760 19 7
Non-assessed - 75,823 15 7 1,136 9 2 || 0 17 ll 605 1,136 9 2
49,156,826 13 1 | 737,347 13 8 || 4 14 3 955 |48,615 16 0 || 3 9 4 574 | 688,731 17 8
l 0.94
No. 3.
207th Dividend Consolidated 31. per Cent. Annuities, 5th January 1856.
* = -º Principal. Interest. Fractions. Duty. Fractions. Nett.
§ -," 3.
# = $ 3
ºt: as 3 :
s; P- tº P-
£ s, d. 39 s. d. £ c. d. O £ s. d. £ s. d. É's £ s, d.
A - 49,156,826 13 1 737,347 13 8 4 14 3 955 48,615 l 6 0 3 9 4 094 688,731 17 8
Ba - || 12,640,902 14 0 189,008 9 I 5 l 8 72 12,118 5 3 3 19 1 404 || 177,490 3 10
Beſi - || 10,778,804 3 7 | 161,677 5 4 4 15 l l 045 || 10,369 8 6 3 13 8 453 |. 151,307 16 10
Bo/u - 15,029,985 7 7 225,308 11 4 6 4 3 365 14,366 0 9 4 16 2 265 210,942 10 7
Caſe - || 13,293,204 0 1 199,392 14 6 5 6 S 41 5 12,754 18 7 4 3 5 255 186,637 15 11
Ciſu - || 25,003,954 17 8 375,052 8 6 6 17 11 58 14,741 13 5 5 4 9 134 360,310 15 1
125,894,677 16 0 | 1,888,387 2 5 || 33 0 11 080 | 112,966 2 6 25 6 8 165 |1,775,420 19 11





DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 175
No. 4.
207th Dividend Consolidated 31 per Cent. Annuities, 5th January 1856.
Principal. Interest. Fractions. Duty. Fractions. Nett.
§§ #
º cº
; º
Q) cº ©2 c5
- R - &
fº s, d. £ s. d. 1 #2 s. d. O £ s. d. £ s. d. É's £ s, d.
380,423,934 4 11 || 5,706,215 18 6 || 143 l 9 285 356,245 6 3 || 109 8 l 276 5,349,970 12 3
No. 5.
Consolidated 31. per Cent. Annuities.
sº-sº- Interest. Duty. Nett. g-sºº
Dec. Dec. Dec.
£ Mils. £ Mils. Fracs. 38 Mils. Fracs. £ Mils. Fracs.
250,000 3,750 250 3,500 121326
163,677 055 2,455 155 825 163 677 055 2,291 478 77 121327
131,227 225 1,968 408 375 131. 227 225 1,837 181 15 12 1328
100,000 1,500 100 1,400 121329
97,043 435 1,455 651 525 97 043 435 1,358 608 09 121330
88,847 24 1,332 708 6 88 847 24 1,243 861 36 12 1331
81,000 1,215 81 1,134 12 1332
74,953 8 1,124 307 74 953 8 1,049 353 2 12 1333
72,868 985 1,093 034 775 72 868 985 1,020 165 79 121334
66,000 990 66 924 12 1335
65,236 66 978 549 9 65 236 66 913 313 24 12||1336
60,600 855 909 012 825 60 600 855 848 41 1 97 121337
60,395 34 905 930 I 60 395 34 845 534 76 121338
60,000 900 60 840 12 1339
60,000 900 - 60 840 121340
60,000 900 60 840 121341
59,900 265 898 503 975 59 900 265 838 603 71 12 1342
57,500 862 5 , 57 5 805 12 1343
52,468 O2 787 020 3 52 468 02 734 552 28 121344
49,081 15 736 217 25 49 08.1 15 687 136 l 121345
42,955 835 644 337 525 42 955 835 601 381 69 121346
40,000 600 40 560 121347
40,000 600 40 560 121348
39,961 655 599 424 825 39 96.1 655 559 463 17 121349
37,994 125 569 9] 1 875 37 994 125 531 917 75 121350
1,911,711 645 28,675 674 675 1,911 711 645 26,763 956
7' 03 Fractions
that could not
be paid.
No. 15.
MEMORANDUM on the INTRODUCTION of the DECIMAL SYSTEM of WEIGHTS into the
CUSTOMS DEPARTMENT.
IT is thirteen years since the Decimal System by weight was brought into active
operation in the Customs' waterside business, at which time the pound avoirdupoise was
divided into 100 parts, and by the Honourable Commissioners' Minute, dated 31st January
1843, ordered to be adopted by the service, in order to ascertain the allowances to be made
on account of the tare of silk manufactures imported from Europe, the weights previously
in use for this purpose being ounces, half ounce, and quarter ounce.
Silk ribbons and broad stuffs are charged with duty by weight, the duty being graduated
according to the description of manufacture; at the period mentioned, gauze being assessed
with the duty of 27s. 6d. per pound, and plain silk or satin, which are the commonest
description of silk goods, being charged 11s, per pound.
Ribbons form the bulk of the importation on which it was difficult to determine the proper
allowance to be made on account of tare. They are imported in cases, weighing, exclusive
of the case, from five to six hundredweight each, from one third to two thirds of which
weight is composed of tare, consisting of pasteboard boxes, in which the ribbons are packed,
and the cylinders of pasteboard, or wood on which they are rolled. These boxes and
cylinders are of many varieties of size and weight 3. and in order to preserve the merchantable
appearance of such delicate and fancy articles, it is essential to ascertain the tare by the
smallest possible disturbance of the fabrics, and, therefore, a box and one or more cylinders
of each variety being divested of the ribbon, are weighed in the nicest possible manner,
quarter of an ounce, as stated, being the Smallest weight used; and the weight so ascer-
tained is used as the tare by which to calculate the total tare for any given variety of boxes
and cylinders, the tare on all the different yarieties, in any particular case, being ascer-
Y 4
No. 14.
Calculation of
Dividends.

No. 15.
Decimal Weights
in Customs.
176 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 15. tained in the same manner, which, when added together, form the total tare which,
Decimal weights deducted from the gross, form the total net weight on which the importer is required to
in Customs. pay duty. It is, however, manifest that in weighing so small a section as a base by which
to calculate the total weight to be allowed, the scale moreover being allowed to prepctn-
derate in favour of the importer, the accuracy with which the weight of the selected
portions were ascertained would be of the utmost importance in a revenue point of view,
because, whether a given section be deemed to weigh a quarter of an ounce, more or
less, would, when used as the basis for calculation, make a difference of many pounds weight
for or against the revenue, and vice versá to the importer, in the total tare of a given
package; added to which, the multiplied complex fractional calculation to be made in
every operation considerably impeded the waterside business, prevented the interchange of
officers, and in a great measure prohibited the checking of the accounts.
The foregoing considerations led to the division of the pound weight into 100 parts, the
weights used being parts 50, 30, 20, 10, 5, 3, 2, 1, by means of which the mtnute sections
of tare were weighed to the hundredth part of a pound, instead of the sixy-fourth part
as formerly; thus bringing into operation a weight one half part more minute than the
quarter ounce, and which necessarily led to the ascertainment of a more correct total tare,
the difference being entirely in favour of the revenue ; but the chief value consisted in
he abandonment of the calculation by fractions of ounces, the operation being thenceforward
onfined to the simple rules of multiplication and division.
Example. Parts.
12 boxes, each containing 24 rolls 1 box tº . - 75
5 ad 3 rolls = 17 × 8 = 136
— 211 = 2,532
tº º 1 box gº - 54
8 boxes, each containing 18 rolls { 3 rolls = 14 × 6 = 84
— 138 = 1,104
tº º 1 box ſº - 73
2 boxes, each containing 15 rolls {. rolls = 10 x 5 = 50
— 123 = 246
*=
3,882
38 lbs. 13 oz.
The following scale having been adopted in respect of the decimal remainder—-
4 parts = 1 oz., 10 = 2 oz., 16 = 3 oz., 22 = 4 oz., 29 = 5 oz., 35 = 6 oz., 41 = 7 oz.,
47 = 8 oz., 54 = 9 OZ., 60 = 10 OZ.2 66 = 11 OZ. 3 72 = 12 OZ , 79 – 13 OZ. , 85 = 14 OZ.,
91 = 15 oz., 97 = 1 lb.
Although the change from the ounce to the Decimal System, as here attempted to be
shown, appears sufficiently easy, yet it is not to be inferred that it did not encounter the
difficulties in its introduction which most new projects are required to undergo. It is
sufficient, however, to state that the Board, perceiving its advantages, overruled all those
difficulties and directed its adoption; and that they were right in that decision is sufficiently
evident from the ready acceptance it has met with from the branch of trade interested in
the question, and from the unquestioned facility it has afforded in their continual operations
with the officers of the service.
On its first introduction, the Board limited its use to the ascertainment of tare; but after
it had undergone the test of lengthened experience, they directed that the ribbons them-
selves might be weighed, and the boxes and cylinders disregarded. Thus the net weight of
the ribbons unrolled were weighed on the tare to arrive at the total net, thus dispensing
with the gross and tare and arriving directly at the met weight, as shown in the following
example:—
Roll. Rolls. Parts.
= 175 – 3 = 23 = 1,342
60 – 2 = 36 = 1,080
1 1 canton 10
5 ditto each 33
5)
~
4 ditto 15
1 ditto 3 º tº- K
3| ditto #} = 75 – 2 = 46 = 1,725
4 5 ditto 12 = 60 — 2 = 45 = 1,350
I ditto 26
*{ ditto º = 100 — 2 = 13 = 650
ditto 30
2
1 ditto 27 **- *ssºs
6|| ii. 30 H = 147 – 3 = 21 = 1,029
7 5
ditto 30 = 150 — 3 = 19 = 950
1 ditto 33 2 — ºn 5) –
8
1 ditto 32 &= --> *sº
9{} ditto ;} 152 – 3 = 22 = 1,115
-
10,363
103 lbs. 10 oz.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 177
Since the ad valorem duty has given place to a duty by weight, the Board have allowed
that article also to be tared by the decimal weights. -
These weights are also constantly used to tare many minor articles in the tariff.
Should the Decimal System be recognized generally, exactly the same division as applied
to the pound could be applied to the 100 lbs., and the part itself will also divide in a similar
manner; and here, it may be observed, that the division of the pound decimally can with
advantage be used either to the tenth or to the hundredth part, without infringing the
principle; so that in weighing an article of value the latter could be used, whilst in weighing
a grosser article the tenth only need be applied.
Custom House, West India Docks, (Signed) J. COCKSHOTT.
15th January 1856.
ExTRACT of a LETTER from the Hon. STEPHEN SPRING RICE, one of the Commissioners
of Customs, to Lord MONTEAGLE.
Board of Customs, 26th January 1856.
THE enclosed letter has been addressed by a member of the firm of Leaf and Coles,
one of the principal importers of silk goods in London, to the officer who recently
reported to you on decimal taring. * % 3% %
Yours, &c.
The Lord Monteagle. (Signed) STEPHEN SPRING RICE.
ENCLOSURE.
DEAR SIR, 39, Old Change, 16th January 1856.
HAVING heard that you are preparing a report on the present method of taring by
decimal parts, as compared with the standard weights formerly used, I shall be glad if you
will allow me to offer an opinion on the subject. I have had experience in both ways; and
as regards the old system, when we had nothing less than a quarter of an ounce, some
little advantage might probably have been shown in favour of the merchant, but the time
lost in calculation, and the frequent errors which occured, completely overbalanced any
benefit. The decimal parts now in use, (which were, I believe, introduced by yourself
about the year 1842,) by the simplicity of operation, the readiness with which it is under-
stood and practised, general correctness, and the facility given to business, with much
saving of time, afford in my mind, the strongest reasons for their continuance. An ob-
jection may be made that, by the smaller division of the pound, a trifle more duty may
occasionally be charged; this, however, I do not think worth comparing with the above
advantages. -
I remain, &c. -
J. Cockshott, Esq., (Signed) JOSEPH ASHWELL,
West India Docks.
No. 16.
DIRECTIONs given to ScHool, INSPECTORs.
1.xtRACT from MINUTES of the EDUCATION COMMITTEE of the PRIVY COUNCIL,
for 1854-5, p. 115. (Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her
Majesty.)
DECIMAL SYSTEM for CoINAGE, and for WEIGHTS and MEASURES.
Committee of Council on Education,
REVEREND SIR, Council Office, Downing Street, 31st January 1854.
I AM directed by the Lord President to bring under your notice the fact that there
is a very strong feeling in the country that we should adopt a system of decimals in our
coinage, and in our weights and measures.
The strongest objection urged against this change is, that it would create misapprehension
and distrust in the minds of the people.
The Lord President thinks that you might, with advantage, call the attention of the
principals of training schools to the importance of thoroughly imbuing the students under
their charge with such a practical knowledge of decimals as will enable them to disseminate
the information needed to accompany such a change.
The Lord President thinks that this may be done by personal communication in the
course of your next circuit of inspection, and by introducing a few questions that bear upon
the subject in the examination papers.
The word “decimals” is not confined in this context to decimal fractions, or to a know-
ledge of the decimal point. All that is proposed by a decimal system of money, weights,
and measures, is to get rid of compound arithmetic, and to employ only one simple or
common arithmetic, which is decimal. See articles by Professor De Morgan, in the Com-
panion to the British Almanack, for the years 1841, 1848, 1854.
- I have, &c.
Rev. H. Moseley, (Signed) R. R. W. LINGEN.
Her Majesty's Inspector of Training Schools.
Z
No. 15.
Decimal Weights
in Customs.
No. 16.
Directions to
School Inspectors.
* -
178 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 17.
Change
of Currency
in Ireland.
No. 17.
CHANGE of CURRENCY in IRELAND.
ABSTRACT OF 6 GEO. IV. CAP. 79.
An Act to provide for the Assimilation of the Currency and Monies of Account
throughout the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
I. The currency of Great Britain shall be the currency of the United Kingdom; and
all receipts, payments, contracts, and dealings shall be made in such currency, and shall be
held to be made in such currency, unless the contrary be proved to have been the intention
of the parties concerned.
II. All contracts, debts, &c. in Irish currency, made or contracted previous to com-
mencement of this Act shall be carried into effect and satisfied by payment in British
currency of 12-13ths of the amount in Irish currency.
III. All duties and public revenues, and all funds and public debts, shall be estimated
in British currency, and the accounts thereof kept accordingly. --
IV. Not to affect the real value in gold or silver coin of the public revenues, or of any
sums mentioned in Acts of Parliament, or payable in discharge of any debt due at the
passing of the Act, or to become due afterwards under any custom, law, &c. previously
in force.
W. To provide for the payment of fractions of a penny British currency, resulting from
the converting of lrish currency into British, no payment shall be made for 4-52d parts of
a penny; }d. shall be paid for 8, 12, and 16-52d parts; }d. for 20, 24, 28, and 32 parts;
#d for 36, 40, and 44 parts; and 1d. for 48 parts. Sums under 12d. Irish shall be paid in
British copper coin, as directed by the 15th section, according to the aforesaid rates.
VI. VII. On converting Irish funds into British, all pence and fractions of a penny of
the principal sum shall be paid with the dividend, at the Bank of Ireland, and repaid to
the bank by the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt.
VIII. Where annual sums charged on the Consolidated Fund, in Irish currency, are
converted into British, the Treasury may add sufficient to prevent fractions of a penny.
IX. Contracts, &c., may be made according to currency of foreign states.
X. Liabilities, &c. arising out of matters prior to the commencement of the Act to be
deemed liabilities, &c. prior to the commencement of the Act.
XI. After a day to be named by proclamation, British silver and gold coins shall be
current in Ireland at the same rate of pence as in Great Britain, and not as heretofore in
Ireland, viz.:-The silver sixpence at 6d. instead of 64d. ; shilling at 12d. instead of 136. ;
half-crown at 2s. 6d. instead of 2s. 8d.: crown, 58. instead of 58. 5d. ; half-sovereign,
10s. instead of 10s. 10d. ; half-guinea, 10s. 6d. instead of 118, 4}d. ; sovereign, ll., instead
of 11. 18. 8d.: guinea, ll. 18, instead of 17, 2s. 9d. ; double sovereign 2., instead of
2l. 3s. 4d.
XII. On like proclamation Irish copper coin shall be brought into the Bank of Ireland,
and exchanged there for British copper coin, at the rate of 12d. British for 13d. Irish; and
the Irish copper coin shall cease to circulate.
XIII. To provide for payment of sums under 12d, Irish in British currency 1,d. Irish,
and under, shall be paid by a like sum in British copper coin. From 136. to 43d, by a
sum less than 3d. than the respective Irish amount; from 5d. to 8d. less by ºd, ; from
8d to 11}d, less by #d. ; from 11}d to 12d. less by 14.
XIV. Bankers notes to be in British currency. Penalty 50l.
XV. Bankers allowed stamps on old notes.
XVI. Publication of Act by order of the Treasury.
YVII. Act to commence and to take effect from and after 5th January 1826.
ExTRACTs from Coldwell's Tables for Reducing Irish Money into British Currency.
Cork, 1825.
USE OF THESE TABLES.
In conformity with the foregoing Act these tables are arranged on a new plan, with such
simplicity and accuracy, as will show at one view the amount of any sum of Irish money
reduced into British currency, as will be seen from the following explanation:—
From 4d. to 1.
The tables commence with 4d., advancing progressively by pence to 11. Opposite the
Irish is placed the amount in British currency.
From 11 to 100l. 19s. 11}d.
The tables advance by shillings, with a pence column repeated at each view ; at the top
of the columns are the pounds Irish, and at the left of the pages downwards are the shillings;
the pence placed at the right. Under the required sum of Irish pounds, and on a line with
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
179
the shillings, will be seen the amount in British, to which add from the pence column.
Example, suppose 44l. 168. 11d. Irish to be reduced into British :-
S. d.
The tables advance by hundreds.
£ s.
44 16 O
£44 16 11
d.
in page 31 is
0 0 1 1 in pence column is
Irish is
41
£41
From 100l. to 20,000l.
7 I
0 0 10}
7 11+
Opposite the Irish is placed the amount in British ;
and by which, in conjunction with the former part of the tables, any sum may be found.
Example, suppose 12,744. 16s. 11d. Irish, to be reduced into British:-
£
s. d.
12,700 0
44 16 ll
in page 56
in page 31
£
S. d
- 11,723 i 5,
41 7 11:
£12,744 16 11 Irish is British - e 11,764 9 54
IRISH MONEY reduced into British Currency.
Irish. British. Irish. British. Irish. Eritish.
s. d S. d. S. d s, d. S. d. s. d.
0 0} 0 0} 0 4} O 4 0 8} 0 7%
0 0} 0 0} 0 4} 0 4} 0 8}. 0 7;
0 0; 0 0} 0 , 4; O 4% O 8; O 8
O 1 O 1 O 5 0 4% O 9 O 8].
0 1.J. O 14. 0 5} 0 4; O 9} o si
o iſ o it 0 5} () 5 O 9} O 8;
0 1; 0 1% 0 5; 0 5} O 9; O 9
O 2 0 1 # O 6 0 5% O 10 O 9}.
O 24. O 2 O 6]. 0 5; 0 104 o 5.
o 24 0 2+ o 6; O 6 0 104. O 9;
0 2; O 21. 0 6; O 6+ o ioš O 10
() 3 o 2; O 7 0 6} O | 1 0 10}
0 3} O 3 0 7+ 0 6; 0 11+ 0 10}
O 3} 0 3} 0 71. O 7 O 11; 0 10%
O 3# O 34. o 73 0 7+ 0 11; 0 103.
0 4 o 3; O 8 0 7; 1 O O II
sº £1 Irish. £2 Irish. £3 Irish. .84 Irish. Pence.
Pritish. Dritish. British. Pritish. Irish. |British.
.# s. d. 36 s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. d. d.
0 || 0 18 5} | 1 16 11 2 15 4} | 3 13 10} (); 0%
I 0 19 4} l 17 10} || 2 16 3} | 3 14 9} l" 1
2 || 1 0 33 || 1 18 94 || 2 17 2; 3 15 8} 1% 14,
3 1 I 2; 1 19 8+ 2 18 13 || 3 16 74 1; 1}
4 || 1 2 13 || 2 0 7% 2 19 1 3 17 64 2 1#
5 || 1 3 ] 2 1 6% 3 0 () 3 18 5% 2% 2}
6 || 1 4 0 2 2 5% 3 O II 3 19 4% 3." 2#
7 || 1 4 II 2 3 4} | 3 || 104 || 4 0 33 3% 3].
8 || 1 5 104 || 2 4 3} | 3 2 94 || 4 || 23 4." 3}
9 || 1 6 94 || 2 5 23 || 3 3 8+ || 4 2 1; 4; 4}
10 || 1 7 83 || 2 6 13 || 3 4 7, 4 3 | 4# 4;
11 || 1 8 74 || 2 7 1 3 5 6% 4 4 0 5 4}.
12 || 1 9 6ſ. 2 8 0 3 6 5% 4 4 11 5% 5
13 || 1 10 5} || 2 8 11 3 7 4} || 4 5 10} 6 5}
14 || 1 11 4} || 2 9 10} | 3 8 3} | 4 6 94 6; 6
15 1 12 3; 2 10 9} | 3 9 2; 4 7 8+ 7" 6#
}} | | 13 ** | 3 || # 3 1? It | 4 ; ; 7% 7
17 | 1 14 13 || 2 12 7% 3 11 1 4 9 6% 8 74.
18 I 15 1 2 13 6% 3 12 O 4 10 5% 8% 7#
19 || 1 16 O 2 14 5; 3 12 11 4 11 4; 9 8].
9% §§
10 9}
10% 9;
11 10+
11} 10%
11; 10;
2
No. 17.
Change
of Currency
in Ireland.
** ==g


180 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE

No. 17.
Change
of Currency
in Ireland.
Irish. British. Irish. British. Irish. JBritish.
f £ s. d. .# # s. d. Aft AE s. d.
100 92 6 l; 1,800 1,661 10 9} 3,500 3,230 15 4%
200 184 12 3}. 1,900 1,753 16 11 3,600 3,323 1 6%
300 276 is 5; 2,000 | 1,846 3 1 3,700 || 3,415 7 8+
400 369 4 7% 2,100 1,938 9 23. 3,800 3,507 13 10}
500 Aći 16 ºf 2,200 2,030 15 4} 3,900 3,600 0 0
600 553 16 11 2,300 2,123 1 6% 4,000 3,692 6 1;
700 646 3 I 2,400 2,215 7 8+ 4,100 3,784 12 3;
800 738 9 23. 2,500 2,307 13 10} 4,200 3,876 18 5}
900 830 15 4% 2,600 2,400 0 0 4,300 3,969 4 7%
1,000 923 l 6, 2,700 2,492 6 1; 4,400 4,061 10 9}
1,100 1,015 7 84 2,800 2,584 12 3; 4,500 4,153 16 11
1,200 1,107 13 10} 2,900 2,676 18 5} 4,600 4,246 3 1
1,300 1,200 0 0 3,000 2,769 4 7% 4,700 4,338 9 2;
1,400 1,292 6 13 3,100 2,861 10 9} 4,800 4,430 15 4;
1,500 | 1,384 12 3% 3,200 2,953 16 11 4,900 || 4,523 i 6;
1,600 1,476 18 5% 3,300 3,046 3 1 5,000 4,615 8+
1,700 1,569 4 7% 3,400 3,138 9 23.
From the Irish Almamac and Directory of 1825.
TABLE of EXCHANGE at PAR, or 83 per Cent.
English into Irish. English into Irish. Irish into English.
& 3 s. d. £ 3 s. d. Aft £ s. d.
1,000 - 1,083 6 8 7 - 7 11 8 300 276 18 5%
900 - 975 () O 6 - 6 10 O 200 184 12 3}
800 - 866 13 4 5 - 5 8 4 100 92 6 13
700 - 758 6 8 4 - 4 6 8 90 83 l 6}
600 - 650 0 () 3 - 3 5 O 80 73 16 11
500 - 541 13 4 2 - 2 3 4 70 64 12 3}
400 - 433 6 8 1 - 1 1 8 60 55 7 8}
300 - 325 O O 50 46 3 1
200 - 216 13 4 40 36 18 5}
100 - 108 6 8 30 27 13 10
90 - 97 10 O Irish into English. 2O 18 9 23.
80 - 86 13 4 I () 9 4 7}
70 - 75 16 8 9 8 6 13
60 - 65 O O 3: 26 s. d. 8 7 7 84
50 - 54 3 4 1,000 - 923 l 64 7 6 9 23.
40 – 43 6 8 900 - 830 15 4; 6 5 10 9}
30 - 32 10 O 800 - 738 9 23. 5 4 12 3;
20 - 21 13 4 700 - 646 3 1 4 3 13 O
10 - 10 16 8 600 - 553 16 1 3 2 15 4}
9 - 9 15 O 500 - 461 10 9} 2 1 16 if
8 - 8 13 4 400 - 369 4 7} 1 0 18 5%
LETTER from Colonel LARCOM, Under-Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, respecting
the Change of Currency in Ireland.
Phoenix Park, 9th December 1855.
DEAR LORD MONTEAGLE,
I HAVE had careful search made, and the enclosed memorandum shews what we
possess. e
You shall have copies of any of the letters, or of the proclamation, if you desire them.
% % # * # 3%
I am, &c.
(Signed) M. A. LARCOM.
MEMORANDUM.
The letters in this office relative to the change of currency in 1826 are very few.
There are letters from Cork, Limerick, and Kinsale, complaining of the want of copper
coins, and from Coleraine, complaining of the inconvenience of the old and new coinage
circulating together at different rates. The old copper coins were for some time allowed
to remain in circulation, and the new were issued only in exchange for the old, at twelve
of the former for thirteen of the latter. Applications were made to the Government to
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. I81
issue the new copper coins in exchange for silver and bank notes, but these were not
complied with, because it would then have been impossible to get the old coins out of
circulation. From a letter from Cork it appears that although the old coins were legally of
less value than the new, they in fact circulated as of equal value with the latter, and that,
consequently, the holders of them were backward to exchange them for new coins on the
disadvantageous terms on which alone the latter could be obtained from the Government.
It was proposed to prohibit, after a certain day, the circulation of the old coins; but instead
of this a proclamation was issued, dated 12th July 1826, reciting that great inconveniences
arose from the different rates of the currency, and that it would be a considerable time
before the old coins could be recoined, and declaring that the old copper money should
thenceforth be current at the rate of 12d. =ls. British.
LETTER from the Right Hon. HENRY GOULBURN.
MY DEAR MONTEAGLE, Betchworth, 20th December 1855.
IF you look to the Act which passed for the assimilation of the British and Irish
currency (6 Geo. IV. c. 79), you will find provision made for what were the difficulties of
dealing with the smaller coins.
When it was carried into effect in Ireland the Treasury did not at first furnish us with
a sufficient amount of new coin to effect the exchange, and the complaints made to me in
1826 relate principally to this subject.
I enclose an extract of a letter which I wrote to the Secretary of the Treasury, which
you may like to see.
I have, &c.
(Signed) HENRY GOULBURN.
ExTRACT.
MY DEAR HERRIES, Dublin Castle, 30th December 1825.
THE want of a new copper coinage has created a difficulty in the charging and
payment of postage, which I have been obliged to provide for without previous communi-
cation with you.
You no doubt recollect the difficulty which was at first felt as to converting Irish into
British currency on the back of each letter, and the authority which you gave to substitute
for a sum in Irish the next lowest even sum in British currency.
Orders were some time since issued accordingly, and the British currency rates of
1d., 2d., 3d, 4d., and 5d., were substituted for the Irish rates now received of 2d., 3d, 4d,
5d., and 6d. From want of new coinage, however, it is impossible to pay those British
rates. Irish halfpence must for some time be our principal, if not our only, circulation.
It is necessary, therefore, either to reduce our receipts of postage still lower by taking
Irish halfpence as equivalent to British, or to continue to charge and receive our Irish
rates in Irish currency.
Upon consulting our law adviser, he pronounced the latter course to be illegal, the
section of the Act particularly requiring postage to be charged in British currency.
I have therefore authorized the Post Office to accept Irish halfpence as if they were
British in payment of all rates under sixpence, and in payment of all pence above 6d, or 1s.
respectively. This would lead to a further diminution of the revenue of this department,
already reduced by the arrangement which the Treasury sanctioned, but I hope you
will think it was unavoidable.
I have, &c.
(Signed) HENRY GOULBURN.
LETTER from the Governor of the BANK of IRELAND.
MY LORD, Bank of Ireland, 31st December 1855.
I should have replied earlier to your letter of the 6th inst., but wished to make
the fullest inquiry in my power on the point you particularly allude to before writing to
your lordship.
The changes made in Ireland by the 6th Geo. 4th chapter 47, were two-fold. There
was the change of currency from the old Irish rate of thirteen pence to the British shilling
of twelvepence, and the change of the silver coinage from the Irish bank tokens of ten
pence and five pence Irish currency to the British shilling and sixpence. The copper coin
in use being made to represent the same value in British as they had previously in Irish
currency, thus raising the value of these coins by one-twelfth.
From the best information I can obtain, I am led to believe that these changes were
made without any serious difficulty or inconvenience.
In our establishment such preparations were made previous to the commencement of the
Act, that by closing the bank for public business for three days, on the day appointed the
books were opened with all the balances of the accounts in the bank both public and
private, whether cash or government stock converted into British currency, and after a few
days business seemed to go on without any confusion, the other bankers and respectable
merchants and traders having made similar preparations for the change on the 6th January
No. 17.
Change
of Currency
in Ireland.
tºmº
182 , APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 17.
Change
of Currency
in Ireland.
*s
No. 18.
Isle of Man.
1825. The bank being also well supplied with silver coin of British currency, it was
rapidly given out in exchange for the bank tokens, which soon disappeared from circulation
altogether.
% regards the poorer classes, the effect of the change was at first considered unfavour-
able, the nominal amount of wages and small payments being lower than before; but this
gradually passed away, the general tendency of the period which has since intervened
being to raise the wages of the artizan and labourer, who before long were paid as high in
nominal amount in British currency as they had been in Irish, and of late years consider-
ably higher. -
I need scarcely add, that it will at all times afford me much pleasure to furnish any
information in my power which may be of service to your lordship.
I have, &c.
To the Lord Monteagle, (Signed) JAS. R. STEwART, Junr.
Exchequer, London. -
LETTER from the Honorary Secretary to the DUBLIN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
‘MY LORD, Chamber of Commerce, Dublin, 16th January 1856.
THE council of this chamber delayed replying to your lordship's communication on
the subject of the change of currency and the withdrawal of the tenpenny tokens in 1826,
with a view to obtaining as extensive and accurate information as possible.
The result of this inquiry confirms the opinion expressed to your lordship when you
were good enough to favour us with a visit, that the inconvenience resulting from the
alterations referred to was inconsiderable and of short duration. In large commercial
transactions it was scarcely felt ; but persons receiving small sums in wages and expending
small sums in purchases not amounting to a shilling, could not for a time be persuaded
that they were not defrauded of a penny in every shilling. This impression was strength-
ened, if not originally created, by the fact that about twelve months before January, 1826,
there was an extensive issue in Ireland of shilling and sixpenny coins, which, while the
Irish currency continued, represented respectively 13d, and 6%d., and the humbler classes
seeing that in 1826 these were only “good for” 12d. and 6d., and unable to comprehend
the distinction between the two currencies, really believed they were injured by the change.
To some extent, indeed, they were right, as small transactions did not readily admit of an
equitable arrangement. After a short period, however, the natural tendency of trade to
adjust its own operations, some small concessions on the part of employers, and more
general information amongst the people, removed every objection to this most useful
and important measure.
Should your lordship desire it we shall endeavour to induce witnesses to attend before
your commission; but you may be assured you have here the sum of any information
which they could supply.
I have, &c.
Right Hon. the Lord Monteagle. (Signed) FRANCIS CODD, Hon. Sec.
No. 18.
CHANGE of CURRENCY in IsLE of MAN.
LETTER from W. MASSEY, Esq., Under Secretary of State, enclosing Letter from the
Lieutenant Governor of the Isle of Man, respecting the Change of Coinage in 1840.
MY DEAR LORD, Home Office, 22d January 1856.
THE only information here relative to our alterations in the currency of the Isle of
Man being a Minute of an Order in Council assimilating the currency of the island to that
of Great Britain, I desired that a letter should be written to the Lieutenant Governor of
Man; and I enclose his answer just received. If I can make any further inquiry, let me
have your instructions.
- I remain, &c.
The Lord Monteagle. (Signed) W. MASSEY.
Government House, Isle of Man,
SIR, - 19th January 1856.
WITH reference to your letter of the 15th instant, marked private, asking for
information on the change of the currency in the Isle of Man, I beg to say that prior to
1840 there was a copper currency in this island, of which 14d. was equivalent to 1s. British,
and 1 l. 3s. 4d, to 1. sterling,
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 183
On the 17th March 1840, an Act of Tynwald was promulgated assimilating the
copper currency to that of Great Britain, providing for future payments being in British
money, and fixing the equivalent rates. This Act came into operation in September fol-
lowing under a proclamation of the Lieutenant Governor, and upon the first issue of the
new coinage, and calling in of the old, there was great dissatisfaction in the island, espe-
cially among the lower classes, and serious riots took place at Douglas, Peel, and elsewhere.
Considerable damage was done to property, and peace was only restored by the interference
of the military.
I believe the dissatisfaction arose partly from prejudice against any interference with the
old insular currency, to which the people were accustomed, and partly from the belief that
they lost twopence out of a shilling by the change. And I have no doubt that to some
extent the lower classes may have suffered loss at the time in making purchases to small
amounts from the retail dealers, as it is probable that from many of them they may not
have got such an increase of quantity per 1d. British as would be a fair proportion to the
price under the old Manx currency. This feeling has of course long since passed away,
and I am not aware of any inconvenience now, except that in all the Acts of Tynwald
previous to that date, fixing penalties, regulating fees, &c., the amounts are of course
expressed according to the old Manx currency, and have now to be converted into British
money. -
The only other change of the currency here of which I am aware is that in 1710, 1733,
and 1758, Acts were passed respectively, from which it appears, that in consequence of the
inconvenience arising from a deficiency of copper currency at these dates, the Lords of the
Island introduced certain sums of copper money, which are made current in the island by
these Acts.
If there are any other points connected with this subject on which Sir George Grey
wishes for more specific information, I have no doubt I could obtain it from those who
were in the island at the time of the change in 1840.
I have, &c.
(Signed) CHARLES HOPE.
No. 19.
EAST INDIES.
MEMORANDUM by W.M. LEACH, Esq., Assistant Secretary to the Board of Control, on
the Measure adopted by the Government of India, in the year 1835, for establishing a
Uniform Currency in the British Territories.
1. Previously to the change in the Indian currency in 1835, the silver coins, of which
the circulation was authorized by the Government, were of four denominations:—
The sicca rupee in the lower provinces of Bengal;
The Furruckabad rupee in the upper or north-western provinces;
The Arcot rupee at Madras; and
The Bombay rupee at Bombay.
The last three were either precisely, or so nearly of the same weight and fineness, that
they were exchangeable at the Government treasuries the one for the other.
The Madras and Bombay coins were of the weight of 180 grains, and containing 1-12th
of alloy, yielded 165 grains of pure silver. -
The Furruckabad rupee weighed 179° 16 grains. Its pure silver was 164-77 grains.
The sicca rupee weighed 1919 grains, and contained 1759 grains of pure silver.
It had been formerly customary to consider the sicca rupee less valuable according to
the length of time it had been in circulation, and its original fineness being nearly pure
silver, the exposure to abrasion may, in some measure, have favoured the assumption. Hence
arose other denominations of rupees in account.
The sicca rupee, after two years circulation, was called a sonaut, or a coin of years,
which was considered 4% per cent. inferior to the sicca; and the next distinction was
the current rupee, of which 116 were considered equal to 100 siccas, being 6% per cent.
inferior. º -
The sonaut and the current rupees then became coins of account, but were not repre-
sented by any definite portion of the currency.
The accounts of the Government were originally kept in current, and afterwards in sicca
rupees, until the Company's rupee was adopted in account in 1836-37.
The military establishments were deemed to be entitled to be paid at the rate of the
sonaut rupee. The civil allowances were discharged in sicca rupees; and the rents due to
the Government, and the transactions of the public debt, were contracted in the latter coin.
The East India Company, with a view to check depreciations of the coin, and the
impositions of the shroffs, or native money-changers, consequent upon it, determined, in
1773, soon after they began to acquire power, and the right of coining in the lower
No. 18.
Isle of Man.
*
No. 19.
East Indies.
1. State of the
coinage of British
India, prior to the
introduction of a
uniform currency
in 1835.
184 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 19.
East Indies.
2. Difficulties
and inconveniences
apprehended from
a change of the
currency.
3. Introduction
of a uniform cur-
rency.
provinces, that all the sicca currency should bear the date of the nineteenth year of the
Mogul Emperor, Shah Allum, so that the date of coinage of the respective coins might not
be known; and hence the Calcutta sicca rupee bore the title of a “19 sun sicca.’
Other rupees were in circulation, such as the Benares rupee, fabricated by the Govern-
ment at a mint that had been closed, and many descriptions of coins fabricated at native mints.
They were received at the Treasury at certain established rates of value; but only the
coins above enumerated were a legal tender, with their divisions, the small silver and the
copper coins, which were legal tenders for a fraction of the rupee.
Gold coins were fabricated and put into circulation to a limited extent.
The gold mohur was exchangeable for sixteen sicca rupees, and its divisions propor-
tionately.
The subdivision of the several legal rupees was into sixteen annas, and each of these into
twelve pies.
Prior to 1835, the small coins consisted of half and quarter rupees, or eight and four
anna pieces in silver. -
In copper, a pyce was circulated of the value of three pies, and a double pyce of the
value of six pies, or half an anna.
Cowry shells were, and are still used to represent the divisions of the pie for smaller
purchases, but the quantity representing the pie varies at different periods.
2. The introduction of a uniform rupee was urged by the local Government from
time to time upon the attention of the Government at home; but for many years the pro-
position was received unfavourably, under the impression that the projected change involved
many serious risks, and that as the coin was uniform in value throughout the greater part
of India, and interchanges of coin between the Presidencies was very unfrequent, it was
not right to incur those risks for an inadequate benefit.
The inconveniences applehended by the change were of the following character:—
1st. That the zemindars, or landholders, would not submit readily to pay a larger number
of rupees than that which they had engaged to pay under their pottahs, or leases, and that
a loss of 17,80,000 rupees, or 178,000l. a year, would be the consequence of abandoning
the difference. And it was considered that no prudent Government would incur the
danger of that dissatisfaction, or put in question the good faith of the British nation.
2d. That the army stationed in the lower provinces would be dissatisfied if they were
paid in the new rupee instead of the sonaut, as the former would be of two per cent. less
value than the latter.
3d. That the civil servants would never be satisfied to receive a rupee so much inferior
to that in which their salaries were fixed, and that compensation must be made to them
accordingly.
4th. That the proposed change in the currency could not but produce a change in the
prices of commodities; that purchasers at the large sales of salt and opium held by the
Government would not give an equivalent increase in the number of rupees for the articles
they purchased, and that heavy loss would thus accrue to the Government.
The objections of the Court of Directors against the change in the currency were urged,
on the latest occasion, in a despatch dated 11th March 1829, in which they signified their
decided disapproval of the measure, and their desire that it should not be adopted without
their previous authority.
Nothing further passed upon the subject for several years.
3. In 1833 the Act of 3 & 4 William IV., cap. 85., regulating the Government of the
British possessions in India for a further term of 20 years, passed, which conferred greater
powers of control, and supervision of affairs generally in India, upon the Governor General
in Council, and enabled them to pass laws for the administration of affairs in India, which
did not require the previous sanction of Parliament.
The Act, however, gave no countenance to any departure from the distinct instructions
of the Court of Directors, so that the Government of India acted quite irregularly when,
in 1835, without communication with the home authorities, they determined to substitute a
coin called the “Company's Rupee,” for the various coinages then in circulation, including
the sicca currency, and passed an Act (XVII. of 1835) on the 17th August 1835, declaring
that from the lst September following the only silver coins to be fabricated by the Govern-
ment should be a “Company's Rupee,” of the weight of 180 grains, troy, and containing
165 grains of pure silver, together with a half, and quarter, and double rupee.
The inscription was to indicate the year of the reign of the British Sovereign, and to contain
the words “East India Company.” The designation of the Mogul Emperor, and the year of
his reign, were thenceforth discontinued.
It was further enacted that the new coin should pass as equivalent to the Bombay,
Madras, Furruckabad, and sonaut rupees, and to +} of the Calcutta sicca rupee; and the
same proportion to apply to the double rupee, and to the divisions of the rupee. Any
engagements to pay in the Bombay and other rupees might be satisfied by payment in
the Company's rupee, and the same to apply to the principal or interest of the public debt.
A new gold coinage was also authorized. The new mohur being of the value of fifteen
rupees (instead of sixteen, as formerly), and the weight and fineness the same as the
rupee. The inscription was similar to that on the silver coin. But no gold coin was to be
thenceforward a legal tender in the East India Company's territories.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. I85
On the 7th of December 1835, an Act was passed regulating the copper coinage, and
enacting that only the copper coins, hereafter described, should be issued from any mint in
India.
A pyce weighing - *g tº º - 100 grains troy.
A double pyce sº tºº gº - 200 35
A single pie, or ++ of an anna tºº - 33+ 3.5
The pyce to exchange for ºr of a rupee, and the single pie for ++g, so that each pyce
was equivalent to three pies.
These were only to be legal tenders for fractions of a rupee.
The copper coins were the same in division and in weight as those used with the sicca
currency, but were distinguishable from these by inscription.
4. Many circumstances combined, at the period when the change was made, to render
the introduction of the new coin much more easy than was at first apprehended.
A short time before the change, a revision of the salaries of the civil servants of the East
India Company had been effected by Lord William Bentinck, and one part of that revision
was to change the denomination of coin in which they were fixed, from sicca to sonaut
rupees. They thus stood upon the same footing, in that respect, as the military branch
of the service.
This obviated any claim by the civilian for a larger number of the new rupees than that
at which his salary was fixed.
This likewise smoothed the way for the reception, without complaint, of the new rupee
by the army, notwithstanding the inferiority of two per cent. in the value of the new coin,
as compared with the sonaut rupee. The soldier also obtained a benefit which he had
long desired. He received a larger number of rupees than under the rules of the sicca
currency, which yielded only 95 rupees, 11 annas, for 100 sonauts; and he had supposed
that his ability to purchase articles in the bazaar would be pro tanto increased.
With respect to persons having claims upon the Government, fixed in sicca currency,
the fortunate coincidence that the two coins differed in value to the extent of one anna, or
thereabouts, so that the new rupee was exchangeable for fifteen annas of the sicca currency,
presented an important facility for an intelligible exchange of the two coins.
With respect to the copper currency, a large quantity of Benares or Trysolee pyce was
called in, and a considerable loss was borne by the Government.
The substitution of the new for the old Calcutta copper tokens, which, by the Indian
Acts authorizing their fabrication, respectively bore a different value, though of the same
weight, was facilitated by the acceptance of the offer of the Trade Association of
Calcutta, to open change-shops in different stations, where the coins might be easily
exchanged.
A measure subsequently adopted by the Government also promoted the same object.—
They licensed a number of Podars (not less than 60 or 80) in Calcutta and its environs,
whose business it was to exchange the new coin for silver, they retaining half a pie out of
every rupee so exchanged. In the north-western provinces a similar arrangement was
made, but one pie per rupee was retained by the Podar.
This measure has been since disapproved and discontinued; but the particular operation
above described was doubtless facilitated by it while it lasted.
On the 1st January 1838, the Government, considering the new currency sufficiently
in circulation, declared the sicca rupee to be thenceforth receivable only as bullion at the
Public Treasuries,
It should be remarked that in the correspondence of the Indian Government which
followed the change of currency, while inconveniences are admitted to have been expe-
rienced, the information is very meagre as to their nature, and the way in which they were
met. This might arise partly from the fact that the local Government was subjected to severe
reprehension for having acted contrary to the express orders of the Court, and that the
inconveniences resulting from the measure were less fully and pointedly noticed than they
might otherwise have been.
How far the measure may have affected the prices of commodities, and the receipts of
Government from that source, there is no opportunity of judging from the correspondence
of that period.
Upon the whole, there is fair ground to conclude that this change in the Indian currency,
which practically affected only the lower provinces of Bengal, was accomplished without
any considerable loss, and with much less inconvenience than had been anticipated.
It may not be irrelevant to the inquiry now in progress, to mention that one step towards
an important desideratum for India—a decimal coinage,_has been taken, in the fabrica-
tion of one for the use of a section of the British territories in that quarter of the world.
In the year 1847, in consequence of the great want of a legal coin to represent fractions
of the Spanish dollar in the Settlements of Penang, Singapore, and Malacca, where that
coin circulates largely, a coinage of cents, half cents, and quarter cents, constituting decimal
divisions of the dollar, was authorized to be issued by Act VI. of the Indian Legislature of
1847, an extract of which is hereunto subjoined.
It was represented by the Government of Singapore that the coins were brought
into circulation without difficulty, and were very conducive to the convenience of the
inhabitants.
No. 19.
East Indies.
4. Result of the
introduction of the
new currency.
A a
186 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 19.
East Indies.
&
ExTRACT of an Act of the Government of India (No. VI. of 1847), for establishing a
Copper Currency in the Settlements of Penang, Singapore, and Malacca, dated
1st May 1847.
I. It is hereby enacted that from and after the date of the passing of this Act, the
provisions of Acts XXI, of 1835, and XXII. of 1844, shall not be deemed to apply to
copper currency of the Settlements of Penang, Singapore, and Malacca.
II. And it is hereby enacted, that from and after the 1st day of January 1848 the fol-
lowing copper coins only shall be received at, or issued from, any Government Treasury
within the said Settlements:
1. A cent, weighing 144 grains Troy.
2. A half cent, weighing 72 grains ditto.
3. A quarter cent, weighing 36 grains ditto.
III. And it is hereby enacted, that from and after the date of the passing of this Act,
the said cent shall be legal tender throughout the said Settlements for ++r of a dollar,
and the said half cent for ºr of a dollar, and the said quarter cent for +++ of a dollar.
IV. Provided always, and it is hereby enacted, that none of the said coins shall be legal
tender except for fractions of a dollar.
V. And it is hereby enacted, that after the 1st day of January 1848, no other copper
coins or tokens than those specified in Section II. of this Act shall be legal tender of
payment for the fractional parts of a dollar within the said Settlements.
ACT No. XVII. OF 1835.
Passed by the Honourable the Governor General of India in Council on the
17th August 1835.
I. BE it enacted, that from the first day of September 1835, the under mentioned silver
coins only shall be coined at the mints within the territories of the East India Company :
—A rupee, to be denominated the Company’s rupee—a half rupee—a quarter rupee—and
a double rupee; and the weight of the said rupee shall be 180 grains troy, and the standard
shall be as follows:
++, or 165 grains of pure silver,
++, or 15 , of alloy ;
and the other coins shall be of proportionate weight and of the same standard.
II. And be it enacted, that these coins shall bear on the obverse the head and the name
of the reigning Sovereign of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and on
the reverse the designation of the coin in English and Persian, and the words “East India
Company ” in English, with such embellishment as shall, from time to time, be ordered by
the Governor General in Council.
III. And be it enacted, that the Company’s rupee, half rupee, and double rupee, shall
be a legal tender in satisfaction of all engagements, provided the coin shall not have lost
more than two per cent. in weight, and provided it shall not have been clipped or filed, or
have been defaced otherwise than by use.
IV. And be it enacted, that the said rupee shall be received as equivalent to the Bombay,
Madras, Furruckabad, and Sonat rupees, and to fifteen sixteenths of the Calcutta Sicca
rupee, and the half and double rupees respectively shall be received as equivalent to the
half and double of the above-mentioned Bombay, Madras, Furruckabad and Sonat rupees,
and to the half and double of fifteen sixteenths of the Calcutta Sicca rupee.
V. And be it enacted, that the Company’s quarter rupee shall be a legal tender only in
payment of the fraction of a rupee.
VI. Provided, that if in any contract for the payment of Calcutta Sicca rupees it shall
have been specially stipulated that if payment be made in the territories of the Madras,
Bombay, or Agra Presidency, it shall be made in the rupees now current in those Presi-
dencies respectively, at a different rate from that above provided with reference to the
Calcutta Sicca rupee, the contract shall be satisfied by payment within those Presidencies
of Company's rupees of the amount of Furruckabad, Madras, or Bombay rupees so
especially stipulated:—Provided also, that if payment of the principal or interest of the
public debt be made for the convenience of creditors at any public treasury other than as
stipulated in the notes and engagement of the Government, it shall be competent to the
Government to make such payments at the same exchange as heretofore.
VII. And be it enacted, that the under mentioned gold coins only shall henceforth be
coined at the mints within the territories of the East India Company :—
First. A gold mohur or fifteen rupee piece of the weight of 180 grains troy, and of the
following standard, viz.:
++, or 165 grains of pure gold;
tº or 15 , of alloy.
Second. A five rupee piece, equal to a third of a gold mohur.
Third. A ten rupee piece, equal to two thirds of a gold mohur.
Fourth. A thirty rupee piece or double gold mohur; and the three last-mentioned coins
shall be of the same standard with the gold mohur and of proportionate weight.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 187
VIII. And be it enacted, that these gold coins shall bear on the obverse the head and
name of the reigning Sovereign of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
and on the reverse the designation of the coin in English and Persian, and the words
“East India Company ” in English, with such embellishment as shall from time to time be
ordered by the Governor General in Council, which shall always be different from that of
the silver coinage.
IX. And be it enacted, that no gold coin shall henceforward be a legal tender of payment
in any of the territories of the East India Company.
X. And be it enacted, that it shall be competent to the Governor General in Council, in
his executive capacity, to direct the coining and issuing of all coins authorized by this Act;
to prescribe the devices and inscriptions of the copper coins issued from the mints in the
said territories, and to establish, regulate, and abolish mints, any law hitherto in force to
the contrary notwithstanding.
MEMORANDUM BY JAMES COSMO MELVILL, JUN., ESQ.
There can be no question that the operation of Act XVII. of 1835 has been beneficial.
During the twenty years which have elapsed a great progress has been made towards the
universal acceptance in India of the Company's rupee (165 grains pure and 15 grains
alloy); still much remains to be accomplished.
With respect to Central India, where for many years the new rupee failed to find any
acceptance (the vicinity of other mints belonging to native powers doubtless forming a
great obstacle), the Court of Directors were able, on the 13th April 1853, to write as
follows to the Government of India :—
“ The letter from Mr. Bushby, the Governor General’s agent in Bundlecund, dated
“ 13th May 1851, has been received by us with much satisfaction, as evidencing that
“ considerable progress has been made in the last few years towards attaining a general
“ uniformity in the silver currencies of Bundlecund and the Sangor and Nerbudda
“territory.”
The recent accessions of territory in the Punjab, Pegu, and Berar, have afforded oppor-
tunities for extending the circulation of the rupee, which have not been neglected. It is
believed that the measures adopted have been very successful in the Punjab, but a com-
plete change of currency is, of course, a work of time.
The difficulties which have been experienced have been in great measure owing to the
proceedings of the native shroffs, or money changers, whose business would be limited and
their profits curtailed by the establishment of one uniform silver coin. These difficulties
have from time to time been noticed in correspondence with the Government of India.
So lately as the 12th September last the Court addressed the following remarks to that
Government with reference to the difficulty experienced in withdrawing the local curren-
cies of Rohilcund :-
“It appears that our instructions for the receipt of the local currencies of Rohilcund
(consisting chiefly of Bareilly, Furruckabad, and Nujeejabad rupees), as bullion by
weight in exchange for Company’s rupees, instead of by tale at certain rates of discount,
“ has been quite ineffectual towards the withdrawal of those currencies from circulation,
“ owing, doubtless, as observed by the Agra Board of Revenue, to the fact that the supe-
“ rior fineness of the old native rupees would leave the Government an advantage of two
“ or three per cent. on the transaction.
“It is therefore right that the rate of receipt should be altered, after the real value of
“ the coins in question shall have been determined upon more accurate assays. This is a
necessary preliminary step, whatever may be the ulterior proceedings.
“It being evidently conducive to the pecuniary advantages of the shroffs to maintain a
“ variety of currencies in circulation, we question, whatever measures be adopted, whether
“ they will be efficacious, so long as any profit can be reaped by the shroffs in the
“ exchange of Company's rupees. We believe, in short, that the withdrawal of the native
“ currency cannot be effected except at a pecuniary sacrifice to the Government; and with
“ reference to the suggestion of the Accountant of the north-west provinces, that recourse
“ should be had to a prohibitory and penal exactment, such a measure would, in our judg-
“ ment, be unadvisable, and calculated to retard the object in view, which is more likely
“ to be accomplished by encouraging the people to co-operate with the Government, than
“ by the employment of restrictive and therefore unpopular measures.”
Hopes were entertained about three years ago, that the Nizam might be induced to
accept a coin of the same weight and fineness as the Company's rupee, as the currency of
his dominions. His Highness had expressed a wish to be furnished from the Calcutta
mint with rupees of the same size, quality, and value as the Company's rupee, but with a
different inscription. The Court, in reply to the reference of the Government of India
upon the subject, wrote as follows (Despatch dated 15th June 1853): —
“While we concur with the Governor General in objecting to the manufacture at the Bri-
‘tish Indian mints of any coin bearing the insignia of, or in any way recognizing the King of
“ Delhi as suzerain of the Nizam, we think the favourable opportunity now presented of
‘ assimilating the Hydrabad currency in weight and fineness to the Company's rupee should
“ not be allowed to pass without some further proposal being made on the part of the
Governor General's agent to induce the Nizam either to accept the British Indian cur-
• rency in substitution of that of his own mints, or to adopt a coinage bearing his own
66
C 6
G
6
6
(
&
&
&
No. 19.
East Indies.
A a 2
188 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 19.
East Indies.
No. 20.
Emperor Napoleon.
Mºuammanºm•
* name, without any objectionable device, and to be manufactured at the mint either of
* Madras or Calcutta.
* It is scarcely necessary to enumerate the manifold evils resulting from the present
* condition of the Hydrabad currency. They have frequently been practically exhibited.
* An uncertain and fluctuating exchange, and the introduction of base and spurious coins,
* inevitably attends the circulation in the same country of a great variety of coins, the
* production of several mints. Any reform, to be effectual, must, we are convinced, be
* carried out with the assistance, amd by the agency of your Government, and as we
* cannot doubt that a complete reform would afford vast relief to the subjects of the
* Nizam, by freeing them in their monetary transactions from the grasping exactions of
* the money brokers who now rule the exchanges according to their own will, and for their
* own pecuniary advantage, we consider it important to endeavour to persuade the Nizam
* to conform the coinage to the British Indian standard of weight and fineness. The
* present opportunity is a good one for the purpose, the initiative proposition having been
* made by the desire of his Highness. Ff the result should be favourable to our views, it
* will be necessary to pass a short Act in modification of Act No. XVII. of 1835, the
* existing law not permitting the coinage at the Government mints of any silver pieces
* except the Company's rupee and its fractional parts."
The anticipations of the Court have, however, not been realized. The Government of
India, in a Despatch lately received, give it as their opinion that there is no prospect of
the Nizam giving his consent to any real or permanent reform of the Hydrabad currency.
But measures have been adopted for giving currency to the Company's rupee in the
districts recently assigned by the Nizam to the British Government, in discharge of the
money debt due from his Highness. It is affirmed that there are still no less than 96
descriptions of rupees current in the Nizam's dominions.
6
No. 20.
ExTRACT from the Memoirs dictated by Napoleon at St. Helena to Count de
Montholon. Vol. 3, p. 210.
Le besoin de l'uniformité des poids et mesures a été senti dans tous les siècles ; plusieurs
fois les états-généraux l'ont signalé. On attendait ce bienfait de la Révolution. La loi sur
cette matière était si simple, qu'elle pouvait être rédigée dans vingt-quatre heures, adoptée
et pratiquée dans toute la France en moins d'un année. Il fallait rendre commune à toutes
les provinces l'unité des poids et mesures de la ville de Paris. Le Gouvernment, les
artistes, s'en servaient depuis plusieurs siècles ; en envoyant des étalons dans toutes les
communes, contraignant l'administration et les tribunaux à n'en point admettre d'autres, le
bienfait eut été opéré sans efforts, sans gêne, et sans lois coercitives. Les géomètres, les
algébristes, furent consultés dans une question qui n'était que du ressort de l'administra-
tion. Ils pensèrent que l'unité des poids et mesures devaient être déduite d'un ordre
naturel, afin qu'elle fût adoptée par toutes les nations. Ils crurent qu'il n'était pas suffisant
de faire le bien de quarante millions d'hommes, ils voulurent y faire participer l'univers.
Ils trouvèrent que le mètre était une partie aliquote du méridien ; ils en furent la démon-
stration, et le proclamèrent dans une assemblée composée de géomètres Français, Italiens,
Espagnols, et Hollandais. Dès ce moment, on décréta une nouvelle unité de poids et
mesures, qui ne cadra ni avec les réglemens de l'administration publique, ni avec les tables
de dimension de tous les arts, ni avec celles d'aucune des machines existantes. Il n'y avait
pas d'avantage à ce que ce système s'étendît à tout l'univers. Cela était d'ailleurs impossi-
ble ; l'esprit national des Anglais et des Allemands s'y fût opposé. Si Grégoire VII. en
réformant le calendrier l'a rendu commun à toute l'Europe, c'est que cette réforme tenait à
des idées religieuses, qu'elle n'a point été faite par une nation, mais par la puissance de
l'église. Cependant on sacrifiait à des abstractions et à de vaines espérances le bien des
générations présentes ; car pour faire adopter à une nation vieille une nouvelle unité de
poids et de mesures, il faut refaire tous les réglements d'administration publique, tous les
calculs des arts ; c'est un travail qui effraie la raison. La nouvelle unité des poids et
mesures, quelle qu'elle soit, a une échelle ascendante et descendante qui ne cadre plus en
nombres simples avec l'échelle d'unité des poids et mesures qui sert, depuis des siècles, au
Government, aux savans et aux artistes. La traduction ne se peut faire de l'une à l'autre
nomenclature; parceque ce qui est exprimé par le chiffre le plus simple dans l'ancienne,
se trouverait dans le nouvelle un chiffre composé. Il faudra donc augmenter ou diminuer
de quelques fractions, afin que l'espèce ou le poids exprimée dans la nouvelle nomenclature,
le soit en chiffres simples. Ainsi, par exemple, la ration du soldat est exprimée par vingt-
quatre onces dans l'ancienne nomenclature ; c'est un nombre fort simple ; traduit dans la nou-
velle, il donne sept cent trente-quatre grammes deux cent cinquante-neuf millièmes. Il est
donc évident qu'il faut l'augmenter ou la diminuer pour pouvoir arriver a sept cent trente-
quatre ou sept cent trente-cinq grammes. Toutes les pièces et lignes qui composent
l'architecture, tous les outils et pièces qui servent l'horlogerie, à la bijouterie, à la librarie,
et à tous les arts ; tous les instruments, toutes les macbines, ont été pensés et calculés dans
l'ancienne nomenclature, et sont exprimés par des nombres simples, que la traduction
ne pourrait rendre qu'en nombres composés de cinq à six chiffres, Il faudra donc tout
refaire. -
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 189
Les savans conçurent une autre idée tout-à-fait étrangère au bienfait de l'unité de poids
et de mesures ; ils y adaptèrent la numération décimale, en prenant le mètre pour unité;
ils supprimèrent tous les nombres complexes. Rien n'est plus contraire a l'organisation, de
l'esprit, de la mémoire et de l'imagination. Une toise, un pied, un pouce, une ligne, un
point, sont des portions d'étendue fixés, que l'imagination conçoit indépendamment de leurs
rapports entre eux ; si donc on demande un tiers de pouce, l'esprit opère sur-le-champ ;
c'est l'étendue appelée pouce qu'il divise en trois. Par le nouveau système, au contraire,
ce n'est pas l'opération de diviser un pouce en trois que doit faire l'esprit ; c'est un mètre
qu'il lui faut diviser en cent onze parties. L'expérience de tous les siècles avait tellement
fait comprendre la difficulté de diviser un espèce ou un poids au-delà de douze, qu'a chacune
de ces divisions on avait créé un nouveau nom complexe. Si on demandait un douzième
de pouce, l'opération était toute faite, c'était le nombre complexe appelé ligne. La numéra-
tion décimale s'appliquait à tous les nombres complexes comme unité ; et si l'on avait besoin
d'un centième de point, d'un centième de ligne, on écrivait un centième ; par le nouveau
système, si l'on veut exprimer un centième de ligne il faut avoir recours à son rapport avec
le mètre, ce qui jette dans un calcul infini. On avait préféré le diviseur 12 au diviseur 10,
parceque l0 n'a que deux facteurs 2 et 5, et que 12 en a quatre, savoir, 2, 3, 4 et 6. Il
est vrai que la numération décimale, généralisée et exclusivement adaptée au mètre comme
unité, donne des facilités aux astronomes et aux calculateurs ; mais ces avantages sont loin
de compenser l'inconvénient de rendre la pensée plus difficile. Le premier caractère de
toute méthode doit être d'aider la conception et l'imagination, faciliter la mémoire, donner
plus de puissance à la pensée. Les nombres complexes sont aussi anciens que l'homme,
parcequ'ils sont dans la nature de son organisation, tout comme il est dans la nature de la
numération décimale de s'adapter à chaque unité, à chaque nombre complexe, et non à une
unité exclusivement.
Enfin, ils se servirent de racines Grecques, ce qui augmenta les difficultés ; ces dénomi-
nations, qui pouvaient être utiles pour les savans, n'étaient pas bonnes pour le peuple.
Les poids et mesures furent une des grandes affaires du Directoire. Au lieu de laisser agir
le temps, et de se contenter d'encourager le nouveau système par tous les moyens de
l'exemple et de la mode, il fit des lois coercitives, qu'il fit exécuter avec rigueur. Les
marchands et les citoyens se trouvèrent vexés pour des affaires en elles-mêmes indifférentes;
ce qui contribua encore à dépopulariser une administration qui se plaçait hors du besoin
et de la portée du peuple, brisait avec violence ses usages, ses habitudes, ses coutumes,
comme l'aurait pu faire un conquérant Grec ou Tartare, qui, la verge levée, veut être obéi
dans toutes ses volontés, qu'il règle sur ses préjugés et ses intérêts, abstraction faite de ceux
du vaincu. Le nouveau système de poids et mesures sera un sujet d'embarras et de
difficultés pour plusieurs générations ; et il est probable que la première commission
savante chargée de vérifier la mesure du méridien trouvera quelques corrections à faire.
C'est tourmenter le peuple pour des vétilles.
No. 21.
ExTRACTs from a REPoRT upon WEIGHTs and MEAsUREs. By JoHN QUINCY ADAMs,
Secretary of State of the United States. Presented to the Senate, Feb. 22, 1821.
8vo. Washington, 1821, p. 53.
In France the principle of decimal arithmetic was applied exclusively to all weights
and measures ; their multiples were all tenfold, and their subdivisions were all tenth paris
To complete the system a vocabulary of new denominations was annexed to every
weight and measure belonging to it. As a circumstance of great importance to the final
success of the system, it may be remarked that these two incidents, the exclusive adoption
of decimal divisions and the new nomenclature, have proved the greatest obstacles to the
general introduction of the new weights and measures among the people.
It has indeed from its origin, like all great undertakings, been obliged to contend with
the intemperate zeal and precipitation of its friends, not less than with prejudice, ignorance,
and jealousy of every description. The admeasurement of the meridian was commenced
at the very moment of the fanatical paroxysm of the French revolution. At every station
of their progress in the field survey the commissioners were arrested by the suspicions and
alarms of the people, who took them for spies or engineers of the invading enemies of
France.
The Government was soon overthrown, the Academy of Sciences abolished, and the
National Assembly of the first constitutional monarchy, just at the eve of their dissolution,
instead of waiting calmly for the completion of the great work which was to lay the
foundation of a system to be as lasting as the globe, in a fit of impatience passed, on the
1st of August 1793, a law, declaring that the system should go immediately into Opera-
tion, and assuming for the length of the standard metre the ten millionth part of the quadrant
of the meridian, according to the result of the old measurement of a degree in 1740, and
· arranging an entire system of weights and measures, in decimal divisions, with new deno-
minations, all of which were to be merely temporary, and to cease when the definitive
length of the metre should be ascertained. This extraordinary act was probably intended,
as it directly tended, to prevent the º,prosecution of the original plan ; and though
- a 3
No. 2O.
Emperor Napoleon.
"- -- --
No. 21.
J. Quincy Adams.
190 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 21.
J. Quincy Adams.
**E=
**
soon after, it was followed by a decree, of 11th September 1793, authorizing the
temporary continuance of the general committee of weights and measures, which had
been appointed by the Academy, yet, on the 23d December of the same year, a decree of
Robespierre's Committee of Public Safety dismissed from the commission Borda, Lavoi-
sier, Laplace, Coulomb, Brisson, and Delambre, on the pretence that they were not
republicans sufficiently pure. Mechain escaped the same proscription only because he was
detained as a prisoner in Spain.
Yet even Robespierre and his committee were ambitious, not only of establishing the
system of new weights and measures in France, but of offering them to the adoption of
other nations. By a decree of that committee, of 11th December 1793, the Board or
Commission of Weights and Measures were directed to send to the United States of America
a metre in copper and a weight, being copies of the standards then just adopted. They
were accordingly transmitted; and on the 2d of August 1794, the two standards were, by
the then French minister plenipotentiary Fauchet, sent to the Secretary of State, with a
letter recommending, with some urgency, the adoption of the system by the United States.
This letter was communicated to Congress by a message from the President of the United
States, of the 8th of January 1795.
In the meantime the mensuration of the arc of the meridian was entirely suspended, by
the dismissal of Delambre and the detention of Mechain. Its progress was renewed by a
decree of the National Convention of 7th April 1795, which abolished almost entirely the
nomenclature of the temporary standards adopted in August 1793, and substituted a new
one, being that still recognized by the law, and the units of which have been already
mentioned—the metre, the gramme, the are, the litre, and the stère. To express the
multiples of these units, the Greek words denominating ten, a hundred, a thousand, and
ten thousand, were prefixed as additional syllables; while their tenth, hundredth, and
thousandth parts were denoted by similar prefixed syllables from the Latin language.
Thus, the myria-metre is ten thousand, and the kilo-metre one thousand, the hecto-metre
one hundred, and the deca-metre ten metres; each of those prefixed syllables being the
Greek word expressive of those respective numbers; while the deci-metre, the centi-metre,
and the milli-metre are tenth, hundredth, and thousandth parts, signified by the Latin
syllables respectively prefixed to them. The theory of this nomenclature is perfectly
simple and beautiful. Twelve new words, five of which denote the things and seven the
numbers, include the whole system of metrology; give distinct and significant names to
every weight, measure, multiple, and subdivision, of the whole system ; discard the worst
of all the sources of error and confusion in weights and measures, the application of the
same name to different things; and keep constantly present to the mind the principle of
decimal arithmetic, which combines all the weights and measures, the proportion of each
weight or measure with all its multiples and divisions, and the chain of uniformity which
connects together the profoundest researches of science with the most accomplished labours
of art, and the daily occupations and wants of domestic life in all classes and conditions of
society. Yet this is the part of the system which has encountered the most insuperable
obstacles in France. The French nation have refused to learn or to repeat those twelve
words. They have been willing to take a total and radical change of things; but they
insist upon calling them by old names. They take the metre; but they must call one-
third part of it a foot. The accept the kilogramme; but, instead of pronouncing its name,
they choose to call one half of it a pound. Not that the third of a metre is a foot, or the
half of a kilogramme is a pound; but because they are not very different from them, and
because, in expressions of popular origin, distinctness of idea in the use of language is
more closely connected with habitual usage than with precision of expression.
This observation may be illustrated by our own experience, in a change effected by our-
selves in the denominations of our coins, a revolution by all experience known to be
infinitely more easy to accomplish than that of weights and measures. At the close of our
War of Independence, we found ourselves with four English words—pound, shilling, penny,
and farthing, to signify all our moneys of account. But though English words they were
not English things. They were nowhere sterling, and scarcely in any two states of the
Union were they representatives of the same sums. It was a Babel of confusion by the
use of four words. In our new system of coinage we set them aside. We took the
Spanish piece of eight, which had always been the coin most current amongst us, and to
which we had given a name of our own—a dollar. Introducing the principle of decimal
divisions, we said, a tenth part of our dollar shall be called a dime, a hundredth part a cent,
and a thousandth part a mille. Like the French, we took all these new denominations from
the Latin language; but instead of prefixing them as syllables to the generic term dollar, we
reduced them to monosyllables, and made each of them significant by itself, without refer-
ence to the unit of which they were fractional parts. The French themselves, in the
application of their system to their coins, have followed our example ; and assuming the
franc for their unit, call its tenth part a decime and its hundredth part a centime. It is now
nearly thirty years since our new moneys of accounts, our coins, and our mint, have been
established. The dollar, under its new stamp, has preserved its name and circulation. The
cent has become tolerably familiarised to the tongue, wherever it has been made by circu-
lation familiar to the hand. But the dime having been seldom, and the mille never, pre-
sented in their material images to the people, have remained so utterly unknown, that now,
when the recent coinage of dimes is alluded to in our public journals, if their name is
mentioned it is always with an explanatory definition to inform the reader that they are ten
DECIMAL COIN AGE COMMISSION. | 9 |
cent pieces; and some of them which have found their way over the mountains by the
generous hospitality of the country have been received for more than they were worth, and
have passed for an eighth, instead of a tenth, part of a dollar. Even now, at the end of
thirty years, ask a tradesman or shopkeeper in any of our cities what is a dime or a mille,
and the chances are four in five that he will not understand your question. But go to
New York and offer in payment the Spanish coin, the unit of the Spanish piece of eight,
and the shop or market man will take it for a shilling. Carry it to Boston or Richmond,
and you shall be told it is not a shilling but ninepence. Bring it to Philadelphia, Balti-
more, or the city of Washington, and you shall find it recognised for an elevenpenny bit;
and if you ask how that can be, you shall learn that, the dollar being of ninety pence, the
eighth part of it is nearer to eleven than to any other number; and pursuing still
further the arithmetic of popular denominations, you will find that half eleven is five, or
at least that half the elevenpenny bit is the fivepenny bit, which fivepenny bit at Rich-
mond shrinks to fourpence halfpenny, and at New York swells to sixpence. And thus we
have English denominations most absurdly and diversely applied to Spanish coins, while
our own lawfully established dime and mille remain, to the great mass of the people,
among the hidden mysteries of political economy—state secrets.
Human nature, in its broadest features, is everywhere the same. This result of our
own experience, upon a small scale, and upon a single object, will easily account for the
repugnance of the French people to adopt the new nomenclature of their weights and
measures. It is not the length of the words that constitutes the objection against them, nor
the difficulty of pronunciation; for fivepenny bit is as hard to speak and as long a word as
kilogramme, and elevenpenny bit has certainly more letters and syllables, and less euphony,
than myriametre. But it is because in the ordinary operations of the mind distinctness
dea is, by the laws of nature, linked with the chain of association between sensible
images and their habitual denominations, more closely than with the exactness of logical
analysis.
Page 67–9.
The law of the 1st of August, 1793, established all the principles of the new system, but
under denominations different from those which had ever been used before, and
not less different from those which have been adopted since. It directed the Academy
of Sciences to compose an elementary book, containing a clear explanation of the new
weights and measures, with tables of equalization and instructions for adapting them
to those which had been in use until them. A few days afterwards the Academy was itself
abolished; but the duty of composing the book was assigned to a temporary commission, or
board of weights and measures, consisting of the same persons who had been employed as
members of the academy on the work. The book was composed and published in the year
1794; but on the 19th of January of that year, (30 Nivose 2,) the nomenclature had
already been changed, and on the 7th of April 1795, (18 Germinal 3,) a nomenclature
entirely new, with the exception of three or four words, was enacted. The names ordained
by this law of 7th April 1795, are still the proper technical appellations, and have already
been mentioned with their Greek and Latin prefixes of decimal multiples and subdivisions.
The same law directed that weights and measures might be made of double or of half the
units and their tenth part or tenth-fold amounts; but that no other subdivision or mul-
tiple, such as thirds, or quarters, or sixth, or eighth parts, should be allowed. The law of
19 Frimaire 8, (10th December 1799), declared the platina metre of 443,296 lines in the
kilogramme of 18,827-15 grains mark weight, to be the definitive standard weight and
measure ; on the 13th Brumaire 9, (4th November 1800), the executive directory issued an
arrèté, or order, authorizing, either in public writings or in habitual usage, what they called
a translation into French words of the authentic nomenclature; so that the myriametre
might be called a league, the kilometre a mile, the litre a pint, the kilogramme a pound,
the hectogramme an ounce, the gramme a denier, and so of all the rest, excepting the metre,
which was to have no synonymous or translated name, and the stere, for firewood and
measures of solidity. This ordinance was never executed, and the minister of the interior,
by an order of 30 Frimaire 14, (21 December 1805,) directed all the subordinate adminis-
trations to use exclusively the denominations prescribed by the law of 7th April, 1795.
An imperial decree of 12th February 1812, presents the subject under a new aspect,
by ordaining,
1. That the units of weights and measures should remain unchanged, as established by
the law of 10th December 1799.
2. That the minister of the interior should cause to be made instruments for weight
and mensuration, presenting the fractions or multiples of the said units the most
commonly used in commerce, and accommodated to the wants of the people.
3. That these instruments should bear on their respective faces the comparison of the
divisions and denominations established by law with those which had been formerly
used.
4. That after a term of ten years, a report should be presented to the Emperor of the
result of experience upon the improvements of which the system of weights and
measures might be susceptible.
5. That in the meantime the legal system should continue to be taught in all the schools
and be exclusively used in all the public offices, and in all markets, halls, and com-
mercial transactions.
No. 21.
J. Quincy Adams.
A a 4
192 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 21
J. Quincy Adams.
sºmeº
For the execution and explanation of this decree an ordinance was on the 28th of March
1812, issued by the Minister of the Interior, of the following purport:-
Art. 1: Permission was granted to employ for the purpose of commerce,
1. A long measure equal to two metres, to be called a toise, and to be divided into
six feet. -
2. A measure equal to one-third of the metre, to be called a foot, to be divided into
twelve thumbs, and the thumb into twelve lines.
Each of these measures shall bear on one side the corresponding divisions of the metre,
that is to say, the toise, two metres, divided into decimetres, and the first decimetre into
millimetres, and the foot, three decimetres and one third, divided into centimetres and
millimetres, in all 333+ millimetres.
Art. 2. All cloths may be measured by a stick equal in length to twelve decimetres,
to be called an ell (aune), which shall be divided into halves, quarters, eighths, and six-
teenths, as well as into thirds, sixths, and twelfths. It shall bear on one of its sides the
corresponding divisions of the metre, in centimetres only ; that is to say, 120 centimetres,
numbered from ten to ten.
Art, 4. Corn and other dry measure articles may be measured, in sales at retail, by a
vessel equal to one-eighth of the hectolitre, which shall be called a boisseau, and shall have
its double, its half, and its quarter.
Art. 5. For retail sales of corn, seeds, meal, and roots, green or dry, the litre may be
divided into halves, quarters, and eighths.
Art. 7. For retail sales of wine, brandy, and other liquors, measures of one quarter,
one-eighth, and one-sixteenth of the litre may be used, each of which measures shall be
called by a name signifying its proportion to the litre.
Art. 8. For retail sales of all the articles which are sold by weight, the shopmen may
employ the following usual weights:—
The pound (livre), equal to half a kilogramme or 500 grammes, which shall be divided
into sixteen ounces.
The ounce (once), or sixteenth part of a pound, which shall be divided into eight gros.
The gros or eighth part of the ounce, which shall be divided into halves, quarters, and
eighths.
They shall bear, with their appropriate names, the indication of their weight in grammes,
namely:-
The pound º : - } & - 500 grammes,
Half pound º º -> º - 250 33
Quarteron - º ſº º - 125 55
Eighth, or half quarter tº -> - 62 5 ,
Ounce º e. -> tº-e - 31 3 ,
Half ounce º º tº tº a - 15 6 ,
Quarter ounce, two gros tº- & is tº- 7 : 8 ,
Gros --> tº º e-e tº 3 - 9
35
And such is at this day the system of weights and measures, or, rather, such are the
systems existing in France in their present condition; for it cannot escape observation, that
this decree and explanatory ordinance engraft upon the legal system an entirely new
system, founded upon different, and in many important respects opposite, principles; so
that the result, hitherto, of the most stupendous and systematic effort ever made by a nation
to introduce uniformity in their weights and measures, has been a conflict between four
distinct systems:
1. That which existed before the Revolution.
2. The temporary system introduced by the law of 1st August 1793.
3. The definitive system established by the law of 10th December 1799; and,
4. The usual system, permitted by the decree of 12th February 1812.
This last decree is a compromise between philosophical theory and inveterate popular
habits. Retaining the principle of decimal multiplication and division for the legal system,
it abandons them entirely in the weights and measures, which it allows the people to use.
Instead of the metre and its decimals, it gives the people a toise of six feet, an aune of
three feet and one fifth, a foot of twelve thumbs, and a thumb of twelve lines. And these
measures, instead of divisions exclusively decimal, are divisible in halves, thirds, quarters,
sixths, eighths, twelfths, and sixteenths. Instead of a decimated kilogramme, it gives
them a pound of sixteen ounces, an ounce of eight gros, and a gros of seventy-two
grains. The standards of capacity, wet and dry, have the same indulgence,
Page 70.
It appears also not to have been considered that decimal arithmetic, although affording
great facilities for the computation of numbers, is not equally well suited for the divisions
of material substances. A glance of the eye is sufficient to divide material substances into
successive halves, fourths, eighths, and sixteenths. A slight attention will give thirds,
sixths, and twelfths. But divisions of fifth and tenth parts are among the most difficult
that can be performed without the aid of calculation. Among all its conveniences, the
decimal division has the great disadvantage of being itself divisible only by the numbers
two and five. The duodecimal division, divisible by two, three, four, and six, would offer so
many advantages over it, that while the French theory was in contemplation, the question
DECIMAI, COIN AGE COMMISSION. 193
was discussed, whether the reformation of weights and measures should not be extended
to the system of arithmetic itself, and whether the number twelve should not be substi-
tuted for ten, as the term of the periodic return of the unit. Since the establishment
of the French system, this idea has been reproduced by philosophical critics as an
objection against it; and Delambre, in the third volume of the Base du Système Me-
trique, page 302, has considered it, and assigned the reasons for which it had been
rejected. He admits, to the full extent, the advantages of a duodecimal over a decimal
arithmetic, but alleges the difficulty of effecting the reformation, as the decisive reason
against attempting it.
Page 73.
In the French system decimal divisions were prescribed by law exclusively. The
binary division was allowed as being compatible with it, but all others were rigorously ex-
cluded; no thirds, no fourths, no sixths, no eighths, or twelfths. But this part of the system
has been abandoned, and the people are now allowed all the ancient varieties of multiplica-
tion and division, which are still further complicated by the decimal proportions of the law.
Page 81.
The advantages of the French system might, however, be with ease adapted to that of
France, but for the exclusive application in the latter of the decimal arithmetic to all its
multiples and subdivisions. The decimal numbers applied to the French weights and
measures, form one of its highest theoretic excellences. It has, however, been proved, by
the most decisive experience in France, that they are not adequate to the wants of man
in society; and for all the purposes of retail trade they have been formally abandoned.
The convenience of decimal arithmetic is in its nature merely a convenience of calculation;
it belongs essentially to the keeping of accounts, but is merely an incident to the trans-
actions of trade. It is applied, therefore, with unquestionable advantage to moneys of
account, as we have done; yet, even in our application of it to the coins we have not only
found it inadequate but, in some respects, inconvenient. The divisions of the Spanish
dollar as a coin are not only into tenths, but into halves, quarters, fifths, eighths, sixteenths,
and twentieths. We have the halves, quarters, and twentieths, and might have the fifths;
but the eighth makes a fraction of the cent, and the sixteenth even a fraction of a mil.
These eighths and sixteenths form a very considerable proportion of our metallic currency;
and although the eighth, dividing the cent only into halves, adapts itself without incon-
venience to the system, the fraction of the sixteenth is not so tractable, and in its circulation
as small change it passes for six cents, though its value is six and a quarter, and there is a
loss by its circulation of four per cent. between the buyer and the seller. For all the trans-
actions of retail trade the eighth and sixteenth of a dollar are among the most useful
and convenient of our coins ; and although we have never coined them ourselves, we
should have felt the want of them, if they had not been supplied to us from the coinage of
Spain.
*. illustration from our own experience of the modifications with which decimal arith-
metic is adaptable even to money, its most intimate and congenial natural relative, will
disclose to our view the causes which limit the exclusive application of decimal arith-
metic to numbers, and admit only a partial and qualified application of them to weight or
DO €3MSUll'C.
Page 84.
In the promiscuous use of the old weights and measures and the new, which was una-
voidable in the transition from the one to the other, the approximation to each other of the
quarter and the fifth parts of the unit became a frequent source of the most pernicious frauds
—frauds upon the scanty pittance of the poor. The small dealers in groceries and liquors,
and marketmen, gave the people the fifth of a kilogramme for a half pound, and the fifth of
the litre for a half setier. The most easy and natural divisions of liquids are in continual
halvings, and the Paris pint was thus divided into halves, quarters, eighths, sixteenths,
and thirty-second parts, by the names of chopines, half setiers, possons, half possoms, and
roquilles; the half setier, just equivalent to our half pint, was the measure in most common
use for supplying the daily necessities of the poor; and thus the decimal divisions of the
law became snares to the honesty of the seller, and cheats upon the wants of the buyer.
Thus, then, it has been proved by the test of experience that the principle of decimal divi-
sions can be applied only with many qualifications to any general system of metrology; that
its natural application is only to numbers, and that time, space, gravity, and extension in-
flexibly reject its sway. The new metrology of France, after trying it in its most universal
theoretical application, has been compelled to renounce it for all the measures of astronomy,
geography, navigation, time, the circle, and the sphere; to modify it even for superficial
and cubical linear measure, and to compound with vulgar fractions, in the most ordinary
and daily uses of all its weights and all its measures. It has restored the foot, the pound,
and the pint, with all their old subdivisions, though not exactly with their old dimensions.
The foot, with its duodecimal divisions into thumbs and lines, returns in the form the most
irreconcileable possible with the decimals of the metre; for it comes in the proportion of
three to ten, and consists of 333; millimetres. This indulgence to linear measure is
No. 21.
J. Quincy Adams.
amº
B. b
194 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 21.
J. Quincy Adams.
Thos. Jefferson.
––––– "
without qualification, and may be used in all commerce, whether of wholesale or retail.
The restoration of the pound, the boisseau and the pint is limited to retail trade. The
fractions of the pound are as averse to decimal combination as those of the foot. The
eighth of a pound, for instance, is 62/5 decigrammes, each of about 14 grain troy weight.
The half of this eighth is an ounce, to form which decimally requires a recourse to another
fractional stage, and to say 31.25 milligrammes. But the milligramme being equivalent to
less than 4 of a grain troy weight, is too minute for accurate application, so that it is called
and marked upon the weight itself as 31-3 decigranmes; the half ounce instead of 15.625
decimilligrammes, is marked for 15-6 decigrammes; the quarter of an ounce, instead of
7-8125, passes for 7-8 decigrammes, and the gros or groat, instead of 3.90625 is abridged
to 3-9. The ounce and all the smaller weights, therefore, reject the coalition of subdivision
by decimal and vulgar fractions, and the weights for account are different from the weights
for trade.
From the verdict of experience, therefore, it is doubtful whether the advantage to be
obtained by any attempt to apply decimal arithmetic to weights and measures, would ever
compensate for the increase of diversity which is the unavoidable consequence of change.
Decimal arithmetic is a contrivance of man for computing numbers, and not a property of
time, space, or matter. Nature has no partialities for the number ten ; and the attempt to
shackle her freedom with them will ever prove abortive.
Page 89-90.
After an experience of several years it was found necessary, not only to give back to
the people the vulgar fractions of their measures, which had been taken from them, but all
their indefinite and many-meaning words of pound and ounce, foot, aune and thumb,
boisseau, and pint. Since which time there have been, besides all the relics of the old
metrology, two concurrent systems of weights and measures in France; one, the proper
legal system, with decimal divisions and multiplications, and the new, precise, and signifi-
cant nomenclature; and the other a system of sufferance with the same instruments, but
divided in all the old varieties of vulgar fractions, and with the old improper vocabulary
made still more so by its adaptation to new and different things.
Perhaps it may be found by more protracted and multiplied experience that this is the
only uniformity attainable by a system of weights and measures for universal use; that the
same material instruments shall be divisible decimally for calculations and accounts, but in
any other matter suited to convenience in the shops and markets; that their appropriate
legal denominations shall be used for computation, and the trivial names for actual weight
or mensuration.
o
Page 93.
The experience of France has proved that binary, ternary, duodecimal, and sexagesimal
divisions are as necessary to the practical use of weights and measures as the decimal
divisions are convenient for calculations resulting from them, and that no plan for intro-
ducing the latter can dispense with the continued use of the former.
“No TEs on the ESTABLISHMENT of a MoREY UNIT, and of a COINAGE for the UNITED
STATEs, by THOMAS JEFFERSON.” Prepared in the Year 1784, and which laid the
Foundation of the System adopted by Congress for a Coinage and Money of Account.
—Randolph's Mem. and Corresp. of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 1, p. 134.
IN fixing the unit of money, these circumstances are of principal importance—
I. That it be of convenient size to be applied as a measure to the money transactions of
life.
II. That its parts and multiples be in an easy proportion to each other, so as to facilitate
the money arithmetic.
III. That the unit and its parts or divisions be so nearly of the value of some of the known
coins as that they may be of easy adoption for the people.
The Spanish dollar seems to fulfil all these conditions.
I. Taking into our view all money transactions, great and small, I question if a common
measure of more convenient size than the dollar could be proposed. The value of 100,
1,000, 10,000 dollars is well estimated by the mind; so is that of the tenth or hundredth
of a dollar. Few transactions are above or below these limits. The expediency of attending
to the size of the money unit will be evident to every one who will consider how inconve-
nient it would be to a manufacturer or merchant if instead of the yard for measuring
cloth, either the inch or the mile had been made the unit of measure.
I1. The most easy ratio of multiplication and division is that by ten. Every one knows the
facility of decimal arithmetic. Every one remembers, that when learning money arithmetic,
he used to be puzzled with adding the farthings, taking out the fours, and carrying them
on ; adding the pence, taking out the twelves, and carrying them on ; adding the shillings,
taking out the twenties, and carrying them on ; but when he came to the pounds, where
he had only tens to carry forward, it was easy and free from error. The bulk of mankind
are schoolboys through life. These little perplexities are always great to them; and even
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION 195
mathematical heads feel the relief of an easier, substituted for a more difficult process.
Foreigners, too, who trade or travel among us will find a great facility in understanding
our coins and accounts from this ratio of subdivision. Those who have had occasion to con-
vert the livres, sols, and deniers of the French, the gilder, stivers, and frenings of the
Dutch, the pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings of these several states—into each other
can judge how much they would be aided, had their several subdivisions been in a decimal
ratio. Certainly, in all cases, where we are free to choose between easy and difficult modes
of operation, it is most rational to choose the most easy. The Financier, therefore, in his
report well proposes that our coins should be in decimal proportions to one another. If
we adopt the dollar for our unit, we should strike four coins; one of gold, two of silver,
and one of copper, viz.:
A golden piece equal in value to ten dollars.
. The unit or dollar itself, of silver.
. The tenth of a dollar, of silver also.
. The hundredth of a dollar, of copper.
Compare the arithmetical operation of the same sum of money expressed in this form
and expressed in the pound sterling and its divisions:—
:
30 s. d. Dollars. A s. d. Dollars.
Addition: 8 13 11} = 38 : 65 Subtraction: 8 13 l l # = 38 : 65
4 12 8; - 20 - 6 | 4 12 84 == 20 61
13 6 8} = 59:26 4 2; a 1s. 04
Multiplication by 8: Division by 8:
sé' s. d. Dollars. 39 s. d. Dollars.
8 13 11} = 38 : 65 8 13 11} = 8) 38 : 65
20 8 20 *** **-ºsmºs
*-m-mºsºms —- *-ºs- 4 83
I 73 309 - 2 173
12 I 2
2087 2087
4 4
835() - 8 ) 835()
8 4 ) l ()43
*s-s-s-6 - 12) 260—#
4) 66800 20) 21–8
12) 16700 *s-ºs º-----
20) 1391—8 421 1 83
sſ?69 || 8
A bare inspection of the above operations, will evince the labour which is occasioned by
subdividing the unit into 20ths, 240ths, and 960ths, as the English do—and as we have done—
and the ease of subdivision in a decimal ratio. The same difference arises in making pay-
ments. An Englishman, to pay 8l. 13s. 11%d, must find by calculation what combination
of the coins of his country will pay this sum ; but an American having the same sum to
pay—thus expressed, 838 : 65—will know by inspection only that three gold pieces, eight
units or dollars, six tenths, and five coppers will pay it precisely.
III. The third condition required is that the unit, its multiples and subdivisions, coincide
in value with some of the known coins so nearly that the people may by a quick reference
to the mind estimate their value. If this be not attended to, they will be very long in
adopting the innovation, if ever they adopt it. Let us examine in this point of view each
of the four coins proposed.
1. The golden piece will be + more than a half joe, and +1, more than a double
guinea; it will be readily estimated, then, by reference to either of them ; but more readily
and accurately as equal to ten dollars.
2. The unit or dollar is a known coin, and the most familiar of all to the mind of the
people. It is already adopted from south to north; has identified our currency, and there-
fore happily offers itself as a unit already introduced ; our public debt, our requisitions,
and their apportionment have given it actual and long possession of the place of unit. The
course of our commerce will bring us more of this than any other foreign coin; therefore it
renders it more worthy of attention. I know of no unit which can be proposed in competi-
tion with the dollar but the pound. But what is the pound 2 1,547 grains of fine silver in
Georgia; 1,289 grains in Virginia, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and New
Hampshire; 1,031+ grains in Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey; 96.6%
grains in North Carolina and New York. Which of these shall we adopt? To which
State give that pre-eminence of which all are so jealous, and on which impose the
difficulties of a new estimate of their corn, their cattle, and other commodities 2 Or shall
we hang the pound sterling as a common judge about all their necks? This will contain
1,718; grains of pure silver. It is difficult to familiarise a new coin to the people; it is
more difficult to familiarise them to a new coin with an old name. Happily the dollar is
No. 21.
Thos. J efferson.
B b 2
196 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 21.
Thos. Jefferson.
familiar to them all, and is already as much referred to for a measure of value as their respec-
tive provincial pounds.
3. The tenth will be precisely the Spanish bit or half-pistereeen; this is a coin perfectly
familiar to us all. When we shall make a new coin, then, equal in value to this, it will be
of ready estimate with the people.
4. The hundredth or copper will differ little from the copper of the four Eastern States,
which is ++ of a dollar, still less from the penny of New York and North Carolina, which
is ºr of a dollar, and somewhat more than the penny or copper of New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, and Maryland, which is ºr of a dollar. It will be about the medium between
the old and the new copper of these States, and will therefore soon be substituted for them
both. (N.B.-The halfpenny of Europe had become nearly the penny of the United States.)
In Virginia coppers have never been in use. It will be easy, therefore, to introduce them
there of one value as of another. The copper coin proposed will be nearly equal to three-
fourths of their penny, which is the same with the penny lawful of the Eastern States.
A great deal of small change is useful in a State, and tends to reduce the price of small
articles. Perhaps it would not be amiss to coin three more pieces of silver, one of the value
of five-tenth or half dollar, one of the value of two-tenth, which would be equal to the
Spanish pistereen, and of the value of five coppers, which would be equal to the Spanish
half-bit ; we should then have five silver coins, viz.:
1. The unit, or dollar.
2. The half dollar, of five-tenths.
3. The double tenth, equal to 2 or + of a dollar or to the pistereen.
4. The tenth, equal to a Spanish bit.
5. The five-copper piece, equal to 500 or ºr of a dollar or half-bit.
The plan reported by the Financier is worthy of his sound judgment. It admits, how-
ever, of objection in the size of the unit. He proposes that this shall be the l’440th part
of a dollar; so that it will require 1,440 of his units to make the one before proposed. He
was led to adopt this by a mathematical attention to our old currencies, all of which this unit
will measure without leaving a fraction. But as our object is to get rid of these currencies,
the advantage derived from this coincidence will soon be past, whereas the inconveniences
of this unit will for ever remain, if they do not altogether prevent its introduction.
It is defective in two of the three requisites for a money unit:
1. It is incovenient in its application to the ordinary money transactions. 10,000 dollars
will require eight figures to express them, to wit, 14,400,000 units. A horse or a bullock
of eighty dollars’ value will require a notation of six figures, to wit, 115,200 units. As a
money of account this will be laborious even when facilitated by the aid of decimal arith-
metic. As a common measure of the value of property it will be too minute to be compre-
hended by the people. The French are subjected to very labourious calculations, the livre
being their ordinary money of account, and this but between + and 4 of a dollar; but what
will be our labour should our money of account be ++++ of a dollar only
2. It is neither equal nor near to any of the known coins in value.
If we determine that a dollar shall be our unit, we must then say with precision what
a dollar is. This coin, as struck at different times, of different weight and fineness, is of
different values. Sir Isaac Newton's assay and representation to the Lords of the Treasury
in 1717 of those which he examined make their values as follows:—
dwt. grs.
The Seville piece-of-eight º 17 12 containing 387 grains pure silver.
The Mexican piece-of-eight - 17 10; > 5 385} 55
The Pillar piece-of-eight º 17 9 55 385; 55
The New Seville piece-of-eight 14 0 308-17, 53
The Financier states the old dollar as containing 376 grains of fine silver, and the new
365 grains. If the dollars circulated among us be of every date equally we should examine
the quantity of pure metal in each, and from them form an average for our unit. This is
a work proper to be committed to mathematicians as well as merchants, and which should
be decided on actual and accurate experiment.
The quantum of alloy is also to be decided. Some is necessary, to prevent the coin
from wearing too fast; too much would fill our pocket with copper instead of silver. The
silver coins assayed by Sir Isaac Newton varied from 1% to 76 pennyweight alloy in the
pound troy of mixed metal. The British standard has 18 dwt. ; the Spanish coins assayed
by Sir Isaac Newton have from 18 to 19% dwt. ; the new French crown has in fact
194, though by edict it should have 20 dwt., that is 1–12.
The taste of our countrymen will require that their furniture plate should be as good
as the British standard. Taste cannot be controlled by law. Let it then give the law in
a point which is indifferent to a certain degree. Let the legislatures fix the alloy of
furniture plate at 18 dwt. the British standard, and Congress that of their coin at one
ounce in the pound, the French standard.
This proportion has been found convenient for the alloy of gold coin, and it will simplify
the system of our mint to alloy both metals in the same degree. The coin, too, being the
least pure will be less easily melted into plate. The reasons are light indeed, and of
course will only weigh if no heavier ones can be opposed to them.
The proportion between the values of gold and silver is a mercantile problem altogether.
It would be inaccurate to fix it by the popular exchanges of a half Joe for eight dollars,
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 197
a Louis for four French crowns, or five Louis for twenty-three dollars. The first of these
would be to adopt the Spanish proportion between gold and silver; the second, the French;
the third a mere popular barter, wherein convenience is consulted more than accuracy.
The legal proportion in Spain is 16 for l; in England, 15% for l; in France 15 for i.
The Spaniards and English are found in experience to retain an over proportion of gold
coins, and to lose their silver. The French have a greater proportion of silver. The
difference at market has been on the decrease. The Financier states it at present as at
14% for one. Just principles will lead us to disregard legal proportions altogether, to
inquire into the market price of gold in the several countries with which we shall princi-
pally be connected in commerce, and to take an average from them. Perhaps we might
with safety lean to a proportion somewhat above par for gold, considering our neighbour-
hood and commerce with the sources of the coins, and the tendency which the high price
of gold in Spain has to draw thither all that of their mines, leaving silver principally for
our and other markets. It is not impossible that 15 for 1 may be found an eligible propor-
tion. I state it, however, as a conjecture only.
As to the alloy for gold coin, the British is an ounce in the pound. The French,
Spanish and Portuguese differ from that only from a quarter of a grain to a grain and a
half. I should, therefore, prefer the British, merely because its fraction stands in a more
simple form, and facilitates the calculations into which it enters. Should the unit be fixed
at 365 grains of pure silver, gold at 15 for 1, and the alloy of both be one twelfth, the
weights of the coins will be as follows: —
Grains of
pure Metal. Alloy.
dwt. gr.
The golden piece, containing 2434. wº 22:12 will weigh I 1 I-45
The unit, or dollar gºe 365 wº 33 18 95 16 14° 18
The half dollar, or five-tenths 1824, tº 16-59 55 8 7-09
The fifth, or pistereen 73 * 6.63 3 ) 3 7.63
The tenth, or bit tº ºt 36} sº 3.318 53 1 15.818
The twentieth, or half-bit 18+ § - 1.659 55 19.9
The quantity of fine silver which shall constitute the unit being settled, and the propor-
tion of the value of gold, to that of silver, a table should be formed from the assay before
suggested, classing the several foreign coins according to their fineness, declaring the worth
of a pennyweight or grain in each class, and that they shall be lawful tenders at those
rates if not clipped or otherwise diminished, and where diminished, offering their value for
them at the mint, deducting the expense of re-conage. Here the legislatures should co-
operate with Congress, in providing that no money be received or paid at their treasuries,
or by any of their officers, or any bank, but on actual weight, in making it criminal in a
high degree to diminish their own coins, and, in some smaller degree, to offer them in pay-
ment when diminished.
That this subject may be properly prepared, and in readiness for Congress to take up at
their meeting in November, something must now be done. The present session drawing to
a close, they probably would not choose to enter far into this undertaking themselves.
The Committee of the States, however, during the recess will have time to digest it
thoroughly, if Congress will fix some general principles for their government. Suppose
they be instructed to appoint proper persons to assay and examine with the utmost accuracy
practicable the Spanish milled dollars of different dates in circulation with us.
To assay and examine in like manner the fineness of all the other coins which may be
found in circulation within these States.
To report to the Committee the result of these assays, by them to be laid before
Congress.
To appoint also proper persons to inquire what are the proportions between the values of
fine gold and fine silver at the markets of the several countries with which we are or
probably may be connected in commerce; and what would be a proper proportion here,
having regard to the average of their values at those markets, and to other circumstances,
and to report the same to the Committee, by them to be laid before Congress.
To prepare an ordinance for establishing the unit of money within these States; for
subdividing it; and for striking coins of gold, silver, and copper, on the following
principles:—
That the money unit of these States shall be equal in value to a Spanish milled dollar,
containing so much fine silver as the assay before directed shall show to be contained, on
an average, in dollars of the several dates in circulation with us.
That this unit shall be divided into tenths and hundredths ; that there shall be a coin of
silver of the value of a unit; one other of the same metal, of the value of one-tenth of a
unit; one other of copper, of the value of the hundredth of a unit.
That there shall be a coin of gold of the value of ten units, according to the report
before directed, and the judgment of the Committee thereon.
That the alloy of the said coins of gold and silver shall be equal in weight to one-
eleventh part of the fine metal.
That there be proper devices for these coins.
That measures be proposed for preventing their diminution, and also their currency, and
that of any others, when diminished.
No. 21.
Thos. Jefferson.
B b 3
198 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 21.
Thos. Jefferson.
That the several foreign coins be described and classed in the said ordinance, the
fineness of each class stated, and its value by weight estimated in units and decimal parts
of units.
And that the said draught of an ordinance be reported to Congress at their next meet-
ing, for their consideration and determination.
SUPPLEMENTARY EXPLANATIONs.
The preceding motes having been submitted to the consideration of the Financier, he
favoured me with his opinion and observations on them, which render necessary the
following supplementary explanations. I observed in the preceding notes that the true
proportion of value between gold and silver was a mercantile problem altogether, and that
perhaps fifteen for one might be found an eligible proportion. The Financier is so good as
to inform me, that would be higher than the market would justify. Confident of his better
information on this subject, I recede from that idea.
He also informs me that the several coins in circulation among us have been assayed
with accuracy, and the result published in a work on that subject. The assay of Sir Isaac
Newton had superseded in my mind the necessity of this operation as to the older coins,
which were the subject of his examination. This later work with equal reason may be
considered as saving the same trouble as to the latter coins.
So far, then, I accede to the opinions of the Financier. On the other hand, he seems to
concur with me in thinking his smallest fractional division too minute for a unit, and there-
fore proposes to transfer that denomination to his largest silver coin, containing 1,000 of
the units first proposed, and worth about 4s. 2d. lawful, or 25-36 of a dollar. The only
question then remaining between us is, whether the dollar or this coin be best for the unit.
We both agree that the ease of adoption with the people is the thing to be aimed at.
1. As to the dollar, events have overtaken and superseded the question. It is no longer
a doubt whether the people can adopt it with ease; they have adopted it, and will have to
be turned out of that into another tract of calculation if another unit be assumed. They
have now two units which they use with equal facility, viz., the pound of their respective
State, and the dollar. The first of these is peculiar to each State ; the second happily com-
mon to all. In each State the people have an easy rule for converting the pound of their
State into dollars, or dollars into pounds; and this is enough for them without knowing how
this may be done in every State of the Union. Such of them as live near enough the
borders of their State to have dealings with their neighbours, learn also the rule of their
neighbours; thus in Virginia and the Eastern States, where the dollar is 68, or three-tenths
of a pound, to turn pounds into dollars they multiply by ten and divide by three. To
turn dollars into pounds, they multiply by three and divide by ten. Those in Virginia who
live near to Carolina, where the dollar is 8s. or four-tenths of a pound, learn the operation
of that State, which is a multiplication by four and division by ten, et e converso. Those
who live near Maryland, where the dollar is 7 s. 6d. or three-eighths of a pound, multiply by
three and divide by eight, et e converso. All these operations are easy, and have been found
by experience not too much for the arithmetic of the people when they have occasion to
convert their old unit into dollars, or the reverse.
2. As to the unit of the Financier. In the States where the dollar is three-tenths of a
pound, this unit will be 5' 24. Its conversion into the pound, then, will be by a multipli-
cation by five and a division by 24. In the States where the dollar is three-eighths of a
pound, this unit will be 25-96 of a pound, and the operation must be to multiply by 25
and divide by 96, et e converso. Where the dollar is four-tenths of a pound, this unit will
be 5' 18. The simplicity of the fraction, and of course the facility of conversion and recon-
version, is therefore agaifist this unit and in favour of the dollar in every instance. The
only advantage it has over the dollar is, that it will in every case express our farthing
without a remainder ; whereas, though the dollar and its decimals will do this in many
cases, it will not in all. But even in these, by extending your notation one figure
further, to wit to thousands, you approximate to perfect accuracy within less than the
two-thousandth part of a dollar, an atom in money which every one would neglect. Against
this single inconvenience the other advantages of the dollar are more than sufficient to
preponderate, This unit will present to the people a new coin, and whether they endea-
vour to estimate its value by comparing it with a pound or with a dollar, the units they
now possess, they will find the fraction very compound, and of course less accommodated
to their comprehension and habits than the dollar. Indeed the probability is that they
could never be lod to compute in it generally.
The Financier supposes that ++g of a dollar is not sufficiently small where the poor are
purchasers or vendors. If it is not, make a smaller coin. But I suspect that it is small
enough. Let us examine faets in countries where we are acquainted with them. In
Virginia, where our towns are few, small, and of course their demand for necessaries very
limited, we have never yet been able to introduce a copper coin at all. The smallest coin
which anybody will receive there is the half-bit or ºr of a dollar. In those States where
the towns are larger and more populous, a more habitual barter for small wants has called
for a copper coin of ºf or # or ++; of a dollar. In England, where the towns are many and
populous, and where ages of experienec have matured the conveniences of intercourse, they
have found that some wants may be supplied for a farthing, or ºr of a dollar, and they
have accommodated a coin to this want. This business is evidently progressive. In
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 199
Virginia we are far behind. In some other States they are further advanced; to wit to the
appreciation of ,# , #, T# # of a dollar. To this most advanced State, then, I accommodate
my smallest coin in the decimal arrangement, as a money of payment corresponding with
the money of account. I have no doubt the time will come when a smaller coin will be
called for; when that comes, let it be made. It will probably be half of the copper I
propose, that is to say. 5 1000 or 005 of a dollar, this being very nearly the farthing of
England. But it will be time enough to make it when the people shall be ready to
receive it. -
My proposition, then, is that our notation of money shall be decimal, descending ad
libitum of the person noting; that the unit of this notation shall be a dollar; that coins
shal be accommodated to it from ten dollars to the hundredth of a dollar; and that to set
this on foot the resolutions be adopted which were proposed in the notes, only substituting
an inquiry into the fineness of the coins in lieu of an assay of them.
No. 22.
ExTRACTED from the * ANNUAIRE DU BUREAU DES LONGITUDES," for 1856.
MoNNAIEs DÉCIMALES DE FRANCE (*).
Les monnaies françaises sont assujetties, sous le rapport de leurs divisions, de leur titre,
de leur poids et de leur module, au système métrique décimal des poids et mésures.
Aux termes de la loi du 7 Germinal an XI (28 Mars 1803), 5 grammes d'argent, au titre
de neuf dixièmes de fin, constituent le franc, l'unité monétaire.
Dans l'échelle décimale, on passe de l'unité aux nombres 10 et 100 qui, divisés par 2 et
5, les seuls diviseurs de 10, donnent les pièces de 50 et de 20 francs, puis de 5 et de 2 francs.
Mais, en descendant, on a le dixième et le centième du franc nommés décime et centime ;
leur division par 2 et 5 donne 50 et 20 centimes, puis 5 et 2 centimes. La division déci-
male du franc comprend donc seulement les pièces de 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50 centimes. Viennent
ensuite le franc et ses multiples décimaux de 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, et 100 francs. La pièce
de 40 francs, qui n'est pas décimale, ne se fabrique plus.
Les pièces de 1, 2, 5, 10 centimes sont en bronze, loi du 19 Avril 1852 ; la pièce de 20
centimes, décret du 10 Avril 1852, et celle de 50 centimes, puis le franc et ses multiples,
2 francs, 5 francs, sont en argent, loi du 7 Germinal an XI. Les pièces d'or sont :
Celle de 100 francs, décret du 12 Decembre 1854.
5 > 50 ,, idem.
5 9 20 ,, loi du 7 Germinal an XI.
5 5 10 , décrets des 3 Mai 1848, 12 Janvier 1854, et 7 Avril 1855.
5 ,, décrets des 12 Janvier 1854 et 7 Avril 1855.
Titre.
Les expériences faites en France, en 1792, par l'Académie des Sciences, par suite de la
proposition de Clavière de frabriquer des monnaies avec des métaux dégagés d'alliage, et
les travaux de Cavendish et Hatchett en Angleterre, ont montré que l'alliage au douzième
est celui qui résiste le plus longtemps au frottement.
Les monnaies d'or et d'argent de France contiennent un alliage d'un dixième et neuf
dixièmes de métal pur. Le titre monétaire qui s'exprime en millièmes est, en conséquence,
représenté par 900 millièmes.
L'alliage au dixième a l'avantage d'être en harmonie avec notre système de numération
décimale, de simplifier les calcuts d'alliage et de titre, enfin de se rapprocher beaucoup de
l'alliage au douzième qui donne au métal le plus de dureté, ou le rend le plus propre à
résister à l'action du frai, c'est-à-dire à la diminution de poids par le frottement et la circu-
lation.
Dans la combinaison des deux métaux, argent et cuivre, le cuivre servant d'alliage, le
point d'homogénéité est représenté par la formule atomique Agº + Cu*, correspondant au
titre 719 millièmes de fin ; ainsi qu'il résulte des travaux faits en 1849 par M. A. Levol,
membre du Bureau des essais de la Commission des Monnaies, et consignés dans les Annales
de Chimie et de Physique, 3e série, t. XXXVI. et XXXIX.
La tolérance du titre, soit en dessus, soit en dessous du titre droit de 900 millièmes, a
été fixée, par le décret du 22 Mai 1849, à partir du 1er Janvier 1850, à 2 millièmes pour
les espèces d'argent, comme elle l'était déjà par la loi du 7 Germinal an XI, pour les
monnaies d'or. -
La tolérance du poids, par chaque sorte de pièce, en or, argent et bronze, est indiquée
dans le tableau au dessous.
» 9
(*) Cet article, qui avait d'abord été donné par M. Samuel Bernard, ancien élève de l'Ecole
Polytechnique, et ancien chef des bureaux de la Commission des Monnaies, a été modifié et
complété ensuite par M. Neuhaus, contrôleur au change près de la Monnaie de Paris, conformé-
ment aux dispositions des décrets du Gouvernement en date des 22 Mai 1849 et 22 Mars 1854, sur
les tarifs des espèces et matières d'or et d'argent. - -
No. 21.
Thos. Jefferson.
ſ - L，-,
No. 22.
French Money.
e-samsºs
B b 4
200 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 22.
French Money.
u-º
Poids et Diamètre des Pièces de Mommaie.
Poids. Le poids des pièces de monnaie d'argent a été etabli en nombres ronds de grammes ;
elles peuvent donc servir de poids usuels ; ainsi : Poids.
1 pièce d'argent de 1 franc s- ©- -> - - 5 grammes.
1 pièce d'argent de 2 francs - © º-, 10 grammes.
4 pièces d'argent de 5 francs ou l0 pièces d'argent de 2 francs - 100 grammes.
155 pièces d'or de 20 francs ou 40 pièces d'argent de 5 francs 1 kilogramme.
Sac de mille francs, 200 pièces de 5 francs º-9 ©- - 5 kilogrammes.
La proportion entre l'or et l'argent, qui est de 15# à 1 dans notre système monétaire,
n'a pas permis de donner aux pièces d'or un poids en nombres ronds ; mais 155 pièces de
20 francs équivalent à l kilogramme.
Ce qu'on vient de dire suppose que les pièces de monnaie sont du poids exact qu'elles
doivent avoir, ce qui a lieu ordinairement à peu de chose près ; la tolérance de poids, tant
en dessus qu'en dessous étant très-minime. ( Voir le tableau au dessous.) Il suffit d'en
peser un certain nombre pour être sûr qu'un même poids donnera la même quantité de pièces.
Diamètre. Les monnaies de différentes valeurs ont plus ou moins de diamètre, suivant
leur poids et la nature du métal dont elles sont composées; mais on a eu soin, en général,
qu'aucun de ces diamètres ne fût le même pour les monnaies d'or, d'argent et de cuivre (*),
afin qu'elles ne pussent être confondues dans les piles ou les rouleaux, et qu'on pût les
distinguer à la première vue ou au tact.
Les pièces de monnaie de même métal et de même valeur ont toutes, au contraire,
rigoureusement le même diamètre. Ainsi, quoique fabriquées dans divers ateliers moné-
taires, comme elles se frappent dans des viroles d'acier exécutées sur un seul et même
calibre, elles forment, étant réunies, un cylindre parfait ; ce qui donne une grand facilité
pour en former des piles ou rouleaux. Il suffit d'en compter une pile, pour être sûr que
toutes les autres piles de même hauteur contiendront le même nombre de pièces ; si toute-
fois elles n'ont pas trop frayé par la circulation, et si, étant mélangées, il s'en trouve autant
de neuves que de vieilles.
Le diamètre ou module des pièces étant fixé en nombres entiers de millimètres, elles
peuvent offrir des mesures usuelles de longueur ; ainsi, par exemple :
19 pièces d'argent de 2 francs et 20 de l francs d t 1 mèt
ou 20 pièces d'argent de 5 francs et ll de 2 †} OIlI06lllU l IIlC t I'62,
Ce qu'on vient de dire est exact pour les pièces de monnaie qui ont été frappées en
virole pleine et dont les lettres de la légende sur tranche sont marquées en creux. Depuis
1830, époque à laquelle on a adopté, pour les monnaies d'or et la pièce de 5 francs, la
marque sur tranche en relief, au moyen de la virole brisée, les diamètres des surfaces sont
bien restés les mêmes ; mais la légère saillie des lettres de la tranche donnerait moins
d'exactitude aux mesures de longueur si les pièces se touchaient par ces lettres. Les pièces
de 2 francs et de 1 franc sont, depuis la même époque, cannelées sur tranche.
Quant aux pièces d'or de 10 et de 5 francs, qui avaient d'abord été fabriquées en viroles
lisses, elles sont maintenant frappées en viroles cannelées ; conformément à l'article 3 du
décret du 3 Mai 1848 (décision ministérielle du 22 Juillet 1854.)
TABLEAU DU POIDs ET DU DIAMÈTRE DEs PIÈCES DE MONNAIE.

Tolérance Poids avec la tolérance. Diamètre
Dénomination des pièces. Poids exact ou droit. en milli- ou module
èmes du en milli-
poids. En plus. En moins. èmes.
OR.
fr. c. gl'. mill. gl'. gl'. IIlIIl ,
100 00 32,258 1 32,290258 32,225742 35
50 00 16.129 16, 161258 16,096742 28
40 00 12,90322 O 12,92903 12,8774 26
20 00 6,45161 sºd 6,46451 6,43871 21
10 00 3,22580 U # 23225 3,21935 19
5 00 1,61290 3 1,61774 1,60806 17
ARGENT
5 00 25. } 3 25,075 24,925 37
2 00 10. 10,05 9,95 27
1 00 5. 5 5,025 4,975 23
0 50 2,50 7 2,5175 2,4825 18
' O 20 l. 10 1,01 0,99 15
CUIVRE ancien.
0 10 20. 20,4 19,6 31
0 5 10. 20 10,2 9,8 7
0 2 4. «a-f 4,08 3,92 22
0 1 2. 2,04 1,96 18
CUIVRE IlOlIVG a,Ul OUl
bronzé.
Loi du 6 Mai 1852.
0 10 10. R. 10 10,100 9,900 30
0 5 5. J 5,050 4,950 25
() 2 2. } 15 2,030 1,97O 20
0 1 l. l,015 O,985 15
(*) Excepté pour la pièce de 2 fr. qui a le même diamètre que l'ancienne pièce de 5 centimes en
cuivre ; mais la différence du métal et des types les distingue suffisamment.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 201
L'ordonnance du 8 Novembre 1830, pour la fabrication des pièces de 100 et de 10 francs
en or, n'a pas reçu son exécution.
Le décret du 3 Mai 1848 avait autorisé la fabrication des pièces d'or de 10 francs au
diamètre de 19 millimètres, et des pièces d'argent de 20 centimes.
Les pièces d'argent de 25 centimes, qui ne sont pas décimales, ont été retirées de la cir-
culation à mesure qu'elles rentraient dans les caisses publiques, et converties en monnaies
nouvelles, en vertu du décret du 20 Avril 1852. Le cours forcé de ces pièces a cessé le
1er Octobre 1852.
Conformément au décret du 12 Janvier 1854, il a été fabriqué des pièces de 5 francs en
or au diamètre de 14 millimètres et des pièces de 10 francs au diamètre de 17 millimètres.
Mais le décret du 17 Avril 1855 ayant fixé le nouveau module des 5 francs à 17 millimè -
tres, et celui des 10 francs à 19 millimètres, comme les 10 francs au type de la République,
et prescrit le retrait des pièces de 10 francs du petit module de 17 millimètres; ces dernières
pièces sont retirées de la circulation, et elles ont cessé d'avoir cours pour leur valeur
nominale, le 15 Octobre 1855 ; à partir de cette époque, elles sont reçues au change
de la Monnaie de Paris et payées en raison de leur poids et au titre de 900 millièmes,
soit 3093 francs 30 centimes le kilogramme.
La première fabrication des pièces de 10 francs au nouveau module de 19 millimètres
est du 4 Juin 1855, et celle des pièces de 5 francs en or, au module de 17 millimètres, est
du 30 Octobre 1855.
Le décret du 12 Decembre 1854 a autorisé la fabrication des pièces d'or de 100 francs
et de 50 francs ; les poids et diamètres sont consignés dans le tableau au dessus.
La première fabrication des pièces d'or de l00 francs est du 27 Mars 1855, et celle des
50 francs, du 14 Juin 1855.
D'après la loi du 10 Juillet 1845, les pièces anciennes de 1 franc 50 centimes et de 75
centimes, créées par les lois du 28 Juillet et du 18 Août 1791, ont cessé d'avoir cours légal
le 31 Août 1846.
Les pièces de 10 centimes en billon, créées par la loi du 15 Septembre 1807, ont cessé
d'avoir cours légal et forcé à la fin de Décembre 1845, conformément à la loi du 10
Juillet 1845.
Les pièces de cuivre de 10 centimes (un décime) et de 1 centime qui sont en circulation,
ainsi que les pièces de 5 centimes, avaient été créées par les lois des 3 Brumaire an V (24
Octobre 1796) et 29 Pluviôse an vII. (17 Février 1799) aux poids qui sont indiqués dans
le tableau précédent ; mais la tolérance de poids était de 40 grammes par kilogramme, dont
moitié en dehors et moitié en dedans.
Les pièces de 3 centimes et de 2 centimes, décretées par la loi du 7 Germinal an XI
(28 Mars 1803), n'ont pas été fabriquées.
L'ancienne monnaie de cuivre, imparfaite sous le rapport de l'art, a encore l'inconvénient
d'être de toutes sortes de diamètre, poids, type et alliage ; il a souvent été question de la
remplacer par une monnaie de bronze uniforme, moins lourde, peu altérable, et exécutée
avec toute la perfection possible, afin de la rendre plus difficile à contrefaire. Une loi, en
date du 19 Avril 1852, promulguée le 6 Mai suivant, en a ordonné la refonte et le rem-
placement par une monnaie de bronze, pour une valeur égale à celle qui sera retirée de la
circulation. Cette nouvelle monnaie de bronze est composée de 95 parties de cuivre pur,
de 4 # et d'une de zinc. ( Voir le tableau du poids et du diamètre des pièces au
dessus.
Proportion de la Valeur des Métaux dans les Monnaies.
On désigne par la proportion d'un métal à un autre, servant tous deux de monnaie, le
rapport de la valeur d'un kilogramme de monnaie du premier métal à celle d'un kilogramme
de monnaie du second métal.
En d'autres termes : la valeur relative de l'or à l'argent résulte de la comparaison du
prix courant ou légal de chaque sorte de monnaie avec la quantité proportionelle de métal
pur qui s'y trouve contenu.
En France, dans notre système monétaire, la proportion de l'or à l'argent est—
de s ， © º C # ſ ! d-> - 15,5 à l
de l'or au bronze, de 6-5 - s - - 310,0 à 1
de l'argent au bronze, de - - - 20,0 à 1
En Angleterre, l'or est à l'argent comme - - 14,28 à 1
En Belgique agº s-e •-, • - 15,79 à 1
En Espagne •s •- •s - 15,75 à 1
En Portugal º-º •e g ! L # - 15,48 à 1
En Russie 4- •- º- - 15,00 à 1
Aux Etats-Unis e- e- e-s - 15,98 à 1
Prix du Kilogramme d'Or et du Kilogramme d'Argent.
La retenue au Change des Monnaies pour frais de fabrication, déchets compris, ou la
différence entre la valeur intrinsèque et la valeur nominale, était, du 17 Prairial an XI
(6 Juin 1803) au 1er Juillet 1835, de 9 francs par kilogramme d'or et de 3 francs par
kilogramme d'argent.
A compter du ler Juillet 1835, cette retenue a été réduite à 6 francs pour l'or et a 2
francs pour l'argent. Et, à partir du 1er Octobre 1849, elle a été réduite, seulement pour
l'argent, de 2 francs à 1 franc 50 centimes.
No. 22.
French Money.
e-s
C c
202 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 22. A compter du 1er Avril 1854, la retenue, par kilogramme de matière d'or au titre de
French Money. 900, a été portée de 6 francs à 6 francs 70 centimes, suivant le décret du 22 Mars 1854.
•mm-m-ºm- Cette augmentation de 70 centimes est motivée par la quantité proportionnelle de pièces
à fabriquer par million d'or (décision du Ministre d e du # Mars 1854), savoir :
I'. • 9'l'.
en 20 francs 42,500 valant 850,000 et pesant 27 #
en 10 francs 10,000 ,, 100,000 2 ) 322,580
en 5 francs 10,000 ,, 50,000 55 16,129
62,500 1,000,000 322,580
Les espèces d'or de 100 francs et de 50 francs, fabriquées en exécution du décret du
12 Décembre 1854, ont nécessité, pour chaque nature de pièces, l'établissement d'une nou-
velle fixation proportionnelle (décision du Ministre des Finances du 26 Mai 1855) :
fr. k. gr.
en 100 francs 200 valant 20,000 et pesant 6,451,6
en 50 francs 400 , 20,000 , 6,451,6
en 20 francs 36,250 ,, 725,000 33 233,870,5
en l0 francs 21,500 ,, 2l5,000 33 69,354,7
en 5 francs 4,000 ,, 20,000 33 6,451,6
62,350 1,000,000 322,580,0
Les pièces divisionnaires d'argent à fabriquer par chaque million en pièces de 5 francs,sont
fixées à la somme de 50,000 francs (décision du Ministre des Finances du 20 Avril 1854 :)
A* en pièces de 2 francs les 4/20, soit 10,000 fr.
99 1 franc les 10/20, soit 25,000
55 32 50 centimes les 5/20, soit 12,500
93 3 2 20 , les 1/20, soit 2,500
e-
50,000
ANCIEN TARIF DU 17 PRAIRIAL AN xI (6 JUIN 1803).
Kilogramme. Sans retenue ou au pair. Avec retenue au change.
fr. c. fr. c.
Or - - -{†oom 3444 44 4444 3434 44 4444
à 900m. 3100 0 0 3091 0 0
A t pur - 222 22 2222 218 88 8889
rgent - -{# 900m. 200 0 0 197 0 0
TARIF DU lER JUILLET 1835.
Or - - -4 Pº . " 3444 44 4444 3437 77 7777
à 900m. 3100 0 0 3094 0 0
A pur - 222 22 2222 220 0 0
rgent - -{†oom. 200 0 0 198 0 0
TARIF DU 1ER OCTOBRE 1849.
Décret du Gouvernement du 22 Mai 1849.
O pur - 3444 44 4444 3437 77 7777
I' - - -{§oo . 3100 0 0 3094 0 0
pur - | 222 22 2222 220 55 5555
Argent - -{†oom 200 0 0 198 50 0
TARIF DU 1ER AVRIL 1854.
Décret du 22 Mars 1854.
pur - 3444 44 4444 3437 0 0
Or - - -{ à 900m. 3100 0 0 3093 30 0
pur - 222 22 2222 220 55 5555
Argent - - 4 § 900m. 200 0 0 198 50 0
TABLEAU DES FABRICATIONS D'ESPÈCES D'OR ET D'ARGENT FAITES EN FRANCE DEPUIs
L'ETABLIssEMENT DU SYSTÈME DÉCIMALE (de 1793 à 1855.)
Désignation des types. Or. Argent.
fr. fr. c.
ler Rép. Hercule - é º 35 106-237-255 O
Napoléon - $ $ g- 528°024-440 887'582-321 50
Louis XVIII. 6 # º-º 389°333°060 614'668'520 0
Charles X. - s- # e 52-918-920 631 914-637 50
Louis-Philippe s-> #-> 215-912'800 1°750-273-238 50
2e République, 1848
Génie pour l'or º- 6 > 56-921-220 :5
Hercule pour l'argent ©- 35 259-628-845 O
Déesse de la liberté ſ > 371-479-830 199-471-488 O
Napoléon III. - #º 1° 114-989-180 85-813-707-40
- 2.729 579.450 4.535.59001290 _
Total Général - 7.265.169.462 francs 90 centimes.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 203
SAVOIR 5
fr. c. fr. c.
ſ 100 0 2.726-100 0
50 0 4-398-600 0 fr. C
40 0 204-432-360 0 .azh K
Or " i 20 0 2.384,479,020 0 2-729'579°450 0
10 0 111-050-430 ()
5 0 22-492-940 0
5 0 4.363-482-175 0
2 O 69-824-420 0
Argent I O 66-247°587 0 - 4°535-590-012.90.
O 50 33-5 18-031 50
020 2-517-79940
No. 23.
ExTRACTs from the Third and Fourth Reports of the Committee of the Legislative
Assembly of Canada on DECIMAL CURRENCY, April 1855.
Page 9.
The Americans have eagles, half-eagles, quarters, and dimes, but in accounts only
dollars and cents are employed. Were England to adopt a decimal coinage, no other
denominations than the pound and mil would be used in the day-book and ledger. The
rench have napoleons and deniers, but only use francs and centimes in book-keeping.
Russia has sundry coins of gold, platinum, and copper, but all accounts are recorded in
rubles and copecks, a copeck being the hundredth part of a ruble. So, too, in Holland;
guilders and cents are the only money designated in the columns of account books,
although there are ducats, crowns, and stivers in circulation.
Page 14.
The Rev. Joshua Leavitt, of New York, while bearing testimony to the admirable
qualities of the decimal currency for records, correctly asserts that for small circulation and
payments in marketing, huckstering, and the like, a duodecimal coinage is also wanted,
and preferable to the other. These small transactions of daily life far outnumber the
dealings of commerce. The decimal currency admits of but one aliquot division—into
halves; but the New York shilling, an eighth of a dollar, can be divided into sixths,
quarters, thirds, halves, &c., and although Congress has never coined any shillings, the
American people during sixty years have clung to their well worn shillings and sixpences,
perceiving them to be a great public convenience. ... Your committee are of opinion that
coins representing the eighth and sixteenth of a dollar are indispensable in small transac-
tions in Canada, and that the smooth British sixpences will continue to pass extensively as
the eighth of a dollar unless a better coinage is provided.
Page 48.
From Rev. Joshua LEAVITT, Editor of the Independent, New York.
Your first question is “Do you desire to establish one currency of accounts and pay-
ments, having the parts and multiples in a decimal ratio 3’ I have no doubt of the
superiority of the decimal system for the purposes of accounts, and am astonished that
other countries have so long delayed its adoption. Our experience of the benefit of our
federal currency in this respect is all one way. The saving of time and labour is pro-
digious, and the advantage in point of correctness and of the facility of detecting errors
unquestionable. But for the purposes of small circulation, in marketing, huckstering,
and the like, I am persuaded that a duodecimal currency like that of England, or like that
which formerly prevailed in the city of New York, is far preferable. These small transac-
tions of daily life outnumber the transactions of commerce almost infinitely. And it
seems impossible to make a decimal currency as convenient in these as the old currency.
One reason is, that the decimal currency admits of only one aliquot division, that is, into
halves. The shilling can be divided into halves, quarters, thirds, sixths, and twelfths; and
if it were needed, a coin of the value of two-thirds of a shilling would be found manageable.
In all these countless small transactions which I have referred to, and in which every man
is employed many times every day, this capability of subdivision is of great convenience.
We are constantly buying a half of a thing, or a quarter, the eighth, the one-third, and so
on. If the price is a dollar, we can make the change for one-half, for one-quarter, and if
one, two, or more pence, with our decimal currency; but we cannot pay the exact price
of one-third, one-sixth, one-eighth, one twelfth, or any other of the fractional parts. If
the price is half-a-dollar, we can only pay for one-half, one-fifth, and one-tenth. If the
price is a quarter of a dollar, we can pay for no aliquot division whatever. ... This is a
constant inconvenience, and can be got along with in no other way than by disregarding
small differences. Our Congress has attempted a partial remedy of the evil by coining
three-cent pieces, of which the most * quality is, that it is impossible to make
C 2
No. 22.
French Money.
No. 23.
Canada.
204 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 23.
Canada.
change with them for any other American coin; and another is, that they do not conform to
any known currency. -
I think it is possible to combine the benefits of both systems, and that we in New York
have accidentally stumbled upon the very plan which will do it. You are aware that in
our marketing and other small transactions, our business is still done in shillings and pence,
the shilling being one-eighth of a dollar, and therefore corresponding exactly in its value
to the old Spanish coin of one-eighth. The provincial currency of New York, before
the revolution, was framed upon the reckoning of eight shillings to a dollar ; and when
the federal currency was introduced in matters of coin, the common people still clung to
the old shilling as a matter of necessary convenience in their pocket payments; and the
experience of sixty years has not in the least diminished their attachment to this method
of reckoning in small payments. Although all commercial accounts are kept in decimal
currency, and all large payments are made in the same way ; and although we have no
coin that represents a shilling, and cannot make it by any combination of federal coinage,
and are obliged still to use the old worn-out Spanish pieces that circulate above their value,
this matter of convenience enables those smooth-faced coins to hold their ground, and to
govern our methods of reckoning in our small transactions. And not only this, but we
find that the people in all parts of the country are learning more and more to use the
vernacular currency of New York in their daily chaffering. From one end of the United
States to the other you will frequently hear people giving you the price of things in York
shillings and York sixpences. I think this experiment is conclusive, and ought to be
satisfactory to prove that the duodecimal currency in small transactions is a great public
convenience. I am sure it is only this actual and felt convenience which has enabled it
to maintain its ground for sixty years. -
There is another consideration of some weight that I have never seen mentioned by
any writer. The decimal currency is denominated by words expressive of the relative
value of the different pieces to the one which is taken as the regulating unit; but it should
be remembered that numbers are not names. No man calls his children one, two, or
three. The shepherd names his sheep, the hunter his dogs, the little boy his chickens.
It is a great convenience and satisfaction that our small coins should have names of
their own.
The people in Canada can have a choice of two methods of carrying out the system
which I suggest. One is, by adopting the federal currency of dollars, cents, and mils
as the money of account, and the New York shilling and its parts for their petty cash.
The other is, to adopt the pound sterling as their regulating unit, with the florin as the
tenth, and the farthing as the one-thousandth part. Let this be the money of account;
and then for a small currency adopt the English shilling, with its subdivisions down to the
farthing. The result in either case will be a small difference between the actual value of
the coin and the corresponding value of the money of account. The difference is, in fact,
four per cent. ; and, if it were not counterbalanced and averaged in practice, would be a
matter of very considerable importance. But we find in fact that the prices of things
which we buy in small quantities are regulated just in such a way as to afford a living
profit; and if any profit is made by the dealer in consequence of this method of reckoning,
competition will soon bring it about that the profits in prices will be reduced in proportion,
and the petty losses which some people grumble about would be very much reduced also,
if we were properly supplied with a duodecimal coinage. This loss of four per cent. takes
place only when we have to employ the federal coins to pay or make change for duodecimal
pieces. As all dealers receive as well as pay twelve cents for a shilling, the loss or gain
must be about equal in most cases. At any rate there is no such inequality as ought to
counterbalance the benefits of the shilling currency.
Although your Canadian currency is different from that which prevailed in colonial times,
and therefore it would not be quite so easy for your people to fall into the use of the New
York shilling, yet the proximity of your position, and the constantly increasing intercourse
between the two countries, will greatly facilitate it. For myself, I have no idea that we
shall ever abandon the shilling currency. The lapse of generations has only fixed it more
firmly upon us; and I fully believe that in a few years we shall have a Congress so governed
by common sense, and so alive to the convenience and welfare of the people, that they will
legalize the York shilling and sixpence as the eighth and sixteenth of a dollar, and will
give us from their own merit a corresponding coinage. The fact that we continue to use
the worn-out, light, and depreciated Spanish coinage, ought to be considered a satisfactory
proof of what public convenience actually requires,
MEMORANDUM on the STATE of the CURRENCY in CANADA.
COINS.
BY the Act 13 & 14 Vict. cap. 8. the legal value of the dollar and half-dollar is
reduced from 5s. 1d. to 2s. 6d.g. respectively to 5s., to 2s. 6d. The Act authorizes the
Governor in Council to cause silver and gold coin to be struck for circulation in the
province, the expenses to be defrayed out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund; the silver
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 205
coin to pass for 5s, 2s. 6d., 1s. 3d, 1s., 6d, and 3d, currency each, to be a legal tender for No. 23.
21. 10s. The gold coins to pass respectively for 25s., 20s., 12s. 6d., and 10s. currency Canada.
each, to be a legal tender to any amount. By cap. 9, same Act, the legal value of the fol-
lowing silver coins of Spain, Peru, Chili, and Central America, South America and Mexico,
being less than half-dollar, is reduced as follows: 4 to 1s. 3d, 4 to 6d., ++ to 3d, currency,
the silver dollar of the United States coined before 1841, and weighing less than 17 dwt. 4 grs.
to pass for 5s, the half-dollar for 2s. 6d., the + for 1s. 3d, the + for 7%d., and the fºr for 3}d.
The British silver coin to pass for 6s. 1d., the half for 3s. 1; d., the shilling for 1s. 2%d,
the sixpence for 7}d. The five-franc piece of France coined before 1841, and weighing
not less than 16 dwt.s. is a legal tender for 4s. 8d. The British sovereign as in England,
ll. 4s. 4d. currency; halves in proportion. The United States eagle, 11 dwts, 6 grs. coined
before 1834, 21. 13s. 4d. ; 10 dwts. 18 grs., coined since, 21. 10s. ; halves in proportion.
The above is a legal tender so long as they do not want more than 2 grains of their proper
weight, deducting one halfpenny for each quarter of a grain deficiency. In payment of
over 50l. they must be paid or received, at the option of either party, at the following rates
by weight, viz:–
£ s. d.
The sovereign and eagle first mentioned º - 4 14 10 per Oz. troy.
The eagle coined since 1834 ge -> º - 4 13 0 , , 35
The French 40-franc piece - º - 4 13 I , 35
Old doubloon of Spain, Mexico, Chili - - - 4 9 7 ,, 39
Gold coins of La Plata and Columbia g- – 4 9 5 , 93
Ditto of Portugal and Brazil º º - 4 14 6
55 33
and their multiples and divisions, coined before the passing of the Act of 1841, may be
weighed in bulk, and are a legal tender in sums not less than 50l. Gold of the United
States, coined subsequent to 1841, to be a legal tender, in bulk, in sums of not less than
50l., at the rate of 4!. 13s. per oz.
The penny of the United Kingdom, or any other that Her Majesty may cause to be
coined of not less than the weight of 5-6ths of such penny, with divisions in proportion
are a legal tender to the amount of 1s. currency, to pass for 1d.
By the Act 16 Vict. cap. 158. the denominations of money in the provinces are regulated
as pounds, dollars, shillings, pence, cents, and mils; the dollar to be 4 of a pound, the
cent rºw of a dollar, and the mil Tr of a cent. The pound currency shall be held to be
equivalent to represent 101 grains and ºr of a grain of standard gold. The copper
penny of the United Kingdom shall pass for two cents, the copper halfpenny for one cent.
AMOUNT of COIN in CIRCULATION.
There is not any means of arriving at a correct estimate of the amount in circu-
lation, as no returns bearing in any way on that subject are required by the Government.
The proportion is, however, Small as compared with the aggregate circulation in the
province, all the banks issuing notes of so low a denomination as 5s, currency.
The only provincial metallic currency, as yet established in this province, is a certain
amount of copper coins imported by some of the banks, under permission granted by
an order of the Governor in Council, and these coins are a legal tender to 1s.
ACCOUNTS
Rept in Canada or Halifax currency, (the Act of 16 Vict, cap. 158, not having as yet
come into force,) pounds, shillings, &c.; the pound currency is usually considered as equal
to 18s. Sterling, and relative value as 10 to 9. This is the standard of official salaries.
The Currency Act of 1842, declares the pound currency to be such that the pound sterling,
as represented by the British sovereign, shall be equal to ll. 4s. 4d. currency; that is, the
pound currency shall be equal to 16s. 5; d. Sterling.
Army sterling is at the rate of 4s. 2d. per dollar of 5s.
No. 24. No. 24.
Circular Queries.
QUESTIONS circulated by the Decimal Coinage Commissioners in Foreign Countries which
have adopted a Decimal Coinage.
Present Money of Account.
1. What is the money of account at present established by law
2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account 7
3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations?
4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account
estimated in money of the United Kingdom
C c 3
206 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 24.
Circular Queries.
wºº ºmº
Present Current Coins.
5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their
respective value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom,
distinguishing gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal
6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account, in common use ?
7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?
8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or incon-
veniently high in value by any and which classes in society :
Former Money of Account and Coins.
9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system
What were its subdivisions?
10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account 7
11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account 7
Change of Money.
12. When did the change take place 3
13. What was the cause of the change
14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the
previous currency 3
15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of
the principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other?
16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconve-
niences felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping?
17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt
18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the
currency to that of neighbouring countries; and if so, had the new money been rendered
familiar by its use either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established
by law
19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a non-decimal division ?
20. In what way was the change effected ?
21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed ?
22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of simultaneously
with, or after the change 2
23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were
any and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new
24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins ?
25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with
and expressible exactly in the new monies
26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under
the old system, and to be discharged under the new Or, in the case of fixed money
tolls, pontages, duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public
bodies, or to the State, the right to which was acquired under the old system, or any
other fixed engagements?
27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate : Was it optional
or compulsory? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it
effectually enforced 2 or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in
accounts or in popular language
28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concur-
rently for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently :
29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent
use & How does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts :
31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in
any and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or
keeping accounts?
32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what
classes of society? If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting
Does it now exist? Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness %
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 207
33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages , No. 24
or disadvantages ? Circular Queries.
1st. In paying and receiving--
(a) Large sums.
(b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts-
(a) In large transactions.
(b) In small transactions.
Weights and Measures.
34. Are weights and measures divided decimally ? If so, did such decimal division
precede, accompany, or follow the decimal division of money ? or was itin any and what
way connected with it ?
35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and
measures not corresponding with the divisions of money ?
36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of
commodities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes ? Does inconvenience or loss
arise to them therefrom ?
General Que,
37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in
the present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws,
ordinances, reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change
of coinage, the reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into
effect.
No. 25. No. 25.
B'r $
F R, A N C E. alIlC0
French Govern-
ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into ment.
sºmmmmmm ?
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the EMPIRE OF FRANCE.
Sent through HER MAJESTY's AMBASSADOR at Paris.
Monnaie de compte actuelle en F'rance.
Q. 1. Quelle est la monnaie de compte légale actuelle ?
A. Il n'y a pas de monnaie de compte proprement dite. La monnaie réelle
est également la monnaie de compte,
L'unité monétaire est le franc.
Q. 2. Quelles sont les subdivisions de cette monnaie de compte ?
A. Les subdivisions sont le décime et centime.
Q. Se sert-on en pratique de plus de deux dénominations de monnaie de compte, en exprimant
ou en enregistrant des paiemens et des recettes, et quelles sont ces dénominations ?—
A. Les seules dénominations dont on se serve sont le franc et le centime.
Q. 4. Quelle est la valeur de la plus grande et de la moindre unité de cette monnaie de compte
en argent Anglais ?
A. Le franc représente la 25e partie environ de la livre sterling ; le centime
la 2,500e partie.
Mommaies courantes actuelles.
Q. 5. Quelles sont les monnaies courantes d'après la loi, et quelles en sont les valeurs respectives
calculées en monnaie de compte aussi bien qu'en monnaies Anglaises, en distinguant entre l'or,
l'argent, le cuivre, et le métal mixte ? •
Monnaies courantes.
A. Or.—J00f., 50f, 20f, 10f et 5f.
Argent.—5f, 2f, 1f, 50c. et 20c.
Bromze.—10c., 5c., 2c. et 1 centime.
Il n'y a pas de monnaie en métal mixte.
Un souverain Anglais vaut en monnaies d'or et d'argent de France 25f 20c.
Q. 6. Est-ce que les monnaies représentant la moindre dénomination de monnaie de compte
sont en usage ordinaire ?
A. Le centime, qui est la pièce de la moindre valeur, est d'un usage ordinaire
comme monnaie réelle et comme monnaie de compte.
Q. 7. Quelle est la monnaie de la moindre valeur qui entre dans les usages ordinaires ?
A. Le centime.
C c 4
208 , APPENDIX TO REPORT OE THE
No. 25.
France.
French Govern-
ment.
e•4
Q. 8. Est-ce que l'on se plaint des monnaies de la moindre valeur en usage ordinaire, soit
comme étant incommodément élevées, soit comme étant incommodément petites en valeur ? Dans
ce cas, quelles sont les classes de la société qui s'en plaignent ?
A. Aucune plainte n'a été formulée à cet égard.
Q. 9. Quelle était la monnaie de compte avant l'introduction du système actuel ? Quelles en
étaient les subdivisions ?
A. La livre était l'ancienne monnaie de compte.
Les subdivisions étaient le sou et le denier.
Q. 10. Quelle en était la Valeur légale en la comparant avec la monnaie de compte
actuelle ?
A. La valeur légale de la livre comparée à la monnaie de compte actuelle
était de, environ 99 centimes ; celle du sou, de 5 centimes ; celle du denier
'4l5 centimes, soit un peu moins de la moitié du centime.
Or.—Le louis de 48 livres.
33 25 24 3 )
Argent.—L'écu de 6 livres.
6)
5 ) 5 5 eD 25
La pièce de 30 sous.
25 55 15 55
» » 24 »
55 : 2 12 55
5 ) 35 6 5:
Cuivre.—La pièce de 2 ,,
y 5 ,, l SOu.
55 ,, 2 liards.
,, 1 liard.
55
Métal mixte (argent et cuivre).—La pièce de 6 liards.
Chamgement de Mommaie.
Q. 12. A quel époque le changement a-t-il eu lieu ? —
A. En 1793, loi du 15 Aôut.
Q. 13. Quelle fut la cause du changement ?
A. La nécessité de mettre la monnaie en rapport avec le système décimal
métrique.
Q. 14. Le changement a-t-il eu lieu par suite de quelques inconvénients, de quelque confusion,
ou de quelque complication dans l'état de la circulation monétaire ancienne ?——
A. Non, mais il a eu pour effet de simplifier les calculs.
Q. 15. Y avait-il dans la circulation monétaire ancienne des inconvénients inhérents dans la
valeur des unités, principales ou subordonnées, ou dans leurs proportions relatives ?
A. Les rapports de valeur qui existaient entre les différentes unités
monétaires rendaient les calculs compliqués et multipliaient les chances
d'erreurs.
Q. 16. Les inconvénients (s'il y en avait) qui ont causé le changement ou qui y ont amené, se
faisaient-ils sentir dans les paiements et dans les recettes d'argent, ou bien dans la tenue des
livres ?
A. Les inconvenients se faisaient sentir principalement dans la tenue des
livres.
Q. 17. Si de tels inconvénients ont existé, par quelles classes de la société ont-ils été le plus
éprouvés ?
A. Ces inconvénients étaient sensibles pour toutes les classes de la société.
Q. 18. Le changement a-t-il été causé jusqu'à un certain point (et dans ce cas jusqu'à quel
point ?) par le désir d'assimiler la circulation monétaire à celle des pays voisins ? Alors, la
nouvelle monnaie a-t-elle été mise en usage, soit comme monnaie de compte, soit comme monnaie
de change, avant d'être établie par la loi ?
A. Le changement n'a pas été opéré dans le but d'assimiler la circulation
monétaire à celle des pays voisins. La France a été la première nation qui
ait adopté le système décimal métrique des poids et mesures.
La monnaie décimale n'a été mise en usage comme monnaie de change et
comme monnaie de compte, qu'après avoir été établie par la loi.
Q. 19. Ou bien ce changement a-t-il eu lieu jusqu'à un certain point (et dans ce cas jusqu'à
quel point) par suite d'une simple prédilection pour la division de monnaie décimale, comme étant
plus avantageuse que la division non-décimale ?
A. Voir l'annotation ci-dessus.
Q. 20. De quelle manière le changement a-t-il été effectué ?
A. 1°. La loi a interdit d'employer les anciennes dénominations de la monnaie
de compte dans les actes publics, les sous seing-privé, registres de commerce,
et autres écritures privées produites en justice.
2°. Les nouvelles monnaies émises ont été fabriquées dans la coupure du
système décimal métrique.
3°. Les anciennes monnaies ont été successivement retirées de la circulation.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 209
Q. 21. Est-ce que les valeurs relatives de quelques-unes des monnaies précédemment en circu-
lation ont subi quelque changement ?
A. Aucun changement n'a été fait dans les valeurs relatives des anciennes
monnaies.
Q. 22. Y a-t-il eu une sortie de nouvelles monnaies (et dans ce cas des quelles) avant et au
vu et au su du changement, Ou simultanément avec le changement, ou après ?
A. Aucune émission de monnaie décimale n'a été effectuée antérieurement à
la loi qui a changé le système monétaire.
Q. 23. Est-ce que l'on a fait retirer quelques-unes des monnaies précédentes de la circulation,
et dans ce cas lesquelles ?
Est-ce que quelques-unes (dans ce cas lesquelles) des anciennes monnaies ont été admises
à circuler simultanément avec le changement, ou après ?
A. Toutes les anciennes monnaies ont été retirées successivement de la
circulation.
Les anciennes monnaies ont été admises provisoirement à circuler avec les
monnaies nouvelles, mais jusqu'au délai fixé par la loi pour la démo-
nétisation.
Q. 24. A-t-on donné d'anciens noms à quelques-unes des monnaies nouvelles, ou de nouveaux
noms à quelques-unes des anciennes monnaies ?
A. Les dénominations des monnaies décimales sont distinctes de celles des
anciennes monnaies.
Q. 25. Les anciennes monnaies de compte des moindres dénominations étaient-elles exacte-
ment commensurables avec les nouvelles monnaies, et pouvaient-elles s'exprimer de la même
manière ?
A. La valeur du liard et celle du denier ne peuvent pas être exprimées
exactement en monnaie décimale.
Q. 26. Si elles n'étaient pas exactement exprimables, quel arrangement a été fait pour la
liquidation des dettes contractées sous l'ancien système, et qui devaient être payées sous le système
nouveau ?
Ou dans le cas de la perception des droits de barrières fixes, de péages, et autres droits
appartenant à des particuliers, ou aux corps municipaux ou publics, ou à l'état, qui auraient pu
acquérir ces droits sous l'ancien système, ou dans le cas d'autres engagements fixes ?
A. L'impossibilite d'exprimer exactement la valeur du liard et du denier en
monnaie décimale n'a aucune importance en ce qui touche la liquidation
des dettes contractées sous l'ancien système, puisque la différence pour
chaque compte ne porte en définitive que sur la fraction du centime.
En ce qui concerne la perception de droits de barrières, de péages, &c., les
tarifs ont été modifiés par des lois et des réglements spéciaux. Les
nouveaux droits ont été exprimés en francs et centimes.
Q. 27. Le changement de la monnaie de compte fut-il graduel ou immédiat ? Fut-il volon-
taire ou obligatoire ? Dans le dernier cas, comment et sous quelles amendes a-t-il été mis en
vigueur ? A-t-il été mis en vigueur efficacement ? ou l'ancien système est-il resté en usage
pendant quelque temps et pendant combien de temps pour les comptes ou dans les habitudes
populaires ?
A. Le changement, d'abord facultatif, a été ensuite rendu obligatoire ;
l'emploi des anciennes dénominations a été interdit sous peine d'amende.
L'amende était de 20f. pour les officiers publics et de 10f pour les autres
contrevenants. Les nouvelles dénominations ont été admises dans un
bref délai, cependant quelques personnes ont continué à se servir, dans le
langage, de quelques-unes des anciennes dénominations.
Q. 28. Si le changement a été volontaire, le nouveau et l'ancien système sont-ils restés en
usage conjointement pendant quelque temps et existent-ils toujours conjointement ?
A. L'annotation qui précède indique que le changement a été obligatoire.
Q. 29. Y a-t-il eu des inconvénients et de quelle nature par suite de cet usage concourant des
deux systèmes ? Comment cet usage concourant affecte-t-il les comptes, les billets de banque,
et les lettres de change ?
A. Depuis la promulgation de la loi, les comptes ont toujours été réglés
d'après le nouveau système, c'est-à-dire, en francs et centimes.
Q. 30. Sous cet usage concourant, comment les marchands et les banquiers tiennent-ils leurs
comptes ?
A. L'annotation précédente répond à cette question.
Q. 31. Le changement a-t-il été fait efficacement, ou y a t-il quelques classes de personnes,
et lesquelles, et dans quelle partie du pays, qui persistent à se servir des anciennes dénominations
en parlant ou dans la tenue des livres ?
A. Quelques personnes appartenant aux classes les moins élevées emploient
encore dans le langage les anciennes dénominations, et confondent, sous la
même désignation, le franc et la livre, le sou et la pièce de 5 centimes ;
mais les dénominations anciennes ne sont plus admises dans la tenue des
livres, -
No. 25.
France.
French Govern-
ment.
D d
21() APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 25 Q. 32. Ce changement a-t-il été mal vu par quelques classes de la société (et dans ce cas par
L， © 6 ! $ © A º A° $ A° v é ,:
f§ lesquelles) au moment de son introduction ? Dans le cas affirmatif, ce préjugé a-t-il été transi-
toire ou permanent ? Existe-t-il à l'heure qu'il est ? Le changement a-t-il donné lieu à quelques
French Govern- commotions ou malaise parmi les populations ?
n)Glnt. A. Ce changement a été accueilli favorablement par toutes les classes de la
---- société en général. Il n'a donné lieu à aucune commoticn, ni à aucun
malaise parmi les populations, et n'a rencontré d'opposition que dans un
petit nombre de personnes routinières qui ne voulaient pas prendre la
peine de se familiariser avec le nouveau système.
Q. 33. La nouvelle monnaie est-elle plus ou moins commode que l'ancienne, et quels en sont
les avantages et les inconvénients ?
lo. En payant et en recevant,—(a) Les fortes sommes. (b) Les petites sommes.
2o. Dans la tenue des livres,—(a) Pour les grandes affaires. (b) Pour les petites affaires.
A. La nouvelle monnaie est incontestablement d'un usage plus commode
que l'ancienne pour la recette et le paiement des petites et des fortes
SOlIllIl6èS,
Elle simplifie les calculs et facilite la tenue des livres.
Poids et Mesures. -
Q. 34. Les poids et mesures sont-ils divisés selon le système décimal ? Dans ce cas, cette
division décimale a-t-elle précédé, accompagné, ou suivi la division décimale des monnaies ? Quel
rapport y avait-il entre la division décimale des monnaies et celle des poids et mesures ?--
A. Les poids et mesures sont divisés selon le système décimal sans aucune
exception.
La division décimale a été adoptée pour les monnaies, en même temps qu'elle
a été établie pour les poids et mesures. Mais elle n'a pu être appliquée que
successivement et après un long délai en raison des difficultés que présen-
taient le retrait des monnaies de l'ancien système et leur remplacement
par des monnaies décimales, et à cause de la dépense que cette opération
devait occasionner à l'état.
Un rapport parfait existe entre la division décimale des monnaies et celle des
poids et mesures.
Q. 35. S'il n'y avait pas de rapport entre les deux divisions ci-dessus indiquées, est-ce qu'il
ne s'est pas présenté des inconvénients à cause du manque du rapport ?
A. Voir le 2º paragraphe de l'annotation ci-dessus.
Q. 36. Comment une division décimale de monnaies s'accorde-t-elle avec une division non-
décimale de commodités dans les affaires de détail parmi les classes pauvres ? Leur en résulte-t-il
des inconvénients ou des pertes ?---
A. Le prix des objets de consommation, et tous objets quelconques, peut
toujours être mis en rapport avec la coupure des monnaies.
gººg-is-sº
No. 26. No. 26.
France. LETTER from M. MICHEL CHEVALIER to LORD MONTEAGLE ; with ANSWERs to QUERIES
M. Chevalier. proposed by the DECIMAL CoINAGE COMMISSIONERS, so far as regards the EMPIRE
| ---- OF FRANCE.
CONSEIL D'ETAT, Paris, le 16 Avril 1856.
J'AI été très flatté de recevoir de vos nouvelles. Vous trouverez ci-jointe ma réponse
aux questionsimprimées que vous m'avez fait l'honneur de m'adresser au sujet des mon-
naies décimales.
La transformation du vieux système monétaire de la France a eu lieu comme une
partie du changement général de nos poids et mesures, changement général qui fut
ordonné dès le début de la Révolution de 1789, en vue d'arriver à un système universel
des poids et mesures, et auquel un décret spécial de l'Assemblée Constituante avait convié
l'Angleterre à coopérer, mais qui ne fut accompli que sous la République.
Vous savez aussi bien que moi que toutes les parties de notre système nouveau des poids
et mesures, connu sous le nom de système métrique, sont solidaires et liées entr'elles par
des rapports décimaux, de même qu'elles sont toutes caracterisées par des sous-divisions
décimales et des multiples décimaux. C'est en cela que consiste le principal avantage du
système ; c'est cette double décimalité qui en fait l'excellence.
De toutes les parties de l'entreprise du système nouveau des poids et mesures, le renou-
vellement du système monétaire est celle qui a souffert le moins de difficulté dans l appli-
cation. Au surplus le système métrique lui-même n'a rencontré dans son ensemble aucune
difficulté sérieuse, mais la résistance a été absolument nulle en ce qui concerne les
monnaies.
Relativement au système métrique consideré dans son ensemble, et spécialement en
dehors de la monnaie, l'obstacle est venu plutôt des classes bourgeoises et non pas des gens
de métier, artisans et ouvriers des villes ; ces derniers en effet ressentaient le bienfait du
système métrique par la facilité qu'ils y trouvaient pour les calculs de leur profession
quelle qu'elle fût. Les classes bourgeoises, cette partie du moins qui vit dans une sorte
de loisir sans se mêler aux professions manufacturières, résistaient quelque peu, par
routilie
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSI()N. 2 [ l
Mais relativement aux monnaies aucune classe n'a résisté. Jl y a bien eu çà et là
quelques routiniers, mais ils ont été à l'état passif et presque honteux. C'est que tout
le monde sans exception a journellement des comptes d'argent à faire, et chacun peut
reconnaître d'un clin d'œil la commodité du système des monnaies décimales, de même
que chacun peut en apprendre la pratique en un tour de main.
La seule objection qu'on puisse faire au système des monnaies décimales, objection qui
s'applique au système métrique tout entier, est celle-ci : qu'on n'y peut pas pousser loin
la division binaire. Cette difficulté est inhérente, à ce que le nombre dix est divisible
par deux, mais ne l'est pas par 2 x 2 = 4, tandis que le nombre douze l'est. C'est un
inconvénient irrémédiable à moins de changer le système même de numération, c'est à
dire la méthode usitée pour écrire les nombres en chiffres dits arabes, et de substituer le
nombre douze au nombre dix, de telle sorte que ce soit douze et non pas dix que s'écrive
par l'unité suivie d'un zéro (10), et c'est une chose à laquelle il ne faut pas songer, car
certainement le systéme de numération a été adopté une fois pour toutes. Le désir de
pousser plus loin la division binaire avait fait adopter, dans les anciens systèmes, la sous-
division par douze et quelquefois par seize ; mais il faut remarquer que ces anciens systèmes,
à l'époque où ils avaient été fixés, étaient à l'usage de peuples parmi lesquels peu de per-
sonnes savaient écrire, et où l'on comptait de tête. On peut même faire cette autre
remarque, qu'à cette époque les chiffres arabes étaient peu usités. Aujourd'hui presque
tout le monde écrit et calcule avec la plume, au lieu de calculer de tête. Le système
décimal de numération reprend tous ses avantages.
La divisibilité par quatre a son prix. Mais peut-on la comparer avec la facilité qui
résulte de ce que les divisions et les multiples suivent la même loi que celle qui règle le
système de numération ?
Pour ce qui est des monnaies en particulier, l'inconvénient de ne pouvoir pousser loin
la division binaire s'évanouit à peu-près du moment que la sous-division du franc en pièces
de valeur successivement plus faible est poussée jusqu'au degré qui est représenté chez
nous par le centime. En supposant (ce qui n'est pas chez nous) qu'on voulût suivre indé-
finiment la division binaire dans la mesure des marchandises, les comptes en argent se
feraient aisément à un centime près, et qui est-ce qui peut s'arrêter à la somme d'un
centime ?
Ce que vous appelez, Milord, le concurrent use des deux systèmes n'a jamais eu lieu
depuis l'adoption du système métrique, chez nous, que pour les sommes au dessous d'un
décime (à peu-près un penny) je pourrais même dire d'un demi-décime ou cinq cen-
times. Il y a eu pour ce concurremt use, qui au surplus a été confiné au dernier échelon
du commerce de détail, une excellente raison pratique ; les sous-divisions au dessous d'un
demi-décime n'existaient pas à l'état de pièces monnayées. Au dessous du demi-décime ou
cinq centimes on n'avait que le liard ou quart de sou. Si dès l'origine on eut monnayé
beaucoup de centimes, le concurrent use n'aurait pas eu lieu.
Vous me demanderez pourquoi l'on ne frappait pas des centimes. Ce n'était point par
respect pour un sentiment d'affection des masses populaires pour le liard ; c'était simple-
ment par un sentiment d'économie fort mal entendu. La pièce d'un centime et celles de
deux centimes sont assez couteuses de fabrication par rapport à la valeur. Les directeurs
des monnaies n'auraient consenti à en frapper des quantités que moyennant un subside
qu'on n'aimait pas à leur donner.
Je serai toujours heureux, Milord, de contribuer de mes faibles avis et de mes faibles
efforts à toute entreprise d'utilité publique à laquelle vous apporterez le puissant concours
de vos lumières et de votre influence. Tout renseignement qui serait en mon pouvoir
dans la circonstance actuelle et dans toute autre est à votre service.
Rien ne peut m'être plus agréable que de voir les deux grandes nations de l'occident de
l'Europe se rapprocher l'une de l'autre, par le rapprochement de leurs usages et de leurs
lois , toutes les fois qu'il me sera donné d'y coopérer, je me tiendrai pour l'obligé de ceux
qui m'en auront fourni l'occasion.
Veuillez agréer, Milord, l'assurance de ma haute considération et de mes sentiments
dévoués,
MICHEL CHEVALIER,
73, Rue de l'Université.
P.S.—Il ne sera peut-être pas inutile que je transcrive ici un extrait d'une lettre
que M. de Bruck, le Ministre des Finances de l'Autriche a adressée il y a peu de temps, au
comité qui s'est formé à Paris, à la suite de l'Exposition Universelle de l'Industrie, pour
recommander l'adoption générale parmi les peuples civilisés d'un système uniforme des
poids et mesures.
* º * " * Je puis à cette occasion porter à votre connaissance, Messieurs, que le
Gouvernement Impérial d'Autriche est disposé à introduire le demi-kilogramme comme
* poids monétaire, avec la division par millièmes, et à adopter également pour les mon-
* naies d'or et d'argent la loi on titre de - ºº de fin et Tlg de cuivre ou alliage, ce qui
* répondrait déjà en deux points essentiels au but que l'Association Internationale se
* propose d'atteindre."
( (
* Vienne, 8 Mars 1856."
Le très Honorable Lord Monteagle, -
de la Commission des Monnaies Décimales.
No. 26.
France.
M. Chevalier.
•- - • -• • • • • •
| ) Cl 2
212 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 26. º - #
France. Present Money of Account.
Q. I. What is the money of account at present established by law ?
M. Chevalier. A. Le franc,
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account ?—
A. Sous-divisions, le décime et centime, ou plus simplement le centime.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations ?
A. Dans les comptes, on ne se sert que de deux dénominations, le franc et le
centime.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom ?
A. Je ne saisis pas bien cette question. Le franc fait un peu moins de
10 pence,
Presemt Curremt Coins.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respec-
tive value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal ?
A. Les pièces de monnaie sont,-
En argent, de 5f. 2f. 1f 50c. 20c.
En or, - 100f 40f 20f 10f 5f
Les pièces les plus abondantes sont 5f en argent ; 20f en or. La pièce
de 100 francs existe peu et ne devrait pas exister, puisqu'il y a des billets
de banque de 100f.
En cuivre ou bronze, il y a des pièces de 10c., 5c., lc. L'émission de pièces
de 2 centimes, est aussi ordonnée ; mais il n'y en a pas encore beaucoup
dans la circulation. Je n'en ai jamais vu de l'ancienne émission. Quant
à la nouvelle, posterieure aux évenèments de 1851, (loi de 6 Mai 1852) on
en rencontre peu. Il en a été fabriqué cependant un mcntant de
351,339f 40c. au 31 Décembre 1853. Depuis lors la quantité a du
augmenter.
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use ?—
A. Les pièces de lc. sont encore rares ; mais on en frappe.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?—
A. La pièce de 5 centimes.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
niently high in value by any and which classes in society ?
A. La pièce de 5 centimes est un peu trop forte pour le solde des achats de
peu de valeur; mais il y était pourvu au moyen des vieilles pièces de billon
d'une valeur de moins de cinq centimes.
Former Momey of Account and Coims.
Q. 9. What was the money of account beſore the introduction of the present system ? What
were its subdivisions ?
A. La livre, avec les sous-divisions le sou et le denier. La livre, le sou, et
le denier avaient entre elles le même rapport que la livre sterling, le
schelling et le denier de l'Angleterre. Une livre faisit 20 sous, et le sou
12 deniers.
Q. 1O. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account ?
A. 8l livres font 80 francs.
Q ll. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account ?
A. Il y avait des pièces en argent de 6 livres, de 3 livres, de 30 sous, de
24 sous, de 15 sous, de 12 sous et de 6 sous ; pièces en or de 24 et
48 livres. En cuivre, c'étaient la pièce de 2 sous, le sou, et le liard ou
quart de sou représentant 3 deniers.
Chamge of Momey.
Q. 12. When d,d the change take place ?—-
A. Sous la République, à l'époque du Directoire, en vertu de mesures dont
le commencement datait de l'Assemblée Constituante.
Q 13. What was the cause of the change ?
A. La volonté d'avoir un système décimal de poids et mesures y compris la
monnaie.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency ?
A Répondu sous le No. 13.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 2l3
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. On ressentait l'inconvénient de ne pas avoir les divisions décimales.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences M. Chevalier.
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping ?
A. Répondu au No. 15.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt ?—
A. L'inconvénient était sensible pour les commerçants et les employés des
services financiers.
No. 26.
France.
•=e
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries ; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was establised by law ?
A. Non.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a non-decimal division ?
A. Oui.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected ?—
A. Par l'adoption du système décimal général des poids et mesures.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed ?
A. Non, pas sensiblement, et même pas du tout, faut qu'on tînt compte
du frai moyen de chaque espèce de pièce et qu'on adoptât en centimes
des nombres ronds divisibles par 10 ou par 5. Ainsi le décret du 12 Sept.
1810, et celui du 18 Août de la même année posèrent les termes
suivants :-
C.
Ecu de 6 livres = 5 80
— 3 livres = 2 55
Pièce de 24 sous = 1
-- 12 SOuS = 0 50
6 SOuS = 0 25
Q. 22. Where any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change ?
A. Oui ; on a fabriqué en masses des monnaies nouvelles, à partir de la
promulgation de la loi.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any and
which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new ?
A. Les anciennes monnaies circulaient avec les nouvelles ; mais d'après un
tarif qui fixait la valeur de chaque sorte des pièces anciennes en monnaie
nouvelle. Voir le No. 21. C'est seulement fort tard par la loi du 14 Juin
1829, qui fixait le terme du I Avril 1834, qu'on a démonétisé les pièces
anciennes. Pour les pièces de cuivre la démonétisation n'est pas encore
un fait accompli, mais ce sera fait en 1856. Si l'on tarda à démonétiser
les vieilles pièces d'or et d'argent, ce n'est pas que les populations y
fussent attachées ; tout le monde, au contraire, les trouvait incommodes. Ce
ne fut que par un effet de la lenteur de l'administration à prendre un
parti.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins -
A. Les pièces nouvelles ont eu leurs noms en francs. Par corruption, la
pièce de 5 centimes s'appela un sou dans le langage ordinaire,
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies ?
A. Le sou a été assimilé à 5 centimes ; mais c'est un billon et non pas de
la monnaie. Le vieux sou a circulé comme pièce de 5 centimes, jusqu'à
cette année où il sera définitivement retiré, ce qui aura lieu cette année.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new ? Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements ?
A. Quant aux dettes, il n'y avait pas de difficulté ; 81 livres se sont changées
en 80 francs. Pour ce qui est des péages des ponts and autres choses
semblables qui étaient d'un faible montant, c'était engénéral exprimé en
sous et liards ; or on confondait le sou et la pièce de 5 centimes, et le liard
a continué de circuler ; et puis le publique n'attache pas d'importance pour
des sommes de cet ordre à une fraction.
Il y avait à cette époque peu de péages ; il en fut établi sous le Directoire,
un sur les routes, au profit de l'état. Mais dès que c'était au profit de
l'état il n'y avait pas de difficulté ; et d'ailleurs les péages nouveaux
s'exprimaient en monnaie nouvelle.
D d 3
:
:
:
C
:
:
:
.
:
214 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 26.
France.
M. Chevalier.
• mass
No. 27.
France.
M. Delessert.
( =-s-ses
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate ? Was it optional or
compulsory ? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced ? Was it effectually
enforced ? or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language ?
A. Pour les particuliers, le changement fut facultatif et non obligatoire ; il fut
forcé pour les administrations publiques et les officiers publics. Maisla com-
modité du nouveau système était telle que les commerçants l'adoptèrent
aussitôt.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently for
any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently ?
A. Quelques petits marchands ou fournisseurs, n'ayant pas de livres de compta-
bilité régulièrement tenus, gardèrent seuls les comptes par livres, sous et
deniers.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use ? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange ?—
A. Les billets de banque et les lettres de change sont en francs.
Q. 3O. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts ?
A. En francs. -
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any and
what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking orkeeping accounts ?
A. La seule chose qui reste dans les usages, c'est le nom du sou.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society ? If any such umpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting ? Does it now exist ?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness ?
A. Le changement n'a éprouvé aucune difficulté.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages ? { $
1st. In paying and receiving-(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts.—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. Le nouveau système a sous tous les rapports une supériorité reconnue,
sur l'ancien,
Weights and Measures.
év*
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally ? If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money ? or was it in any and what way connected
with it ?
A. La France a d'une manière générale le système décimal pour les poids et
mesures. Le système français dit métrique a été édifié tout d'une pièce ;
y compris la monnaie.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money ?--
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commodities
in the retail transactions of the poorer classes ? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
A. Il ne pourrait y avoir de difficulté que si l'on manquait de mêmes pièces en
cuivre. Mais on a eu longtemps les liards comme division inférieure au sou,
ou à la pièce de 5 centimes ; maintenant on a et va avoir encore plus la
pièce de 2 centimes et le centime.
(Signé) MICHFI, CHEVALIER.
No. 27.
LETTER from M. GABRIEL DELESSERT to Lord MONTEAGLE ; with ANSWERS to CIRCULAR
QUERIEs proposed by the DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSIONERS, so far as regards the
EMPIRE OE FRANCE.
Mon cher Lord Monteagle, Passy, 8 Avril 1856.
LE 30 du mois passé j'ai eu l'honneur de vous écrire pour vous demander un délai
de quelques jours pour satisfaire aux questions que vous m'avez envoyées sur l'établissement
du système décimal tant pour les monnayes que pour les poids et mesures. Aujourd'hui
je viens m'acquitter de cette dette fort agréable envers vous, en vous retournant avec la
présente les questions et les réponses, que j'ai faites de mon mieux.
J'ai cru devoir y joindre la collection des loix et décrets rendus sur cette matière
depuis l'origine du système nouveau, ainsi que l'almanach du Bureau des Longitudes,
qui vous fournira des renseignements également utiles sur cette matière.
Les sommes deposées aux caisses d'épargne ont toujours depuis l'établissement de ces
institutions été calculées en monnayes décimales.
Le système décimal n'a jamais excité des murmures que pour les très petites transac-
tions, sur les marchés et chez les boulangers.
Le système duodécimal aurait peut-être encore des partisans, mais celà serait fort
discutable et fort discuté.
Permittez moi, mon cher Lord Monteagle, de vous renouveler l'expression de mes
sentiments de haute considération et de dévouement.
GADRIEL DELESSERT.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION 215
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law ?
A. Il n'y a point en France de monnaye de compte.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account ?
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations ?——
Q. 4, What is the va'ue of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom ?——
A. Les Questions 2, 3, et 4 trouvent l'absence de réponse dans la non-existence
en France de monnaye de compte.
Present Current Coins,
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account as well as in coins of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold, silver,
copper, or mixed metal ?——
A. Voici l'état indicatif des diverses espèces monétaires ayant actuellement
cours en France ; savoir (l'evaluation ou change de fr. 25 pour l livre
sterling) :-
Oy'. -9 s, d.
Pièces de 100 francs 1-5 º) - 4 0 0
> ) 50 ,, - - - = 2 0 0
55 40 , 4 > - 1 12 0
3> 20 ,, - 6- eºs - 0 16 0
)) 10 ,, @ s º = 0 8 0
2 ) 5 , - 4- 4-4 - 0 4 0
Argent.
Pièces de 5 , •s g- - 0 4 0
5 > 2 , - 4- g- — 0 l 7
5 ) 1 ) ) e - º - 0 0 9#
> 2 50 centimes - s- - 0 0 4#
2 ) 20 ,, - - = 0 0 1-# 5
Billon.
Pièces de 10 centimes ，- - 0 0 i
3 ) 5 3 ) -> •- = 0 0 0# penny.
: 5 2 35 " º - 0 0 0# de half penny.
J 5 • •s E 0 0 0# de half-penny.
5 y - >
L'évaluation du billon portée ici est approximative.
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use ?——
A. Pas de réponse à cette question toujours à cause de l'absence de monnaye
de compte.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?——
A. La pièce de la moindre valeur dans la monnaye courante est la pièce d'un
centime,
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or incon-
veniently high in value by any and which classes in society ?
A. On ne se plaint point au sujet de la pièce d'un centime, comme offrant des
inconvénients par sa valeur, ou trop basse ou trop élevée ; cependant, dans
les campagnes, et sur les marchés alimentaires fréquentés par les classes
ouvrières, on s'est plaint quelquefois qu'il n'y eût pas en circulation une
plus grande quantité de ces monnaies de petite valeurs.
Former Money of Account and Coins.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system ? What
were its sub-divisions ?
A. Pas de monnaye de compte.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account ?
A. Idem.
Q. 11. What coins were current and of what value in the former money of account ?
A. Double Louis de 48 livres tournois.
Louis de ,, 24 2 )
Ecus de ,, 6 2 )
Ecus de ,, 3 > >
Pièces de , 1 livre et demi ou 30 sols.
Pièces de , l5 sols.
No. 27.
France.
M. Lelessert.
D d 4
216 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 27. Change of Money.
France. Q. 12. When did the change take place ?
M. Delessert A. Le 11 Decembre 1793 (17 Frimaire an III) la Convention rendit un décret,
4 0 par lequel il était ordonné que tous les comptes et marchés des dépenses
publiques fussent tenus en livres décimes et centimes.
Le 15 Août 1795 (23 Thermidor an III.) décret de la Convention ordonnant
que l'unité monétaire porterait à l'avenir le nom de franc, et qu'elle serait
subdivisée en décimes et centimes. -
Mais c'est la loi du 7 Germinal an XI., soit 28 Mars 1S03, qui a réelement
fait la base du système nouveau.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change ?
A. L'idée de simplifier le système des monnayes, de lui donner une base plus
rationnelle, et d'un usage plus facile, peut-être aussi une intention d'opposi-
tion, ou de haine contre l'ordre de choses que l'on venait de renverser
Au termes des loix nouvelles 5grammes d'argent au titre de neuf dixième.
constitue le franc.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency ?
A. Beaucoup d'inconvénients résultaient de la division des anciennes mon-
nayes ; le système décimal admis aussi pour toutes espces de mesures,
parût simplifier avantageusement les monnayes, ainsi que toutes les opéra-
tions monétaires.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the prin-
cipal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ? -
A. On trouvait des inconvénients dans l'ensemble comme dans le détail des
monnayes ainsi que dans leurs subdivisions.
G). 16. Were the inconveniences (if amy) which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping ?
A. C'était autant pour les payements que pour les recettes que l'on trouvait
qu'il y avait des inconvénients dans le vieux système.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt ?
A. Principalement par les négociants et comptables de toutes espèces et plus
particulièrement par les difficultés que présentait l'ancien système dans la
tenue des comptes du Gouvernement.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries, and if so had the new money been rendered familiar by its use,
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law ?
A. Non, il n'y eut aucune intention de ce genre, mais les divers états ou
populations provenant de la conquête et réunis à la France, tels que la
Belgique, les Provinces Rhenanes, la Savoye, le Piémont, &c. reçurent ainsi
que celle des autres loix de l'empire l'application du système décimal.
Le système nouveau ne reçut point d'applieation sous forme d'essai, avant
son établissement légal. -
Q. 19. Or was the change caused by an abstract preference for a decimal division of money
over a non-decimal division ?
A. Malgré la répugnance qui accompagne ordinairement de grands change-
ments dans les habitudes des populations, et les contrariétés qu'elles en
ressentent, il est certain que le changement eut lieu par suite d'une pré-
férence marquée dans la système décimal.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected ?
A. Par la publication et la mise à exécution des actes du Gouvernement cités
plus haut ; les actes du Gouvernement et de la trésorerie furent immédiate-
ment rendus obligatoires ; quant aux transactions diverses, commerciales, ou
autres, comme aussi les opérations monétaires entre particuliers, comptes, &c.
elles furent tolérées et point entravées alors,
La conversion de la monnaye de l'ancien système, en monnaye du nouveau,
se faisait en ajoutant 1# pour # à la livre tournois pour faire le franc.
Q. 2l. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed ?
A. Non ; il y eut des désignations de valeur en nouvelles monnayes mais pas
d'altération.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued beſore and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change ?
A. Les nouvelles monnayes ont eu cours aussitôt après le changement et dès
que l'office des monnayes en a eu de fabriquées.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new ?
A. Les monnayes du système précédent ont continué à circuler librement
pendant un grand nombre d'années, excepté celles effacées, ou usées par le
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 217
temps ; ce n'est que fort long temps après, que graduellement ces monnayes
anciennes ont été démonétisées.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins ?
A. Non, aucune substitution de ce genre n'a eu lieu.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies ?
A. Pas dans la monnaye de compte puisqu'il n'y en avait pas, mais pour la
' monnaye courante, on représentait le sol en disant cinq centimes : deux
sols en disant une décime.
On disait bien dans l'expression de l'ancienne monnaye un liard pour
# de sol, deux liards pour un # sol (ou sou); mais ces dénominations
n'avaient pas d'expressions dans la nouvelle monnaye.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new ? Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements ?—
A. Aucunes ; seulement, la différence de l# # étant établie entre la livre
tournois et le franc au profit du franc ; on faisait la réduction lorsqu'il
s'agissait de sommes qui dépassaient celles tout à fait minimes.
Par exemple, dans la marche courante des petites transactions, on disait
un sou, et on donnait cinq centimes ; on disait deux sous, et on donnait dix
centimes, &c., sans pour cela faire la réduction de l} # ; mais lorsqu'il
s'agissait de six livres on demandait souvent le complement de l# # ;
cependant l'usage en était à peu près ad libitum, pour ces petites valeurs.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate ? Was it optional
or compulsory ? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced? Was it effectually
enforced ? or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language ?
A. Le changement fut immédiatement fondé par la loi en attendant que
l'habitude et l'usage vinssent à son secours, mais ce changement fut graduel
et libre dans l'usage.
Il n'y eut donc pas de pénalités contre ceux qui ne l'adoptaient pas,
jusqu'en 1837, plus de cinquante ans après l'établissement du nouveau
système.
Le vieux système monétaire, ainsi que nous l'avons dejà dit, resta donc
par tolérance en usage pendant un grand nombre d'années pour les tran-
sactions entre particuliers, dans le langage et les habitudes du peuple, et en
particulier dans les provinces, moins à Paris, et très rarement dans les
comptes de quelque importance.
Q. 28. If the change was optional did the old and new system contiuue in use concurrently
for anv time, and do they still continue in use concurrently ?
A. La réponse à la question précédente, No. 27, satisfait à celle-ci.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use ? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange ?
5 • A • - - º $
A. Pas d'inconvénients notables, seulement quelque confusion par fois, dans
les transactions entre particuliers. Il n'en résultait non plus aucun incon-
vénient rélativement aux billets de banque, et aux billets de change, puis-
que la réduction se faisait toujours de la livre au franc en ajoutant l} pour
cent à la livre pour faire le franc ; des tables de réduction avaient été im-
primées et se trouvaient dans tous les bureaux, comptoirs, offices, études de
notaires, &c.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts ?
A. Presque à l'unanimité les négociants et banquiers tinrent leurs livres, ou
compte, en francs, dès l'année 1800.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts ?–
A. Le changement est complètement exécuté depuis plus de 30 ou 40 ans ;
personne ne se sert des anciennes dénominations, sauf peut-être, mais bien
rarement, sur les marchés de details, de celle de sols ; cela arrive aussi
quelquefois aux cochers de voitures de place, et encore plutôt par exclama-
tion que comme indication réelle.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society ? lf any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting ?
Does it now exist ?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness ?
A. En France, malheureusement, notre esprit frondeur rend impopulaires
presque toutes les mesures nouvelles provenant du Gouvernement ; les
avantages en sont rarement appréciées avant que l'habitude en ait con-
sacré l'usage ; cependant le changement des monnayes n'éprouve d'impo-
pularité réelle que dans les classes inférieures, sur les marchés, dans les
No. 27.
France.
M. Delessert.
E e
218 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 27. populations agricoles : il était difficile de faire plier tout-à-coup les vieilles
France. traditions aux habitudes nouvelles. Cette impopularité de la mesure di-
minua peu à peu et cessa sans effort. Le changement produisit des mur-
M. Delessert. mures, mais pas de révoltes, ni de commotions violentes.
Q. 33. Is the new money naore or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages ?—"-
A. Il est généralement reconnu que la nouvelle monnaye est d'un usage plus
commode et plus facile que l'ancienne, excepté cependant la monnaye
inférieure pour laquelle un grand nombre de personnes auraient préféré le
système duodécimal au système décimal.
1. In paying and receiving ?
Pas de différence.
(a.) Large sums,
Non plus.
(b.) Small sums,
Peut-être pour les très petites transactions tant alimentaires que d'autres
sortes, le système nouveau aura-t-il trouvé des opposants.
2. In keeping accounts ?
(a.) In large transactions,
(b.) In small transactions.
Pour la tenue des comptes en grand comme en petit, le nouveau système
est reconnu infiniment plus commode et préférable.
Weights amd Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally ? If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money ? Or was it in any and what way connected
with it ?
A. Oui, pour toutes espèces de mesures quelconques le système en usage en
France pour les poids et mesures est décimal.
Le décret de la Convention du 1 Août 1793 a fondé ce système sur la mesure
du méridien de la terre. Un décret du 7 Avril 1795 a confirmé, developpé, et
régularisé ce système. L'un et l'autre de ces décrets comprennent le système
monetaire du franc et la division par centimes dans ce changement. Des
délais furent accordés, et ce n'est que la loi du 4 Juillet 1837 rendue
sous le règne du Roi Louis Philippe, qui a défendu l'emploi des anciennes
mesures et l'emploi de leurs dénominations. Lesquelles défenses furent
accompagnées de diverses penalités, amendes, &c. &c.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money ?
A. Il ne résulterait peut-être pas de grands inconvénients de ce défaut de
similitude entre le système décimal des poids et mesures, et le système
décimal monétaire, il semble, cependant, que leur uniformité offre de
grands avantages.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commodities
in the retail transactions of the poorer classes ? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them there-
from ?
A. Il nous semble que ce sont des inconvénients provenants de changements
dans les habitudes et dans l'usage plutôt que des pertes pour les classes
pauvres qui pourraient résulter de ce changement, surtout si le Gouverne-
ment avait le soin de mettre en circulation une quantité suffisante des très
petites fractions monétaires.
A Paris, on s'est plaint plusieurs fois de ne pas avoir une quantité suffisante
de centimes en circulation, c'était plus particulièrement relativement au
commerce de détail des boulangers que ces plaintes étaient proférées.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
A. Tous les depôts faits dans les caisses d'épargne, ou toutes autres institu-
tions quelconques, charitables, hospitalières, civiles ou militaires, sont
depuis de longues années soumis au calcul décimal.
Nous le répétons encore une fois, les mesures décimales de toutes sortes sont
universellement adoptées et en usage en France ; dans les magasins, bou-
tiques, &c. &c. on ne sert jamais plus du mot aune, il y n'y a que le mot mêtre
qui soit en usage ; également on ne parle plus que par litre, hectolitre,
decalitre pour les mesures de capacité , on ne dit plus guerre une lieue,
mais presque toujours un kilomètre, dix kilomètres ; les personnes agées
faisent peut-être par ancienne habitude le petit calcul d'un kilomètre pour
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 219
un quart de lieue, ou de quatre kilomètres pour une lieue de 2,000 toises, No. 27.
ou 4,000 mètres; quelques fois peut-être aussi, et toujours les gens agés, France.
on dira un arpent, quatre arpents, lorsqu'il s'agira de mesures agraires, mais
dès que cela sert de l'exclamation on revient bien vite à l'hectare, centiare, M. Delessert.
are, &c. ，- • •
Quant au mesurage ancien et aux instruments d'anciennes mesures, la loi de
1837 les a formellement défendues, et c'est un délit puni par les loix que
de s'en servir dans toutes espèces de transactions.
Passy. G. DELESSERT.
No. 28. No. 28.
ANswERs to QUERIEs proposed by HER MAJESTY 's CoMMIssIoNERs for inquiring into ºce
DECIMAL COINAGE, so far as regards the EMPIRE OF FRANCE, by the French Mercantile
Correspondent of a London Mercantile House. Correspondent.
ty•mme
Present Money of Account.
Q. l. What is the money of account at present established by law ?—
A. Le franc.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account ?
A. Les centièmes de franc.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations ?——
A. Le franc seul.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account esti-
mated in money of the United Kingdom ?—-
A. Le franc pèse 5 grammes, contenant 900 parties d'argent pur, et 100 par-
ties d'alliage de cuivre en général.
1000 grammes = l kilogramme.
3ll kilogrammes = 10,000 onces anglaises.
e 5 º
Donc l franc soit 4 5 grammes d'argent fin vaut 9-# deniers, en supposant
le prix de l'argent standard à 60 deniers (il est en ce moment beaucoup
plus élevé).
Present Current Coins.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal ?
A.- Oq'.
Pièce de # francs }p 6U1 COIllIOlllIlGS,
Pièce de 20 # pesant 6'450 grammes contenant 5 805 gr. or 0-645 gr. alliage.
5 3 10 3y 32 3°225
33 5 3y 5 > l °6 l 2#
Argent.
Pièce de 5 francs pesant 25 grammes contenant 22'500 grammes argent.
23 2 5 ) 55 10 25 9°500 J)
22 1 52 35 5 25 4°500 2 )
y ) 0'50 centimes 2'500 grammes 2-250 y )
99 0-20 ,, 1'000 , 0°900 »y
* C'uivre.
Pièce de 0'10 25 10 grammes,
55 0:05 5 > 5 93
32 0-01 55 1 5 »
(Voir à la dernière page.)
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use ?
A. Les pièces de 10 et 5 centimes circulent beaucoup.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?
A. Le centime est d'une circulation peu commune ; il est nécessaire pour des
péages de ponts, le payement du pain, de la viande.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society ?
A. Les centimes sont sans inconvénients mais peu utiles.
* La refonte de la monnaie de cuivre se fait, en ce moment, les pièces dont nous parlons ont
un poids moitié plus faible que celui des pièces qu'on supprime.
E e 2
220 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 28. Former Money of Account and Coins.
France.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system ? What
Mercantile were its subdivisions ?
Correspondent. A. La livre tournois. Il y avait—
• Or.—Pièces de 48 livres.
L3 55 24 55
Argent.—Pièces de 6 ,,
5 y 3 35
5 ) - ,, 24 sols.
@ ., »? " 35 6 5 y
Cuivre.—Pièces de - , 2 ,
75 " 35 1 93 ©
5 y - , - , 2 liards.
95 " 53 s， 55 1 y >
En 1793 on a frappé des
pièces d'argent de 30 sols.
l5 ,,
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account ?—
A. 80 livres tournois = 81 francs.
Depuis 1793 le Gouvernement a successivement modifié le prix en francs au-
quel les anciennes pièces devaient être recues ; elle sont maintenant toutes
démonétisées.
On tenait les comptes en livres, sols, et deniers :-
l livre = 20 sols.
l sol = 12 deniers.
Q. ll. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account ?
A. Toutes celles indiquées à la reponse 9.
Change qf Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place ?
A. La loi des monnaies est du 7 Germinal an XI., Bonaparte Consul. (Avril,
1803.)
La première loi est l'an I. (1793) : on frappait encore des pièces de 6 livres
et de 3 livres pendant cette année. La fabrication des monnaies décimales
prit peu de dévelopement pendant les premières années, et ce n'est qu'en
1796 qu'on frappa des pièces de 20 francs et de 40 francs en or.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change ?
A. L'esprit d'unité qui dominait alors, et le besoin d'assimiler en toutes choses
toutes les parties de la France, sont les principales causes de changement.
On introduisit le système décimal non seulement pour les monnaies, mais pour
tous les poids et toutes les mesures. Le système est complet et unitaire.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency ?
A. Le système décimal est plus simple pour les calculs.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. Non.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any) which caused or promoted the change inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping ?
A. Pour payer et recevoir aucun ; pour la tenue des comptes le système
décimal est beaucoup plus simple.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt ?
, A. Par les commerçants pour les comptes.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries ; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law ?
A. Non.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a decimal
division of money over a non-decimal division ?
A. Oui ; et surtout pour introduire un système unitaire de poids et mesures
dans toutes les parties du pays.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected ?
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed ?-—
A. Non.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change ?
A. Non : après la publication du sytème nouveau, et pendant assez longtemps,
on a fabriqué de pièces de 6 et de 3 francs.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 221
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any and
which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new 2
A. Toutes les anciennes monnaies ont continue à circuler avec les nouvelles;
elles ont été plusieurs fois tarifées; en l'an XI. entr'autres, et en 1810. En
cette dernière année le tarif fut:—
Pièces de 6 livres
5-80 francs.
* } 3 35 - 2.75 5 y
, 48 , or = 47-20 ,,
24 , , = 23:55 35
33
On payait indifféremment en monnaies nouvelles, anciennes. En 1835, la
refonte générale des anciennes monnaies fut décidée, et en 1836 elles ces-
sèrent d’avoir cours.
Il y avait aussi des pièces de billon, 6 liards et 2 sols, qui ont été démonétisés
en 1838.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2
A. Non.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies?
A. Il y avait le rapport de 80 livres à 81 francs.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new * Or, in the case of fixed money, tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements 2
A. Tous les engagements antérieurs en livres tournois étaient traduits en
francs dans cette proportion.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate? Was it optional or com-
pulsory 2 If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it effectually enforced 2
or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular language 2
A. Ces questions sont déjà répondu. L'introduction des nouvelles monnaies
s'est faite très lentement depuis 1793. Jusqu’en 1836 les anciennes monnaies
ont légalement circulé; depuis longtemps la dénomination du franc est
seule en usage; mais le sol est encore la dénomination commune, et le
Gouvernement cependant punit d'amende l'emploi de la dénomination sol
au lieu de 5 centimes.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently
A. Toutes les anciennes monnaies ont été refondues.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been ſound to arise from such concurrent use ? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank nºtes, and bills of exchange 2
A. Aucun. Le franc est la scule monnaie de compte.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts 2
A. En francs.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts
A. Tout le monde, sans exception, compte en francs. J’ai dit quela dénomina-
tion de Sol au lieu de 5 centimes est encore en usage général.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society 2 If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting Does it now exist 2
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness -—
A. Non; mais on a eu, tout naturellement, beaucoup de peine à changer les
habitudes.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages?
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums, (b) Small sums.
2nd, In keeping accounts.--(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. Plus commode.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally * If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money 2 or was it in any and what way connected
with it *
A. Oui; l’introduction a été simultanee.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money :
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commodities
in the retail transactions of the poorer classes 2 Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?—
A. Tout est décimal.
No. 28.
France.
Mercantile
Correspondent.
E ( 3
222 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 28. General Query.
France. Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
Mercantile reports, or public documents bearing on the subj ct, by describing the change of coinage, the
Correspondent. reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect ? —
a-m ! A. La pièce de 20 francs contient 5 805 grammes d'or fin.
Le rapport du poids français au poids anglais est de 311 kilogrammes, pour
10,000 onces.
L'or standard est à # #. Pour trouver la valeur des pièces d'or française il faut
poser,-
20 francs 5805 grammes.
3l l grammes x # = 3l. 17s. 10}d.
20 francs = 15 852 schellings.
Or.—Pièces de 100 francs = 79'260 shillings.
52 50 5 ) = 39 ' 630 ,,
35 20 ,, = 15 '852 ,,
35 10 3 3 - 7 " 926 3 9
y ) 5 92 - 3 © 963 95
*Argent.—Pièces de 5 > 2 = 46 925 pence.
95 2 3 2 = 18 " 770 ,,
93 l ,, = 9 ' 385 ,,
35 0'50 , = 4 ' 692 53
93 () ' 20 35 - 1 ° 877 55
Le changement de monnaies étant réel, et les anciennes monnaies disparaissant
à mesure que les nouvelles monnaies circulaient, il a bien fallu s'habituer
aux dénominations nouvelles.
Mais pour les poids et mesures, malgré des lois et ordonnances fréquentes, des
pénalités assez fortes, après plus de soixante ans, dans presque toute la France
on exprime encore les transactions en livres au lieu de kilogrammes; en arpents,
journées, &c., au lieu d'hectares ; les distances en lieues au lieu de kilomètres :
mais tous les officiers publics sont sous des peines sévères tenus de ne se servir
que des unités décimales.
No. 28. No. 29.
France. C) # # $ 4 $ 4 3
ANswERs to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
M. St. Hilaire. Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the EMPIRE OF FRANCE.
By M. BARTHÉLEMY ST. HILAIRE.
Presemt Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law ?
A. La monnaie de compte légale est l'argent. A la rigueur, et aux termes
de la loi, on pourrait refuser un paiement en or, à moins qu'il n'eût été
expressément stipulé. r
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account ?
A. L'unité de la monnaie étant le franc, il y a au-dessous, la pièce d'un demi
franc en argent, d'un cinquième de franc en argent, le décime en bronze,
et le demi décime ou vingtième du franc en bronze aussi, puis le cinquan-
tième ou deux centimes, et enfin le centime, ou 100e du franc. Au-dessus
du franc il y a la pièce de 2 francs et la pièce de 5 francs, en argent toutes
deux. Il y a aussi des pièces de 5 francs, de 10 francs, de 20 francs, et de
40 francs en or. Chacune de toutes ces pièces a son poids, son diamètre,
et son alliage fixé par la loi. Les dimensions sont rapportées au mètre,
base générale de toutes les mesures.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations ?
A. Il n'y a que deux dénominations en usage, l'or et l'argent. Il y a aussi
le cuivre ou billon, qui est une monnaie légale. Il faut une loi spéciale
pour que les billets dits de la banque de France aient cours forcé. Le cours
forcé de ces billets a été établi avec grand avantage en 1848.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom ?
A. Le rapport des monnaies de France à celles du Royaume Uni varie con-
stamment suivant l'offre et la demande des deux marchés. Le franc vaut
en général # # du shilling. La pièce de 20 francs vaut # # d'une livre
sterling Mais c'est tantôt plus et tantôt moins.
* This is reckoning the price of English standard silver at five shillings per ounce troy.—A.S.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 223
Presemt Current Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respec-
tive value in the inoney of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal ?—
A. Les pièces courantes sont toutes celles qu'cn a indiquées plus haut. Les
autres ont été successivement démonétisées.
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use ?
A. Les pièces les plus petites en usage sont les centimes; c'est celles aussi
dont on se sert dans les appoints, quoiqu'en général on donne la pièce
entière de 5 centimes pour 3 centimes, et qu'on ne donne rien quand
l'appoint est au-dessous de trois centimes.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?
A. Le centime est la pièce de la plus faible valeur. Parfois dans la conversa-
tion on parle de liards et même de deniers, mais il n'en existe plus.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
niently high in value by any and which classes in society ?
A. On trouve généralement le système commode, et dans les classes ouvrières
on ne se plaint pas de recevoir des centimes ; ce qui est du reste en général
fort rare.
Former Momey of Account amd Coins.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system ? What
were its subdivisions ?
A. La monnaie de compte avant celle-ci était la livre subdivisée en vingt
sous. Il y avait des pièces de 15 sols, et autres dont je ne me rappelle pas
très bien l'existence. Il y avait aussi des pièces de 2 sols, de 1 sol, des
liards, dont 4 pour former un sol. Il y avait des pièces de l # livre, de 3
livres, de 6 livres, en argent. Des louis d'or valant 24 livres, de doubles
louis valant 48 livres, et des quadruples valant 96 livres.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account ?—
A. La livre valait à très-peu-près ce que vaut le franc aujourd'hui ; et dans la
conversation ordinaire on prend indifféremment les deux expressions ; on
dit également dix mille livres de rente ou dix mille francs de rente.
Q. l l. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account ? —
A. Les pièces courantes étaient jadis celles qu'on vient d'indiquer, et leur
rapport est facile à tirer des indications précédentes.
Chamge of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place ?
A. Le changement a été commencé par la Convention Nationale en 1793, et
après bien des transitions il n'a guère été achevé que vers 1845, après plus
d'un demi-siècle. Tout récemment encore il a subi quelques modifications
de peu d'importance.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change ?
A. Le système était peu commode en lui-même, mais c'est surtout la bigarrure
de province à province qui a décidé le changement. En voulant réduire le
pays à l'uniformité, on a été poussé à examiner de plus près les bases du
système et à les changer absolument.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency ?
A. L'ancien système avait des inconvénients, mais c'est surtout par des
causes politiques qu'on a été amené à le remplacer.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. L'ancien système n'étant pas décimal offrait des divergences profondes avec
le système de numération, et par suite causait des difficultés dans les
comptes ; il fallait faire des opérations assez complexes et assez difficiles,
parceque le système était duodécimal dans certaines parties, vicésimal ou
décimal dans d'autres.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money, or in account keeping ?
A. Ces inconvénients, tout réels qu'ils étaient, auraient été supportés très-
longtemps encore sans les causes supérieures qui firent bouleverser et re-
construire, de fond en comble, toute la société.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt ?——
A. C'était surtout les classes ouvrières qui sentaient les inconvénients. Plus
haut on en sentait moins la gêne, parcequ'on était plus éclairé.
No. 29.
France.
M. St. Hilaire.
-
E e 4
224 APPENDIx TO REPORT ON THE
No. 29. Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency
France. to that of neighbouring countries ; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law ?—
M. St. Hilaire. A. Il n'y eut aucun désir d'imitation en France ; on prétendit, au contraire,
•sºmme •
donner l'exemple au monde entier ; et, au fond, on n'avait pas tout-à-fait
tort ; malgré les excès de la vanité nationale, on était seul dans le vrai.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a non-decimal division ?
A. La préférence était indiquée et justifiée par le système général de numé-
ration, qui est essentiellement décimal par la loi même de la nature qui a
donné dix doigts aux mains de l'homme. Mais il y eut aussi en France
une sorte de passion violente et abstraite pour l'unité en toutes choses, y
compris la monnaie.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected ?——
A. Le changement a été fait par la loi, rattaché au changement général des
mesures de tout ordre, et fondé sur la mesure de la terre.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed ?—
A. On changea plusieurs fois la valeur des monnaies courantes, en attendant
que les nouvelles livres fussent substituées complétement. La pièce de 6
livres, par exemple, fut réduite à 5 francs 80 centimes ; celle de 3 livres à
2 francs 75 centimes, &c.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change ?
A. On émit les nouvelles pièces en concurrence avec les anciennes, en indi-
quant une époque où les dernières n'auraient plus cours.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new ?
A. On modifia plusieurs fois les époques où les anciennes pièces devaient
cesser d'être reçues. On mit beaucoup de modération dans ces exigences
SllCCGSS1VeS.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins or new names to old coins ?——
A. Le nom de franc était en usage peu fréquent avant le changement. C'est
le seul nom qu'on emprunta au passé, où d'ailleurs il n'était pas légal.
C] > & b
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies ?
A. Il n'y avait pas de rapport tout-à-fait exact entre les deux genres de
monnaies, mais la livre et le franc étant très rapportés on les prit l'un pour
l'autre dans la conversation, mais jamais la loi ne les confondit.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new ? Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements ?—
A. Je ne connais pas assez le détail de ces changements pour répondre directe-
ment à cette question. Des lois transitoires ont réglé ces petites
difficultés.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate ? Was it optional or
compulsory ? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced ? Was it effectually
enforced ? or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language ?—— -
A. Le changement a été, je crois, immédiat. Les lois de la Convention
Nationale, insérées au Bulletin des Lois de ce temps, fourniront sûrement
tous ces renseignements. La Convention fut en général moins dure qu'on
ne le croirait d'après sa réputation.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently ?
A. Les deux systèmes ont continué assez longtemps d'être simultanés. Ils
sont actuellement tout-à-fait distincts, et le nouveau est seul légal.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use ? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange ?
A. La simultanéité n'était qu'une tolérance. On la fit cesser le plus tôt
qu'on pût.
L'histoire des assignats est très compliquée, et je n'oserais en parler ici
parceque je ne la sais pas assez bien, M. Thiers en a parlé en traits géné-
raux dans son histoire de la Révolution, mais admirablement.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts ?
A. C'était à l'amiable qu'on s'entendait en s'appuyant le plus qu'on pouvait
sur la loi,
.1DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 225
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts ?—
A. Il y a diverses parties de la France,—la Bretagne, par exemple, l'Auvergne,
&c.,—où l'on a conservé les anciennes façons de parler et même beaucoup
de vieille monnaie.
Certaines classes ont conservé aussi certaines locutions. Les maquignons,
par exemple, parlent toujours par pistoles, ou pièces de 10 livres. Dans
bien des provinces on parle aussi par louis ; et à Paris même, depuis quelque-
temps, cette expression est souvent appliquée aux pièces de 20 francs.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society ? If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting ? Does it now exist ?
Did the change cause amy popular commotions or uneasiness ?
A. Le changement a été surtout impopulaire parmi les classes ignorantes. Il
n'y a guère que vingt ans que l'impopularité a disparu ; elle a duré plus de
trente ans. Cela tenait surtout à ce que les marchands en détail trom-
paient les pauvres à l'ombre du changement légal.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages ?-
lst. In paying and receiving-(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. La monnaie actuelle est mille fois plus commode, parcequ'elle est décimale
soit pour les grosses sommes, soit pour les petites, dans l'usage courant ou
dans les comptes.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally ? If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money ? Or was it in any and what way connected
With it ?
A. En France tous les poids et mesures sont divisés décimalement, sauf
le temps, qui est duodécimal, sexagésimal, &c. Le système entier a été
décrété à la fois, par la Convention Nationale en 1793 et 1794.
Le système monétaire tient par le mètre au reste du système des poids et
IllGSUll'GS.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
mot corresponding with the divisions of money ? -
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes ? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
A. Tout est décimal. Il ne reste que les tromperies inévitables, quand les
gens ne sont pas honnêtes et parfaitement droits.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect ?
A. Toutes les lois, décrets, ordonnances, arrêtés, &c. sont insérés au Bulletin
des Lois.
Il y a aussi une foule d'ouvrages où tous les détails sont consignés. Les plus
récents seraient les meilleurs à consulter. Je ne pourrais point les indiquer
particulièrement.
BARTHÉLEMY ST. HILAIRE,
15 Décembre 1856. Membre de l'Institut de France.
No. 20.
SARDINIA.
ANSWERs to QUERIEs proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
L)ecimal Coinage, so far as regards the KINGDOM OF SARDINIA.
Sent by HER MAJESTY's MINISTER at TURIN.
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law ?—
A. The lira or franc throughout the Sardinian States.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account ?
A. The centime, or hundredth part of a lira.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations ?
A. Practically all payments and receipts are recorded in lire and centimes.
f
No. 29.
France.
M. St. Hilaire.
•==m-s-s
No. 30.
Sardinia.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
1 -•m
226 APPENDIx. To REPORT OF THE
No. 30.
Sardinia.
* 3
Her Majesty's
- Minister. “
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom 2– - * : * * *
A. The value of the lira is about 10d. Sterling, and of the centime T's of
a penny. x- -
Present Current Coins.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respec-
tive value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal? -

tº º Value in Lire and Value in British
A. Denomination. Centimes. Currency.
Gold.
New Coins :— Lire. Cents. £ s. d.
Pieces of IOO lire cº tº 1OO O 4 O O
.., 80 , - * > 8O () 3 4 2
» 50 × tº º 5O O 2 O O
,, 40 , - tº a 4O O I 12 I
99 2O 39 * > tº 2O O O 16 O}
99 10 × tº £º 10 () O 8 0}
Old Coins :—
Doppia of Savoy * * tº 28 45 1 2 10}
Half - - tºs º 14 22% 0 l l 5%
Quadruple of Genoa - gº 79 O 3 S 4
The fractions +, +, in proportion.
Silver.
Piece of 5 lire º ſº 5 O O 4 2
9, 2 × tº -º º 2 O O 1 8
» l ; e- * 1 O C O IO
,, 0:50 * * tº O 5O O O 5
,, O-25 gº tº O 25 0 0 23
Miared Metal.
Old Coins :- -
Piece of 8 sous gº tº º O 40 O O 4
53 4 » ſº $º O 20 O O 2
Copper.
New Coins :—
Piece of 5 cents gº tº- O 5 O O}
92 3 * ſº º * : O 3 O 0 ºr
39 l 9) gº tº-e O | O 0.15
In the Island of Sardinia the following coins are also legally current :—
Denomination. Value in Lire and Value in British
- Cents. Currency.
Gold. £ s, d.
Carlino sº tº gº º 50 lire. 2 O O
# carlino gº gºe - ſº 25 , 1 O O
Dopietta • tºº tº gº 10 ,, o 8 4.
Silver. -
Crown gº tº tºº tº 4 80 cents. o 4 o'
} crown tº gº gº tº- 2 40 () 2 O
# crown cº- 4- tºº * - 1 20 O 1 O
Mized Metal. -
Reale * -º †- tº sº + O 48 99 O O 4%;
# reale tº º sº - || 0 24 , O O 2 fºr
- - Copper. -
Sol gº • * - se O 10 ,, O O I
% sol. - tº gº tº O 5 , , 0 0 O}
Cagliarese tº &= se O 1 , O O OTºr
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use 2
4. They are amongst bakers and the lower orders generally.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use P
A. The centime.
..Q.,8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
niently high in value by any and which classes in society?
4. No classes in society complain of the centime as inconveniently low or
inconveniently high in value. t
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 227
Former Money of Account and Coins.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions f
A. In the continental portion of the state the lira of Piedmont; it was sub-
divided into 20 sols, and the sol into 12 deniers. But in the “Novarese,”
the Milanese lira, equal to 0-768 of a franc or lira, is in general use as a
money of account. In the island of Sardinia the money of account was
the lira Sarda = l'92 francs, subdivided into 20 sous, and the sous into 12
deniers. In Liguria, on its annexation to Sardinia in 1814, the money
of account was the lira = 0.83% franc, or 120 lire to 100 francs, subdivided
into 20 Sous, and the sous into J2 deniers.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account 2
A.100 old lire of Piedmont (the money of account) are equal to 118; new
lire or francs.
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account?
A. None.
- - - Change of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place 2
A. Practically, when Piedmont was annexed to France in 1793. In the
Duchy of Genoa, however, and in the Island of Sardinia, the decimal
system was not finally introduced until the years 1827 and 1843 respectively;
and in the Island of Sardinia the old coins are still current at a rate fixed
- by law. (See Reply No. 5)
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change?—
A. The habits contracted during the French occupation, and the evident
advantage of a uniform monetary system.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the
previous currency P —
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. It is difficult at this distance of time to speak with confidence as to the
inconveniences which may have existed; but it is obvious that the main
reason for the change was the inconvenience of a return to the system which
existed before the French occupation.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money, or in account keeping?
A. Same answer.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt P--—
A. Same answer.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency
to that of neighbouring countries ; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its
use either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law Ż
A. Undoubtedly the French occupation and the constant intercourse with
France had rendered the new money familiar to the public, and induced the
wish to assimilate the currency of Sardinia to that of France.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a non-decimal division ?
A. It was not.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected 2–
A. The change was finally effected by legislative enactments of the 6th and
12th August and 7th September 1816, and 4th and 9th December 1820, by
which the new lira was declared to be the money of account, and all
contracts were thenceforth to be made in that coin.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed 2
A. They were not, except in the case of the coins of mixed metal of 20 15,
and 10 sous, which were reduced in 1814 to their real value of 8 Sous,
7# Sous, and 4 Sous.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of simultaneously
with, or after the change 2
A. In contemplation of the change the following new coins were issued, viz.:
Gold.—New doppia, 20 lire; 40 lire; 80 lire.
Silver.—Crown, 5 lire; piece of 2 lire; piece of 1 lira ; piece of 0:50 lira.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new 2
A. In 1826 the pieces of 7% sols (15 sous) were withdrawn from circulation. In
that year also the old lira was reduced to a new lira, with an augmentation of
18; ; that is to say, 100 old livres were to be equal to 118; new lire ; and
on the 16th of December of the same year the decimal system was intro-
duced, and only decimal coins were permitted to circulate.
No. 30.
Sardinia.
Her Majesty's
Minister. --
tºmmemºms
F f 2
228 APPENDIX TO REPORT ON THE
No. 30.
Sardinia.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins or new names to old coins?
A. The old coins retained their names, and the new coins received names
corresponding with their French equivalents.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies?
A. They were not. *
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new P Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements?
A. The proportion which the old monies should bear to the new was determined
by law, and all public officers were directed to conform to the tariffs accom-
panying that law.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate 2 Was it optional or
compulsory P If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it effectually
: or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
anguage :
A. The change was so far gradual that the public had been accustomed to it
from the time of the French occupation; but it became compulsory on the
18th January 1827. It was enforced by a penalty of 50 francs. It was
adopted easily, except on the confines of Lombardy, where the Milanese lira
is still much used; it is, however, gradually disappearing.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently P
A. The old and new system continued in use concurrently for some years;
but at present, with the exception of the “ Novarese,” and to a certain extent
Liguria, the new system is generally adopted. At Genoa the lower classes
and retail dealers continue to use the old denominations, and in some
instances the merchants' books are kept in double columns for the old and
new money.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use 2 How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
A. No inconvenience is felt at Genoa from the concurrent use, except by
merchants, who are still in some instances obliged to buy and sell in the old
money, and subsequently, in their accounts, reduce it into new money.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts?
A. Answered in No. 28.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts?--
A. The change has been effectually made in most instances throughout all
classes; but in a few districts of Liguria and the Novarese it has not yet
been wholly accomplished.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society 2 If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting 2 Does it now exist?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness P
A. Like all other changes, this was somewhat unpopular amongst the lower
orders at the outset; but they are gradually becoming familiar with the use
of the decimal system, and all the old denominations will disappear ere long.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages 2
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2d. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. The new money is undoubtedly more convenient than the old, in paying
and receiving large and small sums, in keeping accounts, in large transac-
tions and in small; sums are more easily divided, multiplied, or added up.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally? If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money 2 Or was it in any and what way connected
with it?
A. They are. The decimal division of weights and measures followed the
decimal division of money, but at a long interval.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money?
A. No inconvenience was found to arise from this want of conformity whilst
it existed.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
A. This difference of division did not entail any loss upon the poorer classes
as far as is known. In fact, the retail dealers found no difficulty in
adapting the old weights and measures to the decimal monetary system, or,
where that system was not understood by the lower orders, to the old money
of account.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 229
General Query.
G. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect? –
A. The documents annexed to this report are:
1st. A paper of answers prepared by the Sardinian Government.
2d. A comparative table of the monies of the Sardinian states and of
France, accompanied by remarks.
3d. An enumeration of the Laws and Acts passed since 1814 on the
subject on the Sardinian continent, accompanied by a sketch of those
in force prior to that periodi; and likewise by a statement of the
laws peculiar to the Island of Sardinia.
4th. A paper drawn up by M. Despine, a gentleman of great authority
on such matters.
The Sardinian Government are not yet in a condition to supply the whole
collection of laws and other documents required, but they will be for-
warded as soon as they can be got together.
No. 31.
RISPOSTE AI QUESITI DELLA BRITANNICA COMMISSIONE DELLE MONETE
DECIMALI.
MINISTERO DELLE FINANZE.
L'AMMINISTRAZIONE CENTRALE delle REALE ZECCHE a ToRINo porge su quesiti
a rincontro le seguenti risposte.
Presente Moneta di Conto.
(2 1°. Qual è la moneta di conto presentemente stabilita dalla legge ? –
R. L'attual moneta di conto è la stessa che l'effettiva metallica giusta il
vigente decimal sistema; cioè la lira di Piemonte, pari al franco, ossia lira
di Francia.
Q. 2°. Quali sono le suddivisioni di tal moneta di conto?
R. La lira, tanto moneta di conto, quanto effettiva, suddividesi in centesimi
CentO.
Q. 3”. Sonvi più di due denominazioni di moneta di conto praticamente usate nello esprimere o
notare pagamenti o ricevuti, e quali sono codeste denominazioni ?
R. Legalmente sola evvi e sola praticasi l'anzidetta denominazione di lire, e
di centesimi; salvo pe rari casi eccezionali, che si avesse bisogno di far
menzione dell' antica moneta di Piemonte, Genova, o Sardegna, od altra
straniera non-decimale.
Presenti Monete in Corso (cioè, Moneta di Cambio).
Q. 4°. Quali sono le monete in corso legale ed in generale circolazione, e qual è il loro rispettivo
valore nella moneta di conto ? –
R. La moneta di cambio, ossia effettiva metallica, in corso legale,-
Pe Reali Stati di terraferma,-
Consta delle specie d'oro, d'argento, d'erosomisto (billon), e di rame, indicate
nella vigente tariffa 26 Ottobre 1826 ; suddividentisi in nazionali e straniere,
decimali e non-decimali; aventi il legale o nominal valore ivi espresso in
lire e centesimi, anchè per le specie non-decimali; al qual valore e governo
e privati son tenuti a riceverle da qualsiasi debitore; purchè non liscie, nè
altrimenti guaste, nè calanti in peso oltre la legal tolleranza ivi statuita, e,
quanto al viglione ed al rame, fra i limiti dalla legge prefissi.
Furono però, nell'intervallo trascorso dalla emanazion della tariffa, aboliti, fra
le antiche specie nazionali in rame, il due soldi, il due danari, ed in erosomisto
il così detto soldino, il mezzo soldo, cioè pezzo da sei danari, e tuttº e sei le
specie di Genova.
Si tolsero inoltre dal legal corso, quanto alle specie straniere, in oro, il luigi e
il doppio luigi di Francia; in argento il vecchio scudo di Milano, gli scuti
e spezzati del già Regno d'Italia, il vecchio scudo ed il venticinque centesimi
di Francia, il vecchio scudo di Piemonte, quel di Genova, e gli spezzati loro.
E vi si aggiunsero, in ispecie nazionali d'oro, i pezzi da L. 10, da L. 50, e da
L. 100, la seconda e la terza in sostituzione di quelle da L. 40, e da L. 80,
rimaste sibbene in legal corso, ma da più non coniarsene.
Per l'Isola di Sardegna,-
Consta delle specie d'oro, d'argento, d'erosomisto, e di rame, inscritte nella
vigente sua tariffa 26 Novembre 1842; delle cui suddivisioni, e legale o
nominal valore obbligatorio, è a dire il medesimo che additossi circa le
specie tariffate pe Reali si º terraferma.
f 3
No. 30.
Sardinia.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
2-
230 APPENDIX TO REPORT ON THE
No. 31. Egli è però da osservare, –
Sardinia. Che, mentre le specie descritte nella tabella No. 1. della tariffa Sarda, non
- hanno legal corso ne Reali Stati continentali, le tabelle No. 2. e No. 3.
Sig. Cattaneo, comprendono tutte le specie incluse nella tariffa per terraferma.
Eccettuate quelle in erosomisto, quelle in rame sì antico sì decimale, in
argento il pezzo decimale da centesimi 25, il vecchio scudo di Genova, e gli
spezzati d'esso, lo scuto e gli spezzati del già Regno d'Italia, ed in oro li
multipli dell'antica doppia di Savoja.
Ed aggiuntevi all'opposto, in oro straniero, la ghinea.
Che le specie toltesi poscia di corso quanto a terraferma, come sopra si disse, il
furon pur ad un tempo per la Sardegna.
E che il legale o nominal valore dalla tariffa assegnato alle specie Sarde,
costituentivi la tabella No. 1., è, più o meno, superiore all'effettivo loro valor
monetario (materia e opera) a cui trovasi nella tariffa medesima precisamente
pareggiato il valor nominale di tutte le altre specie.
E solo è da eccettuare il cagliarese, tariffato per 1 centesimo, che in effettivo
monetario valor come sovra monta a quasi º di più che il centesimo di
Piemonte, e ad oltre il doppio di quel di Sardegna.
Q. 5”. Sono le monete rappresentanti le più basse denominazioni della moneta di conto in suo
comune ? –
Q. 6°. Qual è la moneta del più basso valore in uso comune ?
R. Le tre specie in rame, da centesimi 1, due decimali denominate centesimo, e
l'antica, detta cagliarese, sono le infime, ed in uso comune.
Q. 7°. Sono le più basse monete in uso comune lamentate come troppo alte o troppo basse in
valore da qualche e da quale classe della società ?
R. Niun richiamo da niuna classe.
Antiche Monete di Conto, e Correnti.
Q. 8°. Qual era la moneta di conto prima dell'introduzione del presente sistema? Quali erano
le sue suddivisioni ? -
R. L'antica lira di Piemonte, l'antica lira Genovese, e l'antica lira Sarda,
suddividentisi tutte e tre in soldi 20, ed il soldo in danari 12.
Q. 9°. Quale era il suo valore legale relativamente alla presente moneta di conto?
R. Legalmente equivaleano, nell' attuale decimal moneta, la Piemontese a
L. 1'18-75; la Sarda a L. l 92; e la Genovese a L. 0.83 333 ossiano
centesimi, 83 .
Q. 10”. Quali monete erano in corso, e di quale valore, nell'antica moneta di conto?
R. Quanto a moneta effettiva, le antiche specie in legal corso erano le stesse
che quelle in corso attualmente, e quali trovansi nelle ricordate tariffe.
Alle medesime però hannosi da aggiugnere le specie posteriormente abolite,
o toltesi dalla legal circolazione, come già a suo luogo additossi; ed alcune
cattive monete d'Allemagna provvisoriamente ricevute (onde breve durarono)
per triste necessità di guerra; ed inoltre, per la Sardegna, in rame, il mezzo
cagliarese, ch' era il danaro Sardo, specie non più compresasi nella tariffa in
vigore; e pel Piemonte, in erosomisto, le due specie denominate quinzone
e sett e mezzo, perchè il nominal valore, lor prefisso nella emissione, fu di
soldi antichi quindici, pari all' ottavo del vecchio scudo in argento, e di soldi
sette e danari sei rispettivamente, corrispondenti perciò in decimal moneta
a L. 0.89:0625, ed a L. 0:44:53125; di cui la lº fu tra breve abolita, e la 2º
ridotta sotto il Governo Francese a L. 0:37 5, venne pure slegalizzata, col richi-
amo del coniato in zecca, poco prima ch emanasse la vigente tariffa del 1826.
Qual si fosse l'antica moneta di conto in Sardegna, quale in Liguria, e quale
in Piemonte (vale a dire in tutti gli altri Reali Stati di terraferma, com-
presevi perciò anche la Savoja, e la contea di Nizza) già disopra si è detto.
Or siffatta moneta era meramente di conto, cioè diversa dalla moneta
effettiva in ispecie metalliche; salvo, pel Piemonte, quanto al soldo e (per
breve tempo) alla lira, ridotta poscia a centesimi 40 ; pel Genovesato, quanto
alla lira ; e per la Sardegna, quanto al soldo, e al danaro ch era il mezzo
cagliarese sovra indicato.
ciascuna d'esse antiche specie avea nella rispettiva moneta di conto un
legale ossia nominal valore, pari allo attuale in decimal moneta aumentato,
quanto alle specie Liguri, nella ragione di 5 : 6, e diminuito, rispetto alle
Sarde, ed alle Piemontesi, nella ragion di 48 : 25, e di 19 : 16; i quali
ragguagli fra le antiche e la nuova moneta sono in massima precisi; se non
che talvolta, nel tariffare decimalmente le vecchie monete li peculiari motivi,
che in seguito si additeranno, recarono ad estimarle un po' di meno. A meglio
però chiarir la cosa, ed a esattamente indicar tal valore per le specie che in
maggior uso erano, si vegga il seguente specchio comprendente le nazionali;
salvo per le straniere il riandar la tariffe anteriori alle sopra citate; e di
più avvertendo, circa le monete straniere non-decimali, essere generale e
costante regola il non ammetterle nella tariffa, fuorchè al solo effettivo lor
valore in materia.
IE
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
231
SPECIE ANTICHE NAZIONALI.
Valor nominale in
o º Moneta.
Giurisdizione. I Materia. Denominazione. Annotazioni.
Nuova. Antica.
o Li. Cent. Li. Sol. Da. - -
PIEMONTE - Oro - - l Carlino - e - | 142 25 | 120 0 0 CoMUNI ALLE TRE SoRTE DI MONETE.
Mezzo carlino - - | 7 l 12-5 - 6o o o Le più o men tenui differenze ne decimali valori
delle singole specie fra li tariffati e quelli cui do-
Doppia - 28 45 24 o o | vrebbono rilevare secondo le accennate ragioni di
ragguaglio, generalmente provengono dall' aversi
Spezzati, cioè metà, e A proporzione. nel tariffarli avuto in especial conto il titolo e il
quarto. 9 peso attuale in media effettiva anzichè in tassa
legale, quanto all' oro e all' argento; e dal volere
schivar le frazioni. Tali differenze (fuor che pel
Argento - Scudo e a o 7 10 6 0 0 | due danari di Piemonte, pel soldo e mezzo soldo
o Sardi), son tutte in meno.
Spezzati, cioè metà, A proporzione.
quarto, e ottavo. se-
ge SPECIALI.
º o 0 -
º" Quinzone e- a - O 7 0 15 0 Moneta di Piemonte.
Sett e mezzo º se O 37'5 O 7 6 L'antico nominal valore del sett e mezzo e del
du e mezzo corrispondea, in nuovo ossia decimal
Otto soldi - e- 0 40 I 0 0 | valor nominale, a quasi centesimi 45, e centesimi 15;
ma durante l'occupazione Francese fu ridotto a
Quattro soldi e- a - O 20 O l0 0 | centesimi 37à e 12) rispettivamente; e tal si rimase
il 1° fino all' abolizion della specie nel 1826, ed è
Du' e mezzo e e e 0 12'5 O 2 6 | tuttora il secondo in legal corso.
Lo stesso è a dire dell' otto soldi, del quattro
Soldo, detto soldino - 0 05 O l 0 | soldi, e del soldo maurizio, che pure in legal corso
rimasero, e da L. 1'18'75, da centesimi 59'37-5, e da
Mezzo soldo e sº 0 02'5 0 0 6 | centesimi 29 6875, equivalenti a L. 1, a soldi 10, e
a soldi 5 (cui per calamità de tempi si emisero)
s vennero come sovra ridotti a centesimi 40, 20, e 5
Bronzo - Due soldi, detto soldone 0 10 0 2 0 rispettivamente. 3 - v.5 - º 5
l E così pure il soldone, il soldino, ed il mezzo
Rame - Soldo, detto maurizio - 0 05 O 5 0 | soldo, che nominalmente valuto avrebbono quasi
centesimi 12, 6, e 3, furono rispettivamente ridotti
Due danari - - | 0 01 0 0 2 | a centesimi 10, 5, e 24.
se º so - d e - - - i -
SARDEGNA Oro Carlino 50 0 26 5 0 Moneta di Sardegna.
p .] se 25 - e º o g o o
Mezzo carlino 2 ) 13 2 Alle picciole differenze in nominale decimal
Doppietta - - l 0 5 5 0 | valore delle tre specie in oro, tra 'l tariffato ed il
risultante dall' esatto ragguaglio della lira deci-
Argento - Scudo - sa a 4 80 2 l0 0 male coll' antica Sarda, fu motivo il volersi tal
Spezzati, cioè metà, e
quarto.
A proporzione.
valore assegnato in cifra rotonda, e fors'anche il
troppo divario in più, che altrimente sarebbevi
stato, tra 'l valor reale ed il nominale in L. 1:08 pel
carlino, e a proporzione per gli altri 2 pezzi.
Le ultime 4 specie, a preciso ragguaglio, corri-
e º - - e- pr º o -
Erosomisto | Reale - 48 0 5 0 sponderebbero, in nominal valore decimale, a
Mezzo reale e- ass 24 2 centesimi 9:6, a 4'8, a 1'6, ed a 0 8. Ma nella tariffa
v se si apprezzarono, per rotondità di cifra, le prime
Soldo t- 0 10 1 0 due a centesimi 10, e a 5 ; si tolse l'ultima, fra altri
- motivi, per la somma esiguità di valore ; e la 3a
Rame - Mezzo soldo, o tre ca- 0 05 0 0 6 | si tassò ad un solo centesimo, perchè dovendosi di
gliaresi. necessità scegliere fra tal quota, e l'altra di centesimi2,
Cagliar 01 0 0 2 reputossi conveniente il preferir la minore, siccome
agliarese sa e- agguagliante all'incirca l'intrinseco valor della specie
Mezzo cagliarese 00'5 in opera e materia.
GENovESATO - Oro - - Quadruplo a - 79 0 96 0 0
Spezzati, cioè metà, A proporzione.
quarto, e ottavo.
Moneta di Genova,
Argento - Scudo - a- - 6 56 8 0 0 e se o o º
º e s. à A º - La più o men lieve discrepanza che presenta il
Spezzati, cioè metà, proporzione, nominale decimal valore di ciascuna specie, a
quarto, ottavo (ch'è rincontro, relativamente a quanto riuscir dovrebbe
la lira), e sedicesimo. a giusta ragion di ragguaglio fra l'antica moneta
º s Genovese, e la nuova decimale, è imputabile senz'
Erosomisto | Quattro soldi - - 0 16 0 º l altro alle trascurate frazioni, e massimamente alla
Due soldi e-o º 08 2 0 | differenza in meno tra la presumibil media degli
º te º. effettivi titolo ed attual peso, ed il peso e titolo
Parpajola doppia, ossia legali.
cavallotto s - 0 10 O 2 8
Parpajola - t- 0 05 0 l 4
Otto danari t- - 0 02 0 0 8
Quattro danari 0 0l 0 0 4
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig.
Cattaneo.
F f 4
232
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
INo. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
umma
Q. 11°. Quando ebbe luogo il cambiamento ?-
R. Molte furono, come in generale per tutti gli altri stati, le vicissitudini cui,
Q. 12°. Qual fu la causa del cambiamento ?
R. Cagione estrinseca e accidentale si fu l'abitudine da cittadini contratta,
Cambiamenti di Monete.
secondo circostanze, andò la moneta soggetta ne paesi ora spettanti alla
Sabauda Monarchia, tanto al di là dell' Alpi, quanto in Italia, e nel Mediter-
raneo. Ed il partitamente annoverarle da primordi in fino ad ora, o sol
anche da quando nel cominciar del secolo XI, al caduto Regno di Borgogna,
succedea fra le altre la signoria di Savoja, riuscirebbe lavoro di tal momento
da esigere più volumi, gravissime indagini, tempo lunghissimo, e dovizia di
modi e d'agi da tanto; alla qual impresa però già attesero alcuni fra gli
illustri scienziati, specialmente il Cavaliere Domenico Promis, nella preziosa
opera sua delle Monete de Reali di Savoja, stampata in Torino co' tipi del
Chirio e Mina nel 1841, illustrata con rami, e descrivente quanto in siffatta
materia li principi nostri per li vari stati, cui vennero di mano in mano
acquistando, provvidero ed operarono nei 7 secoli addietro, e sino al 40° anno
del corrente decimonono ; lavoro questo per altra parte, che non par richiesto
da quesiti cui si risponde, che per quanto sembra tornerebb estraneo ed
inutile a probabili fini del quesiti medesimi, e per cui ad ogni modo agevol
sarebbe il ricorrere all' opera citata.
Per la qual cosa le presenti risposte riferisconsi unicamente alla nuova
monetazion vigente, ed all' ultima delle antiche, a quella cioè che vi avea,
quando l'augusta Sabauda Casa nel Maggio del 1814 rientrò nel possesso
degli aviti stati di terraferma, cui s'aggiunse il Genovesato, conformemente
a trattati di Parigi e di Vienna.
Or la surrogazione dell' uno all' altro monetario sistema incominciò per
terraferma nel 1816, che da Real Provvigione del 6 Agosto di quell' anno
(mandata eseguirsi con Cameral Manifesto del 12 stesso mese) sostituendosi
la nuova decimal moneta di conto all' antica, s'instituirono, quanto alla cor-
rispondente moneta effettiva, le precipue due specie, in oro da L. 20 deno-
minata doppia, ed in argento da L. 5 chiamata scudo, vocaboli già usati
nella monetazione antica. Progredì poscia coll'istabilirsi in altra Real Prov-
vigione del 4 Dicembre 1820, li due primi multipli del pezzo da L. 20, e
li tre maggiori spezzati dello scudo. E dopo emanata in principio del 1826
una nuova general tariffa, comprendente (al precipuo fine di tassarne il
valore in decimal moneta) tutte indistintamente le specie in legal corso, si
recò, per Realo Editto del 26 Ottobre d'esso anno,º a pien compimento in
diritto, e nella pratica attuazione vieppiù avanzossi. Pichè da tal legge
tutta rifusasi la general tariffa, con qualche correzion nelle tasse dell'
antiche specie, vennero alle decimali già introdottesi aggiunti l'infimo
spezzato dello scudo, e le tre in rame da centesimi 5, da 3, e da 1 ; le antiche
in erosomisto ed in rame, sian di Piemonte sian del ducato di Genova,
furono a legal corso ammesse cumulativamente in entrambe esse parti dello
stato, ma ciò in via soltanto provvisoria (mentre vi si espresse la intenzione
e riserva di poscia ritirarle) e colla debita limitazione a proporzional quota
ne singoli pagamenti: oltrechè tutte vi si fermarono le basi della nuova
monetazione in conformità con quelle statuite nel regno di Francia. Il
qual sistema, ne modi e limiti che già si dissero, fu poi dal 1° Gennajo 1843,
esteso all'Isola di Sardegna per Realo Editto, e per la citata annessavi general
tariffa, del 12 Novembre 1842.
durante la signoria Francese, di computare e pagar in franchi e centesimi;
donde avveniva che, sebben legalmente ricangiata dal 21 Maggio 1814
la Francese decimal moneta nell' antica nazionale, continuassero tutti a
contrattar nella decimale; o pienamente, o per lo meno, ritenuti soltanto i
vocaboli di lira, e di soldo, conteggiarli siccome pari l'uno a centesimi 5, e
l'altra ad 1 franco. Il che però vuolsi detto non per Sardegna alla nimica
invasione sottrattasi, ma per terraferma; e vieppiù pel Piemonte, che per la
Liguria, ove tuttor frequente ne volgari usi rimane l'antica moneta di conto
in lire, e soldi, e, strano a dire, centesimi (a luogo di danari) fuori banco,
abusivamente ragguagliando il centesimo a danari 3, li 4 centesimi al soldo,
e gli 80 alla lira, quando in realtà la lira è centesimi 834, il soldo 44, ed il
danaro # di centesimo, siachè 3 danari equivalgono a centesimi 1 gir.
Anzi, per ciò che al Piemonte concerne, vuolsi a compiuta nozione della
costumanza soggiugnere, che primamente, benchè a non lungo intervallo e
fino all' emanar dell' analoga dichiarazion legislativa, praticossi per le due
monete antica e nuova, in luogo della giusta ragione di 16 : 19, quella
erronea, ma più spiccia e più comoda, di 5 : 6. E per ciò che alla Sardegna
riguarda, la non mai precedentemente interrottavi osservanza dell' antico
sistema, la maggiormente indugiatavi sostituzione del nuovo, e, fra varie
º Promulgato il 4 successivo Febbrajo.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 233
altre cause, il non essersi colà per anco ritirate nè pur le minime fra le No. 31.
antiche specie, ned emessene altre decimali fuorchè in rame, come meglio in Sardinia.
seguito si dirà, guari finor non permisero, che la pratica attuazione della
nuova moneta di conto dagli atti ed ufici del Governo, e dalle commerciali Sig. Cattaneo,
operazioni, si diffondesse e si connaturasse eziandio a minuti traffici, alle
private giornaliere transazioni, e al popolari costumi.
Che se l'addottasi cagione accidentale ed estrinseca, pel Piemonte in ispecie, e
così per la massima parte dello stato, spinger potè il Realo Governo a modi-
ficare in dritto il monetario ordinamento, acciocchè più non fosse in con-
traddizione col fatto: ben altre maggiori cause ve n'ebbero, a tutto lo stato
comuni, permanenti, ed alla cosa intrinseche ed essenziali.
Da lunghi anni li finitimi stati di Lombardia (per le specie del Regno Italico,)
di Parma e Piacenza, e massimamente di Francia, colla quale è il più delle
nostre internazionali relazioni di commercio, costituito aveano a decimal
forma il monetario sistema; il quale, fattavi diuturna e buona prova,
lasciava presagio, or forse non lontano dall' avverarsi, che più o men tardi a
pari mutamento procederebbero le altre Genti Europee, anteponendo alla
vaghezza, al vanto, o, se pur vogliasi, al qualche benefizio d'aversi ciascun
popolo una monetazione peculiarmente propria ed esclusiva, eziandio pel
titolo, pel peso, e per la graduazion delle specie, li positivi ed assai più
importanti vantaggi, che la decimale appresenta.
In siffatta condizion di cose dovette la Sabauda Corona avvertire all'isolamento
dai suddetti stati, nel quale serbando il vecchio modo sarebbesi rimasta, senza
punto avvantaggiare rispetto alle altre nazioni, ritenenti l'antica bensì, ma
pur diversa loro moneta; a danni del men facile ricevimento delle specie
nostre nelle contrattazioni co menzionati paesi conterminanti; al disagio delle
conversioni dall' una nell' altra guisa di moneta di conto; all convenienza
di limitazion della materia all' oro meglio appurandolo dal commistogli
argento, all'argento meglio sceverandolo dal frammistovi oro, e, pel mero
bisogno de menomissimi cambi, de resti, e dei saldi, al rame, proscrivendo
l'erosomisto siccome a indebiti lucri allettante, ed in ogni modo a falsamenti
agevolissimo; al dovere il legale o nominal valore di ciascuna specie non
eccedere il real valore della materia ed opera; ed a benefici, per questo
ramo di servizio come in ogni altro, dell' unità di principi per cui nella
monetazione al computo misto di vigesimale, e duodecimale, si sostitui-
rebbe il decimale; a titoli vari in ragion di metalli e di specie, un solo
e medesimo titolo, e questo assegnato verso il punto, in cui la necessaria
durezza per resistere agli attriti conciliasi colla maggiore possibil finezza,
malleabilità, ed appariscenza; alle quote d'essi titoli, in numeri com-
plessi, e giusta metallo diversi, una quota dell' unico titolo, in semplice
numero; alle quote de pesi in numeri egualmente complessi, altre in sim-
plici, e questi anzi rotondi quanto all'argento, ch è appo noi, in Francia, e
quasi ovunque, il principale dei due monetari campioni, come pur quanto
al rame; ed in fine a parecchie fra lor diverse graduazioni nel valore delle
singole specie, in somma talor complessa, progredenti in molte ned appien
adeguate ragioni, una graduazion sola, in semplici somme, e progredente
in assai men ragioni, e meglio fra loro analoghe. Li quali mutamenti
producendo, per tutti i conteggi e le operazioni attinenti a moneta sì nel
lavorarla, sì nell'usarne, e per ciò che al Governo ed alle finanze concerne, e
per quanto al pubblico ed a privati riguarda, l'uniformità, e la maggiore
possibile semplicità, chiarezza, e facilità, gioverebber di molto a scemare i
rischi ed i casi d'errori, ed anco di frodi a danno de'meno instrutti od
esperti, ma precipuamente e sempre a notevol risparmio di tempo, che al più
degli uomini è danaro, e per tutti è preziosissima cosa.
I lunghi studi però, le molte cure, e le spese gravissime, cui richiedeva il
passare dall'antico al nuovo sistema, tanto a bene ed ordinatamente organizarlo
quanto e più ancora a porlo in esecuzione, resero necessari gli indugi a com-
pierne l'ordinamento ed in maggior parte attuarlo per terraferma, insino al
chiudersi del 1826; ed infino allo scadere del 1842, per prescriverlo, e,
nella già dettasi porzione, effettuarlo, quanto all' Isola di Sardegna, reame
separato dai Reali Stati Continentali fino al 1848. o
Nè l'ingente dispendio, che tuttavia ci si vorrebbe, ha infino ad ora permesso il
por mano ad integralmente, e per tutto lo stato, condurre ad effetto la nuova
instituzion monetaria nella notevole parte che ancor le manca; il ritirarcioè,
ed in ispecie decimali, a prefissi valori, titolo, pesi ed impronte, riconiare
tutte le antiche in oro di Piemonte, di Genova, e di Sardegna, in argento di
quest'ultima, in erosomisto ed in rame sì d'essa che di Piemonte, ed anche il
nuovo eroso della mentovata Isola, perchè non sol di tipi diverso, ma di peso
per metà inferiore al nuovo di terraferma; fra le quali operazioni è certo la
più urgente e costosa quella dell' erosomisto, perchè il più logoro, ed inoltre
disforme per natura da principi che reggono la moneta, tariffato a soverchio
valor nominale, ed inscritto di valor diverso e molto superiore al tariffato
SteSSO.
a- “samassa e
G g
234 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 31. Q. 13°. Fu desso cagionato da inconveniente, confusione, ovvero complessità complexity] nello
Sardinia. stato della moneta precedentemente in corso? -
R. Risponde su questo il già detto a NN. precedenti, e specialmente intorno
Sig. Cattaneo. all' ultimo; ned altro evvi ad arrogere, se non se (a modo di semplice
amm- svolgimento) ch'eravi ne Reali Stati, considerandoli nello insieme, la com-
plessità o confusione inerente al sussistervi tre diverse monete di conto; il
difetto d'analogia sì nelle corrispondentivi specie delle quattro metalliche
serie, fra l'una e l'altra d'esse tre monete di conto, sì fra le specie medesime
spettanti alla moneta di Piemonte; dacchè non solamente superfluo e pic-
colo di troppo sembra il quarto di doppia in oro, del valor medesimo c' era
lo scudo in argento (specie questa però che, sebbene in legal corso tuttora,
può dirsi da molti anni scomparsa dalla circolazione), ma al penultimo nostro
ben coordinato sistema l'infelicità dei tempi, in sullo scorcio del passato
secolo, aggiugner facea in erosomisto, e ad eccessivo nominal valore, le specie
1° del quinzone da soldi lā, valor dell' ottavo di scudo in argento, moneta
però che assai poco in corso rimase, come a suo luogo accennossi; 2° della
lira da soldi 20; 3° della mezza lira, ossia del dieci soldi; nominali valori
talmente soverchianti i reali, che, dopo ridottili a soli otto soldi, e quattro
(or quaranta e venti centesimi), ne restarono per anco inferiori di circa i ;
4º del cinque soldi detto maurizo, emesso per i di lira, mentre, ridotto in
seguito come fu a centesimi 5, superò ancora il reale di circa metà ; colle quali
riduzioni poi se fu rimediato a gran parte del danno in valore, emersene
l'inconveniente d'avere, per la 2", la 3°, e la 4" d'esse monete, disordinata la
classe delle minori specie, col venire a concorrervi l'otto soldi col sette soldi
e mezzo, il quattro soldi col du' e mezzo, ed il cinque soldi, che prima di sua
riduzione non valea in realtà la trentesima parte del quattro soldi (allor
mezza lira) trovossi, dopo ridotto a soldi 1, concorrere col soldino, ch era
miglior moneta pur esso.
Q. 14°. Eranvi forse in tal moneta degl' inconvenienti inerenti al valore delle unità principali,
o subordinate, ovvero nelle loro proporzioni l'una coll' altra ? –
Q. 15”. Erano gl' inconvenienti (se pur ve n'erano) che necessitarono o promossero il cambio,
inconvenienti provati nel pagare o ricevere danaro, oppure nel tenere li conti ?-.
Q. 16°. Se cotali inconvenienti esistevano, da quali classi della società erano essi precipuamente
sentiti ?–
R. Vi é soddisfatto pel già risposto a precedenti numeri, ed in ispecie
al 12° e 13°; donde pur si rileva, che degli spiegati inconvenienti, altri
erano generali e toccanti al complesso del sistema, altri peculiari a pro-
porzioni ed a valori in alcune serie, od in alcune specie d'effettiva moneta,
od altrimente; che i primi direttamente colpivano quanto a moneta si
attenga, ed i secondi più o meno sfavorevole influenza vi esercitavano; che
tutti perciò rispettivamente provavansi e ne conti da fare e da rendere,
e nell'esazioni e pagamenti; ch essendo e corso e valori, giusta la legge,
comuni all'Erario e a privati, senza distinzion di contrattazioni, di crediti,
e debiti, di lor cause, o di classi o qualità di persone, tutti, proporzionata-
mente all'entità di lor pecuniarie operazioni, n'erano per ugual modo
affetti; tranne le differenze che, nel comprenderne per nulla, per poco o
molto, o pel tutto, le origini, le conseguenze anco rinnote, ed il come recarvi
riparo, necessariamente poneano l'ignoranza, od il sapere e la esperienza,
o la poca o niuna pratica, in siffatta materia, secondo classi e professioni,
secondo individui, e secondo paesi, e costumanze.
Q 17°. Fu il cambio cagionato, in qualche ed in quale distesa [extenti da un desiderio di assimilare
la moneta corrente a quella de paesi vicini ? e se così, era stata la nuova moneta resa famigliare
dal suo uso, sia come moneta di conto o di cambio, prima che fosse stabilita per legge ?––
Q. 18°. Fu il cambiamento cagionato, in qualche ed in qua e distesa, da una preferenza astratta
per una divisione decimale di moneta sopra una divisione non-decimale ?
Q. 19”. In qual guisa venne effettuato il cambiamento º –
R. Il cambiamento ordinossi, non in un solo, ma in tutti li tre scom-
partimenti dei Reali Stati (il come, il quando, ed il precedentene volgare
uso già si spiegarono); e non già pel fatal vezzo, dimitar gli stranieri,
senza ponderare se l'altrui metodo sia buono in sè o relativamente alle
circostanze altrui, nè solo in teoria ed astrattamente, ma in pratica, se
fra le altrui e le nostre circostanze abbiavi parità, e se, sommati e fra
lor comparati li vantaggi e svantaggi dell' altrui, e del nostro, quello a
questo in bene prevalga; ma bensì, dopo accuratamente adoprate le cautele
anzidette, e pel saggio consiglio di preferire l'altrui modo al nostro, quando da
lunga esperienza per anche risulta per noi certamente e notevolmente migliore.
Q 20”. Furono li valori relativi di alcuna delle monete previamente in corso cambiati ?
R. Per tutte le antiche specie, colla general tariffa emanata nell' introdursi
del nuovo sistema, e già dianzi, ma isolatamente ora per le une, or per le
altre, con tariffe parziali, si convertirono i legali o mominali valori dall' antica
nella nuova decimal moneta; il cui provvisorio uso fe il Governo precedere
da parte delle pubbliche amministrazioni.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 235
Oltre poi a questa general conversione i valori di non poche fra le antiche
specie andarono in esse tariffe soggetti a que tenui aumenti o diminuzioni,
che gli avuti ulteriori lumi, a seguito principalmente di nuovi e ripetuti
saggi, dimostrarono bisognare stante un men giusto e preciso apprezzamento
nelle tariffe anteriori, ossia che qualche sbaglio od inesattezza fossevi tra
scorsa, ossiache scoperto si fosse nell' effettiva media di titolo, e di attual
peso un qualche abuso nel coniamento, od un maggior logorio, non esigenti
però la esclusion dalla tariffa,
Q. 21”. Fu qualche e quale nuova moneta coniata prima ed in contemplazione di, simultanea-
mente con, ovvero dopo il cambiamente ? -
R. Delle monete decimali instituitesi prima del general riordinamento, dell'
altre contemporaneamente al medesimo, anzi per esso introdotte al fine di
compierlo, e delle posteriormente aggiuntevi (il che fecesi nel 1832, per
Reali Patenti del 29 di Maggio), già si diede ragguaglio nel No. 4.
Q. 22 Fu qualcheduna e quale delle previe monete tolta di circolazione ; e fu qualcuna e
quale delle antiche monete permessa di circolare simultaneamente alla nuova ?
R. Tutte le antiche specie, tanto nazionali quanto straniere, già ammesse
nel precedente sistema, rimasero pel nuovo in legal corso, insiem colle
decimali; tranne, in erosomisto, il quindici soldi, ed il poco dianzi abolito
sett e mezzo; in rame, il mezzo cagliarese; ed alcune monete d'Allemagna
a bassa lega.
Alle quali abolizioni, altre se n'aggiunsero posteriori al monetario riordina-
mento, ed in più tempi (vale a dir pe Camerali Manifesti del 26 Marzo,
31 Ottobre, e 24 Novembre 1829, 18 Gennaio 1845, e Real Decreto
8 Agosto 1852). Il tutto come già particolareggiossi a NN. 4, 10, ed 11.
Q. 23°. Furono dati dei vecchi nomi alle monete novelle, ovvero nomi nuovi alle monete
antiche ?
R. Per le antiche specie non variarono i nomi; ma soltanto i valori, pesi,
titoli, Soc., convertironsi dal nazional computo antico nel nuovo decimale,
od anco in entrambi si prefissero.
Alla nuova moneta poi saggiamente si diedero gli antichi nomi, in quanto fu
possibile senza detrarre alla decimal forma del nuovo sistema, chiamando
lira l'unità-base, tanto di conto quanto effettiva in una specie d'argento,
pari assolutamente ed in tutto al Franco; alle due precipue spezie, in oro
l'una, in argento l'altra, serbaronsi li nomi di doppia, e di scudo; doppia
eziandio (men acconciamente) e quadruplo si denominarono li due multipli
in oro primamente instituiti; e pezzi o pezze detti furono gli spezzati dello
scuto, e le monete in rame, vocabolo questo a tutte specie comune per
volgare abitudine in Piemonte, e venuto di Francia al vernacol nostro,
anzichè proprio della lingua Italiana, in cui la generica denominazion tecnica
è specie, e la communale è moneta; le pezze si distinsero, specificandone
ciascuna dal suo valore; e solamente si proscrissero le voci di soldi, e
denari, surrogandovi quell'aritmetica di centisimi.
Siccome però con siffatte denominazioni toccato era a tre specie in oro,
l'una antica, e due decimali, il nome istesso di doppia, a riparo d'ogni
anomalia, le già citate Patenti del 29 Maggio 1832, che alla doppia da
L. 40, e al quadruplo da 80, sostituirono le specie da 50, e da 100, e
quell' aggiunsero da 10 lire, a tutti e quattro le decimali monete d'oro este-
sero la generica qualificazione di pezze, già come sovra attribuita alle specie
in rame, ed ai summultipli dello scudo.
Se non che fu, ed è tuttavia nel popolar costume il non chiamar doppia la
decimal moneta da L. 20, ma solamente l'antica; il dirla promiscuamente
o pezza (come tutt'altra) dal valore specificandola, o napoleone o marengo,
dallo institutore o dalla prima emissione in Italia, e doppio o mezzo marengo
o napoleone le specie da L. 40 e da 10; il valersi a voce della denominazione
non più di denari, ma sì di soldi per quanto non aggiugne a lira olire intiere,
dicendo es. gr. sedici, trenta quattro, cinquanta nove soldi, cinque lire e
otto soldi, più ordinariamente che non 80 centesimi, 1 lira 70 centesimi,
2 95, e 5.40 (quale all' opposto adoprano pe' conti), e dando nel parlare il
nome di dieci soldi, di cinque, e di uno alle specie da centesimi 50, da 25,
e da 5, siccome quel di otto soldi, di quattro, di du' e mezzo, e di uno alle
specie antiche da centisimi 40, da 20, da 12 5, e da 5, non meno che al
nuovo pezzo eroso da 5 centesimi -.
Il medesimo poi, e vieppiù è a dirsi pel Genovesato, e per la Sardegna;
rimanendo per l'uno intera e viva la volgar consuetudine dell' antica moneta
di conto, ed alla seconda mancato essendo l'avvezzamento al decimal sis-
tema, ch ebbero i Reali Stati Continentali durante il Napoleonico Impero,
e l'attuazion successiva se non pel rame.
Q. 24°. Furono le antiche monete di conto, nelle più basse denominazioni, commensurabili con ed
espressibili esattamente relle nuove monete?
R. Le tre antiche monete (sì di conto sì effettive), essendo miste di vigesimali
e dodicesimali elementi, diverse inoltre dalla nuova per la entità di valore
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
G g 2
236
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
nell' unità-base, cioè nella lira, riescono bensì non irrazionali, avendo cia-
scuna la peculiar ragione colla decimale, che già si disse al No. 10.; ma sono
in parte incommensurabili con essa, ed in essa non precisamente esprimibili,
perchè in parte non hanno, comune alla moneta nuova, altro aliquoto che
l'unità.
Nè quì farà d'uopo notare, che la condizion della esatta esprimibilità sempre
incontrasi, dove sussiste la condizione della commensurabilità, e manca pur
quella (salvo poche eccezioni) dove questa non trovasi.
Ma convien por mente,
Che, a stabilire, se commensurabili siano le anzidette monete nelle loro unità, e
divisioni o summultipli, e generalmente nell' espressevi somme, come pur ne'
valori delle analoghe specie effettive, forza è per lo più (come si adoprò ne'
calcoli infra riferiti), che, previamente, ciascuna data somma in data antica
moneta di conto od effettiva specie, venga, per quanto bisogni a renderla
capace d'un comune aliquoto, convertita nei volgari summultipli della propria
unità (soldi, ed ove d'uopo denari), od anco, se occorra, in frazionaria decimal
forma, vale a dire in centesimi della stessa unità sua ; e così esclusane la
complessità, ed in ciò almeno fattala omologa alla nuova moneta; e questa
pur, se mestieri, a centesimal espressione ridotta, procedere allor al confronto
dell' una coll' altra.
Che dove fra più angusti limiti si ristringesse la conversion suddetta, ovver si
escludesse del tutto, a men casi nella lº ipotesi, ad assai pochi nella 2º,
senz'alcun proridurrebbesi la commisurabilità.
E che all' opposto, se tal conversione si estendesse a decimale espression fra-
zionaria d'oltre 2 cifre, li casi di commensurabilità diverrebbero tanto più
frequenti, quanto all'uopo crescesse il novero delle ifre di siffatta espres-
sione; novero che aumentar potrebbesi a cotal fine, fuori e sin dove sorgesse
l'ostacolo della periodicità. A tanto però sospinti non furono i calcoli di
commensurabilità nella presente contenuti; poichè questo riuscendo a mera
curiosità e teorica speculazione, anzichè a qualche positiva utilità, parve cosa
estranea al quesito: siccom' estranea vi è la precisa esprimibilita meramente
teorica; la quale, innoltrar potendosi, non solo per frazion decimale fino all'
ostacolo anzidetto (unica menda del decimal sistema, quanto alla matematica
esattezza, scevra però da inconvenienti per ciò che a pratici usi concerne),
ma ben anco per frazion volgare al cui pienissimo sviluppo non v' ha impedi-
mento di sorta, senza eccezione alcuna sussiste per qualsiasi valore e somma
in qualsiasi specie e moneta; esprimibilità questa però praticamente inutile
se non se per quanto ella conduca, ne' finali risultamenti di ciascun dato
conteggio, insino ai dieci millesimi, per negligere tal frazione, ove non
ccceda li millesimi 5, e per forzarla, ove li superi, all'intero centesimo,
infima nel nuovo sistema tra le specie d'effettiva moneta, e sotto cui per
conseguenza più non evvi possibilità di esazione o pagamento,
Considerata pertanto ne limiti sovra spiegati la commisurabilità (e così, per
essa, eziandio la esprimibilità perfetta nei limiti medesimi), verrà ora parti-
tamente esposto il dove sussista, o no, tal qualità, mercè la bisognevole con-
versione; e ciò incominciando dalle tre monete di conto, e quindi passando,
in applicazione, all tre di cambio, ossiano effetive.
Incommensurabile si è la lira: salvo nella moneta Sarda; e tranne inoltre, nelle
somme di 4, o suoi multipli, la Piemontese; di 3, o multipli suoi, la Genovese,
In tutti e tre il soldo è privo di commisurabilità: fuorchè per le somme di 16
nella moneta Piemontese ; di 5, e perciò anche di 10, e di 15 nella Sarda ;
di 6, e perciò anche di 12, e di 18 nella Genovese. E tanto più manca di tal
qualità il danaro, in tutti e tre le monete ugualmente; eccettuata soltanto,
per la Sarda, la somma di 5 oppur 10.
Venendo poi da numeri o valori semplici ai complessi, questi difettano pari-
mente di commensurabilità, ove ne difetti come sovra anche sol una delle
due o tre semplici quantità componenti.
Riescono però eccezionalmente commisurabili –
Li complessi di lire e soldi (senza denari), il cui equivalente in tutti soldi, o
denari, o centesimi della propria lira, abbia per aliquoto il 6, o l'8, secondo-
chè trattisi della moneta di Genova, o di quella di Piemonte,
E quanto alla Sarda, tutt' indistintamente i complessi di soldi e denari (con
o senza lire), ove appartengano ad alcuna delle cinque seguenti combinazioni
(inclusavi per prima, quella di soldi 5, 10, o 15, con denari 5, o 10, già
risultante dalla suddita general regola circa i complessi); ciascuna delle
quali serba inalterata, per ciascuno dei due suoi termini, l'aritmetica pro-
gressione del 5.
Vale a dire :
pe
C)
1º. Di soldi I0 con denari 5, ovvero 10.
15
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 237
l n No. 31.
2º. Di soldi - 11 i con denari 3, od 8. Sardinia.
16 Sig. Cattaneo.
e-
f
7
3º. Di soldi - 12 i con denari 1, 6, od 11.
l 7
3
4º. Di soldi - li con denari 4, ovvero 9,
18
4
5º. Di soldi - li con denari 2, ovvero 7.
19
Nell' effettive tre monete poi, limitando la risposta, in conformità pur del
quesito, alle picciole specie, per tali considerando quelle d'un valor nominale
minore della rispettiva lira, e distinguendole fra le abolite e le tuttora in
corso, si osserverà, che quanto alle specie abolite –
Di Piemonte: l'ottavo di scudo, ed il quinzone, ambi allo stesso nominal
valore di soldi 15, il sett'e mezzo a soldi 7 denari 6, il duesoldi detto soldone,
il soldo detto soldino, il mezzosoldo (denari 6), e il duedenari furono incom-
mensurabili colla nuova decimal moneta; e tali (fuorchè il soldone) eransi
rimasti anche tariffati decimalmente, e di valore diminuiti come, e per
qual motivo, a suo luogo indicossi.
Di Sardegna: il mezzo cagliarese, che vale l danaro, era incommisurabile
parimente.
Di Genova: il sedicesimo di scudo (de valore di soldi 10), il quattrosoldi, il
duesoldi, la doppia parpajola (soldi 2, denari 8), la parpajola (soldi 1, denari
4), l'ottodanari, ed il quattrodanari, tutti egualmente mancavano di com-
misurabilità; nè tampoco (tranne li quattro, e due soldi, ed ambe le specie
di parpajola), vennero ad acquistarla colla operatane tariffazion decimale a
valor come sovra diminuito.
Quanto alle specie in corso –
Di Piemonte: l'ottosoldi, il quattrosoldi, ed il soldo denominato maurizio che,
nel primo ed originario valor nominale, la lira antica, la mezza, ed il quarto
di essa, incommensurabili erano, tassati dappoi decimalmente, e ridotti a
soli centesimi 40, 20, e 5, la condizione acquistarono di commensurabilità;
ma il du' e mezzo, benchè trasmutato dal primordial suo valore d' 4 di lira
antica in l di nuova, praticamente incommisurabile si restò, equivalendo
in decimal moneta dapprima a L. 0 14 84375, e quindi a 0:12 5.
Di Sardegna: il quarto di scudo, il reale, ed il mezzoreale, del nominal
valore di soldi 12 denari 6, di 5 soldi, e di soldi 2 denari 6, commisurabili
riescono; il soldo, il mezzosoldo, ed il cagliarese che punto non l'erano di-
ventaronlo per la nuova tariffa, la quale da centesimi 9 6, centesimi 4 8, e
centesimi 1-6, forzò, li due primi a centesimi 10, ed a 5, e ridusse l'ultimo
a solo 1 centesimo onde fu aguaggliato alla decimal effettiva moneta di tal
nome e valore.
Di Genova: non evvi minuta specie, fuori dell'abolite.
Nè quì altro rimane a soggiugnere, se non se-
Che mentre la decimal tariffazione, ed a più o men valore, avvenuta per le
dette specie, tanto in corso quanto abolite, non potè dotar tutte di commen-
surabilità, tutte però le fornì dell'altra indispensabile condizione la precisa
esprimibilità ; giacchè pur le due monete tassatesi colla frazion di mezzo
centesimo, e perciò, a seconda dei posti principi, ed a rigor di sistema, prive
di tal condizione; nel debito suo senso, ch è il pratico, non ne diffettavano
correlativamente alle peculiari inveterate abitudini del paese.
che del resto, se nel tariffare qualsivoglia specie, generalmente schivar
deesi (negligendo o forzando) la frazion decimale oltre la 2º cifra;
se nelle nobili monete ogni maggiore arbitrio per differenza tra nominale
e real valore, è, più o meno, di biasimo e danno; e se il simile vuolsi
adequatamente pur dire delle men nobili (ossian miste con rame) ove
infelicemente codesta sorta di monetazione già siasi introdotta, nè togliere
ancor si possa ; nelle specie poi ignobili ed infime, che unicamente han
da servire a menomissimi cambi, ai saldi e resti negli altri, quali tenersi
possono le monete non eccedenti li 5 centesimi; il rigoroso pareggiamento
fra li due valori più non essendo di pari necessità, ed anzi meno agevole
riuscendo in pratica, ne riman luogo ad un qualche (però ben modico)
sovrappiù nella tassa; onde poi in caso di successiva conversione vi è
senza inconvenienti attuabili, giusta circostanze, sì un esiguo amplia-
mento, sì ed assai meglio una restrizione; de quali due modi il secondo
venne pressochè sempre trascetto nelle menzionatesi tariffe nostre; e senza
f
-
l
F
IE
Al
G g 3
238 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo,
dubbio egli è, per giustizia, siccome anche per vera utilità, miglior partito
il più avvicinarsi alla uguaglianza ne due valori, che non l'iscortarsene
maggiormente, la parità essendo la regola a tutta monetazion comune,
e la disparità per le ignobili specie un'eccezione: la qual dee rinserrarsi
(come la quantità di coniamento, e di spendibilità obbligatoria nei limiti del
necessario a peculiari usi suoi) entro gli angusti confini di ben poco più
che l'intero costo della materia e dell'opera, incluse però anche le varie
spese di cui non suolsi tener conto nelle monete d'oro e d'argento; poichè
una maggior disuguaglianza produce, a sua gravità proporzionato, il danno
di snaturar tali specie, trasmutandole di moneta in segni non realizzabili,
fuor con iscapito, a peso specialmente dell' ultime classi del cittadini, e
de più poveri comuni (appo cui la menomezza di tutte relazioni le vien
naturalmente accumulando) e vi accoppia, se non il rischio del discredito e
del rifiuto, che pur talvolta ne accadde, il pericolo certamente e della con-
traffazione in grande, or molto agevolata da cospicui incrementi delle
fisiche scienze, e del cacciar di circolazione una parte delle buone specie,
o di farle incarire, avvenendo al monetario valore in corso alcunchè di
somiglievole allo irradiar del calorico fra li corpi e lor mezzi, il quale, fino
all' equilibrio, non posa.
Q. 25°. Se non esattamente espressibili, quali previsioni furon fatte per debiti contratti sotto
l'antico sistema da e essere soddisfatti sotto il novello ? Ovvero, nel caso di danaro fisso, tasse,
pedaggi, 8cc., appartenenti a persone private, a municipii, ovvero ad altri pubblici corpi, ovvero
allo Stato, il diritto delle quali era stato acquistato sotto il vecchio sistema, ovvero qualunque altro
carico [engagementl fisso ?
R. A peculiari previsioni e disposizioni, che avrebbe potuto richiedere la muta-
zion del monetario sistema, ov'ella spettato avesse al valore de nobili metalli
assoluto o comparativo, non potè certo dar luogo l'avvenuto riordinamento,
che limitossi a surrogare i decimali a volgari elementi nelle monetarie disci-
pline ed operazioni. Dimanierachè, nell'applicazion del nuovo sistema, le
imposte non solo, ma le altre ragioni, ed obbligazioni, crediti, e debiti di
qualunque natura ed entità, prima di tale innovazione costituiti o contratti
in qualsiasi guisa, e tanto se di stato, o di corpi o persone morali, quanto se
delle singole fisiche persone, e fossero in certa e fissa quota, ovvero in
eventuale, indefinita, o mutevole, tutt'indistintamente e del pari, a niun altra
modificazione o provvedimento andarono, nè poteano andar soggetti, fuorchè
ne computi alla conversione delle relative somme dall' antica nella nuova
moneta, secondo le tariffe, e le basi particolarizzatesi nel precedente No. 24.,
salvi meramente, pe' volgari conteggi, gli eccezionali usi additati al No. 12
(y'
so
Q. 26°. Fu il cambio nella moneta di conto gradato oppure immediato? Fu desso volontario o
compulsorio ? Se compulsorio, come e da quali penalità fu rafforzato ? Fu desso rafforzato con
successo ? oppure continuò lo antico sistema in uso per qualche e per qual tempo ne conti o nella
lingua popolare ? –
Q. 27°. Se il cambiamento fu volontario [optional continuò in uso il vecchio ed il nuovo
sistema concorrentemente per qualche tempo, e lo continuano essi ancor adesso ?
Q. 28°. Qual inconveniente sorse da tale uso simultaneo ? In qual modo tale uso simultaneo
affetta li conti, biglietti di banco, e le lettere di cambio ? –
R. Sull' oggetto di questi tre articoli già forniscono risposta gli antecedenti
numeri, ed in ispecie il 12°, il 20°, ed il 23°. Sicchè meramente a guisa di
riepilogo s'aggiugnerà,
Come in certo modo a gradi, piuttostochè ad un tratto, si venne introducendo ed
attuando il nuovo sistema; com ei fu ordinamento nè soltanto volontario, nè
soltanto compulsivo, perchè preceduto da quella propension de cittadini che
gli usi loro dimostrano, e congiunto a quell' assai temperata coazione, che
sola è giusta, prudente, ed utile in codesta, non meno che in molte altre
materie; l'esempio cioè del Governo per quanto a lui direttamente concerne,
in tutte le parti del pubblico reggimento; e la prescrizione unicamente sancita
colla disciplinar necessità, e con moderata pecuniaria ammenda, riguardo
agli agenti e per gli atti governativi, o pubblici,
Come, più o meno agevole e sollecita, secondo la data dall' introduzione, ed
a ragion dell'altre circostanze, ove sovra spiegate, ne progredì l'osservanza, e
già da un pezzo è più o meno a buon punto per gli stati continentali, e,
nella misura all' eccezionali sue condizione possibile, per la Sardegna.
Come in ciò che ancor mancavi alla perfetta pratica del decimal sistema, con
esso concorra l'antico; e gl'inconvenienti che da tal concorso derivino (oltre
l'anomalia stessa) consistano in un qualche abusivo maggior valore delle
specie effettive, od aumento d'aggio sulle nobili monete, ovvero, per le
minute contrattazioni, in una cotal facilità di sbagli od anche di frodi a carico
de men pratici o meno avveduti, precipuamente se forestieri; inconvenienti
perciò di niuna od assai poca influenza rispetto all'Erario, alle banche, ed al
commercio in grande.
E come in fine alla imperfezion d'attuamento per l'un sistema, ed al corri-
spondente vi concorrer dell'altro, siano rispettivamente ogetto e causa la
restante mole delle antiche specie, massimamente delle piccole, e le abitudini
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION, 239
popolari; senzachè, per quest' ultime, abbiavi altro adatto e convenevol
rimedio, che un lungo scorrer di tempo, e per la prima, ch'è ben più grave, la
finanziera possibilità d'un dispendioso surrogamento in buone specie decimali.
Q. 29°. Sotto tale uso simultaneo [concurrentl come tengono i loro conti i mercanti, ed i
banchieri?
R. I conti, fin dalla rispettiva introduzione del nuovo sistema, tengonsi in
decimal moneta, salve l'eccezioni che da quanto sovra emergono per la
Liguria, e principalmente per la Sardegna, rispetto a privati, ed al piccolo
COIO) IOO el'O1O.
Q. 30°. Fu il cambio efficacemente operato, oppure havvi qualche e quale classe di persone, in
qualche ed in quale parte del paese, che continui a fare uso delle denominazioni antiche, parlando
o tenendo conti?
R. Li relativi chiarimenti trovansi ai NN. 12, 23, 26, e 29.
Q. 31°. Fu il cambiamento all'epoca di sua introduzione impopolare presso qualche e quale classe
della società? Se qualche impopolarità esiste, fu dessa transitoria o durevole? Esiste essa
ancor adesso? Cagio à il cambiamento delle commozioni o de' torbidi popolari?
R. Niuna commozione, niun perturbamento arrecò la innovazion monetaria,
come può dedursi da circostanziati precedenti ragguagli; ned ha od ebbe
durevole o transitoria impopolarità veruna appo niun ordine di cittadini
(grazie pur anco all'assai ristretta e mite sanzione) ma soli, e per qualche
parte, gli ostacoli, e difetti d'attuamento, che di sopra si svolsero.
Q. 32°. E la moneta nuova più o meno conveniente dell' antica, e quali sono li suoi vantaggi o
svantaggi?
lº. Nel pagare, o ricevere--(a) Grandi somme. (b) Piccole somme.
2°. Nel tener conti,-(a) In grandi transazioni. (b) In piccole transazioni.
R. Senza distinzione alcuna fra le ingenti e le tenui somme, le grandi tran-
sazioni, e le piccole, l'erariali o bancarie operazioni, li commerciali, e li
privati interessi, il riscuotere o pagare, ed il tener conti, utilissimo per più
modi, e da svantaggi scevro, sì teoricamente che praticamente, risulta il
monetario decimal sistema e dalle ragioni partitamente spiegatesi al No. 12.,
e dall' unanime consenso non solamente degli scienziati, ma degli uomini
d'affari in qualunque genere e classe, e, ciò che più monta, dalla costante,
lunga, ed universale sperienza. Imperciocchè li pratici inconvenienti
accennati al No. 28, sono attribuibili, non al sistema di cui si tratta, ma per
l'opposto al non essersi questo ancor in tutto potuto attuare per ciò che
al Governo appartiensi; e la difficoltà delle volgari abitudini è ostacolo
più o men forte, ma da quasi sempre aspettare, riguardo a qualsiasi muta-
mentO.
La qual utilità, nondimeno, se pei Sabaudi Stati è verissima ed insieme
consimilmente la è per gli altri stati in generale; incontrar potrebbesi
qualche difficoltà là dov' esistessero condizioni di molto eccezionali. E così,
ad esempio, se presso qualche nazione il venal valore delle altre merci fosse
grandemente maggior che altrove, o di molto superiori il gran commercio
e la grande industria, e l'unità dell' antica moneta fosse di valore a molti
doppi più forte della comune decimale unità, il franco o lira nostrº attuale;
il trasmutare in questa relativamente esigua unità quell' antica, e le divisioni
d'essa in centesimi dell' altra, come anche il coniar l'equivalenti infime
specie effettive, produr potrebbe ed il non-uso di tali troppo tenui monete,
e quanto a conti un disagevole accrescimento di cifre ; mentre per l'opposto
lo adattare alle decimali forme l'unità antica, in tutto il resto eziandio, ma
non nel valore, torrebbe notevol parte del benefizi dell' uniformità coll' altre
nazioni, che già l'accolsero od in seguito l'accogliessero.
Pesi e Misure.
Q. 33°. Sono li pesi e le misure divisi decimalmente ? Se così, tale divisione decimale prece-
dette, accompagnò, o seguì dessa la divisione decimale delle monete, o fu con quest' ultima, in
qualche ed in quale guisa, connessa ? –
R. Il decimal sistema trovasi nella Sabauda Monarchia esteso, pur anco a pesi
ed alle misure la unità delle quali, fondamentalben anco pei pesi, vale a dire
il metro, diedegli peculiarmente il nome di metrico.
Ma fu soltanto ordinato per la Sardegna col Realo Editto del 1° Luglio 1844,
e per terraferma col Realo Editto dell' 11 Settembre 1845; da non attuarsi
però, ben inteso, fuorchè nel discreto termine ivi prefisso, e stato poscia
ancor prorogato.
Chiaro è quindi, che a lunga seguita d'anni la nuova monetaria instituzione
restò consociata all' antica de pesi e delle misure.
Del rimanente il già esposto, quanto a generali osservazioni, circa la sostituzion
dello antico al nuovo metodo in punto di monete è consimilmente applicabile
a quella eziandio di pesi e misure, se non che –
Sommamente più grave fu l'importanza della seconda, per la enorme quantità
di sorta fra lor diverse, che nelle misure e ne pesi esisteano, non solamente
S
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
a tassº
G O 4
240
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo,
diverse fra li tre massimi spartimenti dello stato, o per ciascuna delle precipue
lor divisioni, ma ben anco (e più nell' antico territorio continentale) per
ciascuna delle suddivisioni, e quasi anzi per le singole città o comuni non
infimi; onde non è a dire qual confusione e quali incertezze, ed impicci ne
provenissero alle vicendevoli relazioni fra l'un luogo e l'altro, sì pel com-
mercio e pei privati, sì pel Governo medesimo, benchè in quanto da lui
dipendeva e così negli atti di legislazione o di amministrazion pubblica,
primamente e ab antico avess egli e adoprasse una sola e propria specie,
denominata Camerale, o di Piemonte, e sol usasse delle precipue Ligure e
Sarda per ciò che a tali due spartimenti peculiarmente atteneasi; e dappoi
s'avviasse a valersi egli pel primo de metrici pesi e misure, e ciò da molti
anni innanzi di obbligatoriamente per tutti ed in tutto introdurli: del
che matural conseguenza pareva a primo aspetto aver ad essere lo affrettar
codesta rilevante innovazione, per guis almeno che, se non accompagnasse il
monetario ordinamento, poco stante il susseguisse; e tanto più per terra-
ferma, ove a tempi della Francese occupazione statuito il metrico sistema,
rimasto era più anni obbligatorio, non cadendo fuorchè nel Maggio 1814,
al risorgervi delle avite leggi ed instituzioni.
Sommamente però più intricata e difficile, che per la moneta, riuscivane
l'attuazione pei pesi e misure; poichè una era la nuova monetaria unità; sola
una divisione, sola una ragion di ragguaglio coll' antica pur unica per ognun
dei tre scompartimenti, e una grande semplicità di computi; ed all'opposto,
fra misure e pesi, sei nuove unità, e tre, quattro, o più fra multipli, e divi-
sioni non sol per ciascuna, ma in varia più o meno ascendente o discendente
graduazione secondo specialità d'oggetti; diverse denominazioni; e ragioni
di ragguaglio diverse; ed altrettante di novero, quante si erano per cias-
cuna città o comune come sovra le antiche unità loro, e d'ogni lor unità
li tre, quattro, o più multipli e summultipli ! Quind' il lungo indugiare a
rinnovarne la prescrizione, aspettando per avventura, che l'esempio del
Governo, ed il progredir dei commerciali rapporti, con Francia massima-
mente, venissero a poco a poco giovando ad infievolire le resistenze dell'
antiche popolari costumanze, contra cui bastato pienamente non era l'imperio
della legge durante la straniera signoria, imperio anzi, che nella Francia
medesima, già da sessanta anni in assiduo vigore, non ha forse ancor potuto
svellerle onninamente.
A stabilire impertanto codesta metrica forma tornavano indispensabili non
solo i maggiori preparatori avvedimenti, il lasciar tempo, come si disse, fra
la promulgazione e l'esecutorietà della legge, il procacciare agevoli modi
a ben conoscere intanto le particolarità del sistema ed a impratichirvisi,
ma eziandio il dargli efficacia, con più estesa obbligatorietà e men lieve
sanzione; onde a pena di confisca de pesi e misure antiche, e sotto le
aggiuntevi pecuniarie multe secondo i casi, fu, in qualsiasi luogo al pubblico
accessibile, proibito l'usarle, ed anche solo il tenerle, ed imposto lo avere e
adoprar le nuove; ed in queste contrarre, tenere i conti, e fare qualsiasi
atto benchè sol con privata scrittura; nè unicamente per gli uficiali a servigio
dello stato od a quello del pubblico, ma per tutti indistintamente gli addetti
a commercio, traffico, arte, o mestiere qualunque, ed a privati medesimi.
Per altra parte poi riuscivane bensì compiuta la real attuazione in tutto
ciò che al Governo, ed a sudditi uficiali appartiene; e così pure, in quanto
estendesi per le varie divisioni dello stato, l'assidua fiscale azione, e vigi-
lanza, riguardo alle industrie ed ai traffici eziandio minuti, ed a pesamenti e
misuramenti qualunque in luoghi non assolutamente privati; ma non per
anco passò ne quotidiani usi de privati; i quali sogliono generalmente, nel
provvedersi del bisognevole da negozianti e fabbricanti, farne la domanda e
l'acquisto ad antico peso, ed ancor più a misura antica, quantunque ne deg-
giano, per le picciole partite in ispecie, sopportar qualche danno; poichè il
venditore astretto a procedervi per via di ragguaglio dai pesi o misure
metriche, tutte incommensurabili colle volgari, ed in esse impossibili ad
esprimersi con pratica esattezza, obbligato perciò a guadagnarvi od a per-
dervi alcunchè nel prezzo, presceglie ben naturalmente il primo di questi
due mezzi. :
Q. 34°. Nel caso negativo si trovano o sorgono degli inconvenienti dalla divisione de pesi e delle
misure non corrispondente alla divisione delle monete ?
Q. 35°. Come è la divisione decimale della moneta conciliata con quella non-decimale delle
mercanzie [of commoditiesl nelle transazioni della vendita al minuto presso le classi povere? Ne
sorgono forse degl'inconvenienti, o delle perdite?
R. La decimalità della moneta e quella dei pesi e misure non avendo tra esse
altra connessione, od affinità, fuorchè nella somiglianza,-
1°. Delle due unità, di cui quella per li pesi è il gramma, equivalente in
gravità ad un centimetro cubo d'acqua distillata a 4° centigradi che si
pesi nel vuoto, e così dedotto dalla stessa fondamentale e precipua delle
unità di misura, il metro; e per la moneta è la lira, la qual, in lega
d'argento a 9 di fino su 10, pesa grammi 5:
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 24l
2°. Della graduazion di valori per questa, e di gravità per entrambe.
Non è l'una dipendente punto dall' altra, sicchè ciascuna da sè isolata-
mente produr non possa in tutto gli utili effetti suoi, od a conciliare codesta
nuova forma nella moneta insiem coll' antica ne pesi e nelle misure occorra
provvedimento alcuno. s
E niuno in fatti sen diede; nè perdite, med altri sconci, per niun genere
d'affari, e per niuna classe di persone, provennero nel diuturno periodo misto
come sovra di decimal sistema per l'una materia, e di volgare per l'altra;
qualor si eccettuino, ben inteso, tanto gl' inconvenienti propri del secondo
(fra cui pur la molto incomoda complessità de numeri) quanto la frequente
necessità di conteggiare a duplice abbaco, e la sgradevole dissonanza, per
diversità di metodi, fra due rami di servigio, attinenti siccome questi, e da
coordinarsi l'uno coll' altro.
Malgrado però queste mende, a chi ben ponderi la cosa in tutti gli aspetti
suoi, parrà più avveduto e profittevol consiglio il non affrontare con due
gravi (non inscindibili) mutamenti ad un tratto gl'inveterati usi d'un
popolo, e perciò differire il più malagevole, sinchè al men difficile già siasi
aVVeZZatO.
Questioni Generali.
Q. 36°. Aggiungete qualunque altro documento, od informazione, che voi possiate considerare
come utile alle presenti ricerche; ed oltreacciò, insieme alle vostre risposte a codesti quesiti,
copie di qualunque legge, ordinanza, rapporto, o pubblico documento su tale subbietto, descrivendo
li cambiamenti di moneta, le ragioni per la loro adozione, ed il modo in cui furono posti in esecu-
zione ?––
R. Triplice si è il generico oggetto di quest' ultimo quesito.
E quanto al 1° alla descrizion cioè dei monetari cangiamenti, di lor cause, e
de modi d'esecuzione, ossia pe sistemi, e applicazion loro alle monete e
di conto e di cambio, ossia per le parziali variazioni avvenute nell' effetive
specie e nelle tariffe, già se n' è partitamente trattato ne precedenti
numeri.
Tuttavia, intorno a modi d'eseguimento può ancor notarsi, che, nell'
ordinare l'abolizion di specie, o cessazione di lor battitura, e sostituzion d'
altre, andaronsi le prime ritirando dal corso all' intero valor nominale, e non
al solo reale del fino, purchè ne prefissi discreti termini, e nei limiti di
tolleranza pel peso, fossero alla zecca recate, e della ritrattane materia si
fabbricarono le nuove monete da surrogarvisi; al coniamento delle nuove
precedettero sperimenti su grandi masse delle antiche, per chiarirne in attual
media effettiva il peso in lega ed il titolo, e per poi su tal base procedere
alla fabbricazione in economia, ma per lo più in appalto a tanto peso di
nuove per tanto d'antiche; ne casi di mera cessazion di battitura senz'
abolizione se ne vennero meramente fondendo, e nelle nuove riconiando
quelle partite, che di mano in mano se ne versassero nelle casse pubbliche
dai debitori dello stato; e lasciaronsi anzi, per intero o quasi, sussistere varie
di quelle specie, la cui grand' entità, oppure grav' eccedenza del nominale
sul real valore, o le due cause riunite importato avrebbero un dispendio
ingente alle circostanze non adeguato; e le esclusioni dalla tariffa di straniere
già ammessevi monete unicamente importarono la fusione ed il riconiamento
in nuove nazionali, come sovra, delle quantità, che all' atto e momento dello
escluderle se ne trovassero appo l'Erario, e di quelle che, pel solo real
prezzo della materia (in peso attuale, e a titolo effettivo) fossero da chic-
chessia presentate al cambio in zecca.
Circa poi le cause delle variazioni alle specie e tariffe, -
Oltre quelle comuni all' abolizion delle antiche monete d'argento, sian di
Piemonte, siano di Genova, di tutte l'erosomiste della 2°, e d'alcune fra
l'erosomiste e l'erose del 1° ; all' instituzione, per ambi, delle decimali
monete nelle tre serie; alla successiva ammession loro, per le prime due,
nella tariffa di Sardegna; ed allo stabilimento per essa d'una peculiare
decimal serie in rame, le quali comuni cause furono e la pratica applicazione
ed esecuzion del nuovo sistema, come prima ed in quanto riuscisse possibile,
e l'interesse e l'officio, pel monetal servizio, di andar togliendo dal corso le
vecchie già logore e liscie specie; il qual ultimo fu pur motivo al togliere di
tariffa le inframmentovate specie straniere, ma non fu il solo.
Concorsero pel luigi d'oro e suo doppio, pel vecchio scudo, e pel venticinque
centesimi di Francia, e per lo scudo di Milano, la preceduta abolizion loro
negli stati cui apparteneano; e riguardo a luigi e lor doppi le molte frodi,
ed anco le contraffazioni operatene in grande, massimamente fuor di Francia,
in seguito a furto de punzoni legali.
Per la Sardegna, non furono ammessi gli scudi di Milano, del già Regno
d'Italia, e di Genova, nè gli spezzati loro; perchè già tolti di corso in terra-
ferma molti anni prima, che la Sarda attual tariffa emanasse; vi si compresero
però, malgrado parità di ragione, l'antico scudo di Piemonte, e summultipli,
probabilmente perchè tutti ve n'avea colà notevol copia in circolazione, a
h
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
242
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
differenza delle consimili specie Genovesi; e forse il medesimo è a dire delle
ghinee, pe'rapporti dell'Isola con quelle del Britannico Imperio; all'opposto
non menzionaronvisi alcun de pezzi da centesimi 25, li due multipli della vec-
chia doppia di Savoja, ed il mezzo cagliarese, perchè quest'ultimo nè confonder
poteasi col proprio doppio, il cagliarese, pareggiandoli nel nominal valore di 1
centesimo, nè conciliabilmente colla uniformità nel nuovo sistema, ridurlo a
mezzocentesimo, ossian millesimi 5, nè convenevole si credette il forzare
l'altro a centesimi 2; e altronde ben poca o nulla esser doveane la quantità in
corso; perchè, rispetto a multipli della doppia suddetta, nulli esser doveanvi,
già pochissimi avendone il Piemonte; e perchè, riguardo al venticinque
centesimi, avrà sconsigliato dal tariffarlo il riflesso, che già ne Reali Stati
Continentali doveasene sospendere l'ulterior coniamento; nè vi s'inclusero le
specie erose, nè tampoco l'erosomiste, siano antiche sian nuove, spettanti a
terraferma, siccome non furono ammesse nella tariffa di terraferma nemmen
le nobili specie Sarde ; non ricevutevi queste, a ragion del bisogno che anzi
aveavi di colà spedire dei fondi dal continente; e quelle reciprocamente
rejette, perchè allora la terraferma e l'Isola due diversi stati costituivano, e
monete d'infima o bassa materia acconcie non sono a legalizzarsi per altro
stato che l'emittente.
Relativamente, in fine, alla decimal serie in oro, se nel 1832 instituironsi le
specie da 100 lire, e da 50, in luogo delle primitive da 80, e da 40 (lasciato
però in corso il già coniatone); se ad un tempo vi si aggiunse la moneta da
L. 10; e se quindi mandò il Governo si sospendesse l'ulterior battitura e della
menoma tra le pezze d'argento, e delle due maggiori in oro: la prima e la
seconda di queste prescrizioni mossero non solamente dall' esempio che ne
diè la Francia, ma ben anche dal proposito di meglio a decimalità ordinar
la serie nel primo de nobili metalli, e meglio pur collegarla, e coordinarla alla
serie nel secondo, sicch ella avesse il decuplo della lira, donde passasse a
quello di lire due, salisse poscia a quel dello scudo, e si compiesse col decuplo
dell'infima tra le proprie specie; alla terza disposizione poi spinsero li risul-
tamenti della esperienza, le monete da 50 e da 100 lire, al pari e più dei dopp,
luigi, agevolare, pel lor valore e profondità, il fraudolento maneggio del
bipartirle con taglio per lo spessore, e, vuotatele, d'un tondino d'ignobil legai
a peso non guari diverso dal detratto, riempierle, poscia le due superficie,
serbate intatte, perfettamente saldarle al tondino stesso, e nel contorno fra
lor ricongiugnerle; del resto cotali monete sparir di circolazione appena
ch' emese vi entrano, o poco stante ; ed insiem parere, che il commercio
anteponga a tutte le altre decimali specie in oro quella da 20, molto ante-
riore, più diffusa, e più comoda, onde in Francia pure fu tenue l'emissione
di quelle due monete, e fra lo stabilirle, ed il batterne molti e molti anni
corsero: la monetina poi d' º di lira, essersi chiarita men gradevole al
pubblico, stante il troppo esiguo diametro dalla vigente legge assegnato, e la
cui ampliazione attemprar dovrebbesi alla solidità necessaria pel coniamento,
e per l'uso, ed a non soverchia logorabilità.
Or dal 1° venendo al 2º argomento del final numero 36, ch' è la richiesta
delle leggi nostre monetarie, e dell' altre provvigioni e documenti utili sulla
materia, se ne unisce al presente scritto un indice, ed insiem con esso una
copia per quante fu, senza maggiori indugi, possibile l procacciarla; di più
vi si aggiugne un quadro sinottico di paragone fra l'attuale monetazion dei
Reali Stati, e quella dell'Impero Francese.
Alla cui maggiore dilucidazione e compimento, non meno che a rispondere
sul 3° ed ultimo obbietto di questo finale articolo, al desiderio cioè di quell'
altre informazioni ed osservazioni, che l'amministrazion delle Reale Zecche
reputerebbe di qualche pro agl' intenti dei quesiti dalla Britannica Com-
missione proposti ; si chiuderà la presente relazioni coi dati che infra.
Il nuovo monetal sistema di Francia, sì per la riconosciutane bontà intrinseca,
e proficua applicabilità in questo regno, sì per aver esso ben maggiori le
relazioni con quello stato che non cogli altri, fu accolto dal Sabaudo Governo
e nelle basi, e ne particolari, tanto dell' ordinamento quanto dell' attuazione,
e sia per la moneta di conto e per l'effettiva, sia nel personal del servigio, e
nel materiale, sia nelle varie operazioni di cambio, di fabbricazione, di veri-
ficazione, e di controlli; tranne alcune eccezioni al primordiale organamento,
e vieppiù alle modificazioni che poi vi si fecero; eccezioni richieste da pecu-
liarità di cause, e massimamente da diversità di nazionali o finanziere condi-
zioni; già in parte chiarite dal citato quadro sinottico, e fra cui le meritevoli
di special menzione, e di ulterior disamina, sono,-
1°. Che, mentre la Regal Prerogativa della Moneta è giusta le leggi, siccome
ovunque, esercitata presso amb i popoli dalla sovrana autorità, senza la
menoma direttiva od invigilativa ingerenza d'altri che de' propri ufziali a
ciò stabiliti; e così è rimosso ogni rischio d'influenza estranea, e di lesione al
geloso credito monetale; dirige a un tempo, e sopravvede cotal servigio in
Francia una permanente commissione, che consta di presidente, di tre altri
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 243
membri, e di due commessari generali, con adeguato numero di subalterni No. 31.
impiegati; fra cui specialmente un controllore a punzoni e conii, ed in ogni Sardinia.
zecca un commessario, due controllori o verificatori, ed un commesso o
scrivano; e presso noi la Centrale Amministrazione delle Zecche, composta Sig. Cattaneo.
d'un amministrator capo, d'un primo segretario, od amministratore in 2º,
e del segretario, cui s'aggiungono pochi altri uficiali, e fra essi, in ciascuna
zecca, un commessario, un verificatore, ed un controllore deputatovi e soltanto
dipendente dalla Camera o Corte dei Conti, che tien sulla moneta una speciale
antica sovrintendenza.
2°. Che la retribuzione ai nostri incisori consta di stipendio, di prestatuito o
convenuto prezzo a ciascun dato lavoro; quandochè in Francia la retri-
buzione per tal servigio è tutta nel prezzo de lavori: del qual divario è
cagione il doversi ugualmente appo noi provvedere a bisogni del servizio
ove ed in quantº occorrano, ed il non avervi quella costante più o men
ragguardevole quantità di lavoro, che in Francia esiste.
3”. Che riguardo alla monetaria fabbricazione, fra li due modi, l'esercizio ad
economia, e quel per appalto, migliore il primo per maggior finitezza e beltà
di coniato, più cauto e men dispendioso il secondo, è quest' ultimo in vigore
per ambi gli stati; ma, come già si disse degl'incisori, e pel motivo stesso
della diversa rilevanza d'opera, il direttore in ciascuna zecca Francese, è un
appaltatore soltanto, paga del suo non solamente tutti gli operai e uomini di
fatica, e le provvigioni occorrenti a lavorare i metalli ed in monete ridurli, ma
eziandio li conii stessi, e la conservazione, e all'uopo rinnovazione di tutto
indistintamente il materiale, onde il monetario opificio è primordialmente
dall'Erario fornito; e di tutte queste spese e di sue fatiche il rimerita la quota,
dalla legge prefissa a tanto il chilogramma di materia, ritenibile a venditori
sul tariffato valor della medesima; mediante la qual ritenuta, non avvi alcun
tacito sconto, nè a lor pregiudicio sull' effettivo titolo della materia stessa,
nè a danno del pubblico sull' effettivo titolo della moneta, qualmente dicesi
a rifazione accadere in altri stati; ed in vece il direttore in ciascuna zecca da
noi è appaltatore ed impiegato ad un tempo; non sopporta di proprio una
parte delle mentovate spese, dovendo l'Erario somministrargli li conii, e
provvedere alle maggiori o straordinarie riparazioni, ed al rinnovamento,
occorrendo, di parte del materiale; ed, oltre il montar dei dritti di fabbrica-
zione per via di ritenuta sul valor come sovra, ei fruisce d'un modico stipendio.
4°. Che, sebben due o tre zecche, od anche una sola, secondo l'importanza, e le
altre condizioni dei singoli stati, possano bastare agli ordinari bisogni del
monetario servizio; ossia la previdenza pei casi di più urgente, o maggior
lavoro, od eziandio d'altre emergenze straordinarie, ma possibili ad avvenire
e già talvolta avvenute, ossian gl' inconvenienti del troppo centralizzar nella
capitale, come all' opposto e vieppiù del lasciar la capitale priva d'un istituto
qual è il monetario, e la insignificanza del quindi aspettabile risparmio di
spesa, ossian queste ed altre cause insiem riunite, v'han tuttora, oltre la zecca
in Parigi e in Torino rispettivamente, altre 6 in Francia, ed 1 nella seconda
fra le città de l'eali Stati, vale a dire a Genova, già da molti anni trovandosi
di fatto abolita quella di Cagliari.
5°. Che riguardo alle partite non minime, li direttori ne monetari stabilimenti
di Francia pagano il valor delle materie ai portatori, col mezzo di cambiali
ad 8 fino a 15 di, od anche a più lunga scadenza; e appo noi li direttori vi
soddisfanno od incontamente, od entro l'assai breve spazio indispensabile a
compiere un adeguata fabbricazione; pel che lor mancherebbe onninamente
la possibilità, ove le finanze non avessero, siccome fecero, dotato ad hoc le
rispettive due zecche d'un fondo, tra ambedue, e parte in oro, parte in
argento, di L. 400/"; e tanto più mancherebbe la possibilità, che al dover
di continuo restar giacenti fra materie nei vari stadi di lavorazione, e fra
ceneri, limature, ritagli, e simili, una somma ragguardevole, aggiugnesi, per
Instituti, come questi, di minor rilevanza che i Francesi, il ben minor lucro
dal men di lavoro, e quind' il niuno eccitamento ad assumere tali appalti
per chi, già di cospicuo capitale in proprio fornito, possegga di più i lumi e
massimamente la pratica necessaria, per non riuscir poi a scapito e rovina
ove di un discreto profitto affidavasi.
6°. Che tal ragione d'assai men lavoro spiega non pur la necessità di allevia-
mento ne carichi, e dell'aggiunta come sovra d'uno stipendio a direttori
della fabbricazion monetaria in questo regno, ma il bisogno ben anche d'altra
più importante differenza tra le zecche nostre, e quelle di Francia; che cioè
pari affatto è sibbene il valore delle nobili monete in ambi gli stati, siccome
conflatevi d'egual peso d'oro, o d'argento, a titolo uguale (900 parti di fino
su 1,000 di lega), ed alla stessa tariffata ragione di L. 3444 - 44 - 444... il
chilogramma di fino per l'uno, e di L.222 - 22 222... per l'altro, non potendosi
del resto e non dovendosi in monetazione tener conto de più o men lievi e
pur sempre mutevolissimi aggi sull'una o sull'altra materia. Ma la ritenuta
E h 2
244 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 31. che a venditori si fa sul mentovato prezzo, pe' dritti, ossia per le spese di
Sardinia. lavorazione, ritenuta, che da noi ragguagliasi a chilogramma in fino, da'
Francesi a chilogramma in lega del titolo di 900 millesimi, che cede in retri-
Sig. Cattaneo. buzione come si disse a direttori, e su cui forza è per essi, alfin di serbar-
sene ed accrescersene l'avviamento, consentire a cambiatori di non picciole
partite uno sconto (e lo stesso è a dire delle tre altre accidentali ritenute
di fusione, di partimento pe' dorati, e d'affinazione per le materie a titolo
inferior del monetabile), potè in Francia ridursi, più anni sono, per l'oro a
sole 6 lire, ed ora è a L. 6-70, e per l'argento a L. 1'50, sul peso in lega,
corrispondenti su quello in fino a L. 7.44.444..., ed a L. 1:66 666..., rispettiva-
mente; quandochè nelle zecche nostre non s'è finor potuto limitare a men di
L. 844 444..., e di L. 272222..., nè per modo alcuno ristringer potrebbesi
ulteriormente, a pena, se in appalto, di più non rinvenire idonee e sicure persone
che incaricar sen volessero, e se ad economia, d'aver ancora ad aggravare,
del più sborsato che ritenuto a talfine, l'onere delle spese generali, e di
alcuni, fra gli speciali dispendi, che il Realo Governo, al par d'ogni altro
avente buona monetazione, dee già, senza verun rimborsamento, sostenere
per siffatto servizio.
7°. Che stante la medesima causa, di minore e discontinua fabbricazione, ed il
potere i monetari meccanismi di nostre zecche esser mossi colla forza dell'
acqua appigionabile, in Genova, e delle molta e perenne acqua demaniale, in
Torino (oltre il sussidiario impiego, ove d'uopo, de cavalli, e delle braccia
d'uomini), non vi è usato, nè punto vi converrebbe il vapore; quandochè
in Francia è, quasi pel tutto, ben opportunamente prescetto, e con molto
vantaggio adoprato.
8°. Che fra le tre sorta di ghiere, la bifida ed a incavo incisa, cui diciamo
spaccata [virole briséel, la scanalata, e la liscia, e fra le tre corrispondentivi
specie di contorni alle monete, l'inscritto a rilievo, lo scannellato o striato,
ed il liscio, cui è da aggiugnere l'altro (che operasi mercè un secondo cor-
donamento ai tondini), il contorno inscritto ad incavo; la prima guisa è
prefissa alle zecche Francesi per le tre maggiori monete d'oro, e per la mag-
giore d'argento; la seconda, per tutte le altre in ambº i metalli; la terza per
le monete ignobili; sicchè non avvi colà uso alcuno del contorno inscritto
ad incavo: e questo pel contrario, insiem colla ghiera liscia, è statuito alle
zecche mostre per le tre maggiori monete in argento; ghiera, e contorno
lisci per le minori, e per le tre in rame; e striati per quelle in oro: delle
quali diversità presso noi è ragione il più costare ed il men durar della
ghiera spaccata; il potersi forse contrapporre ai tre pregi di essa (miglior
regolarità ed uniformità nello improntare il contorno, simultaneità di siffatta
impressione con quelle del ritto e del rovescio, e cresciutane difficoltà pe'
falsatori), che gli aumentatine punti di rilievo e perciò di attrito, senza tutela
d’orlicci come all'effigie ed all'arme, agevolano in tal parte il logorio della
moneta; e del rimanente il dar la forma di striato a sole e tutte le specie in
oro accrescerne li distintivi, per chiunque anche rozzo e analfabeto visibili
a colpo d'occhio, acciò facilmente le discerna dalle specie d'argento a con-
simil modulo, che s'indorassero, od a colore aureo s'inverniciassero, come
talor avviene.
9°. Che ultimamente nella monetazion Francese la serie in oro accrebbesi d'una
quinta specie, il pezzo da L. 5 ; innovazione questa eccezionale, dettata da
staordinarie circostanze, e perciò temporanee, peculiari a quello stato; inno-
vazione pertanto che non s'ammise nella monetazion Sabauda, per cui non
sarebbevi stata ugual ragione di derogare alle norme comuni, dissuadenti dal
coniar in oro specie di valor pari a quelle in argento, e specie preziose per la
materia a modulo sì esiguo, da riuscirne e men comodo il maneggio, e ben
agevole lo smarrimento, e assai più forte e di più danno il consumo; e ciò
tanto più in Istato, quale il Sabaudo, ove la consimile picciolezza della
monetina da centesimi 25 in argento, benchè a sì tenue valore, richiederebbe,
come a suo luogo accennossi, qualche mutamento nelle dimensioni, per tor-
narla in favore del pubblico, e poterne convenevolmente ripigliar l'emissioni.
10°. Che siffatta variazione consistendo principalmente nell' aumentare il
diametro della detta specie (aumento, che seco trarrebbere un altro per la
moneta da centesimi 50) non poteasi al certo seguire il contrario operato di
Francia, ove, non è gran tempo, fu al venticinque surrogato il venti cen-
tesimi, ravvisandola qual moneta in peso e valore, più dell' altra decimale, e
più omologa al duelire, ed al ventilire: poichè questo surrogamento, impor-
tando la diminuzione di 4 nel peso, avrebbecene imposta pure un equipol-
lente o nel diametro già troppo esiguo, o nello spessore, che già, in riparo al
primo difetto, assottigliar converrebbe, e non sarebbe poi in ragione d'ambi
gl' intenti assottigliabile, senza troppo estenderne gli attriti, la logorabilità,
ed anche la difficoltà nel coniare : nè altronde appo noi vi aveano le circo
stanze che dovettero colà influirvi, la esistenza cioè d'una ingente massa di
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 245
tali monetine, battute e poste in circolazione non da 25 o 30 anni al più, No. 31.
come le nostre, ma da tempo doppiamente rimoto, e quind' in gran parte a Sardinia.
tal di liscio ridotte, da urgentemente bisognarne il richiamo a zecca, e la º
conversione in nuove specie. Sig. Cattaneo.
11°. E finalmente, che quanto alla serie d'ignobili monete, se la Francia,
ritirato e abolito affatto l'antico erosomisto, stimò d'aver a costituirla di 4
specie, anzichè di 3 sole, ed a serbarvi per lº (benchè superiore all' ordinario
limite di valuta in codest infima serie) il decimo di lira, siccome decupto del
centisimo, duplo del cinque centesimi, e sudduplo del venti anzidetto; se al
trecentesimi sostituì il due, perchè decimale, e correlativo alle altre monete;
se per le quattro nuove specie, in luogo del rame, trovò preferibile il bronzo
(composto di 95 parti in rame, di 4 in istagno, e di 1 in zinco) perchè tenuto
inossidabile, di somma resistenza agli attriti, e di più difficile contraffazione
per galvanoplastica, o gitto; se credette, in eccezione alle comuni regole del
monetario sistema, di gravemente sminuirne il peso e con esso il real valore
(fatto pur conto del maggior costo di lavorazione) rimpetto al valor nominale,
pel trattarsi di danaro a mero interno uso nei minimi traffichi e nei resti, pel
non potervi esser lucro allettante al falsificare se non se in grandi quantità, e
pel riuscirne il falsamento assai malagevole stante li suddetti motivi, e la
gran precisione e finitezza d'impronte, in tali benchè umili specie, ordinate;
se opportuno le parve il renderne obbligatorio il ricevimento, a compiere le
frazioni non solamente dell'ultimo spezzato d'argento, o al più della lira come
da noi, ma dello scudo medesimo, al che da noi fu sol ammesso l'erosomisto; e
se alcuni di codesti cangiamenti avrebbero, a parità di circostanze, convenuto
pur anche a questi Reali Stati: fra altri motivi, ostavano all'introdurvi la
specie da centesimi 10, l'essersi anzi già abolita una preessistente consimile
moneta (il soldone che pur era in bronzo), e l'esistervene tuttavia, sebbene in
assai picciola quantità, una in viglione, quasi pari in nominal valore
(centisimi 12 5), e di oltre il doppio in valor reale; al cambiare il rame in
bronzo, le difficoltà d'eseguimento maggiori per le zecche nostre non provve.
dute di mezzi uguali a quelle di Francia; principalmente poi, e sul tutto,
l'ancor durare appo noi una ingente mole d'erosomisto, che unita all'entità
dell' antico e nuovo eroso nostro riesce, a ragguaglio fra l'una e l'altra popo-
lazione, molta più che la quantità di danaro in bronzo mandatasi colà
emettere in vece del rame; il non potersi certo codesta conversione ravvisar
necessaria, ed urgente, nè anche per l'eroso non-decimale, quanto sarebbe
lo abolire il viglione riducendolo in nuove specie d'argento, ed anche il
riconiare in decimali monete l'antico argento ed oro; il dovere perciò la
prima di queste tre operazioni (quando pure la si estimasse utile, ed oppor-
tuna) susseguir come in Francia, od al più accompagnare, ma non ma
precedere le altre due; il volersi alla seconda e alla terza un dispendio dall'
erariali condizioni finor dissuaso; ed alla prima od il sovraccarico d'altra spesa
oppur gl' inconvenienti della rifazione mercè grave scemamento nel peso
della materia, e così nel real valore; il non aver ancora una sufficiente espe-
rienza chiarito la realtà del vantaggi teoricamente aspettabili dalla mone-
tazione in bronzo; e massimamente l'esservisi quel Governo determinato,
allorchè l'infima delle monetali sue serie trovandosi di fatto, a differenza della
nostra, non solamente constare di sette specie, per varietà e di duplice
sistema e di metallo duplice e di triplice lega, eterogenee fra loro, ma ben
anco, in gran parte, ad impronte obliterate, riusciva di necessità il ritirarla,
e nell' un modo o nell' altro rinnovellarla.
Torino, dall' Amministrazione Centrale delle Reale Zecche, li 17 Giugno 1856.
L'Amministratore in Capo,
Intendente Generale,
CATTANEO.
IH h 5
246
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
QUADRO SINOTTICO di PARAGONE fra l'attuale DECIMAL

I. II. III. V, I V. VI. VII.
Prezzi dell'oro, e dell' " e - Tolleranze in più, ed in
a chilogramma, netti dalla ri- Materia, e valori delle monete. cs - 010,
tenzione per le spese che d' 8 Peso in lega (al pezzo).
uopo a monetarli. 8 ci
È s S Sul pezo.
Valori. o É 3
Oro, Argento. s ri e-
ge Materia 5 S E Abbondante l Scarso - Al 1,000
e e s o e Reale, cioè cº Giusto. sul titolo. Al
Al titolo di millesimi. O º" i" " i .2 (ni i" " Chilo- peZZO.
e (legale o teria al titolo g- OlIGIT3 IlZ8,), gram-
Serie monetario) di 1,000. i II13.
1,000 | 900 | 1,000 (D.) (F.) (D) H | Go | Io (I.) | (I.)
Li. Ct. Li. Cts. Li. Cts. Li. Ct. Li. Ct s.| Li. Cts. Numero Milli-Mille- Grammi. | Grammi. Grammi. I Millesimi. I Millesi- Milli-
- de pezzi. metri. simi. mi o | grammi.
- Grammi
r Sa. 99"75,482 84 ) 32,290:06 | 32,226 06 - n 32°
100 0 } 31 sassº º
Fr. 99”78,385 85 32,290'32 | 32,225'80 32'26
º 1
Sa. 49'87,741 27 16,145'03 | 16,113'03 16°
50 0 } 62 susº ;
Sa. Fr. 49'89,192 28 16,145 16 | 16,112'90 – 16'13
3436 0 3092'40
e - Oro - Sa. 19'95,095 6,464'11 6,439'11 - 2 - ſ 12'50
Fr. 20 0 155 | 21 sarsi
8437 o 8093'30 Fr. 19'95,676 6,464'51 | 6,438”71 ll 1290
r- 2
Sa. 9'97,546 18 3,232.05 3,219'55 6'25
10 0 } 310 sassº º
Fr. 9'97,836 19 3,232 25 3,219'35 - 6'45
- 5 0 | Fr. 4'98,918 620 17 1,612'90 1,617-74 1,608'06 , 3 4'84
900
pe Sa. 4'93,875 (G.) S
5 0 } 40 37 25 25'075 24'925 3 75'
Fr. 4'96,250
Sa. 1'97,550 ) S
2 0 } 100 27 10 10'050 9'950 50°
Fr. 1'98,500 |
Sa. 219.50 | 197'55 5
Ar- 1 0 !" 0'98,775 } 200 23 ne 5'025 4'975 º e lº }
« è) o o » o 25'
ºr. gento Fr. 0'99,250 Fr. 2
º" 198'50 y-
Sa. 0'49,387,500 2'518 2'482 18°
O 50 } 400 18 zº } 7 º
Fr. 0'49,625 2'5175 2'4815 17'50
0 25 | Sa. 0'24,693,750 " 15 1”25 1'2625 1'2375 } º 12'50
10
- 0 20 | Fr. 0-19,850 1000 - l 1'010 0'990 (I) 10
r 0 5 l Sa. 100 28 10 10'200 9'800 20 200°
Le monete a rincontro constano lº 0 3 | Sa. o" 23 - (G.) 6 6'144 5'856 (G.) 24 | 144' }
di materia, (C) non già (come 0 1 | Sa. 500 19 2 2'040 1°960 20 40°
l'oro e l'argento) recata al Com-
bio in Zecca da chicchessia, ma lº ſ 0 10 | Fr 100 | 30 10 10'100 9'900 ",ra-) 100 )
- - II 10 9 10
direttamente ed unicamente 0 5 | Fr. 200 25 5 5'050 4”950 5/ per lo º 50° |
provveduta da parte e per conto | | Bronzo 100 stagno
del Governo 0 2 | Fr 500 | 20 | | (G.) 2 2'030 1°970 " 30 -
º 5 per lo 15
s O 1 | Fr. 1000 15 l 1'015 0'985 J | zinco (G). º 15° |
J
* Per ogni chilogramma di coniato.
ANNOTAZIONI. – Nella compilazione di questo quadro si seguì, per la parte concernenti alla Monetazion Francese, la Tabella trasmessacene dal
Cavaliere Durand, non quella ch'ei mandava nel Novembre del 1852, ma l'altra inviata verso la metà del 1854, siccome racchiudente le variazioni
ed aggiunte in tale intervallo operatesi; e di più s'ebbe cura d'inserirvi gli altri posteriori additamenti e cangiamenti; quali, in ispezialità, l'accre-
scimento del modulo per le due più piccole specie in oro, statuito precedentemente a soli 17, e 14 millimetri; e le nozioni sulle due maggiori
specie, state bensì da moltº anni ordinate, ma solo ultimamente battutesi.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
MONETAZIONE de' REALI
STATI, e quella dell' IMPERO FRANCESE.

VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII.
Ritenzione, per le
º g e º º spese sul valore g º º º a
Proporzione de coniamenti in ispezzati, Pezzi da prelevarsi, pel saggio, su della materia, a chilo- Spese di Opifici monetari. Legislazione.
rimpetto alla totalità de'comiamenti. ciascuna fabbricazione. gramma.
(J.) (M.)
e e N- N
- In fino, In lega,
In astratto SA Peso. (L. º o
9 In valore, (L.) Verifica | Conii Ghiere | Città, Segni è ;
A- esºs. S| . per ci cioè al titolo di zione | Spac- | ove sono " :
ispecie, i 5 millesimi º (O.) cate stabiliti. Zecca. $ 3
Per serie. Per ispecie. º" â Giust Abbon- (O.) o (O.) (P.) “ . â fi
g /m. Z, IllSIO, dante. Scarso, 1,000. 900.
Li. Cts. Grammi. I Grammi. I Grammi. I Li. Cts. I Li. Cts. I Li. Cts. Li. Cts.Li. Cts. Savoja. g: 5 gi è
i 9 pis.o
co S 4 o 5;ri
r- : º i
6 193,740:36 | 193,356'36) Prancia Testadi si giºsi
193,548'36 º a - Torino, 3 E 2 3 5 .
6 19,3741'92 | 193,354'80 0-15 ? Aquila. 5 | T 3 5 S.
Genova. Ancora i .. li 83
e H : zº:
6 96,870:18 | 96,678'18 Caglieri. e le 5 32
ì 96,774'18 ſ Savoja. sasssssssssssssssssssssssssse $ 35 $ 3
6 ) U 96,870 96 | 98,677 40 id. ? “s | : : : 3.3
0 º 7 60 Francia. 2 S è 3 Èg;
º ; - E i .
38,784 66 | 38,634'66 - s $ , gia;
6 | 38,709 66 Francia. a o 3 3 º 5 l. È g
38,787:06 | 38,632'26 0'15 Parigi. A. 55; 3 ;
0 º 6 70 S si 355
to ... | - 3 - O
Sa. sig. In lire dieci, rèa. 50 º º 19,392:30 | 19,317:30 Roano. IB. i; iº $ # ;
6 | 19,354'80 e -. E 35
F º ſ In lire dieci, i... 1,000 0 19,393'50 | 19,316'10 0'20 Lione. D. | E i; 55 i
- ps- G) 5 : -
I”, i; i" a s Francia, E 5 55 53
In lire cinque, i 500 0 | 6 | 9,677:40 | 9,706 44 | 9,648'36) 3 0 | 0'40 Bordò. I | 5 $ 3 sig
(per ogni Francia, si 5 è $55
6/m pezzi) 40 0 i 55 2 g $
6 | 150° 150'450 | 149'550 ) » (per º 5 : : E. 2 ,
- º H 6 - 5 ai
ogni | Strasborgo. B. e º 3.3 $ 5
8 | 200° 200'600 199'400 200/m. i l 4 $ è 55
i fa i
In lire due, rig. 150 0 | 6 | 60' 60'300 59'700 Marsiglia. | M. | 3 |2 i; gi
gi 3 E tſ ) da Miº
In lire uma, "i. 250 0 | 8 | 80' 80'400 79'600 Savoja. Lilla. W. 5 3 . iº
A- a O | o o C co
Sa. Ai pari :: i ;; g
a i 5. 8 | È i
” |In cent. 50, 100 o 6 | 30. 30'150 | 29'850 | | 0 2,72'222 | 2 45 5 âgi i
º º » | 0:05 | 32 i siti
ll Incent 25, zig. 100 0 | 8 | 40' 40'200 89'800 | . Francia. º i 535
si 3,5 8 º
o $: .- i 3
ſ| In lire due, zig. 100 0 | 6 | 15' 15°108 14”892 0 i" 1 50 i º si
º gr- O crº
| In lire una, i. 250 0 | 8 | 20' 20°140 19”860 fasi:
Fr. 5 pari ; . iS #
a zi. 33 33 $
In cent. 50, rig. 125 0 | 6 | 7'500 7-575 7'425 º 5 S 5
t tº º . c. º Spese di fabbricazione 35 534.e
Ui In cent. 20, zà 5. 25 0 16 16 16°160 15'840 al chilogramma (N). J - i; º e cs #
igi 5 i
Li. l Cts. 10 º 55 il
i Q) 2- e,
Sa. 3 pari º In cent. 3, zi. | 785 73 ? (K.) l 37 gigi:
& 2 e r- o
a +33. In cent. 1, i. 642 85 S 09 5: a l s
i o di GN “i i.
i 5 : 3 E 5
10 | 100° 101° 99° 0 92 ) | 1 50 ) | + i 55
(per ogni - 14 ? ga: i S
In cent. 5, giº. 4,000 0 | 10 50° 50”500 49'500 l 32 ) | L. 100/m.) 5 o S ig
s i 75 G)
º è," In cent. 2. i. 500 0 | 10 | 20° 20'800 19'700 2 24 1 0 | 18 ? 335s è g
a #ij. (come- $ 2 e 2.2
UlIn cent. 1, i. 500 0 | 10 | 10° 10°150 9'850 8 24 sovra.) | 22 ? R5555 $
c: ro r i ci g
i Per ogni coppia di conii,
Quanto poi alle speciali annotazioni concernenti a rispettivi luoghi come sovra distinti colle lettere (A), (B), (C), (D), (E), & c., vennero esse, pel più
agevole riferimento e confronto, estese a parte, nell'apposito fascicolo annesso al presente quadro.
Torino, dall' Amministrazione Centrale delle Reale Zecche, addì 17 Giugno 1856.
L'Amministratore in Capo,
Intendente Generale,
CATTANEO
248 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
ANNOTAZIONI al QUADRO SINOTTICO di PARAGONE fra l'attual DECIMALE MONETAZION
de' REALI STATI, e quella dell' IMPERO FRANCESE.
(A) L'oro e l'argento recati al cambio nelle zecche nostre pagansi a portatori sul peso in fino,
cioè ragguagliato al titolo di 1,000 ; e nelle Francesi sul peso in lega a ragion del titolo.
De quali due metodi, sebbene conducenti ad un medesimo risultamento, stimasi preferibile
il primo ; perchè più semplice, e perchè il prezzo è, per ambi gli stati, prefisso pel metallo
nobile (ch' è il sol ogetto del cambio ossia compera), e non per l'unitovi rame, od altro
ignobil metallo, di cui non è a pro del venditori tenuto verun conto.
(B) Nella Tabella Francese (Colonna I.) alla periodica frazione di 5, è men propriamente surrogato
il forzamento del secondo 5 in un 6. La qual decimale periodica frazione di 5, come quelle
di 2, di 4, e di 6 nella Colonna X., volte in precise frazioni volgari, danno esattamente
i, , , e , di centesimo rispettivamente.
(C) Il bronzo monetabile constar dee, giusta la relativa Legge, di 950 millesime parti di rame,
40 di stagno, e 10 di zinco.
(D) Li divari nel valor reale delle monete Francesi d'oro e d'argento, fra la tabella anzidetta, ed il
presente Quadro, Colonna II., consistono meramente nell'essersi in quest'ultimo, a miglior
dimostrazione, spinto il computo fino ai cento-millesimi di lira, mentre in quella fu limitato
ai dieci-millesimi, forzandoli però d' 1, ove la residua frazione eccedeva li 5 cento-millesimi,
e negligendola ove non eccedea.
Le differenze poi nello stesso real valore tra esse monete Francesi, e le Sabaude, provengono
dall' essere in Francia minore, che da noi, il montar della ritenuta per le spese di fabbrica-
zione, sul prezzo dell' oro e dell' argento da pagarsi a portatori, siccome scorgesi dalle
Colonne I. e X., e colà è minore la ritenzione, perchè più lievi generalmente sono le spese
negli stabilimenti di maggior lavoro. Quind' il real valore, di cui quì ragionasi, calcolato
(sotto cotal diffalco) a ragione del giusto peso indicatosi nella Colonna VI., è il valor relativo
al cambio, ma non l'assoluto, che perfettamente uguale per Savoja e per Francia riesce, in
quanto ciascuna specie è pei due stati identica di titolo e di peso, dai quali due dati dipende
il valore intrinseco d'ogni moneta ; e dicesi identica pur di peso, abbenchè la Legge asseg-
nante il peso giusto per le specie nostre abbiane, quanto alle due prime in oro, ristretta
l'enunciazione alla 3° cifra frazionaria, cioè ai milligrammi, e per la terza specie alla 4°
cifra, vale a dire ai dieci milligrammi ; giacchè poi il reale lor peso, in ambi gli stati, dee
(salve le tolleranze) rispondere al prescrittone rispettivo taglio di 31, di 62, e di 155, al
chilogramma. Della testè mentovata restrizione di peso alla 3°, o 4º cifra frazionaria nelle
nostre prime tre specie d'oro non tennesi conto nè pel peso medesimo, nè in conseguenza nel
computare il detto real valore ; perchè la provegnentene diminuzione, non aggiugnente a
due dieci-millesimi di lira, avrebbe sol valuto a vieppiù complicare il presente Quadro, cos-
tituendo essa una diversità di nessunissimo effetto pratico, stante la somma esiguità dove
trattisi d'uno o pochi pezzi individualmente, e lo scomparir ch'ella fa ove si calcoli in
massa, pel motivo già di sopra indicato, e maggiormente svolto alla Nota (I).
(E) La Legge assegnò, per la specie da centesimi 3 in rame, il taglio a chilogramma in 166 pezzi
rotondamente ; quandochè, a 6 grammi il pezzo, rileva realmente a 166; ; ma nelle fabbri-
cazioni e contabilità relative seguesi tal precisa ragione, che il meno (siccome il più) non
ammettesi, fuorchè a causa e ne limiti delle stabilite tolleranze. Del resto è quì oppor-
tuno il notare, come non è guari, avendo la Francia da riconiar l'intera massa delle ignobili
monete, ha saggiamente colto siffatta opportunità, per far iscomparire dal suo monetario
sistema l'unica specie (quantunque non abbiane mai battuto) la qual fosse disforme dal
nuovo decimal metodo, com' è appunto la moneta da centesimi 3.
(F) A tre fra le specie in oro, ed a tre fra quelle in bronzo è statuito un modulo d'I o 2 millimetri
superiore a quello delle corrispondentivi specie nostre in oro, ed in rame. La dimension
però del secondo d'essi diametri risultando bastevole a fini suoi, stimerebbesi men conveni-
ente lo ampliarla in pareggiamento al primo, sì perchè il rame è men duro che il bronzo, e
men resistente all' attrito, sì perchè, in qualunque serie, e specie (a condizioni nel resto
uguali) la logorabilità d'una moneta è in ragion diretta della ampiezza del modulo.
(G) Il titolo pel bronzo non è punto l'espressione di sua finezza, qual si è il titolo per l'oro e per
l'argento ; ma la semplice espression della unità del complessivo suo peso (grammi o mil-
lesimi 1,000) in quanto debbonsi alla medesima ragguagliare li tre parziali pesi de' compo-
nenti metalli, cioè grammi o millesimi 950 di rame, 40 di stagno, e 10 di zinco, a quali poi
si riferiscono le tre rispettive tolleranze, in più ed in meno, accennate nella Colonna VII.
Poichè di poco o niun pro, e di troppa spesa e difficoltà riuscirebbe in pratica lo stabilire
per codesti ignobili metalli, l'individual titolo propriamente detto, bastando il prescrivere,
che sieno di prima qualità, malleabili, ed atti al monetamento ; siccome praticossi per le
Sabaude monete in rame, le quali non eran nè anche suscettive dell'improprio titolo anzidetto
e relativa tolleranza, siccome confiate, non d'una lega metallica qual è il bronzo, ma d'un
metallo solo.
Relativamente poi a due nobili metalli, non v'ha tra le moneti di Savoja e di Francia niuna
differenza sul titolo, e niuna altra sull'analoga tolleranza in più ed in meno; fuorchè il non
essersi appo noi ridotta da 3 ai 2 millesimi quella per le specie in argento; le quali già
da più anni deggiono colà essere, quanto le specie in oro, d'un titolo nè inferiore ad 898
millesimi, nè superiore a 902; quandochè appo noi basta tuttora, non iscendano a men di
897, nè salgano a più di 903. Della quale maggior tolleranza per l'argento, nella nostra
monetazion conservata, fu ed è motivo la ben più esatta e rigorosa verificazione del titolo,
che in esso metallo si eseguisce per via umida, e non già a volume, assai più intricato e men
cauto metodo, ma sì a peso con bilancie apposite e accuratissime, mentre in sull'oro si opera
ovunque per via secca, cioè a coppella ; e son anche ragioni per conservarla tuttavia la ben
lieve entità della cosa (perdita o lucro di circa 22 centesimi a chilogramma in legalmoneta-
bile, e così, a scudo, di men che 6 millesimi di lira), le gravi difficoltà di questa più precisa
fabbricazione, ed il minor rigore che fors' è usato ne' saggi Francesi; oltrechè poi, ad
aggravare in ciò la condizion degli appaltatori, sarebbe stato e sarebbe forza, a ogni modo,
lo aspettar l'accasione d'un nuovo appalto.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 249
(H) Venendo a ragionare dell' individual peso al pezzo, in ciascuna serie, e dal peso giusto incomin- No. 31
ciando, già nella Nota (D) accennossi, che quello spettante alla serie in oro si è nel presente e - - -
quadro inscritto qual trovasi nella Tabella Francese, anche per le specie Sabaude, spingendolo
fino alla 5° cifra frazionaria, benchè la Legge nostra soffermisi per le prime due specie alla
3°, e per le altre alla 4° cifra ; ed in tal forma operossi, dacchè sostanzialmente non ne
avviene in pratica nessuna diversità. Pel che sarà non inopportuno lo aggiugnere, a maggior
chiarezza, come da noi (nè altrimente avverrà in Francia) sia d'uso ne' pesamenti a pezzo,
che la frazione, oltre la 3° cifra esprimente i milligrammi, si forzi ad 1 milligramma intero
qualor superi 5 dieci-milligrammi, e non superandoli si abbandoni, qualmente accade pel
valore, quanto alla frazione oltre la 2º cifra, ch' è dei centesimi. Ma per l'opposto, se
trattisi delle monetarie operazioni e calcolazioni a chilogramma ed in massa, la ragion
prevalente si è il prefisso taglio, che per l'oro essendo, rispettivamente, di 31, 62, 155, 310,
e (quanto a Francia) 620, ogni millegrammi di materia in lega, ne deriva, che in ciascuna
specie tal numero di pezzi dee (salve le statuite tolleranze) esattamente equivalere al
chilogramma, svanendo per ciò la differenza in meno, imputabile al limitar come sovra la
frazione alla 3° o 4° cifra, ovvero alla 5° ; che per conseguenza sul complesso riguadagnasi
codesta limitazione (qualmente pur l'indicato abbandono o forzamento) peculiare all'
- individual peso ; ch' essa limitazione, se alla 5° cifra, importerebbe, sul menzionato ris-
pettivo numero, per le prime due specie 14, e per la 3a 45 cento-milligrammi, e ad
ognuna delle due altre 2 milligrammi, in meno del chilogramma, e se alla sola 3a o 4a
cifra, produrrebbe per tutte le specie un meno di 2 milligrammi egualmente; che,
togliendo ad esempio la specie da L. 20 in valor nominale, il riguadagno di siffatto meno,
secondochè sia di 45 cento-milligrammi, o di milligrammi 2, e supponendo ben inteso, che
la lega sia a giusto titolo, fa salire il valor monetario del pezzo (il valor cioè della materia
insieme e del lavoro) da L.19 999991, oppur da L.19 99.9960, a 20 lire precisamente,
ed il real valore pel cambio, ossia prezzo da pagarsi a cambiatori per la materia (puro
oro) e perciò diffalcate le spese di fabbricazione in L. 8'44i, se da noi, ovvero in L. 7'44i,
se in Francia, da L. 19 95-67,652,130, a L. 19 95 67,741,935, i rispetto a quest'ultima, e,
quanto a noi, da L.19 95 0,927,840, oppur da L. 19 95 0,958,764 (secondochè si chiuda
il computo del peso alla 4 delle cifre frazionarie, come nella tariffa Sabauda, od alla 5°
giusta la Tabella Francese, ed il presente Quadro) a L. 19 95 0,967,741,935 , recando il
peso all'intera sua matematica esattezza, la qual è di grammi 6'451,612;i, pesar dovendo il
pezzo da L. 20. Tº del chilogramma; e che in fine codesta precision di peso, tranne il più
od il meno per la legal tolleranza, qual già si disse, riceve pratica applicazione quand'
operasi in massa. Donde pur si raccoglie, che, mentre nel valore pel cambio il divario fra
li due stati è cosa esigua, l'assoluto real valore della moneta d'oro, non men che di argento,
è il medesimo in Francia e da noi ; che vi è, qual debb essere, pari al valor nominale o
legale, perchè il valor d'una merce qualsiasi naturalmente e giustamente consta non solo
del prezzo della materia, ma eziandio, se lavorata, del prezzo d'opera ; e che le spese di
fabbricazione non aggiungono, nemmen per gli Stati Sabaudi, ad l per 100 del valore
quanto alle specie in oro, e quanto a quelle in argento ad 11 per la Savoja, nè a più di º al
100 per la Francia.
(I) Or passando a dire del peso individuale sì abbondante sì scarso, e perciò delle relative
tolleranze in più ed in meno, e queste tanto al pezzo quanto al chilogramma, si osserverà
primieramente, che nella Tabella Francese il peso abbondante e lo scarso del pezzo in oro
da L. 20, veggonsi annotati ad un cento-milligramma in meno di quanto s'inscrissero nella
presente, e di quanto in fatti risultano aver ad essere, eseguendo la detrazione od aggiunta,
al giusto peso, de grammi 12-90, ch' è la quota colà della tolleranza al pezzo indicatavi per
tale specie. Il che, riguardando alla esattezza d'espressione fino a tal cifra per le altre
specie usatavi, non saprebbesi guari ascrivere ad altro, che a mero equivoco ; siccome lo è
senza dubbio il vedervisi accennato, pel pezzo in argento da 20 centesimi, il peso scarso
in 999 milligrammi, quandochè non può essere se non di 990. A cagion della grand'
esiguità del pezzo Francese in oro da L. 5, si dovè ampliarne eccezionalmente la tolleranza
sul peso dai 2 a 3 millesimi, pareggiandola a quella dello scudo in argento.
Del rimanente nelle tolleranze sul peso a chilogramma, sussiste per tutte le specie nelle
due nobile serie perfetta parità fra li due stati. Che se nella terza serie avvi differenza
non solamente ne pesi, ma ben anco nelle ammessevi tolleranze, ben minori per le Francesi
monete in bronzo, che per le Sabaude in rame (per cui si dedusse la quì espressa tolleranza
a peso da quella che la Legge prefisse a numero sul taglio, come pur ebbesi da far per la
specie in argento da centesimi 25), è ciò ascrivibile alla ben maggior precisione, che in
Francia ordinossi d'usare in coniando queste nuove comunque ignobili specie, al precipuo
scopo di contrapporre tutta la possibile difficoltà all' ingente lucro che il contraffarle
offrirebbe, mentr esse in real valore, computatavi pur largamente ogni qualsiasi spesa,
non arrivan nè anco alla metà del nominale. Finalmente non saprebbesi per la serie
nostra in rame additar causa, per cui sulla minima delle tre specie abbiavi la tolleranza
medesima che sulla maggiore, e sia superata dalla tolleranza sulla specie media.
Riguardo poi alla tolleranza sul peso al pezzo, essa corrisponde esattamente a quella per
chilogramma, eccettuatene le specie in oro, e la moneta nostra da centesimi 50 in
argento. Quest'ultima, a 7 grammi per 1,000, importa la tolleranza di milligrammi 17.50,
qual è prefissa a codesta specie in Francia ; nè si conosce il perchè siasi alla nostra
assegnata in 18 milligrammi, veggendosi per le altre monete ammesso ove occorre il mezzo
milligramma, ed anco il quarto. Ma, relativamente alla serie in oro, vuolsi avvertire,
che la tolleranza a chilogramma dell' 1 sul 1,000 per le prime due specie, del 2 per le due
susseguenti, e del 3 per la quinta Francese, in matematica precisione importerebbe, sull'
esattissimo peso del pezzo, quanto alla lº specie, grammi 0 03225i, e metà rispetto alla
specie 2a; grammi 0-012 90, º riguardo alla 3º, e metà per la 4a , e grammi 0 004-83;i sull'
ultima; che nella Tabella Francese la tolleranza al pezzo non si diparte dalle mentovate pre-
cissime quote, se non se col forzare all' intero, oppur col negligere la frazione ch è oltre
i cento-milligrammi, secondochè sorpassi o no li 5 millionigrammi, mentre nella Sabauda
monetazione è dalla Legge limitata, per le due maggiori specie, ai milligrammi soltanto,
e per la terza, e la quarta è spinta i" ai cento-milligrammi, ma ritenutili fissamente
l
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
250
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 31.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
nel solo novero di 50 e di 25 rispettivamente, e così alla metà soltanto ed al quarto
d'un milligramma; de quali due metodi il nostro è più acconcio alla possibile pratica
applicazione, senza dar luogo a sensibile scapito per l'Erario, o pel pubblico.
Infatti la tolleranza a chilogramma, osservata infin almeno alla 6º delle frazionarie cifre
decimali (i millionigrammi), è usata nelle operazione e contabilità di zecca per le partite in
massa ; nelle quali nulla vieta, ch' essa impieghisi, ed in cui riuscir può rilevante, più
o meno, la somma delle frazioni anche al di là dei cento-milligrammi. All'opposto la
tolleranza al pezzo non pare utilmente estendibile, fuorchè a metà o quarto di milli-
gramma al più, rotti questi già men agevoli a render concreti per via di campioni e di
pesamenti ; talchè una maggiore teorica accuratezza, per l'ordinario, tornerebbe pratica-
mente inattuabile e vana. Così la tolleranza al pezzo sulla moneta da L. 20 fu presso noi
statuita di soli grammi 0 012'50. Tali sono i motivi delle differenze, che scorgonsi fra
le due sorta di tolleranza ; differenze però di niun momento, poichè, all' addotto esempio
attenendoci del pezzo da 20, in valor monetario rileva a L. 0 00 125, ossia º di centesimo,
ed in material valore, a poco meno, cioè a L. 0 00 124,693s ºro ; il che a nulla monta,
trattandosi di tolleranza a pezzo, e non in massa.
Codesta diversità nella tolleranza al pezzo tra l'inscritto nella Tabella Francese, e lo stabilito
appo noi, cagiona le differenze che rilevansi fra l'uno stato, e l'altro, negl' individuali pesi
abbondante e scarso ; se non che poi in pratica è, pel già spiegato riflesso, applicabile in
genere ad essi pesi, in ambe le monetazioni, ed anche per l'argento, il già detto nella ante-
cedente Nota (H) circa l'individual peso giusto; vale a dire che la frazione, oltre la cifra
de milligrammi, suolsi forzare al milligramma intero, ovver negligere, secondochè sia o no
maggiore della metà d'un milligramma ; norma questa istessamente usata nel complessivi
pesi, giusto, abbondante, e scarso (per amendue le serie, e sì per la Francia sì per Savoja)
rispetto a 6, 8, o 16 pezzi, che ad ogni fabbricazione prelevansi pel saggiamento (come nella
Colonna IX.) fra le quali tre sorta di pesi complessivi, la 2° e la 3º offron pure, a propor-
zione, le differenze medesime, e per la medesima causa, che li corrispondentivi pesi indivi-
duali. (V. però le speciali osservazioni contenute nella Nota (L).
(J) Il poco bisogno e poco uso appo noi del piccioli pezzi in oro intermedi fra la moneta da L. 20
e quella da 5 in argento, e all' opposto il molto bisogno ed uso dei piccoli pezzi in argento
per le minute contrattazioni, e pe' saldi e resti, mezzani fra li rilevanti a uno scudo, e li
pagabili con danaro di rame, dimostrano quì preferibile il metodo in pratica, d'una molto
più tenue ragione che non in Francia, per gli spezzati in oro, e d'una assai maggiore per
quelli in argento ; la qual è pari alla prefissa nella monetazion Francese, ed anzi per lo
Stato Sabaudo, ne' primi anni almeno, sarebbe insufficente, se già o più non avessimo in
circolazione un 14 millioni d'erosomisto, fra terraferma e Sardegna.
INulla è or assegnato pel summultiplo da centesimi 25 in argento, poichè da lungo tempo
mandò l'amministrativa autorità sospenderne la fabbricazione.
Quanto poi alle proporzioni sì degli spezzati co rispettivi interi, sì dell'una coll' altra
specie d'essi spezzati nella serie Sabauda in rame, e nella Francese in bronzo; se la ragione
dei tre summultipli nella 2a è più che tripla di quella dei due summultipli nella lº ; e vice
versa, ove si paragonino li due della lº con solo i due inferiori fra li 3 della 2º, il complesso
degli uni supera di 3 il complesso degli altri ; se questi in entità si pareggiano, mentre
quelli diversificano tra loro di circa 3 ; ed infine se ciascuna delle due specie di spezzati
erosi eccede d'oltre metà od un quarto la omologa sua (prossimiore od uguale) in bronzo:
imputar vuolsi al non essere appo noi, tuttora provvisti di ragguardevole quantità di biglione
(in ispecie inferiori a quelle da 50 e da 25 centesimi d'argento), abbisognata in rame, rag-
guagliatamente a popolazione, la quantità di moneta alla Francia occorrente; al non aver
paruto e non parere opportuno lo introdur quì di nuovo l'abolita specie da centesimi 10; al
formar invece lo intero in tal serie il cinque centesimi; ed al costituir esso nuovo eroso,
insiem coll' antico, e col biglione anzidetto, una somma, non che pari ad 3 della coniazione
in bronzo dalla Francia ordinata, ma sì rilevantene a circa 3 : alla qual diversità di circo-
stanze tornava connaturale una diversità di proporzioni e ripartimenti.
Nè sull'oggetto della Colonna VIII. altro rimane a soggiugnere, trannechè la prefission
de rapporti pei summultipli dipendere, in ambi gli stati, da provvedimenti dell' autorità,
che sovrintende al monetario servizio ; giacchè, generalmente parlando, sconverrebbe lo
statuirli per legge, e così renderli per ogn' altro modo immutabili.
(K) Il divario nel numero dei pezzi pel saggio, tra le zecche nostre e le Francesi, quanto alle
specie d'argento, riesce di nessuna importanza, non potendo influire a maggior sicurezza
e precisione il prelevamento all'uopo di otto o sedici in luogo di sei monete. Il che dipende
dall' usare in Francia, ch una metà de pezzi ritengasi appo la commissione, rimettasi
l'altra all' uficio di saggio, e vi operino due soli saggiatori, non anche il verificatore come
appo noi, restando una metà per gli straordinari ulteriori saggiamenti in caso di notevole
discrepanza fra li due ch' eseguirono l'ordinaria verificazione ; sicchè da ultimo, con men
quantità di pezzi, meglio guarentita parrebbe l'operazione appo noi, avendovi sempre il
giudicio di tre, in luogo di due soltanto.
Riguardo poi alla verificazione delle Sabaude specie in rame, lasciossi alla amministra-
zion delle zecche il far prelevare, ad ogni fabbricazione, quel numero di pezzi, che avrebbe
giudicato opportuno a tal uopo.
(L) Li complessivi pesi delle quantità di pezzi prelevabili per saggiamenti essendo conteggiati
su pesi individuali, a pezzo cioè per pezzo, inscritti nella Colonna VI. ; a quelli ugual-
mente concernono le spiegazioni e avvertenze già per questi datesi nelle Note (H) ed (I),
anche riguardo alle differenze, che ne complessivi pesi abbondante e scarso rilevansi
fra le monete di Savoja e di Francia, come pure alla regola, in pratica, di poi recare al
milligramma intero, oppur trascurare le frazionarie cifre al di là della 3a, secondochè
oltrepassino o no la metà del milligramma.
Quanto però alle specie di Francia in oro da L. 20 e da 10, ed in argento da L. 2, furono
sul presente quadro emendate, siccome ascrivibili a mero equivoco, o meglio ad error di
copia, le indicazioni date nella Tabella Francese, –
1°. Del peso giusto in grammi 38 710 per la lº specie, e dello scarso in grammi 19-316
per la 2° ; poichè, a differenza degli altri pesi notative fino ed inclusivamente alla 5°
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION 251
frazionaria cifra, vi si sarebbon essi limitati alla cifra de milligrammi, seguendo per quei No. 31
due soli pesi la testè menzionata regola di forzamento od abbandono. Sardinia
2º. Del peso abbondante nella 1a e nella 3a delle dette specie, rispettivamente inscrittovi s - sºs-
di grammi 38790, e di grammi 80 440; quando ch' essi non salgono fuorchè, l'uno a 38 787, Sig. Cattaneo.
oltre una tenue frazione che, in qualsiasi ipotesi di calcolo, non aggiugne a 5 dieci-milli- 3-
grammi; e l'altro ad 80'400 esattamente.
3°. Del peso scarso nella la specie, espressovi in soli grammi 38 - 630; mentre, in qual-
siasi ipotesi di cºnteggio, egli supera d'alcun che 38 632.
(M) La Francia andò raducendo la quota di ritenzion per le spese di monetazione dell' argento
e dell' oro, insino a L. 1:66; a chilogramma per l'uno, ed a 6 66; per l'altro, in vista,
come già si disse, non solamente dei risparmi nel costo, cui procacciarono a codesta
lavorazione i progressi notevoli delle fisiche scienze, in chimica specialmente ed in
meccanica, l'applicazion del vapore, proficua ove molta sia l'opera e non discontinua, e lo
arredamento degli opifici in quante ed ottime, comunque dispendiose, macchine abbisogni ;
ma assai più di tutto a cagione dell'incessante più o men grande copia di lavoro: mentre
il diffettare appo noi delle tre ultime condizioni, fra cui la precipua che alla entità del
lavoro concerne, divietò il diminuirla a volta nostra di più che a L. 2 723, ed 8:44;.
Ma essendosi da quel Governo ravvisato opportuno lo aggiugnere alla serie dell' oro una
5º piccolissima specie, il 5 lire, di ben disagevole e costosa fabbricazione, poichè la spesa
del coniare cresce coll' impicciolire, siccome scema coll' ingrandir de pezzi ; riconosciuto
inoltre com' eziandio per la monetazion consueta e precipua, ch' è della specie da L. 20,
da sè isolatamente considerata, l'additatasi riduzione avesse alcun che di troppo, e si
dovesse la peculiare analoga ritenuta computare in rialzo a L. 6 77, quella peculiare
alla moneta da L. 10 fosse da calcolarsi a 9'55;, e l'altra per la nuova da 5 lire a
14 72; ; non fatto caso dell' altre due specie da L. 100, e da 50, pel non uso, o per la
rarità e pochezza di lor battiture ; e altronde statuite le ragioni dell'entità del coniamenti
da farsi ne' mentovati summultipli da L. 10, e da 5, colla total entità della monetazione,
e rimpetto alla quantità da battere in ispecie da 20 lire: sovr esse ragioni di due, d'uno,
e di diciassette ventesimi, come alla Colonna VIII. (mentre non puossi, per le nobili
monete, tassare la rifazion delle spese in quota diversa per ciascuna specie, ma forza è
regolarla in unica quota comune all'intera serie) trovossi aver ad ascendere l'accomunata
ritenzione per l'oro a poco più di L. 7'45; e così da 6'66; fu aumentata a 7'44; ;
onde poi il real valore pel cambio, a rotonda somma tornando com'è da noi, vi riuscì di
L. 3437. Siccome però libero al Governo serbar voleasi l'acconsentire, e occorrendo
prescrivere, a seconda delle circostanze, anche una restrizione alle suddette proporzioni
per gli spezzati in oro ; e, a ragion del meno che annualmente se ne coniasse, rimasto
sarebbe all' appalto un indebito lucro, di altronde impossibile restituzione ai cambiatori
stessi: venne prestabilito, che, per ogni chilogramma di meno in pezzi da L. 10, e da 5,
sarebbero a quelle finanze sborsate L. 9'55; e L. 14 72; rispettivamente.
Il tutto è quì calcolato a peso in fino quale usa da noi; e non in lega al titolo di 900
giusta il costume di Francia.
(N) Nel confronto delle quote di mercede per le spese di fabbricazione delle nostre decimali
specie in rame, battutesi pressochè interamente ne' primi anni del nuovo monetario
sistema, con quelle che importò alla Francia la sua serie in bronzo, non sarà inopportuna
lo accennare.
Ch' esse quote furono prefisse per convenzione, le seconde coi Direttori delle Zecche
per la totalità delle operazioni dal punto di consegna, a lor mani, della materia, con-
sistente nelle anteriori ignobili specie al cambio richiamate ; e le prime con un appal-
tatore a privata trattativa, ed a unico accomunato prezzo, per la somministranza della
materia e lavorazion sua, fino ed inclusivamente all' imbianchimento de tondini, e coi
Direttori delle Zecche per la sola operazion della battitura, a prezzo vario per ciascuna
delle tre specie, siccome fecesi dall' Amministrazion Francese:
Che perciò, ad instituire il paragone fra le mercedi d'appalto dell' una serie e dell' altra
nelle singole specie loro, le due quote pel Sabaudo eroso riunironsi, previo diffalco, dalla
prima, dell' allora corrente prezzo del rame nella pattuitane qualità, e la ripartizione del
resto fra le tre specie, proporzionalmente alle quantità coniate in ciascuna, e al determi-
natone prorata nella seconda quota :
E che la diversità di tempo, e di circostanze, ma principalmente quella gravissima della
ragion d'importanza, tra l'appalto nostro ed il Francese, che fu d' 1 a più di 9, rilevando
a un dipresso la materia monetabile pel 1º appalto a pocº oltre li 500,000 chilogrammi, e
pel 2do a poco men di 5,000,000 ; spiegano abbastanza il come le spese della monetazion
nostra in rame presentino una notevole eccedenza su quelle del coniamento in bronzo per
l'altro stato, detrattane la quarta ed infima specie, del peso d' 1 solo gramma, e la più
dispendiosa: la qual eccedenza sul complesso delle tre altre specie da grammi 10, da 6 (o 5),
e da 2, nell' una serie a rimpetto dell' altra, riesce fra is e Iºs, sommando l'accomunato
prezzo per chilogramma di coniato a pressochè L. l '25 nella serie nostra, e a quasi
L. 1 16 nella Francese.
(O) La ritenuta sul valor dell' oro e dell' argento, per le spese di monetazione in Francia
(ritenuta costituentevi come da noi la rifazione e mercede pel Direttore) comprende pure
il costo di verificazione, ed il prezzo del conii vario per ispecie di moneta, ed il montar
delle ghiere spaccate, regolati entrambi a ragion d'uso come in questa colonna, e le ghiere
scanalate, il cui rilevare è fermato non d'uficio, ma d'accordo fra le parti, e quant' altrº
occorra al coniare ; sicchè ghiere, conii, &c. sono a carico del Direttore che li paga all'Incisor
Generale, come ne lo è il costo della verificazione da sborsarsi al commessario, ond' egli retri-
buir possa gli argenti, cui fa trasportare, pesare, e numerare i tondini, ed i pezzi coniati.
Quandochè appo noi nulla costa la verificazione, siccome direttamente eseguita da uficiali
stipendiati, e nulla i trasporti, che si effettuano da operai del Direttore stesso; le ghiere
continue, sì scanalate, sì liscie (non avendovi uso di spaccate) provveggonsi dal Direttore,
gli costano per coppia lire 15, e regger possono a maggior servigio che le spaccate ; son
pure a spesa di lui li cuscinetti pel cordonare a liscio i tondini, importano per coppia L. 10,
e durano lunghissimamente: li esi poi a cordonamento inscritto, ed i conii vanno
- i 2
assessms-sº
252 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 3 l.
Sardinia.
Sig. Cattaneo.
-
Sardinia.
M. Despine.
-
a carico dell' Amministrazione, e, dopo collandati, pagansi agl incisori in ragione, non
della quantità di pezzi battuti, ma di ciascuna coppia in L. 25 e 40 rispettivamente;
lungo consimilmente a quel delle ghiere si è l'uso del cuscinetti inscritti ; e quanto a conii,
la media loro durata eccede fors'anco gli 800, 266i, 200, e 100 chilogrammi rispettiva-
mente di battuto, che, a centesimi 5, 15, 20, e 40 rispettivamente, darrebbono appunto
40 lire: il qual nostro metodo però meglio adattasi alla condizione di men lavoro in cui
trovansi le zecche nostre a petto delle Francesi, talchè troppo a lungo avrebbono gl'
incisori ad aspettarne la mercede.
Ed il simile è pur a dire circa la infima serie delle monete d'ambi gli stati, in quanto
che la retribuzione a Direttori, per le spese di fabbricazion secondo la specie, include in
Francia, oltre le ghiere liscie, ed i lisci cuscinetti come da noi, anche il carico della verifi-
cazione, e l'onere del conii, &c., cui la Sabauda Amministrazione, ugualmente che per le
nobili specie, dee di proprio fornire, se non che il prezzo del conii pel bronzo Francese
venne stabilito non ad uso, qual pe nobili metalli, ma, istessamente che per tutte le serie
delle nostre monete, a coppia; prezzo però progredente colà da L. 14, a 18, ed a 22, giusta
la specie, e quì unico, a tutte comune, in L. 25; del quale ben maggior costo allegabili sono
le medesime cause già svolte nella precedente nota sulla mercede co Direttori convenuta
per tal fabbricazione. -
(P) Per quanto consti all'Amministrazione, la Zecca di Cagliari non ebbe segno di sorta, siccome
unica nella Sardegna avente, fino a questi ultimi tempi, una monetazione affatto diversa da
quella di terraferma. Tale opifizio poi da moltissimi anni più non è in esercizio, e può
aversi per abolito, sicchè rimangono le sole due zecche continentali, ab antico erette, e
dalla straniera dominazione non tolte, cui questo regno possiede nella propria capitale,
come l'ha ogn' altro stato, e nella seconda di sue città; necessaria l'una, anche perchè la
sola idonea per qualsiasi ingente operazion monetaria, ed importante pur l'altra, perchè al
commercial enporio di Genova, assai più che non a Torino, affluisce il cambio del preziosi
metalli, e con essi la quantità del lavoro.
Riguardo poi alle altre ovver più estese notizie e spiegazioni, che sull'oggetto del presente
Quadro si desiderassero, veggasi l'unito scritto, contenente le risposte a quesiti della
Commissione Britannica sulla Decimal Moneta, nella parte specialmente che al 3° punto
concerne del quesito 36°.
L'Amministratore in Capo, Intendente Generale,
CATTANEO.
Torino, dall' Amministrazione Centrale delle Reale Zecche,
Li 17 Giugno 1856.
NOTE sur les QUESTIONS relatives aux MONNAIES, POIDS, et MESURES transmises au
soussigné par la Légation d'Angleterre.
I. LE territoire des Etats Sardes se compose de plusieurs parties, dont l'aggregation a eu
lieu à différentes époques. Au moment de la première Révolution Française il comprenait
sur le continent la Savoie, le Piémont, le comté de Nice, les provinces détachées de la
Lombardie. Il comprenait en outre le territoire de l'Ile de Sardaigne.
Monnaies.
2. Les provinces continentales avaient toutes le mème système monétaire. La monnaie
de compte à laquelle se rapportait la monnaie effective était la livre de Piémont, dont le
rapport légal au franc ou à la livre actuelle est 100 pour l'18i ; cette livre se subdivisait
cn 20 sols, et le sol en 12 deniers. Seulement dans les provinces du Novarais ou détachées
de la Lombardie on se servait généralement dans les transactions privées de la livre
Milanaise (valant en francs ou livres neuves 0768), et les comptes se fesaient presque
tous avec cette monnaie.
3. Le système monétaire des provinces continentales avait été spécialement fixé par l'Edit
du Roi Charles Emmanuel III sur la monetisation, en date du 15 Février 1755, lequel
prescrivait la refonte successive des anciennes monnaies, et Ordonnait d'en frapper de
mouvelles, comme suit :-
Monnaie d'Or.
Poids. Valeur.
Doppia nuova t- deniers 7 12 6 e- – ls. pt. 24 0 0
Mezza - - 3 18 3 – - - 12 0 0
Quarto - s- - - l 2 1 1 12 - se 6 0 0
Monnaie d'Argent.
Scudo nuova sº v- – 27 10 23 e - a 6 0 0
Mezzo - e- e- - 13 17 11 12 º e- 3 0 0
Quarto e se s e 6 20 17 18 - l 10 0
Ottavo - e- u e 3 10 8 2I - 0 15 0
Erose. Valeur.
Pezza di 7 i soldi u- - v- - ls. pt. 0 7 6
53 di 2, 35 so º s a e-o ºg 0 2 6
55 di 1 5 5 e - e- - e- º o 0 1 0
, di 2 denari - -o - a - e- 0 0 2
Un Brévet Royal du 28 Juin de la mème année autorisa, en outre, de frapper les multiples
en or, dits,- m
Poids. Valeur.
Carlino, 5 doppie i º a 37 13 6 - a 120 0 0
Mezzo carlino, 2; se r- 18 18 15 v- e 60 0 0
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 253
Le 30 Décembre 1785 le Roi Victor Amédée III publia un nouvel Edit, qui apporta quel-
ques variations dans les proportions des matières, et les monnaies ci-dessus furent réduits :-
Monnaie d'Or.
Poids. Valeur.
Pezza da 5 doppie s deniers 35 14 4 - t- – 120 0
, da 24 , - a - 17 19 2 v- – 60 0
Doppia nuova º º – 7 2 20 - – 24 0
Mezzo º e- t- – 3 13 10 u- – 12 0
Quarto d sas se – l 18 l 7 - - - 6 0
Monnaie d'Argent.
Scudo nuovo sº ps s - 27 10 23 t- - - 6 0
Mezzo - t- a- – 13 17 11 12 - 3 0
Quarto - - - - 6 20 l/ 18 as - l 10
Ottavo - e- - – 3 10 8 21 - - 0 15
Par trois autres Edits rendus en 1794 le mème Souverain ordonna le 4 Janvier 1794 de
frapper de nouvelles pièces, eroso-misto, del 5 sous; le 14 Février 1794 de frapper des
pièces de 5 sous; le 14 Mai 1795 de retirer les pièces en cours de 7, sols et de 15 sous,
et de les remplacer par de nouvelles pièces, eroso-misto, 20 sous, et de 10 sous.
4. La Sardaigne avait son système monétaire particulier. Les titres différents auxquels
ces monnaies avaient été battues déterminèrent le Roi Charles Emmanuel è les réformer par
son Edit du 26 Mars 1768. Elles se rapportaient à la lira Sarda, monnaie de compte non
frappée, dont le rapport légal au franc ou à la livre actuelle est l'92, laquelle se divisait en
20 sous, et le sous en 12 deniers; elles se composaient des monnaies suivantes :-–
Monnaie d'Or.
Poids. Valeur.
Carlino - - es deniers 12 12 20 – l. S. 25 0 0
Mezzo carlino º º - – 6 6 10 e- – 12 10 0
Doppietta - e- - 2 12 4 º ºs 5 0 0
Monnaie d'Argent,
Scudo e- - t e- - 18 10 0 e – 2 I 0 0
Mezzo scudo a º - 9 5 0 a- - 1 5 0
Quarto scudo º- s - 4 14 12 t- – 0 12 6
Monnaie d'Argent titre inferieur, Eroso-miste, Cuivre.
Valeur. Valeur,
Reale - am l. S. 0 5 0 Mezzo soldo - l. S, 0 0 6
Mezzo reale – – 0 2 6 Cagliarete - – 0 0 2
Soldo s - - – 0 1 0 Denaretto - – 0 0 1
d. Telle était la condition monétaire des Etats Sardes lors de la première Révolution
Française. A mesure que les provinces continentales furent envahies, le Gouvernement
Français y introduisit son système monetaire, soit le système décimal. Le Novarais fit
partie du royaume d'Italie, où fut introduit le mème système, en sorte que l'Ile de Sardaigne,
restée seule sous le sceptre de la Maison de Savoie, fut la seule aussi dont le système
monétaire n'eprouva pas de variations.
6. Lors de la Restauration en 1814 les provinces continentales furent rendues à a
Maison de Savoie. L'Edit du 21 Mai 1814, qui remettait en exécution les royales consti-
tutions et toutes les dispositions émanées jusqu'au 23 Juin 1800, portait entre autres
Article 5: “Vogliamo che niente si innovi in ordine al corso attuale delle monete.”
L'Instruction du Bureau Général des Finances du 24 Mai, et les Manifestes Caméraux des
28 Septembre, 27 Octobre, et 5 Décembre de la mème année, en assurèrent l'execution et
prescrivirent le frappage de doppie, de mezzo scudo, et de pièces de 2, sous.
7. La Ligurie ayant été réunie aux Etats Sardes, une Délégation Royale fut nommée par
Patentes du 30 Décembre 1814, pour l'administrer provisoirement. Il y futdit, Article 10:-
“ Le monete d'oro e d'argento dell'antico stato Genovese attualmente correnti ed esistenti
saranno ricevute nelle casse pubbliche, unitamente alle monete Piemontesi.”
La monnaie de compte était, la lira de 20 sols 12 deniers chacun, valuta di banco, dont le
rapport au franc est 1'0368, mais devenue hors d'usage depuis la suppression de la banque
de St. Georges. La lira de 20 sols 12 deniers, fuori banco, dont le rapport usuel au frane
est 0-83 è, ou 120 lira pour 100 francs.
GENOA.
Les monnaies effectives étaient:-Monnaie d'Or.
Poids. Valeur.
Doppia di Genova deniers 22 22 - ls. pt. 96 0 0
Metà - - - -s - – 48 0 0
Quarto -so - - - - – 24 0 0
Ottavo - - - - a – 12 0 0
Monnaie d'Argent.
Scudo e- s - – 30 6 - - 8 0 0
Metà s - e a - t – 4 0 0
Quarto - a- - se s - 2 0 0
Ottavo s- a - t - ºss – 1 0 0
Sedicem v- º e- º- - – 0 10 0
Terzo di lira v- t-º so sº – 0 6 8
No. 31.
Sardinia.
M. Despine.
a-º- mammo
254 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 31.
Sardinia.
M. Despine.
gasmº fa -
Monnaie de Billon.
Pezza da soldi 10 abusivi i º- - - 0 5 0
33 da 5 99 sº ess sº 0 2 6
Parpaiola e e o º e- – 0 1 4
Cavallotto º sa e s e – 0 2 8
Prouetta da 8 denari º s - 0 0 8
da 4 , s . e s – 0 0 4
3 3
Par Manifeste Caméral du 8 Janvier 1816, il fut prescrit d'ajouter dans l'écu de Savoie
l'arme de Gènes avec le titre de Duc de Gènes.
8. Le système monétaire de toutes les provinces continentales fut entièrement réformé par
le Billet Royal du 6 Aott 1816, les Lettres Patentes des 17 Septembre 1816, et 4 Décembre
1820, et par les Manifestes Caméraux des 12 Aott 1816 et 9 Décembre 1820. Par ces
dispositions la monnaie de compte fut la lira nuova de Piémont, egale au franc, et il fut
stipulé qu'à l'avenir tous actes et contrats seraient passés en lires neuves, multiples ou sous-
multiples; qu'en outre, les monnaies à frapper seraient –
Monnaie d'Or.
Doppia nuova l. n. 20 155 par kill. 900 mills de fin, 2 mills tollérance.
35 s 40 77; 3 9 55 33 99
39 – 80 38; 9 5 39 35 99
Monnaie d'Argent,
Ecu e - i – 5 40 35 99 3 25
5 ) - ºs 2 I00 5 5 9 9 53 39
55 º º 1 200 99 53 55 99
– 0'50 400
55 3 ) 5 3 55 5 9
Le 16 Janvier 1826 le retrait des pièces de 7, sols (15 sous) fut ordonné. Le 22 Mars
un autre Manifeste Caméral fixa la réduction des livres anciennes en livres neuves avec 18;
per cent. d'augmentation, c'est-à-dire 100 livres anciennes pour l'18; livres neuves.
Le 26 Octobre de la mème année parut l'Edit Général sur la Monétisation, qui déclara
qu'à l'avenir les monnaies décimales auraient seules cours légal; que les contrats devraient
ètre stipulés dans cette monnaie, sous peine de 50f d'amende ; que le scuto de Genova et ses
fractions cesseraient d'avoir cours; qu'il serait frappé des pièces de 025, 0 05, 003, et 0-01.
Les Manifestes Caméraux des 26 Mars et 30 Octobre 1829 prescrivirent le retrait des
pièces de 2 sols 2 deniers, des soldini, des mezzi soldi, et des petites monnaies Génoises.
Enfin les Lettres Patentes et le Manifeste Caméral des 29 Mai et 18 Juin 1832
ordonnèrent de cesser la fabrication des pièces d'or de 80f et de 40f, et d'y substituer de
nouvelles pièces de 100f, 50f, 20f, et 10f.
D'après ce qui precède, les monnaies de terre-ferme en cours sont –
Poids.
DENOMINATIONs. Valeur. Titre en Mills.
Ancien. Décimal.
OR. - L.N. Cent. D. Gr. Granotti. Gr. Mill.
Mouvelles.
Pièces de 100 100 0 25 4 13 32 258 900
55 80 80 0 | 2O 3 I6 25 806 35
55 50 50 0 | 12 14 O7 16 129 2 •
99 40 40 0 10 1 20 12 903 35
35 20 20 O 5 0 22 6 451 35
99 10 10 0 2 12 10 3 225 33
Anciennes.
Doppia di Savoie i º 28 45 7 2 20 9 ] 16 905
Metà a º , - | 14 22; 3 13 10 4 558 29
Quadruplo di Genova - - 79 O 19 16 12 25 214 909;
Ses fractions , , , en proportion.
ARGENT.
AVouvelles. 4 -
Ecu de 5 5 O 19 12 12 25 000 900
Pièce de 2 2 O 7 19 lO 10 000 99
», l 1 0 3 2l 17 5 000 55
, 0'50 O 50 1 22 20 2 500 35
, 0:25 O 25 1 250 33
Anciennes.
Ecu vieux de Pt. ºp º 7 10 27 IO 23 35 164 904
Ses fractions (i, 3, $), en proportion » -
ERoso.
AVouvelles.
Pièce de 0-05 0 5 3 21 17 5 000
, 0:03 0 3 2 8 5 3 000
, 0:01 0 l 0 18 18
Anciennes.
Pièce de 8s. (20s.) 0 40
, 4 si o 40
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION 255
9. Quant à la Sardaigne, qui avait conservé ses anciennes monnaies ($ 4), l'Edit de
Monétisation du 26 Novembre 1842 établit que depuis le 1º Janvier 1843 la livre
neuve de Piémont serait la seule unité legale, et fixa en rapport avec elle le tarif de toutes
les monnaies en cours dans la mème ile, d'après le tableau suivant:-
Poids. Titre
DENOMINATION. Valeur. en
Ancien. º Décimal. Mills.
L.N. Cent. Deniers. Grains. Granotti. | Grms. Millgrs.
Carlino - 50 O 12 12 20 16 053 891
Or - - " carlino 25 O 6 6 10 8 026 95
Doppietto - 10 O 2 12 04 3 210 59
Scudo e- 4, 80 18 10 O 23 587 895
Argent - - Mezzo scudo 2 40 9 5 0 11 793 55
Quarto di scudo I 20 4 14 12 5 897 53
Eroso-misto Reale e o - O 48
Mezzo reale O 24
ſ Soldo - e- 0 10
Rame - - Mezzo soldo 0 05
ì Cagliarese O 01
Monnaies décimales en
cuivre :
Pezza da 5 centesimi O 05 3 21 17 5
, da 3 55 0 03 2 8 5 3
, da 1 55 O 01 O 18 18 O
10. Les détails qui précèdent font connaitre les phases successives qu'a subies le
système de monétisation dans les diverses provinces qui composent les Etats Sardes. Ils
me paraissent répondre à l'ensemble des questions posées par le Gouvernement Anglais,
questions auxquelles il serait assez difficile de répondre isolement.
En prenant toutefois chacune de ces questions par ordre de numéro, on peut dire que:-
Q. 1. Quelle est la monnaie de compte actuellement etablie par la loi?–
R. Que la monnaie de compte adoptée aujourd'hui partout est la livre ou
franc, la seule légale.
Q. 2. Quelles sont les subdivisions de cette monnaie de compte ?
R. Que ses subdivisions et multiples qui forment la monnaie effective sont
données, S 8.
Q. 3. Se sert-on, dans le fait, de plus de deux dénominations de monnaie pour exprimer ou pour
noter les paiements et les recettes; et quelles sont ces dénominations?
R. Qu'il n'y a pas différentes dénominations pour noter les paiements et les
recettes.
Q. 8. Trouve-t-on que les plus petites monnaies dont on se sert habituellement soient incom-
modes par suite de leur valeur trop ou trop peu élevée; et quelles classes de la société se ressentent
de ces inconvénients ?– º
R. Que, par suite du retrait des anciennes petites monnaies de billon, celles
actuelles sont facilement acceptées par toutes les classes de la société.
Ancienne Monnaie de Compte ou Effective.
Q. 9. Quelle était la monnaie de compte avant l'introduction du système actuel ; et quelles en
étaient les subdivisions ?
R. Que les monnaies de compte anciennes sont énoncées aux S 2, 3, 4, 7.
Q. 10. Quelle en était la valeur légale par rapport à la monnaie de compte actuelle ?
R. Que leur valeur légale par rapport à la monnaie actuelle est donnée par les
SS 8 et 9.
Q. ll. Dans l'ancienne monnaie de compte quelles étaient les pièces ayant cours, et quelle en
était la valeur ?
R. Que les anciennes pièces en cours sont indiquées aux S 3, 4, 7.
Changement de Monnaie.
Q. 12. A quelle époque s'effectua ce changement ? -
R. Que le changement de monnaie en celle actuelle est donnée aux SS 8 et 9.
Q. 13. Quelle en a été la cause ?
R. Qu'il fut dà aux habitudes contractées sous l'occupation Française, et aux
avantages reconnus d'un système monétaire uniforme.
Q. 14. A-t-il èté amené par suite d'inconvénient, de confusion, ou de complexité dans l'état de
l'ancienne monnaie ayant cours?
R. Mème réponse.
No. 31.
Sardinia.
M. Despine.
I i 4
256 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
Sardinia.
M. Despine.
Q. 15. Y avait-il dans les anciennes monnaies des inconvénients inhérents à la valeur des unités
principales ou subordonnées, ou dans leurs proportions relatives ?
R. Même réponse.
Q. i6. S'aperçut-on des inconvénients qui amenèrent ce changement en payant ou recevant de
l'argent, ou dans la tenue des comptes ?--
R. Même réponse.
Q. 17. Pour le cas où de tels inconvénients se seraient fait sentir, sur quelles classes de la
société pesèrent-ils le plus sensiblement ?
R. Même réponse applicable à toutes les classes de la société.
Q. 18. Jusqu'à quel point ce changement fut-il causé par le désir d'assimiler la monnaie à celle
des pays limitropes, et le public s'était-il déjà en partie familiarisé avec la nouvelle monnaie
comme monnaie de compte ou d'échange avant qu'elle ne fût étable par une loi ?
R. Même réponse. Sans doute que les nombreux rapports avec la France y
ont beaucoup contribué.
Q. 19. Ou est-ce plus tôt et jusqu'à quel point qu'on l'avait adopté à raison d'une préférence
abstraite pour une division décimale d'argent sur une division non décimale ?
R. Même réponse.
Q. 2O. Comment ce changement s'effectua-t-il ?
R. Le changement s'est effectué par les dispositions législatives indiquées
SS 8 et 9.
Q. 21. Changea-t-on les valeurs relatives de quelques-unes des monnaies ayant cours au-
paravant ?
R. Il n'y a pas eu de changement dans les valeurs, sauf dans les pièces eroso-
misto de l5 sous et de 20 sous, et de 10 sous, réduites en 1814, d'après leur
valeur intrinsique, à 7# sous, 8 sous, et 4 sous.
Q. 22. A-t-on émis de nouvelles monnaies, et lesquelles, en vue de ce changement, avant, simul-
tanément, ou après ?——
R. Les nouvelles pièces en cours sont données S 8.
Q. 23. Retira-t-on de la circulation quelques-unes des anciennes monnaies, et permit on à
quelques-unes des anciennes monnaies, et lesquelles, de circuler simultanément avec les nou-
velles ?
R. Les pièces retirées de la circulation sont indiquées au S 8.
Q. 24. Donna-t-on d'anciens noms aux nouvelles monnaies ou de nouveaux noms aux
anciennes ?
R. On a donné aux nouvelles monnaies des dénominations analogues à leurs
similaires en France. Les anciennes ont conservé leurs noms.
Q. 25. Les anciennes monnaies de compte de dénomination inférieure étaient-elles commen-
surables entre les nouvelles, et pouvaient elles s'exprimer exactement par ces dernières ?
R. Le rapport des anciennes aux nouvelles monnaies est indiqué au S 8.
Q. 26. Pour le cas où elles ne pussent être exprimées exactement l'une par l'autre, quelle pro-
vision fit-on pour le payement de dettes contractées sous l'ancien système et lesquelles devaient
être acquittées sous le nouveau ? Ou dans le cas de péages fixes, comme barrière, droits, &c.
appartenant à des particuliers, à des corps municipaux, ou à l'Etat, lesquels auraient été acquis
sous l'ancien système, ou en fin pour tout autre obligation fixe ?
R. La loi a déterminé les rapports des anciennes aux nouvelles monnaies, et
tous les officiers publics ont dû se conformer à ces tarifs.
Q. 27. Le changement dans la monnaie de compte se fit-il graduellement ou à une seule fois ?
Etait-ce facultatif ou obligatoire ? Et dans ce cas, comment et par quelles pénalités le mit-on
en exécution ? Réussit-on à le faire adopter généralement ? ou l'ancien système continua-t-il
en usage pendant quelque et pour combien de temps en comptes ou dans les discours du
peuple ?
R. Le changement s'est opéré d'après les dispositions énoncées $ 8. Il a été
facilement adopté partout. Seulement dans les pays frontières, notamment
dans le Novarais, l'usage de se servir de la livre Milanaise est encore très
repandu (0-768) ; mais il tend peu à peu à disparaitre.
Q. 28. Le changement étant facultatif, l'ancien et le nouveau système continuèrent-ils à exister
à coté l'un de l'autre pendant quelque temps, et existent-ils encore conjointement ?
R. Les anciennes et nouvelles monnaies ont continué encore plusieurs années
simultanément, mais aujourd'hui, à part l'exception du Novarais, et peut-être
de la Ligurie, on se sert généralement des nouvelles.
Q. 29. S'est-on aperçu de quelques inconvénients, et lesquels, de ce double emploi, et quel effet
exerce-t-il sur les comptes, les billets de banque, et les lettres de change ?
R. Il ne parait pas en être résulté des inconvénients dans les opérations de
banque et de change.
Q. 30. Avec ce système de double emploi, de quelle manière se tiennent les livres des négociants
et banquiers ?
R. Les livres des banquiers se tiennent généralement en monnaie courante
légale.
#>
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 257
Q. 31. Le changement s'est-il opéré complètement, ou quelles classes de personnes et dans
quelles parties du pays continuent-elles à se servir des anciennes dénominations en parlant ou dans
la tenue des comptes?-– -
R. Le changement s'est opéré assez facilement, et sans froisser aucune classe.
Q. 32. Ce changement était-il impopulaire au moment ce son introduction, et auprès de quelles
classes de la société ; et cette impopularité était-elle passagère ou non ? Existe-t-elle encore?
Le changement a-t-il été cause de tumultes ou de perturbation populaire ?
R. Il n'a causé aucune perturbation populaire, et a été accueilli généralement
avec facilité.
Q. 33. La nouvelle monnaie est-elle plus ou moins commode que l'ancienne, et quels en somt
les avantages ou les désavantages ? s
1°. En payant ou recevant,-(a) Defortes sommes. (b) De petites sommes.
2°. Pour la tenue des comptes-(a) Dans les grosses affaires. (b) Dans les petites affaires.
A. La nouvelle monnaie établie sur le système décimal est certainement plus
commode, tant pour les gros que pour les petits paiements, tant pour les forts
marchés que pour ceux peu considérables.
Poids et Mesures.
L'uniformité des poids et mesures dans toutes les parties des Etats Sardes a été le
but constant de la préocupation de la Maison de Savoie.
Par Edit du 5 Juin 1612, le Duc Charles Emmanuel I prescrivit cette uniformité dans
les 11 provinces (610 communes) qui composaient le Piémont, et où existaient plus de 300
poids et mesures différens. Des tables de réduction furent alors dressées à cet effet. Les
nouvelles mesures dont les étalons furent déposés à la Chambre des Comptes étaiént:–
Mesures de Longueur :-
Le trabucco divise en 6 pieds liprands.
La pertica de 2 trabucchi.
Le piede liprando de 12 onces.
Le piede manuale de 8 onces.
L'oncia de 12 punti.
Le raso pour les étoffes de 14 oncie.
La tesa pour le bois, le foin de 5 piedi manuali.
Mesures de Superficie:-
La giornata de 100 tavole.
La tavola di 4 trabucchi quadrati.
Le piede di 12 oncie.
L'oncia di 12 punti.
Le punto di 12 atomi.
Mesures de Solidité :-
Le trabucco cubo pour carrières, fossés, &c.
La tesa cuba pour puits.
Le trabucco quadro de 10 oncie pour les murs.
Poids:–
Poids de marco.
Le rubbo de 28 libbre.
La libbra di 12 oncie , 4, i libbra.
L'oncia di 24 denari.
Le denaro de 24 grani.
Mesures de Capacité pour Matières Sèches et Liquides:--
Le carro de 60 raps.
Le carro de 12 brente pour le vin.
La brenta de 36 pintes.
La pinta de 2 boccali.
Le boccale de 2 quartieri.
Mesures de Capacité pour les Grains et autres Denrées.
Le carro de 6 sacchi.
Le sacco de 3 staia ou 6 emines.
L'emina ou º staio.
La , emina ou quartaro.
La + , ou doppio coppo.
La i , Oul coppo.
Le r , ou semi coppo.
Le gr ,, ou biscudella.
Le r , ou scudella.
Le ri r , ou coppetto cucchiarino.
Les Rois Victor Amedée II. et Charles Emmanuel III., par leurs dispositions des 24 Mai
1727 et 26 Septembre 1749, ordonnèrent de conformer les poids et mesures des provinces
du Piémont aux étalons déposés à la Chambre des Comptes; et déclarèrent aussi vouloir
etendre le même système à toutes les provinces de la monarchie; mais les événemens
politiques ne leur permirent pas de complèter cette réforme.
No. 31.
Sardinia.
M. Despine.
anama-o
258 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
1No. 3l.
Sardinia.,
M. Despine.
•e-am-mºmº
· 12. Lorsque le Gouvernement Français voulut réformer son système de poids et mesures
le Gouvernement Sarde fut invité en 1798 à envoyer ses étalons du pied liprand et de la
livre de Piémont, avec des commissaires pour concourir dans la Commission de l'Institut
à fixer l'unité fondamentale. Ce fut d'abord le Comte P. Balbo, puis l'Abbé Vassali-
Eandi, que désigna à cet effet l'Académie des Sciences.
La valeur du pied liprand (0,"51376597) et celle de la livre de Piémont (0,"368844508)
y furent déterminées par verbaux du l4 Floréal et du 2 Messidor, an 7.
13. Toutes les provinces continentales ayant été successivement réunies à la France, il y
fut introduit le système métrique. Toutes les dispositions émanées en France y furent
aussi promulguées. Des Commissions Spéciales furent nommées dans chaque département
pour publier des tables de réduction ; mais la difficulté de réunir ies élémens nécessaire
n'ayant pas permis d'y apporter toute l'éxactitude nécessaire,la révision de ces tables
avait été commencée lorsque les événemens de l814 et 1815 vinrent tout-à-coup les
interrompre. .
14. A la Restauration, un Billet Royal du 8 Août 1815 remit en vigueur les anciennes
dispositions relatives aux poids et mesures dans toutes les provinces continentales.
Après la réunion de la Ligurie, la Chambre des Comptes fit procéder officiellement au
rapport à établir entre les poids et mesures de ces nouvelles provinces avec les poids et
mesures du Piémont.
15. Le piede liprande devint ainsi la mesure légale; mais sur la proposition faite le 19 Mai
1818, par l'Académie des Sciences, la longueur de ce pied fut altérée pour être mise en
rapport exact avec l'arc du méridien, sous le nom de piede Piemontese, et tous les autres
poids et mesures furent également réformés d'après ce nouveau prototype. Ainsi il fut
admis que :-
1°. L'arc du méridien entre l'equateur et le pôle serait 19,440,000 piedi Piemontesi.
2°. Le cube de # piede Piemontese ou 4 onces de côté, égal à 64 onces, eau distillée a
4° température, serait la livre.
3°. L'émine serait 750 onces d'eau distillée.
4°. La brenta serait 1604 onces d'eau distillée.
16. Toutefois le Règlement des Ponts et Chaussées du 29 Mai 1817 maintint l'emploi du
système métrique Français pour tous les travaux publics.
Le Manifeste Caméral du 14 Mars 1818 le rendit applicable à l'administration des
douanes ; les Lettres Patentes du 3 Avril 1819 l'étendirent à la fixation des dimensions
des tantes de roues.
17. Les applications partielles étaient un acheminement à l'uniformité des poids et
mesures pour laquelle la Royale Chambre des Comptes, dans les attributions de laquelle se
trouvait le service, avait été chargée de préparer les matériaux. A cet effet, elle avait dès le
28 Mai 1827 nommé une commission pour véifier les étalons de chaque commune, proposer
ceux à supprimer ou à maintenir, dresser des tables exactes de rapport ; mais dans les
propositions qu'elle soumit au Gouvernement, celle-ci se borna à un système de transition
destiné à rapprocher du système décimal métrique sans trop les varier, les mesures usuelles
de chaque province.
Le Gouvernement n'agréa pas cette proposition, et, par Billet Royal du 24 Novembre
1832, il la chargea de préparer un tableau exact de réduction de tous les poids et mesures
usuels en poids et mesures métriques.
18. L'Ile de Sardaigne, qui se trouvait régie par une administration et des lois spéciales,
sentait aussi le besoin de reformer son système de poids et mesures, de même qu'elle avait
déjà réformé son système monétaire.
Par Edit du l" Juillet 1844 l'uniformité des poids et mesures fut établie à partir du
1 Janvier 1846. Le système décimal métrique fut rendu obligatoire pour toutes les ad-
ministrations publiques. Les anciennes mesures furent tolérées pour les particuliers, mais
seulement en voie transitoire, et rapportées néanmoins en quantités décimales entières.
C'était déjà un grand pas, en tenant compte surtout des nombreuses difficultés qu'éprouve
en Sardaigne l'introduction de nouvelles institutions. Cependant l'exemple de la France, et
la mauvaise réussite du Décret Impérial du 12 Fevrier 1812, aurait dû faire pressentir
l'inconvénient de semblables demi-mesure de tolérance.
19. Enfin l'Edit du l 1 Septembre 1845 a définitivement fixé toutes les hesitations en
prescrivant l'adoption pure et simple du système métrique Francais dans toutes les parties
de la monarchie Sarde, à partir du 1º Janvier 1850. Par cet Edit remarquable, rendu
sous le ministère de M. Des Ambrois, la direction de tout le service a été transféré de la
Chambre des Comptes au Ministère de l'Intérieur. Il y a été ordonné que des étalons
seraient déposés aux archives de la Chambre des Comptes, aux Bureaux Provinciaux
d'Intendance, dans les chefs-lieux de mandement et dans tous les bureaux de vérificateurs
des poids et mesures ; qu'en outre des tables de réduction seraient dressées et publiées, que
tous les officiers publics devraient, dans les actes et marchés, se servir exclusivement des
poids et mesures métriques, sous les peines y énoncées.
20. Le temps qui s'est écoulé entre la promulgation de cet Edit et l'année 1850 a été
destiné à en préparer les moyens d'execution. Le même jour, ll Septembre 1845, une
Inspection Supérieure a été créée, par Brevet Royal, pour régir ce service sous la direction
du Ministère d l'Intérieur. Une Commission des Poids et Mesures a aussi été nommée,
soit pour dresser les tables de réduction et les divers réglements, soit pour vérifier les
étalons, soit pour donner son avis sur toutes les questions techniques.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 259 :
Une visite générale de toutes les provinces et de tous les bureaux de verification a été
faite pour assurer sur tous les points une marche régulière, pour y connaitre l'état de la
fabrication, et pour apprecier la consistance à donner au matériel de chaque bureau,
matériel au sujet duquel la loi du 6 Octobre 1849 a ouvert un crédit de 150,000f
Des traités élémentaires ont été imprimés par les soins du Gouvernement, et répandus
par milliers d'exemplaires. Dans toutes les écoles communales l'enseignement du système
métrique a été encouragé, et rendu obligatoire, en y joignant des modèles. Enfin, des
instructions suffisantes ont éte données pour que tous les assujettés qui vendent au public
fussent munis des poids et mesures métriques à l'époque fixée.
21. En exécution de l'Edit du 11 Septembre 1845 ont été publiés successivement :-Le
6 Septembre 1848, le Règlement sur la Fabrication ; le 30 Juin 1849, les Tables de
Réduction ; le 26 Mars 1850, la Loi pour la Vérification Première et la Vérification
Périodique ; le 8 Avril 1850, le Règlement Général de Service ; le 8 Avril 1850, l'Ex-
tension à l'Ile de Sardaigne de l'Edit du 11 Septembre 1845 ; le 18 Avril, le Décret
Ministériel classant les Industries assujettées à la Vérification ; le 8 Mai, le Programme
des Examens à subir par les Aspirans Vérificateurs.
Postérieurement ont été publiés quelques autres décrets relatifs à des dispositions
spéciales que l'expérience a fait juger nécessaires, mais qui ne changent rien à l'essence des
lois organiques qui précèdent. Je citerai cependant le Décret du 2 Novembre 1853, qui
a supprimé l'Inspection Supérieure, et fondu l'Administration des Poids et Mesures, avec
celles des contributions directes en conférant les attributions de l'Inspection Supérieure,
partie à l'Administration Centrale, partie aux Directions d'Arrondissements.
22. Au moyen des dispositions qui précèdent, des instructions et circulaires partielles,
on peut dire que le système décimal métrique se trouve aujourd'hui implanté sur tous les
points de la monarchie. Dans aucun magasin ou lieu public on ne se sert, au moins
ostensiblement, des mesures anciennes. Il arrivera bien certainement que des acheteurs
demanderont fréquemment des objets en poids ou mesures anciennes, mais le vendeur le
pèse ou mesure avec les poids métriques, sauf à le leur réduire en poids anciennes. Si
l'autorité communale prêtait partout, un appui suffisant à l'exécution de la loi, notam-
ment sur les places et marchés, tous les abus qui peuvent encore exister cesseraient
bientôt.
23. Les détails dans lesquels je viens d'entrer sur les poids et mesures me paraissent
satisfaire aux questions posées par le Gouvernement Anglais. Considérant toutefois
chacune de celles-ci :-
Q. 34. Les poids et mesures sont-ils divisés d'après le système décimal ? Et cette division
décimale précéda-t-elle, accompagna-t-elle, ou suivit-elle la division décimale de la monnaie ; ou
n'y eut-il aucune relation entre les deux ? -
R. La division des poids et mesures est évidemment d'après le système décimal
Leur introduction a suivi, longtemps après, l'adoption des monnaies déci
- males.
Q. 25. S'ils ne le sont pas, s'est-on aperçu d'inconvénients provenant de ce que la division des
poids et mesures ne correspond pas à la division de l'argent ?
R. On n'a pas reconnu d'inconvénients dans la différence entre la division des
poids et mesures et la division des monnaies.
Q. 36. Comment reconcilie-t-on dans les affaires de détail des classes pauvres la division
décimale de l'argent avec une division non-décimale pour les denrées. Ces classes sont-elles
exposées par suite de ce système à des inconvénients ou à des pertes ?
R. Les classes pauvres n'ont pas eu, que l'on sache, à souffrir de cette différence
de division.
Q. 37. Veuillez ajouter tout autre renseignement que vous croisez utile, &c. ?
R. L'exposé précèdent parait satisfaire à cette question.
DESPINE,
En-Inspecteur Supérieur des Poids et Mesures
Turin, le 10 Juin 1856.
No. 32,
B E L G I U M .
ANSWERs to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the KINGDOM OF BELGIUM, sent through
HER MAJESTY'S MINISTER at BRUSSELS.
Mommaie de compte actuelle.
Q. l. Quelle est la monnaie de compte actuellement établie par la loi ?— -
A. Le franc. -
Q. 2. Quelles sont les subdivisions de cette monnaie ?
A. Le franc se divise en cent centimes.
No. 31 "
Sardinia.
, M. Despine. :
No. 32.
Belgium.
Belgian Govern-
ment.
K k 2
260 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 32. Q. 3. Fait-on usage de plus de deux dénominations pour la monnaie de compte, pour renseigner
Belgium. les paiements ou les recettes, et quelles sont ces dénominations ?
A. Il n'y en a que deux, le franc et le centime, quelque grande ou quelque
Belgian Govern- petite que soit la somme à exprimer.
ment. Dans les calculs théoriques le système décimal permet de subdiviser le cen-
time à l'infini. V
Q. 4. Quelle est la valeur de la plus grande et de la plus petite unité de cette monnaie de
compte estimée en monnaie du Royaume Uni ?
A. L'or étant le seul étalon monétaire du Royaume Uni, et la Belgique
n'ayant pas de monnaie d'or ni aucune valeur ou monnaie étrangère en or
tarifée légalement, et l'argent n'étant en réalité en Angleterre qu'une
monnaie fiduciaire que le Gouvernement seul peut faire frapper et émettre,
il est impossible d'établir un rapport exact entre la valeur de la monnaie
Belge et de la monnaie Anglaise.
Voici quelques données pour l'apprécier plus ou moins approximativement :-
Si l'on compare la valeur intrinsèque du franc, monnaie de circulation, à celle
du shelling, monnaie telle qu'elle est fabriquée pour la circulation, le franc
égale 10 pences +#g, en comptant que 66 shellings pèsent une livre de
troye au titre de +#-#.
Si l'on calcule la valeur intrinsèque du franc en argent fin au prix de 62
pences que la monnaie de Londres paie généralement par once d'argent au
titre de +# # (standard), on trouve pour un franc 9 pences -# # # .
Si l'on considère le franc comme représentant la vingtième partie d'une pièce
d'or de vingt francs de France, le franc comparativement à la livre sterling
vaut alors de 9 pences T# à 9 pences -#r, en égard à la différence de
tolérance qu'il y a en Angleterre et en France pour la monnaie d'or.
En égard aux changes, nous trouvons,
Qu'au change de francs 24'50 le franc vaut 9 pences 796 millièmes.
idem 24'80 5 3 9 idem 677 idem
idem 25-00 5 > 9 idem 600 idem
idem 25-50 5 3 9 idem 412 idem
Pour établir la valeur du centime, il faut prendre la centième partie de la valeur du franc.
Mommaies réelles circulant actuellememt.
Q. 5. Quelles sont les pièces de monnaie légale en circulation générale, et quelle est leur
valeur respective exprimée tant en monnaie de compte du pays qu'en monnaie du Royaume Uni,
en faisant une distinction entre les monnaies d'or, d'argent, de cuivre, et de billon ?
A. Aucune pièce de monnaie Belge ne porte un nom spécial ; toutes, sans
aucune exception, ne reçoivent d'autres dénominations que celle de leur
valeur réelle et légale, toujours parfaitement égale à leur valeur en mon-
naie de compte, de manière que leur énumération suffit pour constater leur
valeur en monnaie de compte.
Quant à leur valeur en monnaie du Royaume Uni, on doit se référer à la
réponse donnée à la question précédente. (4ème question.)
Mommaies d'or.
La Belgique n'a aucune monnaie d'or ; aucune monnaie d'or étrangère, ni
aucun lingot d'or n'y a une circulation ou une valeur légale.
Mommaies d'argemt.
Pièces de cinq francs pesant 25 grammes d'argent au titre de ºg.
idem deux francs et demi id. 12# idem idem.
idem deux francs id. 10 idem idem.
idem un franc id. 5 idem idem.
idem cinquante centimes id. 2# idem · idem.
idem vingt centimes id. 1 idem idem.
Les monnaies d'argent décimales Françaises ont toutes cours légal en Belgique
pour la même valeur que les pièces Belges.
Les monnaies d'argent Hollandaises suivantes ont également cours légal en
Belgique, savoir :-
Le florin des Pays-Bas pesant 10 grammes au titre de #r fin, pour une
valeur de deux francs dix centimes.
La pièce de deux et demi florins des Pays-Bas, pesant 25 grammes au titre
de # pour cinq francs vingt-cinq centimes.
Ces deux pièces ne se rencontrent presque jamais dans la circulation.
Monnaies de cuivre.
Pièces de 10 centimes pesant 20 grammes de cuivre pur.
idem cinq centimes id. 10 id. id.
idem deux centimes id. 4 id. id.
idem un centime id. 2 id. id.
Billom.
Il n'existe aucune monnaie de billon ou d'autre métal mélangé en Belgique.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 261
Q. 6. La pièce de monnaie qui représente la plus petite unité monétaire de compte est-elle
d'un usage général ?
A. Oui ; sur un peu moins de deux cents millions de pièces de cuivre en
circulation, il y en a près de quarante cinq millions en pièces d'un
centime.
Dans quelques parties du pays on réclame encore avec instance plus de pièces
d'un centime.
Q. 7. Quelle est la pièce de monnaie de la plus petite valeur d'un usage général ?
A. Le centime. La pièce de deux centimes est cependant la pièce de peu de
valeur la plus répandue et de l'usage le plus général. Dans la circulation
réelle on la rencontre dans une proportion au moins triple de celle de un
centime.
Q. 8. Se plaint-on de ce que la plus petite pièce d'un usage général soit d'une valeur par trop
minime ou par trop élevée ? De quelle classe de la société ces plaintes émanent-elles ?
A. Non ; la valeur d'un centime, comme la plus petite unité monétaire,
semble au contraire être acceptée aussi volontiers par le grand commerce
que par le commerce de détail, et par le prolétaire aussi bien que par les
classes les plus riches.
Ce qui le prouve encore, c'est que sous le système monétaire Néerlandais, où
la plus petite monnaie de compte était le cent (valant deux centimes # # )
on faisait frapper des demis cents, valant 1 centime T#rr, ayant une circu-
lation générale dans tout le pays.
Anciemme Mommaie de compte et anciemme Mommaie de circulation.
Quelles
Q. 9. Quelle était la monnaie de compte avant l'introduction du système actuel ?
étaient ses subdivisions ?
A. Lors de l'introduction primitive du système actuel en 1803, (car, supprimé
en 1816 et remplacé alors par le système monétaire décimal des Pays-Bas,
il fut rétabli en 1832), on comptait en Belgique au moins quatre monnaies
légales de compte, toutes quatre d'un usage simultané, légalement et géné-
ralement admises.
l. La livre de gros, ou Flamande, qui se divisait en 20 schellings, chaque
schelling valait 12 gros, chaque gros 8 deniers (penninghen), chaque pen
ninghe 3 mittes (myten). Donc une livre de gros égalait 20 schellings, ou
| 240 gros, ou 1920 penninghen, ou 5,760 mittes.
Cette monnaie de compte servait principalement pour le calcul des changes
étrangers.
On s'en est servi pour ce dernier usage, surtout pour calculer le change sur
Londres à la bourse d'Anvers jusqu'à la fin de 1843.
2. Le florin de change, divisé en 20 sous de change, chaque sol en 16 deniers
(penninghen).
C'est en cette monnaie de compte qu'était tenue la comptabilité des grandes
maisons de commerce, et que se calculaient les changes sur Amsterdam et
Hambourg.
3. Le florin de Brabant, ou courant, divisé en vingt sols de Brabant, chaque
sol en douze deniers.
Dans les paiements journaliers on divisait le sol en quatre liards, monnaie
réelle. C'était la monnaie de compte adoptée pour toutes les transactions
de la vie usuelle.
Aucune de ces trois monnaies de compte, pas plus que deux autres moins
usitées (la livre courante et le rixdaler) n'avait une seule monnaie réelle en
rapport avec son unité.
Ces trois monnaies de compte existaient simultanément depuis des siècles.
On en faisait usage simultanément dans les lois et ordonnances, &c.
Dans les actes hypothécaires, il était presque de règle de stipuler que la somme
déterminée en florins de change, serait réduite à des florins courant de
Brabant, en cas de paiement exact à l'échéance fixée.
Ces trois monnaies avaient une corrélation officielle fixée dès 1526. Une livre
de gros valait 6 florins de change ou 7 florins courant.
4. La livre tournois, divisée en 20 sols de France ; chaque sol en 12 deniers.
C'était la monnaie de compte officielle depuis 1794, et la seule en usage dans
tous les rapports avec le Gouvernment de cette époque et en général avec
la France.
100 florins courant de Brabant valaient 183 livres tournois 13 sols 5# #, ou
181 francs 40 centimes ºr ; ou en florins des Pays-Bas, 85 florins 71
cents # # #. 81 livres tournois valaient exactement 80 francs.
Il ne sera pas nécessaire de faire ressortir que, par suite du système suivi
pour la vente des domaines nationaux, il y avait deux livres tournois
différentes, l'une basée sur la monnaie d'or et d'argent, l'autre basée sur
No. 32.
Belgium.
Belgian Govern-
ment.
K k 3 -
262 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 32. une tarification de diverses monnaies de papier dépréciées, ayant eu aupa-
Belgium. ravant cours légal en France et forcé en Belgique.
© A ces diverses monnaies de compte, il faut ajouter aujourd'hui, par suite de
Bee - l'application transitoire du système Néerlandais.
5: Le florin du Pays-Bas divisé en cent cents.
On a cru devoir s'arrêter quelque temps sur ces diverses monnaies de compte,
parceque, sauf la livre tournois, les quatre autres sont d'un usage encore
journalier aujourd'hui. (Voir réponse aux questions Nos. 27 et 31.)
t - º -- º
Q. 10. Quelle était la valeur légale de cette monnaie relativement à la monnaie de compte,
actuelle ?
A. Une livre de gros, ou Flamande, valait 12 fr. 69 cent. T#.
Un florin de change ©-2 ©m francs 2°l 1 64 cents.
Un florin de Brabant sss ©-5 ,, 0-85 71 ,
Une livre tournois º， [ .# @ º - , 0 98 77 ,,
Un florin des Pays-Bas 1-2 ©- $-º ,, 2 ll 64 ,,
La livre tournois pour achat de domaines à peu près 0'01 64 ,,
Q. l l. Quelles étaient les monnaies de circulation et quelle était leur valeur en monnaie de
compte ?
On ne donne cette évaluation qu'en florins de Brabant, la monnaie de
compte la plus usitée dans les transactions ordinaires, en faisant observer
que 7 florins de Brabant valaient 6 florins de change, ou une livre de
gros, ou six florins de Pays-Bas.
Valeur en Florins de Brabant assignée.


Date de l'Ordonnance e ^ Lors de la p= > N
qui règle la Fabrication. Métal. Espèces. Fabrication. En l 794. En l8lO.
19 Septembre 1749 | Or - | Double souverain - | 17 17 0 | 18 12 9 | 18 12 7#
Idem - - | Or - | Souverain º # - 8 18 2 | 9 6 4# 9 6 3#
19 Septembre 1749 | Argent | Ducaton g e - | 3 i0 0 | 3 11 2 | 3 9 5#,
Idem - - | Idem - | Demi ducaton - \ º 1 15 0 J 15 7 l 14 8#
ldem - - | Idem - | Quart de ducaton ( º 17 6 17 O# l7 3#o
Idem - - | Idem - i Huitième de ducaton - 8 9 8 9 8 7
19 Juillet 1755 - | Idem - | Couronne de Brabant - 3 3 0 3 3 0 3 l 3 #
Idem ，- - | Idem - | Demi couronne Brabant | l l l 6 1 11 6 1 10 6 #
Idem - - | Idem - | Quart couronne Brabant 1 5 9 º-， # l5 2#r
1 Mars l75l - | Idem - | Double escalin ，-3 14 0 14 0 13 2 #
19 Septembre 1749 | Idem - Escalin i-º ©s 7 O 7 O 6 7 #
2l Avril # - | Idem - | Plaquette $ 5 & -， 3 6 3 6 3 6
19 Septembre 1749 | Idem - | Pièce de 5 sous a a 5 0 5 0 5 0
Idem ，º - | Idem - | Pièce de 10 liards g -， 2 6 2 6 2 6
Idem - - | Cuivre | Pièce de 2 liards 4 # 6 6 6
Idem i ^i$ - | Idem - | Pièce d'un liard # # 3 3 3
Il y avait, en outre, quelques monnaies étrangères, comme le ducat Impé-
rial, l'écu de Navarre (dite pièce de cinq plaquettes), qui avaient obtenu
une tarification légale.
Les pièces de Liége, de Luxembourg, et de Limbourg étaient des monnaies
provinciales, dont la valeur variait fréquemment.
Changement du Système Monétaire.
Q. 12. A quelle époque se fit se changement ?—-
A. 1. Le premier système décimal monétaire introduit en Belgique, était
le système Français, rendu obligatoire pour la comptabilité publique par
la loi du 17 Floreal an VII. (6 Mai 1799), et par décret du 26 Vendé-
miaire an VIII. (18 Octobre 1799.)
2. Le système décimal des Pays-Bas fut introduit par la loi du 28 Septembre
1816, et appliqué immédiatement à toutes les comptabilités publiques et
particulières.
3. Le système actuel, qui est un retour complet au système décimal Français,
fut décrété par la loi du 5 Juin 1832, et rendu obligatoire à partir du
I Janvier 1833 pour tous les actes publics et administratifs.
Q. 13. Quelle était la cause de ce changement ?
A. Outre les changements politiques, les motifs principaux furent :
I. Pour le premier changement de mettre le système monétaire en har-
monie avec le système décimal des poids et mesures décrétés par les
lois des 30 Mars 1791, 18 Germinal an III. (17 Avril 1795), et
19 Brumaire an VIII. (10 Decembre 1799.) On partait dès-lors du
même point pour fixer l'unité de mesure, celle des poids, et celle de la
IIlOIlIla,l6 .
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 268
2. Pour le second changement la loi indique * d'une part la différence des
* monnaies qui circulent dans les différentes provinces, ainsi que les
* préjudices et les embarras qui en résultent, tant pour le trésor public
* que pour les particuliers, surtout parceque plusieurs de ces mon-
* naies ne peuvent nullement être considérées comme monnaies de
* l'état, lequel ne peut tout au plus que les tolérer et les recevoir d'après
* des tarifs déterminés ; et d'autre part, les avantages que procurent à
* l'état et aux sujets l'unité des monnaies et l'établissement d'un système
* monétaire simple et regulier."
3. Le troisième changement fut légitimé par le désir de revenir aux principes
d'unité du système décimal Français, et d'appliquer à mesurer la valeur le
même point de départ qui détermine les dimensions ou les poids. On
voulait aussi faciliter les relations commerciales très fréquentes avec la
France.
(
Q. 14. Fut-il causé par quelques inconvénients, des confusions ou des complications dans l'état
de la circulation antérieure ?
A. Incontestablement le premier changement mit fin à une complication des
plus fâcheuses et à des embarras des plus grands ; le second changement fut
moins justifié sous ce point de vue, l'unité monétaire Française, aussi bien
que le système décimal des poids et mesures, ayant été, au moins légalement,
établi depuis des années dans toutes les parties du royaume des Pays-Bas.
Le troisième changement n'avait pour lui que le désir de revenir à l'unité
primitive Française, et de faciliter les fréquentes relations avec la France.
Q. l5. Y avait-il dans la circulation antérieure des inconvénients inhérents à la valeur de l'unité
principale ou des unités subdivisionnaires, ou bien dans les rapports de l'un et de l'autre ?
A. La valeur de l'unité principale, ou celle des subdivisions considérées isolé-
ment, n'ont jamais été invoquées comme devant motiver ou justifier un seul
des trois changements introduits ; mais il est incontestable que les rapports
si variés envers les diverses unités de comptabilité usitées dans le pays
avant la domination Française, ont contribué à généraliser dans les classes
éclairées, et même à populariser sous quelques rapports, le système décimal
introduit par ce Gouvernement.
Pour les deux autres changements, on répond négativement.
Q. 16. Les inconvénients qui ont provoqué ou facilité le changement de système, se sont-ils fait
sentir dans les recettes et les paiements, ou dans la Inanière de tenir les comptes ?
A. Avant le premier changement, les inconvénients de toute nature se
faisaient sentir, aussi bien sous le rapport de la comptabilité que sous celui
de la circulation, et il serait difficile de dire de quel côté ils furent les plus
sensibles. Pour les autres changements il faut répondre négativement.
Q. 17. Quelle classe de la société sentait le plus vivement ces inconvénients ?
A. Avant le premier changement, le commerce en général, mais surtout le
grand commerce.
Quant à la classe pauvre, elle n'a pas bénéficié, et s'est soumise difficilement
au premier changement. Elle a bénéficié par le second, en ce sens qu'elle
recevait effectivement pour ses gages un cent là où autrefois elle avait soit
un liard soit deux centimes (près de cinq pour cent de moins) ; et que, d'un
autre côté, agissant par pression générale sur le détaillant, elle l'amena à
introduire dans la vie usuelle la comptabilité en florins et cents des Pays-
Bas, au lieu de celle maintenue jusqu'alors de florins et sols courant de
Brabant.
Le troisième changement lui fut de nouveau défavorable aussi ; quoiqu'existant
depuis près de 25 ans, n'est-il pas généralement admis dans les boutiques, et
au marché, et aux cabarets, où l'on compte presque uniquement en cents, et
non en centimes. Il est vrai que l'usage, petit à petit, amené à faire
perdre au mot " cent " sa signification primitive, et qu'aujourd'hui il a
partout dans la vie usuelle la signification de deux centimes.
De manière qu'un franc se prend et se calcule chez tous les détaillants pour
50 cents et non pour 47 cents et quart.
On peut donc dire que le mot * cent " est aujourd'hui en Belgique, mais seule-
ment dans les petites transactions, une monnaie de compte, valant deux
centimes.
Q. 18. Le changement de système fut-il motivé principalement ou en partie par le désir
d'assimiler la circulation à celle des pays voisins ? S'il en a été ainsi, le peuple était-il familiarisé
déjà avec la nouvelle monnaie, soit comme monnaie de compte, soit comme monnaie de change,
avant qu'elle ne fût établie par la loi ?
A. Pour le premier changement, non. Pour le second, non. Car le florin
des Pays-Bas, divisé en cents, était une création nouvelle et n'existant
nulle part. *-
Pour le troisième changement, oui. Le législateur Belge a eu but avoué
d'adopter le système monétaire Français, afin de faciliter les fréquentes
relations entre ces deux pays.
No. 32.
Belgium
Belgian Govern-
ment.
K k 4
264 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE - -
No. 32. La nouvelle monnaie adoptée étant conforme au système Français, était
Belgium. devenue très familière par suite de la réunion de la Belgique à la France
jusqu'en 1814.
Belgian Govern- Après cette époque, les monnaies Françaises d'argent ont continué à avoir
ment. cours légal dans les provinces méridionales du royaume des Pays-Bas
g -# (la Belgique).
Q. 19. Ou bien le changement fut-il amené uniquement ou partiellement par une préférence
abstraite pour une division décimale sur une division duodécimale ?
A. Pour le premier et le second changement, Oui, en très grande partie.
La nouvelle subdivision du florin en cents, décrété lors du second change-
ment, était uniquement justifiée par la préférence abstraite pour un
système décimal.
Lors du troisième, le système décimal était déjà consacré par l'usage ; les
avantages de la théorie se confondaient ainsi avec les avantages de la
pratique.
Q. 20. Comment le changement ſut-il effectué ?
A. Lors du premier changement, on se borna à le décréter et à le rendre
obligatoire pour les transactions publiques. Ce ne fut même que dix ans
après, le 18 Août 1810, qu'on tarifa légalement les anciennes monnaies.
Le système monétaire des Pays-Bas et le dernier système Belge établirent,
lors de leur publication, et par la même loi, une tarification légale pour
les monnaies existantes ; et successivement les anciennes monnaies, qui
circulaient en grande quantité, ont été démonétisées et retirées de la
circulation.
Q. 21. Les valeurs relatives de quelques-unes des monnaies anciennes furent-elles changées ?—
A. Chacun des trois systèmes amena un changement complet, sans toucher
en rien à la valeur relative des anciennes monnaies tant qu'elles con-
tinuèrent à exister.
Q. 22. Dut-on émettre quelques-unes des monnaies nouvelles, en prévision du changement,
avant, pendant, ou après le changement de système ?
A. Sous les trois systèmes on ne frappa de monnaies nouvelles que
postérieurement à la promulgation et même à la mise à exécution de la
loi, sauf qu'avant la promulgation, en 1799, de la loi monétaire en Belgique,
la France avait fait battre, pour son usage, une certaine quantité de
pièces d'argent et de cuivre, dont quelques-unes, mais fort rares, circulaient
en Belgique.
Q. Retira-t-on de la circulation quelques-unes des monnaies anciennes, et lesquelles ? Permit-
on que quelques-unes des anciennes monnaies continuassent à rester en circulation conjointement
avec les monnaies nouvelles ?——
A. Lors du premier changement, on ne statua rien à l'égard des monnaies
préexistantes, qui continuèrent à circuler et à être admises pour leur
valeur relative, jusqu'en 1810, où on les tarifa officiellement. On ne retira
de la circulation aucune des monnaies anciennes.
Lors du second et du troisième changement, les lois établirent officiellement
les rapports entre la nouvelle et l'ancienne monnaie. En outre, le
Gouvernement des Pays-Bas commença, et le Gouvernement Belge termina,
la refonte complète de toutes les monnaies antérieures qui n'étaient pas
fabriquées en conformité de la dernière loi.
Q. 24. Donna-t-on des noms d'anciennes monnaies aux pièces nouvelles, ou des noms nouveaux
aux anciennes pièces ?
A. Pour le premier changement, non. Lors du second changement, on
conserva la dénomination de florin. On voulait aussi que la pièce d'un
florin Hollandais, ou un florin de change Belge, représentât une valeur
intrinsèque parfaitement égale aux nouveaux florins. * Le florin, comme
º unité monétaire," dit la loi, " sera de la même valeur intrinsèque que
* l'ancien florin frappé dans les provinces septentrionales."
Ceci était vrai en théorie, mais non en pratique, car il n'existait pas en
circulation un seul florin ancien ayant la valeur assignée par la loi
au nouveau florin.
Celà eut des conséquences assez graves. (Voir l'ouvrage cité de M. Vrolik)
Lors du troisème changement on revient aux noms Français.
Sous aucun des trois changements on ne donna une nouvelle dénomination
aux anciennes pièces.
Q. 25. La plus petite monnaie de compte ancienne était-elle commensurable par la nouvelle
monnaie, et pouvait-on par elle exprimer exactement sa valeur ?
A. Non. Lors de l'introduction d'aucun des trois systèmes, la petite monnaie
de compte immédiatement préexistante n'était exactement commensurable
par la nouvelle monnaie. Ainsi, ni le sol, ni le denier de change ou courant,
ni le gros ni la mytte, ne pouvait s'exprimer exactement en centimes, ni le
centime en cents ou centième du florin, ni plus tard le cent en centimes.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 265
Q. 26. Si on ne pouvait exprimer exactement cette valeur, quelles dispositions prit-on pour le
paiement des dettes contractées sous le système ancien ? Que fit-on pour la perception de sommes
déterminées,—par exemple : les droits de pont, péages, les contributions, &c., revenant à des par-
ticuliers, à des communes ou corporations, ou à l'état, lorsque ces perceptions avaient été fixées
sous l'ancien système ou résultaient d'engagement d'un montant déterminé ?
A. Chaque système monétaire nouveau a été suivi ou accompagné d'un tarif
établissant légalement la valeur des monnaies anciennes, tant de compte
que de circulation.
Des lois ont également pourvu aux perceptions et aux paiements de
sommes déterminées en fixant en nouvelle monnaie la plus rapprochée.
Par exemple : 1 liard pour 2 centimes.
22 1 centime pour # cent.
25 l cent pour 2 centimes.
Il fut, en outre, toujours entendu que l'on négligerait, dans les paiements ou
dans les réductions du total, la fraction définitive qui n'atteindrait pas la
moitié de la plus petite unité monétaire, et qu'on porterait à cette unité
les fractions supérieures à la moitié.
En strict droit, cependant, le payeur peut être contraint à se libérer exacte-
ment, et à supporter ainsi toutes les pertes des fractions.
Il est à remarquer, et l'on insiste sur cette remarque, que cet état de choses
n'a pas donné, ni n'a pu donner, lieu à des inconvénients graves, parceque
le calcul des réductions se fait jusqu'à la millième partie de la plus petite
unité monétaire, tandis qu'on ne peut négliger les fractions que lors du
paiement général de l'intégralité de ce qui est dû.
Q. 27. Le changement de la monnaie de compte fut-il graduel ou immediat ? Fut-il facultatif
ou obligatoire ? S'il était obligatoire, comment et par quelles peines fut-il mis à exécution ? Fut.il
mis à exécution avec succès ? Ou, est-ce que l'ancien système continua à être en usage pendant
quelque temps dans les comptes ou dans le langage populaire ?
A. Le changement fut introduit immédiatement. Il fut obligatoire pour tous
les actes des notaires, courtiers, tribunaux, et tous les actes publics, &c.,
sous peine d'amendes diverses; par exemple, pour les notaires cent francs
par chaque contravention.
L'exécution ne souffrit pas de difficultés en ce qui concerne les actes publies et
administratifs ; et quoique non obligatoire pour les actes tout-à-fait privés,
on ne tarda pas à l'appliquer fréquemment, à en faire exclusivement usage
pour tout acte ou piéce un peu importante.
Cependant aucun des trois systèmes ne réussit à se faire accepter générale-
ment dans les rapports de la vie privée et dans les transactions usuelles.
Ainsi, aujourd'hui encore, on fait presqu' exclusivement en florins, sols, et
deniers de Brabant toutes les ventes sur les marchés, tels que pour les
grains, graines, lins, chauvre, pommes de terre, &c.
En outre, le nom de º cent" (centième partie du florin des Pays-Bas) et demi-
cent sont restés d'un usage populaire , mais ces anciennes dénominations
n'expriment plus la valeur ancienne. † Cent" est employé pour désigner la
pièce de deux centimes et " demi-cent" pour la pièce d'un centime.
En détail, on vend encore beaucoup en cents, signifiant deux centimes.
Ce ne fut qu'en Janvier 1844, que la cote des changes de la Bourse d'Anvers
cessa de se faire en livres et deniers de gros ou Flamands pour les changes
sur Londres, en rixdolers pour Vienne, en sols de change pour Hambou ,
en florins des Pays-Bas pour Amsterdam. &>
Aujourd'hui encore toutes les transactions, n'importe leur importance, se
calculent à Anvers à raison de florins courant, pour les grains et les graines,
en florins des Pays-Bas pour les cafés, cotons, cuirs, métaux, riz, &c,
en florins et sols de change pour les sucres candis.
Mais cet état de choses se modifie presque journellement ; et au fur et à
mesure que l'un ou l'autre négociant ou personne influente insiste pour
l'extension de l'application du système monétaire actuel à un article de com-
merce ou à un genre d'affaire quelconque,tout le monde s'empresse de le suivre.
On peut donc dire qu'il suffirait de la volonté bien ferme d'une centaine de
personnes pour faire disparaître les dernières traces des anciens systèmes
monétaires.
Q. 28. Si le changement était facultatif, l'ancien et le nouveau système continuèrent-ils à être
en usage simultanément pendant un certain temps, et continuent-ils encore à être en usage
eoncurremment ?
A. Voir la réponse à la question précédente.
Q. 29. A-t-on trouvé quelques inconvénients à cet usage simultané de plusieurs systèmes ? Com-
ment agit-il sur la comptabilité, les billets de Banque, les lettres de change ?
A. Cet état de choses n'a pas donné lieu à des inconvénients ; mais il faut
remarquer que toutes les monnaies de compte ayant une tarification
officielle toute facture, tout compte, tout billet, &c., quel que soit le
, système sur lequel il est basé ou calculé, finit toujours par être réduit et
No. 32. .
Belgium.
Belgian Govern-
Iment.
L l
266 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 32. décompté en une seule et même monnaie, la monnaie de compte officielle,
Belgium. qui est identique avec la monnaie de circulation.
. -- Une seule difficulté s'est présentée, c'est la suivante :
Belgian Govern- La loi du 5 Juin 1832, avait déterminé que le florin des Pay-Bas serait
ment. calculé à raison de 47} cents pour un franc, ce qui donnait pour un florin
la valeur de fr. 2°ll-#.
Le Gouvernement des Pays-Bas ayant réduit, en 1839, la valeur intrinsèque
de ses florins, ceux-ci n'obtinrent cours légal par la loi du 4 Mars 1848,
qu'au prix de fr. 2 10, valeur exactement et parfaitement égale à leur valeur
intrinsèque.
Il surgit alors la question de savoir si les lettres de change tirées, les comptes
établis, les ventes faites, depuis cette époque en florins des Pays-Bas,
devaient être payés à raison de fr. 2'l l -#r, ou à raison de fr. 2 10,
et si on pouvait se libérer en nouveaux florins, monnaie des Pays-Bas
effective, d'engagements contractés en monnaie des Pays-Bas sans autre
désignation.
Mais il a suffi que la question fut soulevée pour que l'opinion publique,
d'accord avec les tribunaux, fût unanime pour ne reconnaître en Belgique
qu'un seul florin des Pay-Bas, celui de compte, tel qu'il avait été tarifé par
la loi du 5 Juin 1832, et que toute somme ne pouvant être payée légale-
ment en Belgique qu'en francs on ne pouvait se libérer en florins des Pays-
Bas effectifs d'une obligation contractée en florins des Pays-Bas de compte ;
que les deux florins, quoique portant le même nom, étaient deux valeurs
différentes, qui devaient être calculées et réduites chacune selon la valeur
que la loi lui assignait.
Q. 30. Dans cet état de choses d'une double comptabilité usitée, comment les négociants et les
banquiers tiennent-ils leurs comptes ?
A. Pendant assez longtemps chacun tenait son compte dans la monnaie qu'il
préférait, et ce sans grands inconvénients, par suite de la tarification légale
des diverses monnaies de comptes. Aujourd'hui, il n'existe probablement
plus un seul négociant ou banquier qui tienne ses comptes autrement qu'en
francs.
Q. 31. Le changement s'est-il effectué d'une manière efficace, ou bien quelques classes de la
société, dans quelques parties du pays, continuent-elles à se servir des anciennes dénominations dans
leur conversation, ou bien dans la tenue de leur comptabilité?
A. Le changement n'est pas encore radical, ainsi qu'on la fait ressortir en
réponse à la 27ème question.
Ainsi, à peu d'exceptions près, on vend encore dans la Belgique entière les
grains, graines, &c. en florins courant de Brabant, tant aux marchés publics
que dans les bourses commerciales et dans les transactions particulières.
Les denrées et marchandises se côtent en grande partie, à Anvers, en florins
des Pays-Bas.
Le peuple, les détaillants, &c. comptent généralement en cents, nom qui
dans leur bouche n'a cependant d'autre signification que celle de deux
centimes.
Q. 32. Le changement, à l'époque de son introduction, était-il impopulaire dans quelques classe
de la société, et dans lesquelles ? Si une pareille impopularité s'est manifesté, a-t-elle été durable
ou transitoire ? Existe-elle encore de nos jours ? Le changement causa-t-il quelques commotions
populaires, ou répandit-il des inquiétudes et des craintes ?
A. Aucun des trois changements ne semble avoir été impopulaire.
Le premier ne fut réellement jamais introduit dans les usages de la vie
ordinaire, parceque la quantité de la petite et de la grande monnaie en or,
en argent, et en cuivre de l'ancien système Belge, était infiniment plus con-
sidérable, et d'une circulation bien plus générale dans ce pays, que les
monnaies décimales Françaises.
Le second changement se fit très-rapidement, et se généralisa presqu'immé-
diatement.
Le troisième, grâce à l'usage introduit d'appeler * cent " la pièce de deux
centimes, parvient insensiblement à se populariser.
Aucune commotion ne s'est produite ou ne fut provoquée par ces divers
changements ; ils ne servirent même jamais de prétexte à des réclamations
populaires. Jamais aucun de ces trois changements ne fit même craindre
une apparence de troubles.
Q. 33. La nouvelle monnaie est-elie plus ou moins commode que l'ancienne, et quels sont ses
avantages et ses désavantages,
1°. En payant ou recevant-(a) De grandes sommes ; (b) De petites sommes ?
2°. Dans la tenue de la comptabilité—(a) Pour les grandes transactions ; (b) Pour les petites
transactions ?
A. La nouvelle monnaie, mais surtout la comptabilité nouvelle, est bien plus
commode et plus avantageuse que le système antérieur à 1800.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 267
Tant en payant qu'en recevant de petites comme de grandes sommes, on les
compte, pour ainsi dire, d'un coup d'œil ; et il ne faut pas aujourd'hui, à
l'homme le plus minutieux, le quart de temps pour compter une somme
de mille francs qu'il lui faillait autrefois pour compter cent florins de
Brabant.
Aujourd'hui, lorsque l'on paie une somme en diverses espèces de monnaie nou-
velle, l'homme le plus illettré peut vérifier son compte sans aucune difficulté ;
tandis que sous le système précédent chaque espèce de monnaie exigeait un
calcul spécial qui demandait des connaissances arithmétiques assez étendues
et qu'il était presque impossible de faire sans avoir la plume à la main.
Quant à la comptabilité, on ne saurait assez faire ressortir la facilité qu'offre
à cet égard le système actuel, qui ne présente d'ailleurs aucun inconvénient.
Il serait, pensons-nous, impossible de faire revenir les comptables au vieux
système Belge.
Poids et Mesures.
Q. 33. Les poids et mesures sont-ils divisés en fractions décimales ? S'il en est ainsi, ce système
décimal a-t-il précédé, accompagné, ou suivi la division décimale de la monnaie, ou etttit-il sous
quelques rapports, et lesquels, en correlation avec cette dernière ?
A. Oui, les poids et mesures sont divisés en fractions décimales.
Le système Français des poids et mesures, tel qu'il résultait des lois de 30
Mars 1791, 1er Août 1793, 18 Germinal an III. (7 Août l795) et 19
Frimaire an VIII. (10 Décembre 1799), ne fut rendu obligatoire en Belgique
qu'à partir du ler Vendémiaire an X. (21 Septembre 180l). Il accompagna
donc, pour ainsi dire, la mise à exécution du nouveau système monetaire.
Mais, quoique officiellement introduit, quoique rendu obligatoire dans tous
les actes publics sous des amendes considérables, son introduction n'eut pas
lieu dans la pratique, durant l'Empire, même pour les mesures agraires.
La loi avait cependant prescrit des pénalités exorbitantes ; ainsi aucune pièce,
titre public ou privé, ne pouvait faire foi en justice qu'autant que les
quantités fussent exprimés en mesures ou poids nouveaux. (Art. ler de la
loi du ler Vendémiaire an IV.)
Le Code Pénal (Art. 424, 479, et 480), prive l'acheteur de toute action contre
le vendeur qui l'aurait trompé par l'usage des poids et mesures prohibés, et
rend passible d'amende, et même d'un emprisonnement de cinq jours, ceux
qui emploient des poids ou des mesures différents de ceux que la loi a
établis.
Ces dispositions furent ouvertement méconnues.
Le Gouvernement Néerlandais crut faciliter l'usage du système décimal
Français en ne donnant, comme il le dit, à l'article 8 de la loi du 2l Août
1816, * que des dénominations usitées aux Pays-Bas, et préférablement
les dénominations employées aujourd'hui pour les poids et mesures qui
approchent le plus des nouveaux."
Malgré cette précaution, et malgré l'achèvement presque complet du cadastre,
établi uniquement en mesures nouvelles, le système des poids et mesures fit
plus de progrès en apparence qu'en réalité.
Depuis, et quoique par la loi du 18 Juin 1836, on soit revenu aux dénomina-
tions Françaises, les progres ont été plus signalés ; notamment pour les
mesures de capacité, qui sont aujourd'hui généralement en usage, à très-peu
d'exceptions près.
Pour les poids, l'introduction est bien moins générale, et il y a quelques jours
à peine la police a dû agir avec une grande modération à Anvers pour ne
pas avoir à constater que presque tous les boutiquiers de cette ville es
servent encore de poids proscrits par la loi.
Le progrès est moins général encore pour les mesures agraires ; et s'il est vrai
qu'on ne désigne que la mesure décimale dans tous les actes de vente, ces
ventes se calculent, presqu'exclusivement, en mesures anciennes, tels que
les bonniers,verges, pieds carrés.
Pour les mesures de longueur, l'usage de l'ancienne aune de Brabant est encore
général dans toutes les transactions de la vie ordinaire ; et si la loi oblige
le boutiquier à n'exhiber que des mètres, il a soin d'y faire une entaille qui
désigne l'aune.
Dans les grandes transactions, le mètre est plus usité que l'aune, qui cependant,
aussi bien que le yard Anglais, est employée pour plusieurs catégories
'étoffes, de fils, &c., surtout pour tout ce qui se confectionne en pièces d'une
dimension uniforme.
Cet état de choses a été constaté fréquemment, et a motivé la loi du Ier
Octobre 1855, qui, plus rigoureuse que les lois antérieures, prescrit l'usage
exclusif, même dans les actes sous seing privé, du système décimal des poids
et mesures.
L'avenir fera connaître si le résultat désiré sera promptement atteint.
No. 32.
Belgium.
Belgian Govern-
ment.
L 1 2
268 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 32. • Il faut donc répondre à la question posée : ler, Qu'en droit le système décimal
Belgium. des poids et mesures fut introduit simultanément avec le nouveau système
| | -msº ，- ) monétaire, et qu'il y avait les rapports les plus complets entre eux ; tous
Belgian Govern- deux étant basés identiquement sur le même point de départ, le mètre,
ment. comme dix-millionième partie de l'arc du méridien.
2°. Qu'en pratique les poids et mesures anciennes continuèrent longtemps à
être presque exclusivement en usage après l'introduction du nouveau
système monétaire, et sont encore en très grand usage aujourd'hui.
Q. 35. Si non, a-t-on trouvé qu'il résultait quelques inconvénients du fait que le système de divi-
sion pour les poids et mesures ne correspondait pas avec celui adopté pour les monnaies ?
A, Cette différence entre le système monétaire décimal et l'ancien système
maintenu dans la pratique pour les poids et mesures, n'a donné lieu à aucun
inconvénient. Le prix se fixait toujours par une unité quelconque : il
s'établissait alors facilement pour les multiples. e
Quant aux subdivisions, lorsque la division ne peut pas s'effectuer exactement,
on est convenu tacitement de négliger les fractions inférieures à # centime,
et à porter à 1 centime les fractions supérieures à # centime. Ce mode, usité
et nécessité en tous temps, tant sous le système ancien que sous ceux qui
l'ont suivi, n'a pas donné lieu à des inconvénients.
Q. 36. Comment peut-on reconcilier la division décimale de la monnaie avec la division non-
décimale des denrées dans les ventes de détail des classes pauvres ?
En résulte-t-il des inconvénients et des pertes pour elles ?
A. Cette difficulté est plus apparente que réele, et elle était aussi grande et
au moins aussi fréquente avec le système ancien qu'avec le système nou-
veau ; ainsi, lorsque Marie-Thérèse décréta, le 19 Septembre, 1749, la
fabrication des ducatons, elle fixa leur valeur à 3 florins de change ou 3#
florins courant, et leurs subdivisions à des valeurs proportionnées.
Le 21 Août 1755, elle ordonna que le ducaton serait tarifé fl. 3, 1 sol de
change et les subdivisions jusqu'au quart jouiraient de l'augmentation dans
la même proportion.
Cette augmentation d'un sol de change, équivalant à 1 sol 2 deniers courant,
seule monnaie de compte usitée dans la vie ordinaire, il en résultait que
cette augmentation décrétée ne pouvait ni être calculée exactement pour
les quarts de ducaton, ni être payée exactement en cas d'échange d'un
ducaton entier ; aucune pièce de monnaie existante ne représentant avec
précision un sol de change, aucune n'équivalant à deux deniers courant.
Prenons encore pour exemple le système Anglais actuel.
La livre sterling se divise en 20 shellings, et le shelling en 12 pences.
La livre avoirdupois se divise en 16 onces, et une once en 16 drams.
Y a-t-il plus d'analogie entre ces poids et le shelling actuel qu'entre la livre
sterling divisé en 10 shellings ou en cent pences ?
Si l'on peut calculer en pences actuels la valeur d'un pouce cube dont 1728
font un yard cube, pourquoi serait-il plus difficile de le calculer en pences
décimaux ? N'en est-il pas de même pour le gill, comme 2048ième partie
d'un quarter, un gallon, 42ième partie d'un tièrce, ou un gallon, 63ième
partie d'un hogshead ?
Quoiqu'on fasse donc, à moins d'admettre le système décimal comme base
unique du système monétaire et de celui des poids et mesures, une parfaite
concordance est impossible, et des fractions inévitables.
Quant à l'avantage ou au désavantage qui en résulte pour la classe pauvre, il
faut certes reconnaître que généralement le détaillant ne forcerait pas les
fractions à son propre détriment, mais à celui de sa pratique, si la con-
currence ne venait pas l'arrêter.
Généralement la concurrence rétablit la fraction en faveur de l'acheteur.
Ainsi, comme on l'a dit plus haut, lorsqu'en 1832 on rétablit les francs,
presque tous les articles qui se vendaient en détail à des prix presqu'in-
variables-par exemple, le verre de bierre, le petit verre de liqueur, la tasse
de café, &c.—se donnèrent pour deux centimes par cens, ou à un prix pré-
sentant à peu-près 5 par cent au profit du consommateur.
Chez l'épicier, il est rare que la concurrence lui permette de majorer ses prix
dans les plus petites subdivisions, chaque fois qu'une augmentation de prix
ne représente pas à très peu de choses près, pour chacune d'elles, la valeur
d'un centime ; souvent d'ailleurs, pour les articles d'une grande consomma-
tion en détail, pour le sel, le café, le savon, etc., les plus petites subdivisions
se calculent et s'établissent jusques en demi-centimes, qu'on compense lors
des paiements simultanés ou subséquents.
Ces inconvénients sont d'ailleurs inhérents à toute vente de détail; et quelque
uniformité de système qu'on établisse, on ne parviendra jamais à perce-
voir exactement la somme due pour la consommation journalière d'un
ménage pauvre chaque fois qu'une denrée augmente dans une proportion
ordinaire.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 269
Comment (quelque soit le système adopté) faire majorer le prix d'une once de No. 32.
café, lorsque la livre n'est augmentée que d'un ou de deux centimes ; celle Belgium.
d'un demi-litre d'huile, lorsque l'hectolitre a augmenté de 50 ou 60 cen- ©
times ; ou celle d'un panier de charbon, lorsque le tonneau a été majoré de Belgian Govern-
quelques francs, &c. ? Iment.
Aucun système quelconque ne parviendra jamais à faire disparaître la néces- --
sité de forcer ou d'effacer des fractions, un jour au détriment du vendeur, le
lendemain à celui du consommateur.
Q. 37. Vouloir ajouter tout autre renseignement qu'on jugera utile pour cette enquête, et
joindre à ces réponses des copies de toutes les lois, ordonnances, rapports, ou documents relatifs
aux changements de monnaie, ou exposant les raisons de ce changement, et le mode suivi pour le
mettre a exécution ?
A. Toutes les lois et tous les arrêtés royaux depuis 1830, sont mentionnés
dans l'imprimé ci-joint.
Voir pour les Pays-Bas, le livre remarquable intitulé, * Le Système Monétaire
du Royaume des Pays-Bas, la Refonte des Vieilles Monnaies d'Argent et
la Démonétisation de l'Or : par A. Vrolik, Docteur des Sciences, Président
de la Commission des Monnaies (actuellement Ministre des Finances,) à
Utrecht, chez T. G. Broese, 1853. 1 vol. in 8vo.
Joindre à ces réponses un exemplaire de tous les documents et de toutes les
lois, arrêtés, instructions, &c. qui ont accompagné ou suivi les divers
changements de nos systèmes monétaires, serait expédier une masse indi-
geste et probablement peu utile.
Si l'attention de Messieurs les Commissaires de l'enquête se fixait plus par-
ticulièrement sur l'un ou l'autre point de ces renseignements, on s'empres-
serait, à la première demande, de le compléter autant que possible, en y
joignant tous les documents que l'on pourrait se procurer, et dont les plus
intéressants sont en réalité étrangers à la Belgique actuelle et ne se
trouvent que fort difficilement.
No. 33. No. 33.
ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into Belgium.
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the KINGDOM of BELGIUM. Through
T. Baring, Esq.
Communicated by THos. BARING, Esq, M.P. ar1ng, Eisq
Present Money of Accoumt.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law ?
A. Francs and centimes.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account ?
A. One franc is subdivided into a hundred centimes.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations ?
A. None but francs and centimes can be legally recorded.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account esti-
mated in money of the United Kingdom ?
A. One franc is equal to 9 # pence sterling.
Presemt Current Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal ?
A. Silver coins of 5 francs equal to 3 shillings, 10 # pence sterling.
TOTOTO O
5 ) 2# 53 2 ) 1 55 ] r# 5 5
5 2 2 5 > 5 : 1 55 6 # : )
55 1 55 _ » 0 35 9-ºoºººo : 2
>) 50 centimes , , 0 5 ) 4-#ºg 9 >
55 20 5 > 5) 0 5 > l # 5 )
Copper coins of 10 32 ,, 0 5 > 0-ººººº 55
55 55 55 0 55 0-# # 52
55 2 52 2 ) 0 5 3 0-#o 35
| 0 0 0 9 3 9
5 2 >> 95 25 TOTUTOTO 35
Neither gold nor mixed metal coins form at present part of the legal
currency of Belgium. All French decimal silver coins are a legal tender
in Belgium, the standard being identical in both countries. A good deal
of French gold is occasionally met with, but it circulates merely on suf-
ferance, like any other foreign gold or silver coins, and cannot be legally
tendered in payment. Coins of fifty centimes are not admitted in pay-
L l 3
270 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 33.
Belgium.
Through
T. Baring, Esq.
ment for more than one tenth of the sum to be paid ; and as to copper
coins the law does not allow the introduction of more than five francs'
worth to each separate payment, twenty centime silver pieces being in
that respect assimilated to copper.
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common
use P
A. The answer must be negative as far as regards one centime pieces.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use 2
A. Copper coins of five and two centimes are most in common use. Ten
centimes as well as one centime pieces are only occasionally met with,
especially the last named.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society 2
A. The divisions of the small silver and copper coins being chiefly the result
of the dictates of local experience, they seem to answer well enough in
practice, and it does not appear that any complaints are thereby occa-
sioned or inconveniences felt, Ten centime copper pieces are found rather
heavy for the pocket, and are consequently by no means so abundant as
five and two centime pieces. The two centime pieces are comparatively
scarce, as they are continually finding their way into Holland, where the
people make them pass current for cents of a Netherland guilder. It is
indeed a well-founded complaint of the lower classes in Belgium that
there is not enough of copper Inoney circulating in the country.
Former Money of Account and Coims.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions 2
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account 2—,
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account 2
Change of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place 2
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the
previous currency *
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other?
Q, 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping f
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt 2
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency
to that of neighbouring countries; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either a as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law P
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a nondecimal division ?
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected 2
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed 2
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change 2
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new 2
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies 2
A. At the end of the last century, when the French took possession of the
Austrian Netherlands, now forming the kingdom of Belgium, a most
deplorable confusion of coins, and monies of account innumerable prevailed
in those provinces, almost every one of which had its own private cur-
rency, concurrently with that of the German empire, so that the compul-
sory introduction of the French decimal system was actually a boon
conferred on the populations.
In order to furnish here a correct specification of the monies and coins exist-
ing in the Austrian Netherlands and principality of Liege at the moment
of their incorporation to France, it would actually require one's entering
into archaeological researches and laborious investigations, the result of
which would now offer little practical interest. The change having been
introduced by the mere right of conquest, the conquerors did not give
themselves much trouble about explaining or justifying their measures, so
that no other records are to be found in Belgium beyond the mere acts of
the then ruling French powers, decreeing the annexation and assimila-
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 271.
tion of the various Belgian provinces, and their division into French de- No. 33.
partments; such of the coins as were strictly Austrian or German finding Belgium.
their way back to those countries as they best might, whilst local ordi-
nances fixed a value at which the various Belgian provincial coins could Through
still be passed concurrently with French monies. T. Baring, Esq.
The answers to the questions from No. 9 down to No. 25 must, therefore,
be sought from the parties who have been consulted on the same subject
in France, where they have had at their disposal the necessary documents
and records, as replies from Belgium to the same questions can only be the
result of personal appreciation, based on mere theories.
After the formation of the kingdom of the United Netherlands, Government
finding it necessary to introduce a general system of currency for the
whole country, adopted the Brabant Exchange Guilder, a mere money of
account, never coined in Belgium, but which was still in use by many,
especially in Antwerp and Brussels for private book-keeping, and happened
to be precisely of the same value as the Dutch Currency Guilder. This was
henceforth issued and coined under the appellation of Netherlands Guilders,
and subdivided into decimal fractions, each the hundredth part of one
guilder, and called cents, in lieu of the old divisions in stivers and far-
things, of which there were 20 stivers to the guilder, and 12 farthings to
the stiver. By the time that the revolution of 1830 came on, the Nether-
lands guilder and its subdivisions had become the chief money of account,
and indeed the only official one throughout Belgium, whilst French coins,
both gold and silver, to the exclusion of mixed metal and copper, con-
tinued to circulate as legal tender concurrently with the Netherlands coins
at the acknowledged par of 400 francs to 189 guilders. The old Brabant
coins had several years previously been recalled into the Government offices
and the mint of the Netherlands, where they had been melted and
re-coined.
This state of things, notwithstanding the erection of the Belgian provinces
into a separate kingdom, lasted till the 5th June 1832, when a monetary
law was promulgated by the Belgian Government, re-establishing the
French monetary system with the franc as the unit, and admitting at
the same time the Netherland coins issued during the union with Belgium
to circulate until further orders as a legal tender, concurrently with the
French and new Belgian coins, at the par of 189 guilders for 400 francs.
The Netherlands silver and copper coins did not long remain in circu-
lation, but the Netherlands gold coins of ten and five guilders continued
to be one of the chief circulating mediums in Belgium, until they were
called in by the Netherlands Government and suppressed. The Belgian
Government took shortly afterwards the opportunity of recalling a few mil-
lions of francs’ worth of gold coins it had issued, and prohibited the circula-
tion of French gold coins as a legal tender, which dispositions have greatly
tended to increase the circulation of the notes of the new bank, established
at Brussels under the appellation of the National Bank, being, notwith-
standing its title, a mere private establishment, having now notes in cir-
culation to an extent of upwards of 96,000,000 of francs, being in fact
the only establishment of the kind in Belgium now allowed to issue bank
notes. These notes, though accepted in the Government offices, are no
legal tender, but would, no doubt, in case of serious complications have to
be made such immediately, in mere self-defence, as became the case in
1848 with the notes of other establishments, the issues of which have been
superseded and replaced by the National Bank, since created.
As above stated, the change took place at the time of the conquest
of the Austrian Netherlands by the French ; and, leaving aside the
question of assimilation of the newly annexed territories, which of
course carried its own weight with it, it may be fairly stated that the
introduction of the decimal metric system was in itself an immense benefit
rendered to the community at large, by the substitution of a system
reposing on an invariable basis, lucid and rational in its application, and
above all highly convenient in the practice, to a multitude of complicated
and obsolete systems, the result of routine and habit prevailing in the
various provinces, and creating an almost incredible confusion. The higher
classes of the mercantile community immediately adopted the change of
which they could comprehend the many advantages, but not so with the
Small tradespeople and shopkeepers, especially those having to deal with
farmers and countrymen, who made good pickings out of the existing con-
fusion, so that Brabant guilders and stivers are still denominations daily made
use of, although they have no monetary representatives, concurrently with
francs and centimes, as well as Netherlands guilders and cents. Officially,
of course, none but francs and centimes are ever mentioned, and that is the
reason why at Antwerp, where goods are still bought and sold in Nether-
1 4
272 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 33. lands decimal money, all public sales take place in francs and centimes,
Belgium, The majority of the merchants now keep their books and make their
entries in francs, in order to conform themselves to the rules of the bank
Through which keeps its accounts solely in francs. In the country large sums are
T. Baring, Esq. generally mentioned in francs; Small sums connected with the country
Gºmºmºmº people's daily dealings in Brabant guilders and stivers; and such is the
force of habit with the Flemish peasants that, at this very day, in the
districts round Dunkirk, where the Flemish language still prevails, the
farmers, though under French rule since King Lewis the Fourteenth, still
speak of guilders and stivers, meaning by the same francs and sous of five
centimes. In usual life every man in Belgium is compelled to have con-
stantly at hand his tables of reduction of the various monies both past and
present.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the
old system, and to be discharged under the new 2 Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements 2
A. By simply stipulating an equitable relative value between the old coins and
the newly introduced ones, so that the change had no effect on the interests
of the parties concerned.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate P Was it optional or
compulsory 2 If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it effectually
enforced 2 or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language 2
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently 2––
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use ? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts 2
A. The change was immediate and made compulsory for all public deeds and
writings, that means, such as were received by notaries or other public
officers; the penalty consisting in a fine, light in itself, but applicable for
every contravention. The same also for private acts and writings pre-
sented to be registered. Originally, indeed, the law pronounced the nullity
of acts not couched in legal money; but that penalty does not appear to
have been ever applied, being found too severe. Until quite lately, one
was allowed to mention, accessorily, the old monies in an act or deed, pro-
vided the legal ones appeared foremost in the same. This is, however,
now strictly forbidden, and public officers are fined 100 francs for the first
trespass of the kind, and 200 francs for the second, and a deed under
private hand and seal presented at a stamp office to be registered would
be rejected if drawn in money no longer legal in Belgium. Whatever
systems may still be made use of in popular language, there is only one
legal system now in use in Belgium, viz., francs and centimes, and
accounts cannot otherwise be legally kept.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts 2
A. Legally at least, if not effectually so; farmers and small shopkeepers
still continuing to use the old denominations of Brabant guilders and
stivers, especially in the Flemish provinces.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society 2 If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting? Does it now exist?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness 2
A. See answers to queries 9 up to 25.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages 2
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2d. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. There is not enough difference in the value of Brabant or Netherlands
guilders and francs to render either of them more convenient than the
other, so far as the value thereof is concerned, but in book-keeping and
all sorts of calculations the advantages of a decimal system scarcely need
to be pointed out, the same being so very obvious.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally P. If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money? Or was it in any and what way connected
with it 2
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money P –
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commodities
. . retail transactions of the poorer classes 2 Does inconvenience or loss arise to them there-
TOII)
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 273
General Query. No. 33.
Belgium.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the &Y
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances, Through
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect?–
A. The French decimal system of weights and measures was introduced in
Belgium at the time of the conquest, towards the end of the last century
simultaneously with that of the decimal monetary system, and still con-
tinues in force in all the applications it is susceptible of, under the same
names and applications as in France. During the union with the Dutch
Netherlands the names had been changed, but the system was nevertheless
strictly kept up. Since the erection of Belgium into an independent king-
dom the French names have again been resumed.
Notwithstanding the legal introduction full sixty years ago of the decimal
metric system of weights and measures, the old local systems have not ceased
to exist, though their existence was wholly illegal. In Antwerp and other
important places the new systems have long been at work, especially for
large transactions, but with the country people, as well as the lower orders
in the towns, the old weights and measures are still the order of the day
and any other hardly spoken of One must not, however, suppose that such
weights and measures are tolerated by laws; quite the reverse; the mere pos-
session of old weights and measures constituting in itself a misdemeanor,
for which the law provides and actually inflicts fines and punishments.
The people employ decimal weights or measures, and have recourse to
summary reductions and quaint. calculations, to transform the result into
the old weights and measures which vary almost from province to province,
and to which they are so attached that it will be very difficult ever to
eradicate the same completely. Small dealers do their best to keep up
this state of things, as the confusion now subsisting prevents ignorant cus-
tomers from calculating off hand the prices at which the goods stand to
such dealers.
Habit and routine are wonderful things; it would otherwise hardly be cre-
dited that up to this day on the Antwerp Exchange grain still sells in
Brabant guilders, though by decimal weights and measures, and that the
Antwerp sugar refiners sell their sugars by 100 pounds old Antwerp
weight, through a laborious reduction from the actual weight taken in
kilogrammes from the scales. ...”
Till recently old weights and measures were allowed to be mentioned in
deeds and printed documents, provided the legal ones appeared foremost in
the same ; but this is now no longer tolerated, and Government seems dis-
posed to enforce the laws. Respecting the latter, as well as for the monies,
reference of course must be made to such elucidations as will have been
obtained on the subject from France, whence the system, as above stated,
was introduced into Belgium as a consequence of the conquest, and the
French penal laws respecting the same promulgated in Belgium, where
they have never ceased remaining in force down to this very day.
Antwerp, 5th May 1856.
T. Baring, Esq.
No. 34. No. 34.
ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into Belgium.
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the KINGDOM OF BELGIUM. Her Majesty's
Sent by HER MAJESTY's MINISTER at BRUSSELs. Minister.
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law 2
4. The franc. The system, weight and standard, are the same as in France.
Belgium has no gold coin.
Q. 2. What are the subdivions of such money of account 2
A. The centime or hundreth part of a franc.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denomitions P
No ; the franc is both money of account and the coin.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account
estimated in money of the United Kingdom?
A. The franc contains 69°4 grains pure silver, which makes its value 0.808s.,
or 9-69d. The centime or hundredth part of the franc would, at the above
rate, be worth 0.0969d. Its weight in copper is 2 grammes or 30-8640 troy
grains.
M m
274 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 34. Present Current Coins.
Belgium. * -
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respectivo
Her Majesty's value in the money of account, as well as in coins of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
Minister. silver, copper, or mixed metal?
A. Silver coins of 20 centimes, 50 centimes, 1 franc, 2 francs, 2% francs, and
5 francs. Copper coins of 10 centimes, 5 centimes, 2 centimes, and 1
centime.
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use?
A. Yes.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use P
A. The centime in copper, and the piece of 20 centimes in silver.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society?
A. No.
Former Money of Account and Coins.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions 2
A. The florin subdivided into 100 cents.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account 2–
A. The florin is a legal tender of the value of two francs and ten centimes.
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account 2
A. By the Royal Arrête of 8 Dec. 1824, forty-three coins were recognised as
legal tenders at a fixed valuation in florins. (For the list vide page 3 of the
“Legislation Monétaire,” herewith enclosed. -
Change of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place?
A. By the law of 5 June 1832. (Wide page 2).
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2
F. The diversity and bad state of the coinage, and the importance of establishing
one uniform and decimal currency.
Q. 14, Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the
previous currency?—
A. The great number of coins led to inconvenience, to confusion, and to
complexity.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. These inconveniences existed, but owing to long habit were not much
complained of.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping 2
A. Official printed tariffs were used to facilitate payments and account keeping.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt P—
A. Losses of fractional sums fell always on the working and middle class in
making small payments.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilitate the currency
to that of neighbouring countries P and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its
use either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law P
A. The Belgian Legislature acted for the avowed object of adopting the
French currency, in order to facilitate the frequent relations between the
two countries.
The new currency being identical with that of France, had already become
very familiar through the union of Belgium with France down to 1814.
After the latter period, the French silver currency remained a legal tender
in the southern provinces of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. (i. e. in
Belgium).
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a nondecimal division ?
A. The Decimal System was already sanctioned by use.
Thus theoretical and practical advantages were combined.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected?——
A. The Belgian currency was established by the law of 5 June 1832.
The ancient coins, which were not very numerous, were gradually withdrawn
from circulation. (Wide page 5, &c.)
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 275
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed?
A. No.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change?
A. The coins mentioned above (vide No. 5.), excepting the pieces of 20
centimes and of 2% francs, which were only decreed later.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new P
A. All the ancient coins have been gradually withdrawn, except the 1 florin
and 24 florin pieces, which are still admitted as legal tenders.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2
A. The franc is the name of the new monetary unit. The old coins retained
their names. e
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies 2
A. No. The old currency was only expressible in francs, centimes, and
fractions of centimes.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c., belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements 2
A. By the law of 1832 it was enacted that all engagements dated before the
lst of January 1833, and contracted in florins, shall be discharged at the
rate of 47# hundredths of the florin to one franc.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate f Was it optional or com-
pulsory If compulsory how and by what penalties was it enforced Was it effectually
enforced ? or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language 2 f
A. The change was immediate and compulsory for all public and adminis-
trative acts ; not compulsory for private transactions.
The ancient system is very rarely used. Still the terms cent and half-cent
remain in the popular language, though no longer expressing their ancient
value. A cent is used to designate the 2 centime piece.
Retail dealers sell frequently in cents, meaning 2 centimes.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently
A. There are no more ancient coins. For some time the two systems remained
in use concurrently.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use 2
How does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
A. The concurrent use was only tolerated.
The value of the ancient coin in relation to the legal currency was regulated
by official tariffs, and thus all transactions in accounts, bank notes, and bills
of exchange were calculated in the official currency.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts 2
A. The ancient coin was received only as representing its value. Accounts are
now universally kept in the new currency.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectully made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts
A. The change has not yet been radical and complete. The ancient usages long
survived in the masses. Here and there ancient denominations, proscribed
for sixty years, are used, but this is a raretion.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes
of society If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting 2 Does it
now exist 1)id the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness?——
A. The country was already accustomed to the new system.
There was no commotion.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages & d
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2d. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions?
A. The new currency is much more convenient than the former currencies, as
it substitutes a uniform system for a multiplicity of coins different in name
and value.
This is an advantage felt in every species of payment and account.
No.34.
Belgium.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
M m 2
276. APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 34.
Belgium.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
No. 35.
Switzerland.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally 2 If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money 2 or was it in any and what way connected
with it 2
A. The decimal metrical system was already established by the law of
21 August 1816.
A law of 1 October 1855, renders it more rigorously and exclusively
enforced. Even in private contracts, commercial books, and other private
acts, produced in justice, the legal denominations must be exclusively
employed.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money
A. The decimal metrical system was adopted in 1816, and therefore legally
preceded the decimal division of money which did not come into operation
till 1832.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes 2 Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
A. The fractions resulting from reductions are always detrimental to the
poorer classes.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
A. The accompanying pamphlet “Législation Monétaire de la Belgique de
1830 à 1855,” extracted from the “Revue de la Numismatique Belge,”
tom V., gives an epitome of all the laws and royal arrétés on the subject.
For the Netherlands, vide the remarkable book entitled, “Le Système
“ Monétaire du Royaume des Pays Bas, la Refonte des vieilles
“ Monnaies d’Argent, et la Démonétisation de l'Or, par A. Vrolik,
“ Docteur ès Sciences, Président de la Commission des Monnaies,
* (actuellement Ministre des Finances). Utrecht, chez J. G. Broese,
“ 1853. 1 vol. in 8vo.” -
(
No. 35.
SWITZERLAND.
MY LORD, JBern, May 2, 1856.
UPON the receipt of your Lordship's despatch, marked circular of the 7th of March,
instructing me to procure and transmit to your Lordship all the information I might be
able to obtain from any persons acquainted with the question of Decimal Coinage and its
introduction into this country, from private as well as from official sources, I addressed
myself to the Federal Council, to a banking house in this city, to a scientific gentleman in
Zurich through the latter, and to Her Majesty's Consul at Geneva, in order to obtain from
these several quarters replies to the paper of questions from the Decimal Coinage Com-
mission which formed the enclosure of your Lordship's above-cited despatch.
I have now received from the three first of these sources the papers which I sent to
them for this purpose, with answers noted to the several questions contained in them,
and I have the honour to enclose the same herewith.
Paper A. contains a copy of the answers furnished by the Federal Council; they were
transmitted to me with the enclosed note, and, in addition to the information which they
supply, your Lordship will find annexed thereto a number of documents bearing upon the
arguments for and against, the mode of carrying into effect and the nature of the change
which was operated in the Swiss monetary system in 1850, by which the various,
numerous and complicated denominations of coinage previously existing in the country
were swept away, and the present uniform decimal French system adopted, and
rendered compulsory on the whole Confederation. -
Paper B., answered by a member of the firm of Messrs. Marcuard and Co. of this city,
refers to the change of the monetary system as regards especially the large canton of
Bern.
Paper C., answered by M. Trümpler of Zurich, applies to the change generally all over
the Confederation.
I have received no reply as yet from Geneva, and perhaps may fail in obtaining one
from thence. I have thought it best, therefore, not to delay longer in forwarding to your
Lordship, for the use of the Decimal Coinage Commission, the information which I am now
enabled to communicate.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 277
I feel but little competent to offer any observations myself upon the subject of this
despatch, and I hope that the full answers so obligingly made to the papers of questions
I have the honour to forward here with, together with the documents of various sorts
which accompany Paper A., and which we owe to the courtesy of the Federal Council, will
render anything I could offer quite superfluous. I beg leave, therefore, only to invite
attention to the fact, that, whilst it will be observed that the change of the monetary
system in Switzerland and the adoption of a Decimal Coinage appears to have been
effected without difficulty and to meet now with universal approbation, it must, at the
same time, be recollected that the circumstances under which it was carried out were
peculiar, both from the magnitude of the evils which the immense variety of the
previously existing monetary systems and coinage in the country occasioned, and which
were thus at one blow annihilated, as well as from the advantages and facilities presented
by the change that was accomplished, from its assimilating the Swiss monetary system
with that of its powerful neighbour, France, on the one hand, and with that of the
Sardinian states on the other, with both of which countries the relations of Switzerland
are constant and important.
I have, &c.
(Signed) G. J. R. GORDON.
The Earl of Clarendon,
&c. &c. &c.
P.S. May 3.—I have this morning received from Mr. Consul Pictet the paper of
questions and answers marked D., which have been furnished by an old Commissariat
Officer of Captain Pictet's acquaintance, and which I have the satisfaction to enclose with
the other papers.
(Signed) G. J. R. G.
A.
ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards SWITZERLAND.
Prepared by the direction of the FEDERAL CouncIL of the SWISS CONFEDERATION.
Present Momey of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law 2
A. Le franc, Égal au franc de France.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account 2
A. Le centime ou rappe, centième partie du franc.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations 2
A. On ne compte qu’en francs et centimes.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account
estimated in money of the United Kingdom P
4. Le franc vaut 0.8 shilling (la livre sterling supposée égale à 25 francs),
le centime vaut 0.096 penny (I shilling=12 pence).
Present Current Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal P
A. Les monnaies légales et en circulation générale sont:–
Pièce de 5 francs, pesant 25 grammes
2 Contenant
35 5 5 1() 3 5 5
* -4 d'argent.
25 I 35 O 2 3 l () 8–5 o
l 2] et Tº de cuivre.
: 2 2 ... ', T2 32
, 20 centimes 3'25 , contenant fºr d'argent.
22 10 55 2 5 ? ) 5 5 Fºr 25
5 3 O 55 I 667 33 5 x T##5 2 3
e • * { Af º © &
» 2 32 2 * 5 } Composées de cuivre, étain, et zinc (měme
I 55 I 5 alliage que les nouveaux sous Français).
53
L'alliage des pièces de 20, 10, et 5 centimes est composé d'argent, de nickel
de cuivre, et de zinc. Pour comparer la valeur des monnaies Suisses avec
celle des monnaies de compte Anglaises on adoptera encore I livre sterling
a 20 shillings=25 francs. Pour comparer la valeur des monnaies Suisses
avec celle des monnaies :* Anglaises la Seule base praticable parait
m 3
No. 35.
Switzerland.
No. 35A.
Switzerland.
Federal Council.
278 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 35A. être le poids de l'argent fin contenu dans le franc et dans le (nouveau)
Switzerland. shilling; or 1 franc contient 4'500, 1 shilling 5'231 grammes d'argent.
Federal Council.
Monnaie Anglaise.
De compte. Courante.
S. d. s. d.
La piece de 5 francs vaut 4 - •s 4 0 4 3° 62
: 3 33 sse -， gº l 7 - 20 1 8 * 65
22 1 93 - as #- 0 9 60 0 10 " 32
93 0# ,, •-5 º Le •- 0 4 80 0 5 ° 16
,, 20 centimes - º-9 •- 0 1 92 0 2° 06
53 10 92 -> - º-º 0 0.96 0 1 ° 03
95 5 52 - W -) •-) 0 0 - 48 0 ()" 52
55 2 33 ©- - s- 0 0 ° 192 0 0 " 206
95 1 93 " •s º， 0 0 096 | 0 0 ° 103
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common
use ?
A. Oui, les pièces de l centime.
Q 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?
A. La pièce de l centime.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society ?
A. Non.
Former Momey of Account and Coims.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system ? What
were its subdivisions ?
A. Avant la constitution actuelle de la Confédération Suisse, les 22 cantons
qui la composaient étaient souverains dans les affaires monétaires, et il
existait un grand nombre de monnaies de compte dont les principales
étaient :-
(Ancien) Franc divisé en 10 batz à 10 rappes.
- Florin ,, 60 kreuzer à 4 deniers.
Différens florins divisés en 40 schillings à 4 rappes.
Couronne à 25 batz, &c. &c.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account ?
A. L'ancien franc valait à peu près lf 43c.
Les florins valaient de 2f 32c. à 1f. 71c.
La couronne valait 3f. 57c., &c.
l l. Q, What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account ?—
A. Pièces d'or :
2, 1 et # Louis d'or ou doublon, le doublon à 22f 86c.
8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, l# & # de ducats ; le ducat à 11f 43c., &c.
Pièces d'argent :
4, 2, l, & # francs, le franc à 1f. 43c.
2, 1, #, }, & # de florins ; le florin de 2f. 32c. à 1f. 71c., &c. &c.
Cependant les pièces d'or et les grandes pièces d'argent Suisse circulaient assez
peu, et elles étaient loin de pouvoir suffire aux besoins en numéraire ; la
plus grande partie des grosses pièces circulantes étaient des 5 francs
Français, des couronnes de Brabant, des florins d'Allemagne, et des pièces
de 20 kreuzer d'Autriche.
Chitmge of Momey.
l2. Q. When did the change take place ?
A. La Constitution Fédérale de l'année 1848 dépouilla les cantons de leur
autorité en affaires monétaires, mit celles-ci dans les mains de l'autorité
fédérale, et demanda une réforme monétaire. La nouvelle loi fédérale sur
les monnaies date de 1850, et l'exécution de la réforme monétaire eut lieu
en 185 l et 1852.
3. What was the cause of the change ?
14. Q. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the
previous currency ?—
- A. Ce qui vient d'être émis plus haut (réponses aux questions 9 et l1)
explique déjà bien l'urgente nécessité qui existait et qu'on sentait depuis
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 279
50 ans, de réformer à fond les affaires monétaires. La principale raison fut No. 35A.
cependant celle, que les pièces Françaises et Allemandes se faisaient peu Switzerland.
à peu et de plus en plus cours à un taux abusif et trop élevé en comparaison , ©
des monnaies Suisses , ainsi la pièce de 5 francs Française, tarifiée au Federal Counciº
commencement de ce siècle à 34 batz, fut donnée et acceptée finalement à v-m-mm-lº
35# batz ; le florin monta de 14# à 15 batz, &c. A mesure que le cours
abusif de l'une ou l'autre monnaie étrangère haussa, elle chassait et rechas-
sait l'autre. Ces cours abusifs n'ayant cependant pas été adoptés légalement,
la même pièce avait deux valeurs différentes, l'une plus élevée dans les
paiemens du grand et du petit commerce, l'autre dans les paiemens d'intérêt,
du loyer, & c.
15. Q. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. Non.
16. Q. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping ?—
A. Voir la réponse à la question No. 14.
17. Q. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt ?—
A. C'était surtout la classe peu aisée qui souffrait de l'état des choses ; elle
était obligée d'accepter l'argent au taux abusif, et très souvent elle me
pouvait en faire emploi qu'au taux légal.
18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to thaº
of neighbouring countries : and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use either
as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law ?
18. La Suisse étant un pays trop petit et en trop de relations avec d'autres
pays pour fonder un nouveau système monétaire sur un principe tout
particulier, et n'ayant en outre pas l'intention de pourvoir elle-même à tous
les besoins de numéraire, il ne s'agissait guère pour elle que de choisir
entre les systèmes de ses voisins, c'est à dire, entre le franc adopté en France
et en Sardaigne, et le florin, monnaie de l'union monétaire des états de
l'Allemagne méridionale. Le système Français l'emporta à cause des relations
plus fréquentes avec les pays qui l'ont adopté qu'avec les états qui se
servent du florin, et encore à cause de la grande stabilité qu'on se promet-
tait à cette époque du système Français avec sa base métrique. Il faut
ajouter qu'en adoptant le franc Français en argent, on exclut'cependant par
principe dans la nouvelle loi fédérale les pièces d'or pour n'avoir que l'argent
comme étalon unique. Il est clair que la partie occidentale de la Suisse se
prononçait entièrement et vivement pour le système Français. Tandis que
l'est aurait en général préféré l'union monétaire avec les états voisins
Allemands.
A l'exception du canton de Genève, qui déjà depuis 10 ans avait entièrement
adopté le système Français comme monnaie de compte et comme monnaie
courante, on ne compta guère en Suisse en francs de France, mais, comme il
a été déjà dit, les pièces de 5 francs, sous la dénomination de * 35 batz,"
formaient une partie considérable du numéraire circulant en Suisse, et les
pièces divisionnaires, 2, l, et # francs (ainsi que l'or Français) étaient de
même connues dans tout le pays avant l'introduction du nouveau système.
19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a decimal
division of money over a non-decimal division P——
A. La division décimale fut une des raisons secondaires qui firent adopter le
franc plutôt que le florin. Les avantages d'une pareille division étaient
connus dans une bonne partie de la Suisse, où l'on avait pour monnaie de
compte l'ancien franc divisé en 10 batz à 10 rappes.
20. Q. In what way was the change effected ? -
A. Toutes les monnaies, or, argent, billon, et cuivre, frappeés antérieurement
dans le territoire actuel de la Conféderation Suisse, par la République
Helvétique, les cantons, les évêques et les seigneurs, furent retirées de la
circulation, détruites par la font, et remplacées par les nouvelles espèces.
Le retrait eut lieu par canton ou par groupe de plusieurs cantons, en
commençant à l'ouest de la Suisse et en terminant à l'est ; il dura un
mois dans chaque canton ou dans chaque groupe, de manière qu'un an après
le commencement du retrait cette opération se trouvait terminée dans tout
le pays.
Q. 2l. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed ?
A. Nous avons dit plus haut que les florins d'Allemagne avaient acquis peu à peu
un cours abusif de 15 batz, trop élevé en comparaison de la pièce de 5 francs,
qui valait généralement 35 batz, et moyennant ce cours abusif ces ftorins
Allemands envahissaient de plus en plus la Suisse en chassant l'argent Suisse
et les pièces de 5 francs. Pour attirer plutôt ces dernières, et rechasser les
florins, on tarifa pour les caisses fédérales la pi ce de 5 francs à 35# b,tiz
M m 4
280 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 35A.
Switzerland.
Federal Council.
déjà quelque temps avant l'exécution de la réforme monétaire, et ce nouveau
tarif se fit valoir aussi dans les transacticns particulières. Les monnaies
d'origine Suisse, dont les grosses pièces n'étaient guère dans la circulation
générale, n'éprouvèrent aucun changement jusqu'au retrait. -
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change ?
A. Nous avons vu que les pièces de 5 francs Françaises, qui servent aujourd'-
hui de monnaie principale légale, se trouvaient déjà dans le pays en grande
quantité avant la réforme. Abstraction faite de ces pièces, la mise en
circulation des nouvelles pièces à l'effigie Suisse se fit, en retirant les an-
ciennes monnaies Suisses comme paiement pour ces dernières. Depuis la
réforme on ne mit en circulation que des pièces de cuivre qui avaient été
frappées et émises lors de la réforme en trop petite quantité pour suffire
· aux besoins.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any and
which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new ?
A. Le principal but de la réforme étant de faire disparaître la grande variété
des espèces d'anciennes monnaies, et ces anciennes monnaies n'entrant
guère dans le nouveau système (excepté le billon de Genève), toutes les
anciennes espèces d'origine Suisses furent retirées. Le billon Allemand,
qui avait circulé en grand nombre dans la partie de la Suisse limitrophe
à l'Allemagne, n'entrant pas non plus dans le nouveau système, et n'ayant
plus de valeur légale, alla regagner sa patrie sans que l'autorité s'en mêla.
Les pièces d'argent Allemandes, qui avaient fait une partie du numéraire
avant la réforme, et qui n'étaient pas si faciles à éloigner, surtout à l'époque
de la réforme, où les cours pour l'Allemagne étaient bas, restèrent encore
quelque temps, et les cantons furent autorisés à leur donner un cours légal
passager un peu au dessous de leur valeur intrinsèque, relativement à la
monnaie Suisse.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins ?
A. Le nom de franc, qui fut donné à la nouvelle unité, devait être choisi,
parceque cette unité est absolument la même que le franc de France, et que
l'on voulait donner cours légal en France aux nouvelles pièces d'argent Suisses
comme les pièces Françaises (et Belges et celles de Sardaigne) ont cours
légal en Suisse. Nous avons vu qu'avant la réforme une autre espèce de
monnaie de la valeur de 9 du franc actuel avait porté le même nom. De
même le nom de *rappe," autrefois la centième partie de l'ancien franc, fut
donné au centième du nouveau franc. Pour la Suisse Française on donna
à cette dernière pièce le nom de * centime, " en usage en France. Le nom
de * batz," qui signifiait autrefois Tº de l'ancien franc, a été donné, non par
la loi, mais par le peuple dans quelques parties de la Suisse à la nouvelle
pièce de 10 centimes.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies ?
A. La pièce de 5 francs ayant valu autrefois généralement 35 batz, on peut
dire que 7 anciens " batz" étaient égaux à un franc nouveau. Il s'en suit que
les anciennes menues monnaies ne pouvaient être exactement exprimées en
nouvelle valeur.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new ? Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages, duties,
&c., belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the right to
which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements ?
A. Pour fixer en nouvelle valeur les dettes ou d'autres engagemens con-
tractés sous l'ancien régime monétaire, chaque canton établit, sous l'appro-
bation des autorités fédérales, une loi de réduction précise, basée sur la
valeur intrinsèque des anciennes monnaies relativement aux nouvelles.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate ? Was it optional or
compulsory ? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced ? Was it effectually
enforced ? or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language ?
& b & b
A. Les anciennes monnaies, représentants de l'ancienne monnaie de compte,
n'existant plus, et les anciennes valeurs n'étant exprimables en nouvelles
monnaies, il fallut nécessairement changer la monnaie de compte en même
temps que les nouvelles monnaies remplacèrent les anciennes, et des peines
de contravention étaient donc entièrement superflues. L'ancien système
ne resta en usage que dans la langue du peuple, d'où il disparait de plus en
plus.
Quant aux monnaies étrangères au pays, et au système actuel, qui avait servi
de monnaie de compte et comme monnaies courantes dans quelques parties
du pays, (par exemple, les florins d'Allemagne,) la nouvelle loi monétaire
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 281
établit que des conventions peuvent être stipulées comme auparavant en
monnaies étrangères, mais que les paies (gages, salaire) ne doivent se faire
qu'en monnaies légales.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently ? ©
A. Voir la réponse à la question précédente.
Q. 29, Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use ? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange ?
Q. 3O. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts ?—-
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any and
what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts ?
A. On peut dire que la réforme fut éxécuté de la maniére la plus satisfaisante,
et qu'elle eut un plein succès. Il est clair que les personnes moins instruites
ont eu plus de peine à s'y accommoder, et on peut dire que dans les con-
trées industrielles la réforme a pris pied plus vîte et plus facilement que
dans les contrées agricoles. C'est surtout dans ces dernières qu'on parle
encore assez souvent des anciens * batz" dans les petites transactions.
Le nouveau système se trouve toutefois exposé à un danger de plus en plus
imminent, et auquelil lui sera probablement impossible derésister à la longue.
La Suisse ne frappant pas elle-même les grosses pièces (il ne fut frappé qu'un
petit nombre de 5 francs comme représentans), elle les tire de la France par
l'entremise du commerce. Mais en France l'argent va de plus en plus être
remplacé par l'or, et le commerce Suisse ne pouvant plus obtenir des pièces
d'argent, fait venir de l'or ; de sorte que l'or Français, sans être légale-
ment admis, circule en Suisse de plus en plus, et l'argent va disparaître
comme en France. Or l'or Français n'est dans aucun rapport avec le sys-
tème métrique, et la base stable reposant sur le franc en argent va donc
être perdue.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society ? Ifany such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting ? Does it now exist ?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness ?-—
A. Tout le peuple était convaincu de la nécessité urgente d'une réforme quel-
conque. Il y eut bien au commencement une aversion contre le système
Français adopté dans la partie du peuple limitrophe de l'Allemagne, mais
elle ne fut que passagère, et maintenant tout le peuple se trouve fort satis-
fait de l'état actuel. L'exécution de la réforme ne causa aucune animosité,
elle se fit même, grace à l'instruction généralement répandue et avancée
du peuple Suisse, bien plus facilement qu'on n'avait osé l'espérer.
Q 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages ?
1st. In paying and receiving-(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2d. In keeping accounts-(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. La nouvelle monnaie étant la même pour tout le pays, et ayant remplacé
une foule d'anciennes espèces différentes d'un canton à l'autre, elle facilite
beaucoup toutes les transactions d'une partie du pays à l'autre. Elle ren-
dait aussi plus faciles les transactions avec la France, aussi longtemps que
les monnaies d'argent prévalaient dans ce dernier pays. La nouvelle mon-
naie ayant une suite de représentans assez peu éloignés l'un de l'autre par
leur valeur (5, 2, I, #, -*s, T'o, +# s, T#-º, + º,) cela facilite les petites trans-
actions. La comptabilité offre encore par la division décimale de la mon-
naie, un avantage que ne possédait qu'une partie des anciennes monnaies.
Weights amd Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally ? If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money ? Or was it in any and what way connected
with it ?
A. Les poids et mesures sOnt basés sur un système mixte, décimal et duo-
décimal, de la manière suivante :-
Mesures de lomgueur :
Le pied à 10 pouces à 10 lignes ; la brache à 2 pieds, l'aune à 4 pieds,
la toise à 6 pieds, la perche à 10 pieds, la lieue à 16,000 pieds.
Mesures carrées :
Pied, toise, perche, arpent, lieue, carrées.
Mesures cubiques :
I. Pied, toise, perche, cubiques.
II. Mesures creusés, pour objets non liquides : Sester (= 15 litres,
soit 30 livres d'eau) ; + r de sester; malter (10 sesters), ou +# de sester.
III. Mesures pour liquides : Pot (l# litres soit 3 livres d'eau) ; char
à 400 ; muids à 100 pots; seau à 25 pots; #, +, # de pot.
No. 35A.
Switzerland.
Federal Council.
N n
282 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No, 35A. Poids : - - - -
Switzerland. Livre (= #r de pied cube d'eau dans sa plus grande densité = # kilo)
- divisé en 32 demi onces, ou en 16 onces, ou en #, +, # de livre,
Federal Council. ou 500 grammes. (La dernière division est très peu en usage dans
dſl-san- ..-sº-a-mm-Im-m-º ò la vie commune.)
Quintal à 100 livres.
Ce système fut adopté par 12 cantons, qui ont conclu un concordat le
17 Août 1835 et un arrêté de la Diète Fédéral du 26 Juillet 1836 a
étendu ce système à toutes les transactions fédérales comme règle obliga-
toire. Il est rendu obligatoire dès le 1 Janvier 1857, pour toute
la Suisse, par la loi fédérale du 23 Décembre 185l.
En choisissant ce système de poids on tâcha de concilier les anciennes habi-
tudes avec un nouveau système, qui serait en rapport exact, et expressible
avec le système métrique. Voici ces rapports :-
l pied = # de mètre.
l sester = 1# décalitres.
l pot = 1# litres.
1 livre = # kilogramme.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money ?
· A. On ne pourrait dire que les rapports entre le système des poids et mesures
et celui'des monnaies donnassent lieu à des inconvéniens graves. Cependant,
quelques cantons de ceux qui n'ont pas encore introduit le nouveau système
des poids et mesures ont fait leur possible pour introduire en Suisse le
système métrique pur et simple, et il est probable que, si on avait à recom-
mencer, ce dernier système, étant celui qui, plus que tout autre, a la chance
de devenir le système universel, serait préféré au système mixt actuel.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes ? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
A. Comme il existe des monnaies d'une valeur minime, on ne pourrait dire
que des inconvéniens ou des pertes quelconques résultent de la désharmonie
dans la division des poids et mesures et des monnaies, là où cette déshar-
monie a lieu.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the reasons
for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
A. Nous ajoutons à ces réponses :-
No. I. Rapport et projet de loi sur la monnaie, par l'Expert Fédéral des
Monnaies M. Speiser, à Bâle, d. d. 6 Octobre 1849.
No. 2. Rapport et projet de loi du Conseil Fédéral sur la matière, d. d.
? Novembre 1849.
No. 3. Rapport sur la question de la réforme monétaire, présenté par la
majorité de la commission du Conseil des Etats, d. d. ? (fin 1849)
No. 4. Rapport présenté par la minorité de la dite commission du Conseil
des Etats sur la même question, présenté le 12 Décembre 1849.
Nos. 5 et 6. Rapports présentés par les deux parties de la commission du
Conseil National sur la même question, d. d. ? Mars et 5 Avril 1850.
No. 7. Mémoire sur la question des monnaies, présenté par M. Borel,
Consul Suisse à Bruxelles, d. d. 10 Février 1850, avec supplément, d. d.
Nos. 8 et 9. Loi sur les monnaies et sur l'exécution de la réforme monétaire,
d. d. 7 Mai 1850.
No. 10. Rapport sur la mise en exécution de la réforme monétaire, faisant
partie du rapport annuel du Département Fédéral des finances, pour
l'année 185l.
No. 11. Rapport final sur la réforme monétaire, présenté par la Commission
Fédérale des monnaies, au mois de Mars 1853, et faisant partie du rapport
annuel du département des finances, pour l'année 1852.
No. 12. Loi sur les poids et mesures du 23 Décembre 1851.
No. 13. Rapport et proposition de la commission du Conseil National, du
23 Juillet 1851.
No. 14. Rapport de la minorité de la commission du 30 Juillet 1851.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 283
B.
ANswERs to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the CANTON of BERNE, SWITZERLAND.
By a MEMBER of the Firm of Messrs. MARCUARD and Co., of Berne.
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law ?—
A. Francs de France.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account ?-—-
A. Centimes.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations ? -
A. Non.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom ?
A. L'écu de cinq francs de France et le centime, dont la valeur sera connue
en argent Anglais.
Present Current Coins.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respec-
tive value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal ?
. A. L'écu de 5 francs , les pièces de 2, 1, et # francs, en argent ; les pièces
de 20. 10, et 5 centimes d'un mélange de cuivre, argent, et nickel ; les pièces
de 2 et l centimes en cuivre. -
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common
use ?
A. Oui.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?
A. Le centime.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
niently high in value by any and which classes in society ?
A. Non.
Former Money of Account and Coins.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system ? What
were its subdivisions ?
A. Le franc ou la livre de Suisse de 10 batz, ou de 100 rappes pièces.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account ?--—
A. La livre de Suisse valait (à raison de 69 rappes pour I franc de France)
1 f 44 ºº c. y
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account ?
l.
A. En monnaies d'or, le Louis d'or i-i-@ L e - 16 • 0
Le double et le demi dans la proportion.
Le Napoléon d'or à raison de #ºs $- 8 d，s - 13 * 80
L'ancien écu de 6 francs de France pour tg- - 4 ' 0
L'écu de Brabant ou de Bavière pour & - º - 3 - 95
L'écu de 5 franc de France pour sém$ ©-， - 3 - 45
et ses fractions dans la proportion.)
Les pièces de 20, 10, 5, 2#, 1, #, et # de batz.)
Change of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place ?
A. En 1852 avec le 1 Janvier on a commencé à Berne à compter et à payer en
nouvelles monnaies.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change ?
A. Il y avait plusieurs raisons. Chaque canton ayant ses taxations à lui, il
en résultait une confusion ; plusieurs cantons avaient aussi une masse de
mauvais billon. La nouvelle Confédération voulait adopter un pied moné-
taire unique pour toute la Suisse, en abolissant toutes ces diverses monnaies
et leurs diverses taxations.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconvenience, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency ?
A. La confusion dans les diverses taxations et prohibitions était à son comble;
non seulement les cantons avaient des tarifs différents, mais encore, par
exemple, dans le canton de Berne il y avait un tarif légal des espèces et un
No. 35B.
Switzerland.
Marcuard & Co.
N n 2 -
284 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 35B. tarifcourant ou abusif Le tarif légal s'entendait pour tout payement à l'Etat,
Switzerland. caisses publiques, capitaux, &c, et le tarif courant pour payement de
ammmm ! marchandises, bétail, chevaux, et produits de l'agriculture. Dans ce dernier
Marcuard & Co. cas on donnait en payement l'écu de Bavière pour 40 batz, l'écu de 5 francs
pour 35 batz, et les fractions dans la proportion. On marchandait non
seulement sur le prix de la marchandise, mais encore sur le taux des
monnaies à recevoir en payement. •
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A, Les proportions d'une monnaie à l'autre étaient beaucoup plus faciles à
calculer au tarif courant ou abusif qu'au taux légal.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping ?
A. Les inconvénients résultant des divers tarifs de monnaies en livres de
Suisse étaient principalement sentis en payant et en recevant de l'argent
mais ils l'étaient également dans la tenue des livres, qui se tenaient en
valeur légale, ce qui nécessitait surtout dans le livre de caisse à chaque
instant des réductions du tarif courant ou abusif au tarif légal.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt ?
A. Ces inconvénients étaient principalement sentis par le commerce et par le
paysan, qui recevait le prix de ses denrées au tarif abusif, et était obligé de
payer ses dettes et leurs intérêts au capitaliste au tarif légal.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries ; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law ?
A. Une des raisons de changer notre système monétaire était certainement
aussi de l'assimiler à celui de France, pays voisin auquel les cantons de
l'ouest étaient obligés d'avoir recours pour en faire venir de l'argent quand
il leur manquait. L'argent de France était familier à la population, parce-
que depuis que les écus de 6 livres de France étaient mis hors de cours à
cause de leur usure, ils avaient été remplacés par les écus de 5 francs et ses
fractions qui circulaient à 34 # et 35 batz, ou 3'50l. de Suisse.
Q. 19, Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a non-decimal division ?
A. Comme notre ancienne livre de Suisse se divisait en 10 batz, et le batz
en 10 rappes, nous avions déjà le système décimal, mais ceci n'était pas le
cas pour les cantons de l'est limitrophes de l'Allemagne, et qui comptaient en
florins et kreuzer.
L'Assemblée Fédérale ayant décidé l'adoption du système monétaire
Français pour toute la Suisse, on fixa à chaque canton un terme jusqu'au-
quel il devait retirer de la circulation les monnaies mises hors de cours.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected ?
A. Pendant ce temps on fit frapper à l'étranger, Strasbourg, Paris, Bruxelles,
des écus de 5 francs et ses fractions, comme aussi du billon à l'effigie fédérale,
mais au titre et poid des monnaies Françaises pour remplacer les anciennes
monnaies.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed ?——
A. Comme toutes les monnaies autres que Françaises furent mises hors de
cours ou retirées, il n'y avaient pas lieu à changer leur valeur.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change ?
A. Aussitôt que l'adoption du pied monétaire Français fut adoptée ou
décidée, on commanda la frappe des pièces nouvelles mentionnées à
l'Article 20, afin qu'il y en eut une certaine quantité au moment de
l'entrée en vigueur du nouveau pied monétaire.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the mew ?
A. Toutes les pièces de monnaie Suisse furent retirées à l'exception des écus
de 5 francs de France et ses fractions.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins ?
A. On intitula les pièces de 10 centimes, batz ; les 5 centimes, # batz; et
centimes, rappes ; mais cela n'a guère pris, on les nomme par leur valeur
Française, comme les écus de 5 francs, 2 francs, et 1 franc, qu'avant le
changement on nommait vulgairement pièces de 35, 14, et 7 batz.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies ?
A. A l'Article 10 nous avons indiqué la valeur en nouvelle monnaie de
l'ancienne livre de Suisse, ou de la pièce de 10 batz ; les pièces de 5, 2#, l,
et # batz ont leur valeur dans la proportion ; cependant au tarif courant ou
abusif les pièces de 5 batz valaient 70c, les 2# 35 c., et les batz 15c.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 285
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new ? Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages, duties,
&c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the right to
v-hich was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements ?
A. Toute dette à l'état, caisse public, loyer de maison, dettes sur hypothèque
ou par obligation, furent réduites au tarif légal de chaque canton pour le
franc de France en nouvelle valeur fédérale soit dans le canton de Berne à
raison de 69l. anciens pour 100 francs nouveaux, et pour dettes en argent
courant ou au tarif abusif à raison de 70l. pour 100 francs.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate ? Was it optional or
compulsory ? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced ? Was it effectually
enforced ? or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language ?
A. Comme il a déjà été dit plus haut on fixa à chaque canton un terme, passé
lequel on devait non seulement faire les payements en nouvelle monnaie,
mais aussi stipuler tous les titres en nouvel argent ; on défendit aux
notaires de stipuler des actes autrement, et chaque stipulation de francs de
Suisse sans autre explication est considérée par les tribunaux être nouvelle
valeur.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
ſor any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently ?
A. Seulement pour les marchés de bétail et de foins ; les paysans et vachers ont
continué jusqu'à présent à les faire généralement en Louis d'or et en
ancienne valeur au taux abusif de manière que la réduction en nouveaux
francs devient facile. Cependant on commence aussi à faire de marches
de bétails en pièces de 20 francs, et en nouveaux francs.
Cette exception n'affecte du reste nullement la nouvelle manière de
compté ; on connait les réductions d'avance ; elle n'est d'aucune influence
non plus sur la tenue des livres des banquiers et des négocians.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use ?
How does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange ?—-
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts ?
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts ?
A. Personne ne tient plus ses comptes en ancienne valeur, et on ne parle que
de nouveaux francs et centimes.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society ? If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting ? Does it now
exist ? Did the change cause any popular commotions or easiness ?
A. Le changement du système monétaire n'était point impopulaire, parceque
tout le monde comprenait facilement qu'il mettrait fin à la confusion qui
existait ; seulement on critiquait la forme des nouvelles monnaies, princi-
palement du billon.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages ?
1st. In paying and receiving-(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2d. In keeping accounts-(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. Les nouvelles monnaies sont plus commodes que les anciennes, parceque
d'abord les monnaies Françaises sont mieux frappées que celles qu'on avait
auparavant ; on peut facilement en faire des pilles ; les écus de 5 francs sont
tous de la même grandeur, tandis qu'il n'en était pas de même des écus de
6 francs de France et de Bavière ; seulement les pièces de 10 et de 5 cen-
times sont trop petites, et ne se distinguent pas assez des pièces de 50
centimes.
VVeights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally ? If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money ? or was it in any and what way connected
with it ?
A. La Confédération a aussi adopté en même temps ou peu avant, de nouveaux
poids et mesures fédéraux, mais à notre connaissance il n'y a que le
nouveau pied fédéral qui ait obtenu une division décimale en 10 pouces et
l0 lignes, et que les mesures de poids et de liquide ne soient pas au sys-
tème décimal n'est d'aucun inconvénient pour les divisions des nouvelles
monnaies.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money ?
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commo-
dities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes ? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
A. Il n'en est résulté aucun inconvénient pour les classes pauvres puisque
dans le nouveau système il trouve des monnaies plus petites que dans
No. 35B.
Switzerland.
Marcuard & Co.
N n 3
286 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 35B. l’ancien, peutétre, seulement trop petites, parcequ'avec un centime seul
Switzerland. on ne peut rien acheter, il faut qu'il en ait 2 ou 3 pour qu'il puisse acheter
un morceau de pain. Dans l’ancieri Systèmeily avait aussi des centimes ou
rappes, mais les monnaies étaient très rares; la plus petite monnaie en cir-
culation ordinaire était la pièce de 2% rappes ou le kreuzer valant le quart
d’un batz, ou en nouveau Valeur 3% centimes. Celui qui vivait d’aumónes
vivait mieux alors qu'aujourd’hui, où il faut qu'il se contente souvent d'une
pièce de 2 centimes. En attendant dansla paye des ouvriers, et surtout des
journaliers à la campagne, on a conservé les mêmes prix pour les journées
en ancienne monnaie, qu'on réduit alors au centime près en nouvelle mon-
naie, et le journalier n’abandonne pas un Seul centime, lorsqu’il sait qu'il
complette les 8 ou 9 batz qu'il recevait sous l’ancien système pour prix de
sa, journée.
Marcuard & Co.
Gemeral Qwery.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the present
inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances, reports, or
public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the reasons for its
adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
No. 35C. C.
Switzerland. ANswers to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
M. Trümple Decimal Coinage, so far as regards SWITZERLAND.
• L I Ul
By M. TRüMPLER, of Zurich.
Present Momey of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law 2
A. New Swiss francs, being the same as French francs.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account P
A. Centimes or cents.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations 2
A. No, we know of nothing but francs and centimes.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom P
A. The value of French money, as compared with sterling money, is suffi-
ciently known in England. -
Present Current Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal?
A. All French, Belgian, and Sardinian, as well as Swiss Silver coins, they
all being coined according to the French law. Twenty, ten, and five cent
pieces of mixed metal (nickel, &c.) coined in Switzerland, and Swiss copper
coins of one and two cents.
. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common
2 y
UlSe :
A. Yes, the one and two cent coins are.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use?
A. One cent; but few except very poor people will use anything below a five
cent piece, the same as in France coins below a sous are not much in use,
only we do not say Sous, we say a five.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society 2
A. No.
Former Money of Account and Coins.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system? What
were its subdivisions f
A. Up to 1850 there were about twenty different monies of account in
Switzerland, with a multitude of subdivisions.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account P
A. Owing to the great many kinds of money of account under which Switz-
erland laboured before 1850, it would be impossible to answer this
question without writing a long treatise.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 287
Q. 11, What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account 2
A. All kinds of German dollars, German florins, Austrian Zwanzigers, French
five-franc pieces, subdivisions of the above, and about a hundred different
Swiss coins. . The legal value of most coins was different in almost every
canton, and the current value differed everywhere from the legal value.
Chamge of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place 2
A. In 1850 and 1851.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2
A. The confusion then existing, the desire to have one kind of money only,
the wish that it should be the money of one of the larger neighbouring
states, either France or Germany (the German florin, called 24 gulden
fuss); the French system was preferred owing to its decimal subdivisions.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the previous
currency P
A. Yes. See Nos. 9 to 12.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. Yes. See Nos. 9 to 12.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping?
A. Yes, in paying or receiving, as well as in account keeping.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt 2
A. By all classes, but chiefly by the lower.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law P
A. The first part of this question is answered under No. 13. The French
five-franc piece, and the French one-franc piece, especially the former, had
been in general circulation for a great number of years; its value, either
as a money of account or of exchange, as expressed in, or compared with,
old Swiss francs, florins, crowns, batzen, &c., &c., was familiar to every
person.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a decimal
division of money over a non-decimal division ?
A. We had to make our choice between the French system and the florin of
Southern Germany, called the 24 gulden fuss, which is subdivided into
60 kreutzers. The florin would have been preferred by the majority of the
cantons, but the decimal division turned the scale in favour of the French
system, and everyone, including myself, who was opposed to it, is now glad
of it.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected P
A. Gradually in the course of 1850 and 1851, by withdrawing all the old
Swiss coins, exchanging them against new Swiss (including French, &c.)
coins; and by abolishing all legal value of foreign coins other than
French, &c.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed P
A. The old Swiss coins were withdrawn, the French five-franc pieces already
in circulation became the money of the country, and all other foreign coins,
which were in use before either as legal or as current money, became
merchandise.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change 2
A. See No. 20.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any and
which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new P
A. See Nos. 20 and 21. The old coins were only permitted to circulate simul-
taneously with the new during a month or two in each canton, during
which they were entirely got rid of, as everyone was glad to send them
into the public exchange offices for new Swiss (or French) coin.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2
A. Yes, in most parts of Switzerland the public accounts had been kept in
old Swiss francs and tenths, called batzen, and cents called raps, and in
some cantons the current money Was also old Swiss francs, these Swiss
francs again differing between each other from one to three or four per
cent. Our present law calls the subdivision or hundredth part of the new
Swiss or French franc a rap, to which stupid fancy the public have done
justice by adopting the * of “centime.”
n 4
No. 35C.
Switzerland.
M. Trümpler.
288 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 35C.
Switzerland.
M. Trümpler.
*
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies?
A. Not precisely commensurate; but French coins having been before in
general circulation, everyone, even the lowest beggar, was familiar with
their value as compared with the florins, Louis d’ors, crowns, old francs,
batzen, raps, shillings, kreutzers, &c., in which prices were expressed in his
locality.
Q, 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new? Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements?
A. The law fixed the day in each canton at and from which all former
engagements, debts, tolls, duties, &c. &c., were payable in new money, id
est, in French francs. At the same time it fixed the scale at which every
kind of money in use before that day was to be reduced by calculation into
new francs; however different from each other the old monies of account
may have been, the French five-franc piece had already under the old law
its legal value for each such kind of money of account, so that, adopting
this coin as a basis, it was easy to fix the scale of conversion.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate P Was it optional or
compulsory 2 If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced? Was it effectually
enforced 2 or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in
popular language 2
A. The change was immediate on a given day in each canton ; it was com-
pulsory. The law forbids contracts in old monies of account by imposing
penalties, but there is no occasion for them, everyone being glad of the
present order as compared with the former confusion. The old system
does not continue in use for any accounts whatever; in some parts they
still sell cattle, for instance, or land, for so many crowns, but before
payment is made, or a contract reduced into writing, the value is calculated
in legal francs, exactly as you say ten guineas and pay 10l. 108.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently 2
A. See No. 27.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
A. See No. 27.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts?
A. See No. 27.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in
any and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or
keeping accounts 2
A. See No. 27.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society F If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting P Does it now exist?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness 2
A. Popular altogether, as explained before.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages?
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. More convenient in every respect.
|Weights amd Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally 2 If so, did such decimal division precede
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money P Or was it in any and what way connected
with it?
A. Weights are not divided decimally. Measures are.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measure,
not corresponding with the divisions of money?
A. No inconvenience whatever. Suppose a pound weight costs a franc, half
a quarter or 1-8th of a pound will cost 12, cents, and the buyer will pay
either 12 or 13 cents, the half cent which cannot be paid being of course
considered as nothing. Besides, as everywhere, people do not ask to buy
infinitesimal parts of pounds or yards, but ask for 5 or 10 cents’ worth of a
commodity.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes? Does inconvenience or loss arise to
them therefrom ?
A. See No. 35.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 289
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the snbject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
A. Switzerland, the same as Belgium, has so far adopted the French silver
standard only. French gold is merchandise, and people may take it or
not as they please; but the Napoleons, or twenty-franc pieces, are in such
general circulation (for twenty francs of course) that, unless a change
takes place in France, which is not likely, Switzerland will have to legalize
French gold, id est, to adopt the French system, the double standard,
altogether. The coin we want, and of which a constant importation must
take place to fill up the void created by re-exportation to Germany for corn,
we can only get in France. We have become part and parcel of France so
far as monetary transactions go. Silver coins getting scarcer in France, we
have no choice but to take her gold coins. Some of our banks have already
been compelled to declare that “in their transactions they give and take
“ legal Swiss money, id est, Swiss, French, &c. silver, and French gold
“ indiscriminately.”
Zurich, April 10, 1856, F. H. TRüMPLE.R.
D.
ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the CANTON of GENEVA, SWITZERLAND.
By an old COMMISSARIAT OFFICER, at the request of Captain A. PICTET, H.B.M.
Consul at Geneva.
Present Momey of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law Ż
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account 2
A. Les francs fédéraux, au méme titre que le franc Français, divisé en cent
centimes.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations f
A. Il n'y a pas d'autre dénomination en usage.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account
estimated in money of the United Kingdom P
A. L'unité la plus élevée est le franc, qui équivaut à 9 pence + , et l'unité
la plus basse est un centime qui équivaut à fºr du penny.
Present Current Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal f
A. Les espèces en cours sont les pieces de 2 francs, I francs, 50 cents, en argent.
}} 55 les pièces de 20 cents, 10 cents, 05 cents, en argent
et nikel.
5 5 3) les pièces de 2 cents, 1 cent, en cuivre.
Les pièces d'or de France, Belgique, et Savoie ont cours pour leur valeur
nominale ; quelquefois elles valent une prime comme aussi elles pourraient
valoir moins, suivant la valeur relative de l'or et de l'argent, l'or n’ayant pas
un cours fixe et forcé en Suisse.
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common
use 2
A. Les pièces de monnaie de la plus petite dimension Sont d'un usage populaire
dans les marchés de denrées.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use P
A. La pièce de 5 cents est bien la monnaiela plus petite dont on Se Sert le plus.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
veniently high in value by any and which classes in society 2––
A. On ne fait pas grand usage dans les transactions des marchés ou du
commerce des petites pièces en cuivre au dessous de 5 cents.
Former Momey of Accowmt and Coims.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system ż What
were its subdivisions?——
A. Le précèdent système monétaire était assez compliqué, se composant de
plusieurs monnaies qui n'avaient pas de rapport direct entre elles.
O
No. 35C.
Switzerland.
M. Trümpler.
* = ammº-e
No. 35D.
Switzerland.
Commissariat
Officer.
* *=º s
290 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
INo. 35D. Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account ?—-
Switzerland. A. Elles n'avaient pas de rapport légal avec le nouveau système.
Commissariat Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account?— ©
Officer. A. Le précédent système monétaire admettait une grande variété de monnaies
s-m-a•=•-* étrangères tarifées à certain taux par le Gouvernement.
Chamge of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place ?—
A. Le Gouvernement de Genève adopta le système décimal Français en 1840
et le Gouvernement Fédéral Suisse l'a décrété pour toute la Suisse in 1850.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change ?—— -
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the
previous currency ?—
A. L'effet de ces changements a été de faire disparaître l'irregularité des trans-
actions que présentait l'ancien système.
Q. l5. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?——
A. L'ancien système duodécimal ne convenait plus dans nos transactions avec
nos voisins de France et de Savoie, où le système décimal métrique est en
vigueur.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping ?
A. Le changement a eu lieu parceque les monnaies qui nous arrivaient de
nos voisins, et qui étaient devenues la circulation en usage, ne correspon-
daient pas à nos monnaies.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt ?—
A. Ces inconvénients étaient éprouvés par toutes les classes de la société.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries ; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law ?
A. On était déjà assez accoutumé au système décimal par l'usage des mon-
naies Françaises.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any what extent by an abstract preference for a decimal
division of money over a mon decimal division ?…-—
A. Le besoin d'un changement était donc généralement senti.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected ?
A. Ce changement a eu lieu par une loi du Conseil Législatif, qui décréta le
rachat à leur valeur courante des monnaies nationales, et le rachat ou
l'échange jusqu'à une époque fixée, contre la nouvelle monnaie décimale au
cours nominal des anciennes valeurs.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed ?—
A. Les anciennes valeurs furent donc mises hors de cours après l'expiration
du délai fixé pour l'échange.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously with,
or after the change ?
A. Les nouvelles monnaies avaient été frappées par le Gouvernement d'avance
pour en effectuer simultanément l'échange.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new ?
A. Voyez la réponse No. 21.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins ?
A. Les dénominations des anciennes monnaies ont disparu.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with an
expressible exactly in the new monies ? -
A. La plus petite monnaie ancienne en circulation était le demi sol de Genève,
valant environ 2 centimes actuels.
Q. 26. If mot exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new ? Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements ?—
A. D'après les mesures prises par le Gouvernement, comme il a été déjà dit à
l'Article 20, les difficultés qu'on pouvait redouter entre débiteur et créancier
se sont aplanies sans trop d'achoppement.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate ? Was it optional or
compulsory ? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced ? Was it effectually
enforced ? or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language ?
A. La réponse se trouve dans l'article précédent.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 291
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently ſor
any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently ?
A, Il n'y a plus eu qu'un seul système monétaire dans toute la Suisse
depuis 1850.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use ? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange ?
A. Après 1850 les deux systèmes monétaires se sont graduellement fondus
l'un dans l'autre, et maintenant il ne reste plus de trace du premier.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts ?
A. Tous les comptes se tiennent actuellement en monnaies décimales.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any and
what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts ?
A. La réponse est dans les articles précédens. Il n'y a plus de trace du
système duodécimal.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society ? If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting ? Does it now exist ?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness ?
A. Le changement ne pouvait qu'être désiré par les populations, qui y voyaient
un avantage résultant de la simplification dans la manière de compter.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages ?
lst. In paying and receiving-(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts-(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. La nouvelle monnaie a des avantages evidens sur l'ancienne dans les
petites comme dans les grandes transactions.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally ? If so, did such decinmal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money ? Or was it in any and what way connected
with it ?
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money ?
A. Le système décimal Français pour les poids et mesures bien que décrété
par le Conseil Fédéral pour toute la Suisse, n'est pas encore universellement
en vigueur dans le canton de Genève, mais il ne tardera pas de l'être. Les
inconvénients qu'on pouvait redouter de ce mélange de l'ancien système
avec le nouveau vont disparaître.
Q. 38. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commodities
in the retail transactions of the poorer classes ? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them there-
from ?
A. Les œufs qui se comptent à la douzaine se vendent sans peine à 50 centimes.
Il en est de même pour autres choses.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful In the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect ?
A. On croit avoir répondu catégoriquement dans les articles précédens, mais
quant aux loix et ordonnances relatives Le Conseil Fédéral Suisse pourrait
seul les fournir au Gouvernement de Sa Majesté Britannique.
No. 36.
LETTERs of W. BRowN, Esq., M.P., on the CHANGE of CoIN in PRUssIA and
SWITZERLAND.
MY DEAR SIR, Richmond Hill, January 4, 1856,
I UNDERSTOOD from you that you visit Switzerland occasionally, and that there was
no difficulty after the law passed for decimalizing the Swiss currency to its general intro-
duction. Notwithstanding that in some of the cantons, if not in all, people were full of
obstinate prejudices, yet they at once adopted a system without dissatisfaction, which they
found so convenient. I need not trouble you with stating to me anything that occurred
prior to the passing of the Act of 1848, as I am aware that there were long discussions
whether they would take a German or French coin for their basis.
My object in troubling you to write me a note on the subject is, that I may lay facts
before the Decimal Commission, now sitting.
I have, &c.
E. Zwilchenbart, Esq. (Signed) W M. BROWN.
No. 35D.
Switzerland.
Commissariat
Officer.
*m-s
No. 36.
Switzerland.
Letters, &c.
292 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 36.
Switzerland.
esammº
Letters, &c.
INTRODUCTION of the SWISS DECIMAL COINAGE.
DEAR SIR, * Roselands, Aigburth, January 8, 1856.
WITH reference to your inquiry on the subject mentioned above, I have the honour
to state that at the period of the change in the currency some half a dozen of the cantons
raised a strong opposition, but they afterwards, as you are aware, submitted to the
majority. The opposition, it should be mentioned, was on the part of the governments of
the said cantons, and arose from an apprehension that a loss would result from the intended
change;—ultimately, however, this feeling expired, and the new coinage is now regarded
as a happy event for the whole of Switzerland.
I have, &c.
(Signed) EM. ZWILCHENBART.
William Brown, Esq., M.P., &c., &c.,
Richmond Hill.
MY DEAR SIR, Richmond Hill, January 4, 1856.
FROM the conversation I had with you last night, I found that you knew not only
something about the introduction of the Swiss decimal currency, but also of the Prussian.
With respect to the Swiss I am aware that the cantons were a long time debating
whether they would take a German or a French coin as the basis of theirs. The cantons
on the German side wanted to take the German ; those on the French side, the French.
The Diet ultimately adopted the latter, and passed a law in 1848 for carrying it into effect.
What I wish particularly to know is, whether there were any riots, discontent, or passive
resistance to the new coin and decimal system on its introduction.
I do not know what preliminary steps were taken in Prussia, but that is not so very
material. Will you be good enough to inform me when the decimal law passed, and
whether it was as quietly adopted in Prussia as in Switzerland.
My object in asking you to write me a few lines on this subject is that I may transmit
the facts of those cases to the Commissioners now sitting and discussing the subject.
I believe your partner, Mr. Zwilchenbart, and Mr. Speiser, of Basle, were prime movers
in conferring this benefit on Switzerland.
I have, &c.
Augustus H. Lemonius, Esq. (Signed) WM. BROWN.
MY DEAR SIR, Liverpool, January 7, 1856.
IN reply to your inquiry, permit me to state, to the best of my knowledge, whilst
living in Prussia, that the introduction of a new coin by the government of that country
about the year 1833 (substituting 30 groschens for a thaler in lieu of 24 groschens) caused
no riots or even serious discontent, nor any passive resistance, and that the only difficulty
experienced was that always attendant amongst the lower classes upon the withdrawal of
an old accustomed coin, but which difficulty ceased altogether within a few months.
I cannot speak from experience as to the circumstances accompanying the introduction of
the decimal system into Switzerland, but I have always understood that not the slightest
disorder took place.
I have, &c.
(Signed) AUG. H. LEMONIUs.
William Brown, Esq., M.P.
MY DEAR SIR, Richmond Hill, January 7, 1856.
I will. feel obliged if you can inform me if there was any difficulty, after the law
passed for decimalizing the Swiss currency, to its general introduction.
N I am aware that the cantons were a long time debating whether they would take a
German or a French coin as the basis of theirs; the cantons on the German side wanted
to take the German, those on the French side the French. The Diet ultimately adopted
the latter, and passed a law in 1848 for carrying it into effect.
w hat I wish particularly to know is, whether there were any riots, discontent, or passive
resistance to the new coin and decimal system on its introduction.
My object in troubling you to write me a note on the subject is, that I may lay facts
before the Commissioners now sitting.
& I have, &c.
R. Zwilchenbart, Esq. (Signed) WM. BROWN,
I find my former letter intended for you was by mistake sent to your brother.
MY DEAR SIR, Liverpool, January 7, 1856.
IN reply to your inquiry of this day, I need only say, that to the best of my know-
ledge, the introduction of the decimal coinage into Switzerland was unattended with any
dangerous opposition or riots; in the smaller cantons alone some discontent of no great
importance was manifested. The system works, to all appearances, most satisfactorily.
I have, &c.
Wm. Brown, Esq., M.P. (Signed) E. R. ZWILCHENBART.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 293
No. 37.
On the CHANGE of COINAGE in SwitzERLAND.
MY LORD, Richmond Hill, Liverpool, 26th December 1855.
I AM now enabled to place in your Lordship's hands a translated copy of the Law of
the Swiss Diet, but I have not had time as yet to get information how the law was
received and carried out. º: * % % Sk
I have, &c.
Right Hon. Lord Monteagle, (Signed) WM, BROWN.
&c. &c. &c.
LAW of the Swiss DIET on the FEDERAL ConAGE of May, 1850.
THE Diet of the Swiss Confederation, in accordance with the 36th Article of the Con-
stitution, determines—
Article 1. That 5 grammes of silver, 9-10th fine, shall constitute the monetary unit of
Switzerland, and shall be called a franc.
Article 2. The franc shall be divided into 100 rapps (centimes).
Article 3. The denominations of the coinage shall be:
A.–In Silver. B. —In Billon.
The 5 franc piece. The 20 rapp piece.
The 2 ditto. The 10 ditto.
The 1 ditto, The 5 ditto.
The ditto.
C.—In Copper.
The 2 rapp piece. The rapp.
Article 4. The silver sorts shall be of the same fineness as the monetary unit, and of the
same proportion in weight as is expressed by their names.
The 20 rapp piece shall weigh 3} grammes, and shall contain Hº, fine silver.
The 10 rapp piece shall weigh 2% grammes, and shall contain Tº fine silver.
The 5 rapp piece shall weigh 13 grammes, and shall contain +}}º fine silver.
The alloy of the billon shall consist of copper, zinc, and nickel.
The copper sorts shall consist of copper and tin,
The 2 rapp piece shall weigh 2% grammes.
The rap 1% grammes.
Article 5. The margin for error (remedy) in the Swiss coinage shall be determined for
all the silver denominations, as +:#5. No excess or deficiency (betterness or worseness).
For the denominations in billon, as Tºrr. No excess or deficiency.
Any deviations that may arise in deficiency must be compensated by corresponding ones
in excess.
Article 6. The margin of error in weight, either in excess or deficiency, is deter-
mined as:—
A.—In the Silver Pieces. B.—In the Billon Pieces.
The 5 franc piece Târg. The 20 rapp pieces ++3+.
The 2 ditto Tºrg. The 10 ditto T##g.
The 1 ditto Tºrg. The 5 ditto T#5.
The ditto Hºrs.
C.–In the Copper Pieces.
The 1 and 2 rapp pieces rºº
TOTOTO’
This limit of error applies in the silver and billon denominations to each piece, but in
the copper only to an average of 10 francs by tale, or 1,000 grammes by weight. Any
deviations by deficiency must be compensated by corresponding ones in excess.
Article 7. No one shall be obliged to take any other coins except such silver ones as
shall be found to correspond with those struck under the present law, and which shall be
proclaimed by the Federal Council (after investigation made) as a means of payment
corresponding with its conditions with reference to money contracts which have been
entered into previous to the enactment of this law. The cantons shall determine in the
course of the year 1850 the footing upon which they shall be converted, and shall publish,
in connexion with the Federal Council, proper tables of conversion, on the one hand, for
the coins mentioned in such contracts, and, on the other, for such as shall have been
specially stipulated, but which are called in by virtue of this law, into their corresponding
value in the new coinage. Any contracts which shall be entered into after the enactment
of this law in the terms of any foreign law or currency, shall be taken in their literal sense.
Any wages contract, however, must be in the legal coinage, and the wages themselves
must be paid in the legal coins.
Article 9. The public functionaries of the Confederation are forbidden to receive in
payment of dues any but the legal coins; but in extraordinary times, when, in consequence
of a high rate of exchange there shall arise a scarcity of legal coin, they shall be allowed
to receive other descriptions of coins. To this end, so soon and for as long as the course
of exchange corresponding with the French standard shall be half per cent, and more above
the silver par, the Federal Council shall publish a tariff of such coins, other than the legal
currency (in correspondence with this fineness and weight), in accordance with which they
shall be received at all public offices. O O 3
U O
No. 37.
Switzerland.
Federal Law.
294 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 37.
Switzerland.
Federal Law.
Article 10. No one shall be obliged to receive more than 20 francs in value of the
silver coins under the one franc piece, more than 20 francs worth of billon, or more than
two francs of copper in payment, whatever may be the amount to be paid.
Article 11. The Federal Council shall determine in each canton those public offices
which shall be obliged from time to time to exchange Swiss billon and copper coins, but
not in less amount than 50 francs at a time.
Article 12. The Diet shall determine from time to time the amount and denomination
of any coinage to take place.
Article 13. The worn Swiss coinage shall be called in and melted, and replaced by new ;
the consequent expense shall be stated in the budget.
The Federal Council determines—
That the foregoing federal law on the reform of the Swiss coinage shall be communi-
cated to every canton for customary publication, and, at the same time, to be printed in
the Federal Gazette and the official collection of the Confederation.
Berne, 10th May, 1850. In the name of the Swiss Federal Council.
Federal President, H. DRUEY.
Chancellor of the Confederation, SCHIESs.
FEDERAL LAW, concerning the carrying out the REFORM of the SWISS COINAGE.
May 7, 1850.
The Diet of the Swiss Confederation, in accordance with the law for the reform of the
Swiss coinage, determines:—
Article 1. The reform of the Swiss coinage, in accordance with the federal law of the
7th May, 1850, shall be carried out by the Federal Council. Any loss that shall arise in
melting the cantonal coins shall fall upon the cantons, each in proportion to the quantities
which have been struck with their device. Any gain which shall result from the new
coinage shall, after deduction of all costs and expenses, be divided among the several can-
tons, in accordance with the monetary scale of the Confederation of the year 1838.
Article 2. In accordance with the aforesaid law, the following sums and denominations
of silver coin shall be struck and put into circulation :-
A.—In Silver.
Pieces. Current Value.
500,000 - - 5 franc pieces - - frs. 2,500,000
750,000 - - 2 , - . , 1,500,000
2,500,000 - - 1 , - - , 2,500,000
2,000,000 - - , ,, - - , 1,000,000
IB.-In Billon.
10,000,000 - - 20 rapp pieces - – , 2,000,000
12,000,000 . – 10 , , - - , , 1,250,000
20,000,000 - - 5 ,, - - , 1,000,000
C.—In Copper.
11,000,000 - - 2 rapp pieces - T 93 220,000
3,000,000 - - 1 , , - - , 30,000
62,250,000 12,000,000
Article 3. The coinage shall proceed in a rateable succession. The Federal Treasury
shall make the necessary advances.
Article 4. The coinage may be executed, at the discretion of the Federal Council, either
at a Swiss mint or wholly or partially at foreign ones.
Article 5. All Swiss coins at present existing and current shall, within a fixed and
definite term, be called in, and, at its expiration, melted, after which date they shall be
no longer current. They shall be called in at the rates of the accompanying tariff.
Article 6. The Federal Council will superintend this calling in, and the Federal
Treasury will make the necessary advances.
Article 7. These advances consist, in the first place, in the new coinage, and, if more be
necessary, in those foreign coins which may be declared a legal tender, fractional parts of
which do not find expression in these coins can be delivered in Swiss small change, ac-
cording to the provisions of the accompanying tariff.
Article 8. The funds for the coinage and for the calling in of the old coins are, if
necessary, to be raised by a special and temporary loan,
Article 9. The Federal Council is hereby empowered to contract such a loan to the
extent of four million francs of the new currency.
Article 10. This loan is to be repaid from the proceeds of the liquidation of the coin,
and of this a separate account is to be kept.
Article 11. The anticipated loss to each canton from the melting down of their coins
is to be beforehand approximately estimated. The Federal Council will then enter into
negotiations with each canton to cover the anticipated loss pending the definitive account at
the termination of the liquidation.
Article 12. This is to be done immediately, and paid, either wholly or in part, in ready
money or the bonds of the cantons, in favour of the Confederation.
Article 13. These bonds may run, at successive and equal dates, over a period of ten
years. They are to bear interest at 4 per cent, and this rate is to apply to all reciprocal
calculations in the liquidation of the coins. - -
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 295
Article 14. The interest due by the cantons on their loss at each rate of conversion will
commence from the middle of each appointed period of conversion.
Article 15. The Federal Council may negotiate the cantonal bonds mentioned in Article
12, if required for the purpose of paying the loan on account of the coinage, unless the
cantons prefer to redeem them.
Article 16. As soon as the coinage of one portion is completed, its product shall be
applied to the conversion of those old Swiss coins which are in circulation.
Article 17. If the sum of the new coinage does not suffice for the conversion of the old,
what is requisite to this end shall be supplied in accordance with Article 8 of this law.
Article 18. The conversion of the cantonal coinage shall proceed, without reference to
its origin, throughout the cantons in accordance with the directions of the Federal Council.
Article 19. A period of two months shall be appointed, and announced at a proper time,
for the conversion of each issue, at the commencement of which the current value of each
of the old coins shall be legally determined by the accompanying tariffs of conversion, but
still without application to antecedent contracts.
Article 20. After the lapse of the first month of the period of conversion, it is obligatory
on no one, with the exception of the above-named officers of the Confederation, to accept
any of the old descriptions of coin then called in for conversion at any rate whatever. After
the expiration of the second month those sorts are entirely, even at the above-named offices,
deprived of all current value.
Article 21. The new currency shall come into operation at the time of the issue of the
last portion of the new coin. Till that time the following estimation of all foreign current
coin shall be established at all the public offices of the Confederation from the 1st June,
1850:—
The Brabant or Crown thaler gº - 40% batzen.
The 5 franc piece &e * – 35% 55
The South German guilder gº &= - 15 52
The Austrian 20-kreutzer piece tºº – 6 52
The French 2-franc piece Eº gº - 14 25
25 I 55 tº º tº- 7 2 3
35 # 35 sº tº tº a * 3} 53
but if a sum of five francs is paid in these three last denominations in one payment, they
shall be taken as 35% batzen. The denominations of the new Swiss coinage shall be created
in the same manner as the French silver ones of corresponding designations. The Swiss
gold and silver coins, as well as the silver small change of the old coin, are to be taken at
the rate of the annexed tariff of conversion; the Swiss billon and copper coins, at their
present value. This valuation, however, is not to apply to the interest or re-payment of
any existing investment of capital, debts, or contracts of the Finance Ministry of the
Confederation. - -
Article 22. The cantonal laws in reference to these coins will remain in force until the
introduction of the new currency, so far as their determinations shall not conflict with
those of the present law. In those cantons where it shall be necessary to make any tem-
porary enactment in reference to the period of transition, the cantonal governments shall
have power to do so, but these enactments must be previously laid before the Federal
Council for their approval.
Article 23. From the date of the new currency coming into operation, it shall be em-
ployed in all the legal papers and accounts between the cantons and the Confederate (or
central) Government.
The Swiss Federal Council determines—
That the above federal law concerning the carrying out the reform of the Swiss coinage,
together with the tariffs of conversion, be communicated to every cantonal government, and
at the same time be published in the Federal Gazette, and received into the official col-
lection of the Confederation.
In the name of the Federal Council.
Federal President, H. DRUEY,
Berne, 10th May, 1850. Chancellor of the Confederation, SCHIESS.
Tariff of Conversion.
Gold coin, base and pure silver eoin, together with silver small change, shall, in conver-
tion, be taken at their old current rates according to the following valuations. They are
so be redeemed by coins of the new currency, the franc to be taken as 71 rapps of old
currency; fractional parts which cannot be expressed in the new coinage can be made up
in current small change of the old.
IN GOLD.
Francs. Rapps.
Doubloon of Berne (other varieties in proportion) º | 6 20
Ducat of Berne t_º tºº º gº tº 8 IO
10 franc piece of Lucerne tºº wº gº sº IO 12
20 ditto of Geneva º ſº # tº - 14 20
10 ditto, ditto - - - - 7 10
No. 37.
Switzerland.
Federal Law.
296 APPENDIX To REPORT OF THE
No. 37.
~ e IN SILVER.
Switzerland.
Francs. Rapps. Francs. Rapps.
Federal Law. 10 franc piece of Geneva tºº tº 7 10 tº
4 franc piece (new dollar) of all cantons 4 05 7 pieces 28 40
2 gulden piece of Zurich º tº- 3 25
1 gulden in proportion.
2 gulden piece of Bâsle cº * * 3 04 7 2, 21 30
1 & #, in proportion.
2 franc piece of all cantons ſº gº
21 batz piece of Neufchatel * &º
1 franc piece of all cantons - tº
02 7 , 14 20
90
01 7 , , 7 10
SILVER SMALL CHANGE.
Rapps.
8 batz piece (; gulden) of Zurich tº º 80
5 batz piece of all cantons dº &º º 50
15 schilling piece of Glavis ſº tº -* 45
4 batz piece, # gulden, Zurich tºº * 4()
15 kreutzer piece of St. Gall * &= &= - 37
10 schilling piece of Lucerne &º &= } wº 32
2} batz piece of all cantons - dº. dº 25
BILLON AND COPPER COINS
Will be calculated in the new currency and exchanged for the new coinage only.
Cents. Francs. Cents.
3 batz piece of Bâsle sº sº tº - 42 71 pieces 30 0
2 ditto, Zurich, Uri, and Schweitz gº – 28 71 , , 20 0
5 schilling piece of Lucerne tº º - 23 10 , 2 30
6 kreutzer ditto of St. Gall tºº tº – 20 10 , , 2 10
1 batz ditto of all cantons, except Glavis and
Neufchatel - º tºº gº - 14 71 , I0 ()
1 batz piece of Neufchatel and 3 schilling piece of
Glavis - tºº ſº jº - 13 10 , I 30
# batz piece of all cantons, except Neufchatel - 07 71 , , 5
# batz piece of Neufchatel tºº tºº - 06 20 ,, I 30
1 schilling of Zurich tº dº tº - 05 40 , 2 25
1 ditto of Lucerne iº tºº tº – 04 20 , O 90
1 ditto of Glavis s * * * o – 04 25 , , I 0
3 soldi piece of Ticino gº sº tºº – 09 10 , , 0 90
1 kreutz piece of all cantons - * sº – 03 10 , , 0 35
2 rapp piece of all cantons ſº wºme - 02 10 ,, 0 28
1 blutzger piece of Grisons - * gº — 02 20 ,, () 45
# kreutzer piece of all cantons dº tºº - 01. 20 ,, O 35
1 rapp, ditto tº- tº e tº- - Ol 10 , () 14
6 denari piece of Ticino †- dº- - 01 10 ,, () I 5
3 ditto, ditto, ditto sº tº- I () () 07
º º A 9
25, 10, 5, 4, 2, 1 centimes of Geneva, at their
nominal value.
The Federal Council is empowered to place any other coins upon this tariff, and to give
them a proportionate valuation.

GOLD COINs.
Erom “ A Manual of the Gold and Silver Coins of all Nations.” Eckfeldt & D.
The degrees
Denomination. Date. Government. Weight. Fineness. Value. º jº
Standard.
Grs. | Thous. | D. C. M.
Double Pistole iº 1793 || Berne tº tº . 234 || 900 9 07 0 || W. 0 ºf
Pistole gº º 1796 Do. ſº gºe 116 901 || 4 50 1 0 ºf
Ducat ſº tº- 1794 Do. wº * > - 52.5 974 || 2 20 2 | B. 0 1%
T}o. tº - | No date | Basle * -º º 53 | 943 || 2 15 2 0 2%
Pistole tºp & 1795 Do. gº iº * = 118 891 || 4 52 8 || W O 24
Do. tº- . 1798 Soleure ſº º 116 | 898 || 4, 48 6 O y
Do. º tºº 1800 Helvetian Republic - 4 48 1 O 2
116 | 897
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 297
SILVER COINs.
* degrees
© .. 6 7 - 2 º etter Or WOrSe
Denomination. Date. Government. Weight. |Fineness. Value. than English
Standards.
Grs. | Thous. | D. C. M. dwt
Ecu º - || 1790–94 || Zurich e- se 390 | 844 O 88 7 || W. 10
Eight batzen º 1810 Do. sº * * 113 — 1 10 0 , 5%;
Ecu, forty batzen - || 1795–98 || Berne - tº a 452 903 || 0 27 4 , 22}
Francken tº 1797 Do. º gº tº 1 22 833
Do. - sº 18 11 Do. - º 114
Five batzen tº 1826 Do. &º sº 67 760 || 0 13 7 | , 50
Two and a half do. - 1826 Do. * - || 31 5 || 766 || 0 6 5 , 38
Batzen º dº 1826 Do. gº sº 31 || 254 || 0 2 1 , 161
Four franken tºº 1814 Lucerne - º 453
Ten batzen - --> 1812 Do. sº tºº 110 | 904 || 0 26 8 , 5}
Four franken º 1801 Helvetian Republic - 452 900 || 1 09 6 , 6
Genevoise, or ecu of
3 liv. - tº- 1796 Geneva - º 464 868 || 1 08 5 , 13
Twenty-five cent. - 1839 Do. tº- º 62 252 || 0 4 2 , 160}
Ten do. sº 1839 Po. tº * 49 | 126 || 0 | 7 || , 191%
Ten batzen <--> 1823 Vaud º a te 112 || 900 || 0 27 1 , 6
Five do. - tº 1813 Do. º cº- --> 63 | 666 || 0 1 1 3 , 62
Batzen - - 1831 Do. - - tº e 39 164 || 0 || 7 | ,, 182%
Batzen tºº º 1828 Freyburg º gº 40 167 || 0 || 8 || , 141%
Thaler - tº- 1763 Basle º sº 356 833 || 0 80 0 | , 22
Crown -- º 1795 Do. *- tº- 412 | 840 || 0 93 2 , 20%
Small piece - | No date Do. - sº tº 72 53 || 0 1 0 | , 209%
ExTRACT from a LETTER of HORACE JOHNSTON, Esq., Secretary of Legation
at BERNE.
# 3% * % # #
Mr. Brown's questions are, “Were there any riots, dissatisfaction, or passive resistance
“ to the introduction of the new coinage, and whether any inconvenience is found by any
“ parties yet adhering to the old coins or systems?”
Although the discussions on the subject were long, and the opinions divided, yet, as
soon as the law was passed, all the changes determined on were carried into effect without
the slightest resistance, and indeed with a facility which astonished the most ardent advo-
cates of the change. In the course of a year the whole coinage in the twenty-two
cantons was changed. No such thing as a riot or disturbance took place; and if any dis-
satisfaction prevailed, it ceased almost immediately after the introduction of the new money.
Indeed, a banker told me the other day, that it was extraordinary how soon the people had
forgotten the names of the old coins, and that they began counting immediately in the new
money. He also added, that the people of the Canton of Berne received the new coins
with a delight (empressement) that was wonderful, owing, it is true, to the losses they had
often suffered from the old coins. The fact, however, remains the same, viz., that the lower
classes made no resistance to the changes in their old money, and found no difficulty in
accustoming themselves to the new.
As regards the last question, the whole Confederation has adopted the new coinage, for
the federal law was binding on them all.
º * 3% * } % 3% * * 3% #
Yours, &c.,
HORACE JOHNSTON.
No. 38.
L0 MBA.R.D.Y.
ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the Lombardo-Venetian Kingdom.
Sent through HER MAJESTY's MINISTER at VIENNA.
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law P
A. The Austrian lira : its silver and money value (Zahlwerthe) computed
according to the standard of convention, or 20-gulden standard, one gulden
is equivalent to three Austrian lire, and hence the lira contains ºr Cologne
mark fine silver.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account P---
A. The lira is divided into 100 centesimi.
No. 37.
Switzerland.
Federal Law.
No. 38.
Lombardy.
Austrian Govern-
ment.
P p
298 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE'
INo. 38. Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
Lombardy. or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations 2–
ian G A. Lire and centesimi are the only legal tenders.
OWeI’Il- * - - e. e * º
Autº: € Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom ?
A. If 321 sterling are assumed to be equivalent to one Cologne mark of fine
gold,” and if the value of gold as compared with silver is assumed to be as
15:5 is to 1, then the value of
1 Austrian lira
1 Austrian centesimo
8.258 pence.
0.082
35
Present Current Coins.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respec-
tive value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal P
Are equivalent Value in English money :
to 1 Cologne £32 = 1 Cologne mark
mark fine. fine gold.
A. In gold. *º *-
Ducats † - 67.944 0.470970 sovereigns.
Sovrano --> - 22-931 1.395.490 95
#-sovrano g- º 45-862 0.697.745 53
Are equivalent Value in English money :
to 1 Cologne 536'517 pence to 1 Col.
mark fine. mark fine silver.
In silver.
Scudo }
º 4 º e e
Thaler 10 0 sh 5-652 pence
# scudo -
1 gulden piece } 20 0 2 sh. 2.826 ,
Austrian Lira }
20 kreuzer piece 60 0 sº- 8-942 ,
4 lira
2 sº- o
10 kreuzer piece } 120 0 4°471 ,
# lira *- tº 240 () sº 2°235 59
In copper.
15 centesimi piece
lº 55 from 1 cwt. (Viennese), or 56001-2 gramm, are coined
3 55 512 lire of the value of 100 centesimi each.
55
1 39
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use 2
A. Yes.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use P
A. The centesimo.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
niently high in value by any and which classes in society?—
A. No.
Former Money of Account and Coins.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system P What
were its subdivisions f
A. The lira Italiana = 100 centesimi.
The lira Milanese = 20 soldi at 12 denari the soldo.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account?
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account P
A. Wide tariff that accompanies enclosed Patent for the Lombardo-Venetian
kingdom of the year 1823.
Change of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place P
A. In the year 1823.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency?
A. The object was to introduce into the Lombardo-Venetian kingdom the
standard of convention in force in the other provinces of the Austrian empire,
* 1 ounce troy = 133,037 Cologne marks. 1 Cologne mark, fine gold = #31929.--A. S.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 299
whilst retaining, however, the decimal division of the unit. And at the
same time it was sought to avoid the inconvenience which had arisen from
the circulation of different systems of coins, by fixing legally their proportion
to the new coin.
Q 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units or in their proportions to each other?—-
A. No. Refer to foregoing.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money, or in account keeping 2––
A. In every respect.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt P
A. More particularly by the commercial classes.
Q 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law P
A. No. The object was to harmonize the system with that prevailing in other
parts of the monarchy whilst retaining the decimal division.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a non-decimal division?
A. No.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected P
A. Wide patent enclosed herewith.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed?——
A. Vide tariff.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change 2
A. The new coins were issued simultaneously with the change.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any and
which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new 2––
A. The circulation of the old coins was allowed concurrently with the new.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins P-
A. The new coins received old names.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies?
A. One hundred Austrian lire were made equivalent to eighty-seven Italian
lire, or 113-9, Milan lire.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new P Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements?
A. Wide §§ 14, 16, 19, 20, and 21, of the Patent of the year 1823.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate 2 Was it optional or
compulsory P. If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it effectually
enforced 2 or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language P-
A. Wide patent.
The new system was received on the whole willingly. It met with no
resistance, and its introduction did not require to be enforced by compulsory
II].628,SUll’éS.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently 2––
A. Yes. As regards small retail business, the old system continues down to
the present day; but the new system gradually gains the upper hand, and
the old one is superseded.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use P. How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
A. No inconveniences have been felt.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts f
A. In Austrian lire.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts 2
A. In small retail business, the “Lire Milanese ’’ at 20 soldi (12 denari to the
Soldo) are used. (Wide Answer to Question 28.)
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society 2 If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting P Does it now exist?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness?
4. No ; the only impediment in the way of a more rapid change was the force
of former habit.
No. 38.
Lombardy.
Austrian Govern-
ment.
*=mº
P p 2
300 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 38.
Lombardy.
Austrian Govern-
ment.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages? l
1st. In paying and receiving— (a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions, (b) In small transactions.
A. The new money, regard being had to the component parts of the province,
corresponds in every respect to the rest of the monarchy.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally 2 If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money? or was it in any and what way connected
with it 2
A. At the commencement of the century, during the period of the Italian
monarchy, there was introduced, together with the decimal system (Lira
Italiana), the metrical (French) standard for weights and measures, which
is still in force.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money?
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes 2 Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
Inasmuch as according to the above statement the decimal system does prevail
for weights and measures, these two questions do not require answers.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions, copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect,
A. Enclosed herewith are a copy of the Imperial Patent regulating the cur-
rency for the Lombardo-Venetian kingdom, dated the 1st November 1823,
and a copy of the decree of the ministry of finance, dated the 28th of July
1852, respecting the introduction of a copper coinage.
NoTE.—The patent referred to in the foregoing answers is dated the 1st of Nov. 1823.
Its object, as appears by the recitals, was not to introduce a decimal system, such a
system being already in force, the unit of which was the “Lira Italiana,” equal to the
French franc, and divided into 100 centesimi, but to harmonize the currency with that of
the rest of the Austrian Empire, retaining the decimal system, and the standard of fineness
previously in force. For this purpose a new unit was introduced denominated the “Lira
Austriaca,” of the value of 4 of the Convention florin or 20 kreutzers. Its weight
was 4,3304; grammes silver tº fine. Its value was therefore 86.6 French centimes, and
it is declared to be equal in value to 87 Italian centesimi.
Besides the Austrian gold and silver coinage and the “Lira,” there were to be
coined,—
Gold coim.–Sovereign = 40 lire ; ; sovereign = 20 lire.
Silver coin.—Scudo = 6 lire; half scudo = 3 lire ; half-lira; quarter-lira,
Copper.—Soldo = 5 centesimi; 3 centesim piece; centesimo.
These gold and silver coins were to be ºr fine, and +', alloy, except the quarter-lira,
which was to be ºr fine, and Fºr alloy.
In this coinage the relative values of fine gold and fine silver are as 15-2875: I, being
the proportion which in England would give 58. 13 d. as the price of an ounce of
standard silver.
The following are the clauses of the Patent referred to above:–
14. “The gold and silver coins specified in both parts of the Schedule according to
“ their legal value shall be a legal tender in our Lombardo-Venetian kingdom in all
“payments both public and private, and shall be received by all persons in the discharge
“ of all debts, both public and private.
16. “It is left to the arrangements of individuals to employ in payments money not
“ in legal circulation, or to make any special agreement as to the value of the coins com-
“prised in the tariff.
18. “From the day of the publication of these Presents the revenue and expenditure
“ of our Lombardo-Venetian kingdom shall be converted into the new standard. All
“ the accounts of the public offices shall be kept in that standard, and the new standard
“shall be exclusively employed in all public documents.
19. “Private persons may, in their contracts, make use of the new coinage, or of any
“ of the old coinages. But where no particular coinage is expressed in contracts subse-
“quent to the publication of these Presents the legal presumption shall be in favour of
“ the new coinage, unless there be legal evidence of an intention to use another Coinage.
20. “ For the legal comparison between the new and the old coinage, it is declared that
“100 Austrian lire, 87 Italian lire, 113-2, Milanese lire, and 169; Venetian lire, shall be
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 301
“ of equal value. For the more ready comparison of the old and new coinage, tables of No. 38.
“reduction are annexed to these Presents, which have been prepared with the greatest Lombardy.
“accuracy, and which shall be conformed to in all cases in which public offices have to º
“make a reduction. - Anstrian Govern-
21. “When, in a contract between private persons, a particular species of coins is ment.
“expressed which, at the time of payment, is no longer in circulation, the contract shall *mmº mºne
“ be performed according to the 989th Article of the Civil Code, according to which the
“ debtor must pay the creditor in the coins most nearly resembling them, and of such
“ number and sort as to contain the same intrinsic value as the coin expressed had at the
“ time of the contract.”
A. S.
No. 39.
No. 39.
THE TWO SICILIES. Tw.sie.
ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into Her Maiesty's
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the KINGDOM of the TWO SICILIES. Jesty
Minister.
Sent by HER MAJESTY's MINISTER at NAPLEs.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law Ż
A. The ducat, carlin, and grain.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account?—
A. The ducat is equal to *º- - - 10 carlins.
The carlin 55 &º sº * * 10 grains.
The grain 3) - - - - 10 calli.
Therefore the ducat is equal to 100 grains and 1,000 calli.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations?
A. All account books are kept in ducats and grains only, though the ducat
in silver is seldom seen in payments, which are always made in Neapolitan
dollars worth 12 carlins or 120 grains.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account esti-
mated in money of the United Kingdom P
A. The ducat is the highest and the grain the lowest unit. If the exchange
were calculated at 600 Neapolitan grains to a pound sterling British,
which was formerly considered to be the rate of exchange, the ducat of
10 carlins would be equal to 40 pence, and the grain to about 2-5ths
of a penny, but as the par of exchange is now considered to be of 578
for a pound sterling, the ducat would be worth 41% pence, and the grain
somewhat higher in proportion.
Present Current Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal?
A. There are no gold coins at present current by law, or in general circula-
tion. The Mint issued formerly gold coins of various sizes upon which
the value for which they were issued was stamped, but not being legal
tender the Government refuses to receive them in payment of duties or
taxes, and they are, therefore, not in circulation. The silver coin consists
of dollars commonly called piastres of 12 carlins, or 120 grains, half-
dollars of 60 grains, pieces of 4 carlins, 3 carlins, 2 carlins, 1 carlin, and
half a carlin, which latter are scarce. If these silver coins are calculated
at the exchange of 600 grains for the pound sterling the result would be
as follows:–
8. d.
The dollar or piastre, equal to ºs tº- 4, 8
The half-dollar 55 º º º 2 4
The carlin of 10 grains , - º 0 4;
There are also copper coins in common use, which, however, are not money
of account beyond the fractional part of two Carlins. They are as follows:–
Pieces of 5 grains or half a carlin, pieces of 4 grains, of 3 grains, of
2% grains, of 2 grains, of 1% grain, 1 grain, and of half a grain, called
tornese ; there are also pieces called 3 calli, but they are no longer coined.
The grain was in former times divided into 12 calli, the word calli being
a corruption of cavalli; the 3 calli piece was therefore the fourth of a grain ;
but since the decimal system has been adopted, the 3 calli piece goes for
2} calli, still remaining the fourth part of a grain.
P. p 3
302 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 39. Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common
Two Sicilies. use P
A. The grain is the lowest denomination of money of account in common
Her Majesty's UIS6.
Minister. Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use?
A. The tornese is the lowest coin in general use, but the 3 calli pieces are
still used by the poorest classes.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society 2
A. No complaints whatever are heard on this subject.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system P What
were its subdivisions f
A. The present system of coinage has been so long in use that it is impossible
to give any precise information with respect to the system that previously
existed.
(Questions 10 to 33 not answered.)
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34 Are the weights and measures divided decimally? If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money 2 Or was it in any and what way connected
with it P
A. They are so in theory, but not in practice. The new division is of recent
date, and has no connexion with the decimal division of money which
preceded it.
Q. 35. If mot, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money
A. The lower classes have not yet, adopted the new system for weights
and measures, but generally adhere to the old one. The Decimal
System, however, is followed by the Custom House authorities in levying
duties.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commodities
in the retail transactions of the poorer classes 2 Does inconvenience or loss arise to them there-
from ?
A. No inconvenience has arisen to the public at large.
(Question 37 not answered.)
Note—The monetary unit established by the Law of 20th April, 1818, is the ducat.
composed of 22:943 grammes of silver #ths fine, and therefore equal in value to 4.25
francs.
By the same law there were to be gold coins of 3, 15, and 30 ducats, gold being to
silver as 15-208 : 1, equivalent to a price of English standard silver of 62d. per ounce.
A. S.
No. 40. No. 40.
Tuscany. TUSC A.N.Y.
Hºº'. ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
inister. Decimal Coinage, as far as regards the GRAND DUCHY OF TUSCANY.
Sent by HER MAJESTY's MINISTER at FLORENCE.
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law P
A. The money established by law for keeping books should be florins.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account?
A. Subdivision, cents of one hundred to the florin.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations
A. Although the law orders as above, accounts are kept (even by government
offices) in live, Soldi, and demari, of which 20 soldi make one lira, and 12
denari one soldo, and bills are drawn out and payments and receipts
recorded in this denomination of coin.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom ?
A. The highest of said unit of a lira is worth in English money, reckoned at
par, eight-pence sterling; and the lowest, the denaro (imaginary coin,
whereas the lowest coin in circulation is the quattrino, worth 4 denari.)
forms in English money one thirtieth of a penny.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 303
Present Current Coims. No. 40.
Tuscany.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respec- y
tive value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal 2
Her Majesty's
Minister.
A. Gold Coins.
lire. soldi. den. at par.
80-florin piece sº - - 133 6 8 -: #34, 8 10
Ruspone * º * ſº º 40 () () - I 6 8
Gigliato or zecchino * * tº I3 6 8 = 0 8 10
Silver coins.
Dena * º - --> dº 10 0 0 = () 6 8
Francescone º tºº sº º 6 13 4. = 0 4 5
|Mezza dena - * - -º - 5 0 0 = 0 3 4.
Franceschino ſº gº ſº- 3 6 8 = 0 2 24
Testone, or 3 paul piece gº º 2 () () = 0 1 4
Fiorino *g sº *- sº l 13 4. -: 0 1 1+
2 paul piece - - º sºs 1 6 8 - 0 0 104.
Lira - tº- ** tºº I () () - 0 0 8
Mezzo fiorino * - - º- () 16 8 F. 0 0 64.
Paolo - tº- º- sº 0 13 4. - () 0 5+
Mezza lira - * - - 0 10 () = 0 0 4
Cinquino (4 florin) - - gº 0 8 4 ~ 0 0 33.
Mezzo paolo -> - * = tº- () 6 8 - 0 0 23.
Copper coin and mixed metal.
Due crazie piece - - sº () 3 4. - 0 0 1-4
Due soldi º- tº - - 0 2 () – 0 0 04.
Crazia - º G- - () I. 8 - 0 0 03.
Soldo sº - g- tº Lº º- 0 1 0 – 0 0 #
Duetto - º- - - 0 0 8 – 0 0 0+.
Quattrino tº- º º *- 0 0 4 = 0 0 0-2-
There are moreover the following Roman silver coins admitted in circulation established
by law, from the scudo romano, or colonnato worth lire 6. 6, 8, down to the papetta, or
two Roman paul piece, worth lire 1. 5. 4. -
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use ?
A. All the above coins are in common use.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?
A. The quattrino.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
niently high in value by any and which classes in society?
A. None except the crazie of old coinage of the Medici, which are so worn
out that we can scarcely distinguish them from old thin pieces of pewter.
Former Money of Account and Coim.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions?
A. The old money of account was scudi (which, like the denaro, is an imagi-
nary coin), lire, soldi, and denari.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relative to the present money of account P -—
A. One scudo (Fiorentino) legally valued at Seven lires present currency.
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former mouey of account 2
A. All the present coins were current (except the fiorino and the coins,
gold and silver, composed of it, as also its fractions), and at the same value.
Change of Momey.
Q. 12. When did the change take place?
A. The partial change took place in 1826.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2–
A. The cause which influenced the legislature was to bring about the decimal
system, as proclaimed in the annexed law.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency P
A. By the complexity in the accounts.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. To do away with the anomaly and inconvenience of the use in accounts
of an imaginary unit, and because the general popular custom was inclined
to the 10 paul piece or francescone.
P p 4
304 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 40.
Tuscany.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any) which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping 2 –
A. As above. -
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt P−
A. As above. -
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law
A. The change from the scudo to the lira, as unit in account keeping, was
caused as above, and not by any desire to assimilate the currency to that
of any neighbouring state ; but the law of 1826 was undoubtedly pro-
claimed for the evident purpose of bringing about a change towards a
decimal currency, but averseness to change and the apathy both of the
people and the government, allowed the law to be simply a dead letter.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a decimal
division of money over a non-decimal division ?
A. See answer to Query 18.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected 2–
A. The change of scudo to lire was tacitly and by degrees adopted, except in
certain districts, in rural account keeping.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed 2
A. No change took place in the relative value of coins previously in cir-
culation.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before, and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with or after, the change 2
A. Only the florin, and pieces composed of florins, or fractions of florins,
which circulate without any opposition or inconvenience being felt.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any and
which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new 2
A. See answer to Query 11.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2 —
A. None.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies?
A. They were.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new P Or, in the case of fixed money, tolls, pontages,
duties, &c., belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the state, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements 2
A. No change having taken place in the relative value of the coin no pro-
vision was required.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate f Was it optional or
compulsory P. lf compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it effectually
enforced P. Or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language 2
A. The change from the scudo to the lira as unit for accounts was gradually
adopted; but, as before stated, the law intended to bring about the decimal
system, which, however, was never enforced or attended to, although a
penalty was tacked to the nonobservance of the law.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently for
any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently P
A. Answered above.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use 2
How does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
A. For the above reason no inconvenience is felt.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts?
A. Merchants and bankers keep all their accounts in lires.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any and
what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts 2
A. No answer required, being explained above.
Q. 32. Was the change, at the time of its introduction, unpopular with any and what classes of
society P If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting P. Does it now exist?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness f –
A. Nothing of the kind has occurred under the above circumstances.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages
or disadvantages 2
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. No answer required.
DECIMAL COIN AGE COMMISSION. 305
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally 2 If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money 2 or was it in any and what way connected
with it? -
A. Weights and measures are not divided decimally. The old system is still
adhered to with no innovation.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the division of money P
A. Requires no answer, as no alteration took place in coins or weights.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes 2 Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ? -
A. No answer required, as there is no decimal form established for either
coins or weights.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reason for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect 2
A. During the French occupation, and whilst Tuscany was incorporated in
the French Empire as a department, by order of Napoleon I., the decimal
French system was adopted, both as to coins and weights and measures
The Tuscan mint coined five-franc pieces, and a tariff was issued fixing the
relative correspondence between French and Tuscan coins in every species
of current coin, and the same in weights and measures. Accounts and
books were kept as formerly, in lires, but before our courts of law every-
body was obliged to mention the corresponding amounts in French decimal
denominations. In the outset some ill-humour was created, but it gradually
subsided, and no visible inconvenience resulted thereupon. On the return
of the Grand Duke in 1814, all the French laws on the application of the
decimal system were repealed and the old system restored. Annexed is
the decree of 1826, which proclaims the defects of the actual system and
the necessity of founding transactions on a decimal system.
(Translation.)
Notification.
The Imperial and Royal Council, in execution of the Sovereign orders, contained in
the note of the Imperial and Royal Secretary of the Finances, of the 16th June last, notifies
to the public, the following royal resolution :-
His Imperial and Royal Highness having turned his sovereign attention to the monetary
system in force in his most prosperous States, has observed that the two bases of the said
system, the pawl and the lira, not only cause the currency and the method of account
keeping commonly adopted to depend on different elements, but also hinder the adoption
of the decimal system which cannot be put in practice without bringing both of them,
and, at the same time, the general system of currency, to a new type of monetary unity.
His said Imperial and Royal Highness has also considered that the institution of the new
monetary unity may be formed in such a manner as, without difficulty to render the
whole of the former coinage still admissible, both in monetary transactions and payments.
In pursuance of such reflections His Imperial and Royal Highness has determined to
order as follows:– -
I. The royal mint shall issue a new silver coin, under the name of fiorimo, of the value
of one hundred of the present quattrini, which will thus be the fourth part of the current
piece of ten pauls, and will become the sole and only basis of the new monetary
system.
II. This coinage, offering all the requisite divisions and subdivisions of the florin, will
effectually introduce a decimal series, which will promote the convenience of commerce.
III. A new gold coin shall also be issued of the value of eighty florins, His Imperial
and Royal Highness reserving to himself to indicate at a future period his intention
respecting the other multiplications in gold of the new florin.
IV. The royal mint shall continue the coinage of the gold coins known by the name
of ruspone and zecchino, subject, however, to all the laws, usages, and customs relative
to the same.
W. Every declaration of money in notarial instruments and judicial acts shall, from the
1st of January 1827, be made in the new florins and their centesimal fractions, or, at
least, if mentioned by the name of the coin hitherto used, their relative value in florins
shall likewise be specified. The chancellors, sub-chancellors, actuaries, and other officers of
the tribunals, notaries, procurators, etc., who may transgress this rule shall incur the fine
of twenty lire for every transgression, balf of the fine to be applied to the benefit of the
No. 40.
Tuscany.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
Q q
306 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 40. registry office, and the other half to the benefit of the hospital of the place where such
Tuscany. transgression has been committed, or of the nearest existing hospital.
* - - 1. --> VI. The Royal Council will make known to the public in detail, and in order to avoid
He.Majesty's misunderstandings, the description of every new coin to be issued by the royal mint, in
Minister. the form required by the existing laws.
—- — From the Imperial and Royal Council,
July 10, 1826. (Signed) W. A. PUCCINI.
(Signed) L. PELLI-FABBRONI.
No. 41. No. 41.
Netherlands.
THE IN ETHERLANDS.
Sir J. #. º * ANSWERs to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into DECIMAL
all E. CoINAGE so far as regards the KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS.
By Sir JAMES H. TURING, Bart., Her Majesty's Consul at ROTTERDAM.
Present Money of Account.
Q. l. What is the money of account at present established by law P
A. Florins, cents, and half cents.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account 2–
A. One florin contains one hundred cents, or two hundred half cents.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations f -
A. No other denominations of money of account than the above mentioned are
practically used in expressing or recording payments and receipts.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account
estimated in money of the United Kingdom ?
A. The highest unit of such money of account, namely one florin, estimated at .
the par of exchange of twelve florins to the pound sterling, is equal to one
shilling and eightpence, and the lowest unit, being one half cent, is estimated
at the same exchange to be equal to one tenth part of a penny.
Present Current Coins.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal 2
A. The coins current by law and in general circulation are the following:—
Silver.
The piece of two florins and a half:
Value in money of account, two hundred and fifty cents.
,, . coins of United Kingdom, four shillings and twopence.
The piece of one florin:
Value in money of account, one hundred cents.
, coins of United Kingdom, one shilling and eightpence.
The piece of fifty cents:
Value in money of account, fifty cents.
,, coins of United Kingdom, tenpence.
The piece of twenty-five cents:
Value in money of account, twenty-five cents.
, coins of the United Kingdom, fivepence.
The piece of ten cents:
Value in money of account, ten cents.
,, . coins of the United Kingdom, twopence.
The piece of five cents:
Value in money of account, five cents.
, coins of United Kingdom, one penny.
Copper.
The piece of one cent : *
Value in money of account, one cent.
,, . coins of United Kingdom, one fifth part of a penny.
The piece of one-half cent:
Value in money of account, one half cent.
, coins of the United Kingdom, one tenth part of a penny.
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account, in common use?
A. The lowest coin, the one half cent copper piece, and representing the
lowest denomination of money of account, is in common use.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 307
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?
A. The half cent copper piece is the coin of lowest value in common use.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society 2–
A. The lowest coins in common use are not complained of by any classes in
society as being either inconveniently low or inconveniently high.
Former Momey of Account and Coins.
Q 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions 2
A. The money of account before the introduction of the present system was in
many instances inconveniently various and provincial, the basis of the whole
nevertheless resting on the value of the florin, containing twenty stivers or
one shilling and eightpence sterling.
The subdivisions of the florin in account were stivers and pennings; the
stiver containing sixteen pennings.
With reference to the above-mentioned varieties of money of account, it
may be sufficient for illustration to mention that in the Province of Zealand
books and accounts were kept in pounds Flemish, schellings, and groats.
The pound Flemish was equal to six florins, or - 10s. Sterling.
The schelling 52 55 thirty cents, or - 6d.
And groat 53 35 two and a half, or - d.
In like manner in some other provinces a peculiar system in respect to
money of account prevailed, but the cases are now of so old a date that the
memory of them has nearly passed away, and details cannot be furnished.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account 2
A. I cannot say more than that all was based on the value of the florin of one
shilling and eight pence sterling.
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account 2
A. The coins in current use were the following, many of which had in the
course of circulation undergone great mutilation and consequent deprecia-
tion, being in some instances hardly distinguishable by any outward symbol.
Of national gold coin there were these in use:—
£ s. d.
Ducats - - &- - value 0 9 9 sterling.
Half ducats tº- (º - - , 0 4 10% ,
Ryder e- sº * * - * 99 I 3 4 33
Halfryders º - - - , , 0 1 1 8 55
Williams º -> º - , 0 16 8 55
Half Williams º º º - , , 0 8 4 95
The silver coins in use consisted of:—
Ducatoons - {- º - , 0 5 3 55
Zealand rix dollars - ſº a - , 0 4 4 35
Subdivided into half rix dollars - - , 0 2 2 55
55 ,, quarter , , - - , 0 1 1 59
33 55 eighth 35 sº * 35 0 0 6# 35
* See Reply 23. Florins tº- - , , 0 1 8 33
* Subdivided into half-florins º - , 0 0 10 33
% 35 quarter tº º – , 0 0 5 53
Pieces of thirty stivers º - , , 0 2 6 55
35 twenty-eight stivers - - , , 0 2 4 39
25 twelve and a half - - , 0 1 0# ,
25 six stivers * -> - , 0 0 6 55
% 92 two stivers tº- wº - ,, 0 0 2 ,
3%. 33 one stiver - - - , , 0 0 1 22
Copper. -
Doits—8 of which were equal to - -- – 0 0 || 3 y
Change of Money.
Q. 12. When the change take place —-
A. The change was made and commenced in 1822.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2
A. The cause of the change of money (by which, I presume, is meant the
money of account) arose in a great measure from the universally prevailing
opinion that the Decimal System would be beneficial for arithmetical purposes,
tending essentially to greater unity, and to the simplification and abridge-
ment of financial reports and calculations of every description, being also
considered to be arithmetically more correct than the fractional system.
No. 41.
Netherlands.
Sir J. H. Turing,
Bart.
*
Q q 2
308 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 41.
Netherlands.
Sir J. H. Turing
Bart.
wºmmº
Q. 14, Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the
previous currency –- -
A. The change was caused by the inconveniences and confusion which were
experienced by the state of the previous currency.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of
the principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. The previous currency, though from long standing understood by all classes
was replete with inconveniences and essentially objectionable.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping 2
A. Both in paying money, so multifarious in point of coinage as well as in the
keeping of accounts, where some provinces adhered to their own peculiar
system of keeping accounts, inconveniences could not fail to be felt.
Q 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt
A. The inconveniences alluded to were felt by all classes generally.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any, and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency
to that of neighbouring countries ; and if so, had, the new money been rendered familiar by its
use either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law
A. The change was no doubt in part owing to the desire of assimilating the cur-
rency to that of neighbouring countries, and in an especial degree promoted by
the example given by the French nation, who had successfully adopted the
decimal principle in monies, weights, and measures. It had not been
rendered familiar by its adoption as a money of account or of exchange
until established by law.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any, and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a nondecimal division ?
A. A preference of the decimal division above the nondecimal division was
universally felt and understood, but the difficulty of execution was long
anxiously and maturely debated.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected
A. The change was eventually accomplished n the way provided by the con-
stitution, namely, by the Executive Government submitting to the States
General a sketch of law (projet de loi) accompanied by explanatory
memoranda showing the object and advantages of the proposed measure,
which, after passing through committees of the Upper and Lower Chambers
of the States General, were finally adopted by a large majority in both
houses, and then embodied into a law with the approval of the King, and
promulgated by his Majesty's Sanction.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed 2
A. Some of the coins in previous use were altogether withdrawn, and those
detailed in Reply 5 came to be the only legal tenders.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change — © º
A. No other coins have been issued since the issue of those designated in
Reply 5.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the oid coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new ?
A. All the silver coins were withdrawn, excepting those marked *, particu-
larized in Reply No. 11. Of the gold coins the Williams, of the value of
16s. 8d. sterling, and the Half Wlliams, of 8s. 41', sterling, were allowed
to circulate for some time longer.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2
A. No. See, for particulars of new coins, Answer No. 5.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies
A. The lower denominations of monies of account in the old system were
absorbed in the new by the general denomination of cents.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the
old system, and to be discharged under the new Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements 2
A. No provision of this nature was made, as is shewn by the accompanying
translations of the laws enacting the change. See Reply No. 37.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate º Was it optional or
compulsory If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced Was it effectually
enforced ; or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in
popular language 2–
• A. The change was immediate and compulsory, being enforced by law; all
accounts, unless kept in conformity with the law, being inadequate before
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 309
courts of justice, and not recognized by any public authorities; Government
leading the way by keeping all state accounts according to the new system,
and requiring the public to observe the same rule in all transactions with the
State.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently
A. The above reply, No. 27, answers this query.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use
How does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
A. All running bills of exchange were reduced to the new system by simply
adopting cents instead of stivers, at the reduction of five cents to the stiver,
the standard of florins remaining unaltered; thus, for example, a bill of
exchange which had been drawn under the former system for 1,200 florins
and 15 stivers, would, if due after the enactment of the new system, be
paid with 1,200 florins and 75 cents, and all other accounts, bank notes, &c.
on the same principle.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts :
A. This question is replied to by the previous statement, that only one system
now prevails.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts 2
A. This question is replied to by the previous statement, that only one system
now prevails.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society 2 If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting 2 Does it now exist?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness?
A. The change was accomplished without any symptoms of unpopularity, and
no such feeling is now perceptible, nor does the change cause any
uneasiness.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages 2
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2d. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions?
A. The new money (coin) is more convenient than the old, being more suitable
from its greater simplicity and sufficient abundance, as well for paying and
receiving large and small sums, as in keeping accounts in large and small
transactions.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34, Are weights and measures divided decimally 2 If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money P or was it in any and what way connected
with it?—
A. Weights and measures are divided decimally, and had preceded the decimal
division of money several years.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money —
A. No inconveniences have been perceptible, nor were any complaints made on
this subject.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commo-
dities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
A. The people very readily accommodated themselves to the new system,
arranging with each other the retail transactions to mutual satisfaction, com-
plaints, if any, being suppressed as soon as the system was known to be the
law of the land. It cannot be denied, however, that the old system of
weights and measures is still very general in all transactions of a retail
description ; and although this is contrary to the present law, it will never-
theless take a long time completely to eradicate the custom.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the rea-
sons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
The accompanying translation of the law of 18th December 1845, and of the
Decree of 14th February 1846, serve to show the measures pursued by the
Netherland Government for effecting the withdrawal of the old coins from
circulation, and the substitution in lieu of the same of a circulating medium
No. 41.
Netherlands.
Sir J. H. Turing,
Bart.
Q q 3
310 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 41. to serve temporarily while the exchange was in progress, and these public
Netherlands. documents are essential to prove by what simple means the whole coinage
was remodelled and made available throughout the realm without causing
Sir J. H. Turing, interruption or inconvenience.
Bart. British Consulate,
Rotterdam, 31st March 1856.
JAMES H. TURING.
* -- -ºss
Staatsblad, No. 90.
LAw of 18th December 1845, relative the ExCHANGE of the Provincial or General
State CoINs still in CIRCULATION.
WE, William II., by the grace of God, &c. &c. &c., to all who may see or hear these
presents read, greeting. Be it known:—
That having taken into consideration the necessity of Our being legally empowered to
cause all the silver coins coined previous to the promulgation of the Law of 28th
September 1816 (Staatsblad, No. 50), to be cancelled, and at the same time to introduce,
in the lieu thereof, under proper guarantees, a temporary auxiliary coin :
Having heard the Council of State, and with the consent of the States General, We
have seen fit, and by these presents do see fit and ordain:—
Article I. At the periods, and in the manner We shall see fit to appoint, all the silver
coins coined previously to the Law of 28th September 1816 (Staatsblad, No. 50, including
those which, by Articles 12 and 17 of the same Law, are still in circulation, shall, whether
at once or progressively, be annulled, after opportunity shall have been given for exchange
of the same.
Article II. As long as all the coins afore-mentioned shall not have been withdrawn under
the guarantees appointed on Our behalf according to the following articles, and in the form
prescribed by Us, there may be issued mint notes not less in value than one florin to the
collective amount which may be deemed necessary.
Article III. No such mint notes as aforesaid are to be issued, excepting in exchange for
a like nominal value of the silver coin mentioned in Article I.
The mint notes so issued may progressively, but at the latest on the last day of December
1847, be exchanged for silver or gold coin.
Article IV. At the same rate as mint notes are issued, an equal quantity of new silver
coin, or a quantity of the coin described by Article I., equal in nominal amount to the
mint notes issued, and besides for supplement of deficiency as much mint coin or fine silver
or gold in bars in proportion as may be agreed upon with the Directors of the Netherland
Bank to be required for establishing the new coin, which has to be represented by mint
notes, must be transferred to the keeping of the Netherland Bank.
On the mint notes the directors of the Netherland Bank must express that the above
rule has been complied with. -
The difference which may be occasioned by the real re-coinage, must, when such appears,
be immediately regulated and accounted for with the Netherland Bank.
Article V. The coin or gold and silver thus transferred to the keeping of the Nether-
land Bank, will remain in that keeping, or may be transferred by the directors of that
Bank to the Royal Mint at Utrecht for the purpose of fining and re-coinage.
Article VI. As long as all the mint notes have not been withdrawn, or an amount of
new coin be not in the hands of the Netherland Bank sufficient for the withdrawal of the
mint notes still in circulation, none of the coins originating from the specie or gold and
silver transferred for account of the State by the Netherland Bank may be delivered from
the Royal Mint, excepting to the Netherland Bank.
Article VII. At the end of every month the head of the Department of Finance reports
to the General Chamber of Account the amount of mint notes issued or withdrawn.
The withdrawn mint notes are to be accounted for to the General Chamber of Account,
and annulled in the presence of two members of said Chamber; and announcement be
made successively of the amount issued and withdrawn of such notes in the Staats
Courant.
Article VIII. The mint notes issued by virtue of the present law must, until the period
to be fixed for their being withdrawn, be taken by everyone as a legal means of payment
equivalent to ready money, for the sums expressed on the body of the same. Anyone
imitating, falsifying, or criminally circulating or importing mint notes, is punishable with
permanent hard labour, and in modified cases with temporary hard labour, in as far as
judgment shall have been given in the province of Limburg, and in the other provinces of
º: State, with the punishments which are in use in lieu of permanent or temporary hard
labour.
Article IX. The mint notes which, within two years after the time appointed for their
withdrawal, are not presented for that purpose, fall into prescription.
Article X, No Netherland coins coined according to the Law of 28th September 1816
(Staatsblad, No. 50) and subsequent Laws will be received at the State Treasury if they
be in any way altered, and thus falsified, mutilated, clipt, or exteriorly injured, and no one
can be obliged to receive such altered, falsified, mutilated, or injured coins. -
DECIMAL COIN A GE COMMISSION. 311
We reserve the right to apply the rules mentioned in this article at convenient periods,
temporarily also to some of the silver coins described in Article I, which may require it.
Article XI. The new coins or such of the old to which We may apply the reservation
mentioned in the concluding part of the preceding Article, presented in an altered, falsified,
mutilated, clipt, or injured state at the Government offices, may be detained, and with a
proof of such detention be sent to the Council and Chief Masters of the Mint for exami-
nation, and being declared to be in such state, must be cut through, and in that condition
be returned to those presenting them.
These presents to be inserted in the Staatsblad, &c. &c. &c.
The Hague, 18th December 1845.
WILLIAM.
By Order of the King. -
The Director of the King's Cabinet,
A. G. A. VAN RAPPARD.
Issued on the 21st December 1845.
The Director of the King's Cabinet,
A. G. A. VAN RAPPARD.
DECREE of 14th February 1846, relative to the Withdrawal and Exchange of Ducatoms
and Rix-Dollars or Pieces of Two Florins and Fifty Cents, with the Subdivision of
each, in execution of the Law of 18th December 1845. (Staatsblad, No. 90.)
WE, William II., by the grace of God, &c. &c. &c.
Having seen Article I. of the Law of 18th December 1845 (Staatsblad, No. 90), which
provides that at the periods and in the manner to be appointed by Us, all silver coins
coined before the enactment of the Law of 28th September 1816 (Staatsblad, No. 50),
including those which by virtue of Articles 12 and 17 of said Law are still in circulation,
shall, whether at once or progressively, be annulled, after opportunity shall have been
given for exchange of the same :
On the Report of Our Minister of Finance of 13th instant, No. 114 Ill G.S., have
seen fit and do ordain —
Article I. On the 8th of March next following are to be annulled all whole and half
ducatoons or silver ryders, rix dollars, or pieces of two florins and fifty cents, with the half
and quarter pieces of the same, after from Tuesday the 3rd to Saturday the 7th of the
same month, opportunity shall have been given for the exchange of said old coin.
Article II. For the exchange of the Saume, other silver coins or mint notes shall be
used in conformity with the Law of 18th December 1845 (Staatsblad, No. 90), in the form
appointed by Us. -
Article III. Besides at the Netherland Bank, the exchange is to take place at the offices
of the agents of the Treasury, who, in case of being insufficiently provided with coin, are
authorized to issue certificates at five day's date in the manner prescribed by Article 2,
payable at their offices or at Amsterdam, at the Netherland Bank, at the option of those
interested, on presenting the withdrawn coin for exchange, and to be expressed in the
certificates.
Article IV. Our Minister of Finance is authorized to adopt the needful measures for
the exchange expressed in the preceding Articles, as also to promote the same at the offices
of the collectors of taxes, by taking over, up to, and including the 7th of March next
ensuing, as far as their cash permits, the coins withdrawn from circulation by this decree.
Our Minister of Finance is charged with the execution of this decree, copy of which is
to be transmitted for information to the General Chamber of Account, and to the Council
and Chief Masters of the Mint, and inserted in the Staatsblad.
The Hague, 14th February 1846.
WILLIAM.
The Minister of Finance,
WAN HALL.
Issued on the 16th February 1846.
The Director of the King's Cabinet,
A. G. A. VAN RAPPARD.
No. 42.
ANSWERs to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS.
By JAMES ANNESLEY, Esq., Her Majesty's Consul at Amsterdam.
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law ——
A. Guilder, cent, and half-cent.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account
A. One guilder is equal to 100 cents, or 200 half-cents.
No. 41.
Netherlands.
Sir J. H. Turing,
Bart.
No. 42.
Netherlands.
J. Annesley, Esq.
sºmeº
Q q 4
312 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 42. Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
Netherlands. or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations 2
A. Guilders, cents, and half-cents.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom *
J. Annesley, Esq.
cºmmemº ºmºsºme
S. d.
A. Highest unit, one guilder, equal to - I 8 || Calculated at the Exchange
Lowest, half-cent, equal to +'s part of a penny. of 12 fl. per £ sterling.
Present Cºrrent Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respec-
tive value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal *
A. The gold standard coin is abolished.
The silver coins are:—
s. d
The Ryksdaalder (2} fl. piece) equal to - 4 2 T
Gulden (standard) º tº- - 1 8
Half-gulden - º sº - 0 10
25-cent piece sº º - - 0 5 Exchange at 12 fl.
10-cent piece º - - - 0 2 per £ sterling,
5-cent piece º sº - 0 1 as above.
The copper coins are:–
The Cent º tºº º- - - 0 }.
Half-cent - e- sº - 0 +'ſ
Q. 6. Arc coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use?
A. Yes.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use 2
A. The half-cent.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
niently high in value by any and which classes in society 2
A. No complaint is made with regard to their being too high or too low in
value. The silver five-cent pieces are not much liked; their size is too
small to be convenient for the labouring classes.
Foyme, Money of Account and Coins.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions
A. Gulden, stuiver, and penning.
1 guilder tº -->
1 stiver º -
20 stivers.
16 pennings.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account 2
A. The guilder had the same value; the stiver or 16 pennings is equal to
five cents.
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account?
Value in the former
money of accounts.
Guilders. Stivers. JPennings.
A. The ducaton * tº- - 3 0-
3 gulden - sº - - 3 () 0
Daalder tº- *- º- 1. 1() 0
Achtentwentig º a tº- I 8 ()
Gulden &_* º - I () ()
Zeeuwsche ryksdaalder º - 2 12 ()
+ 32 (pietje) - () 6 8 X-Silver.
Hollandsche ryksdaalder - 2 10 ()
Dertiendbalf gº º- º () 12 8
Schelling - tº - () 6 ()
Zesthalf gº - *- () 5 S
Dubbeltje - - - - () 2 ()
Stuivertje º- - - 0 l () –
Ten-gulden piece º – l () () ()
Five-gulden piece - - 5 () () } Gold
Duit - - -- () () 2–Copper.
Besides many old provincial silver coins, indeed too numerous to specify.
Change of Money.
Q, 12. When did the change take place 2
A. The change in account took place on the 1st January 1821. The change
in the currency (coins) took place at different periods five or six years ago,
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 313
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2
A. The deterioration of the coin by unlawful practices (clipping) and the
greater convenience of the Decimal System.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency *
A. Great confusion and inconvenience were experienced from having too many
coins of different (practical) value.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other
A. A great many.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money, or in account keeping 2
A. Principally in paying and receiving Inoney. The present system of
keeping accounts in guldens and cents is far more convenient than the
former one.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt –
A. The inconveniences were felt by all classes, but chiefly by the labouring
classes.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law Ż
A. The change was caused by example. The excellent working of the
Decimal System in France was generally acknowledged ; the new mode of
calculation had been rendered familiar by instruction at the public schools.
The change in accounts, and afterwards in the coinage, was only adopted
after the same had been established by law.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a decimal
division of money over a nondecimal division ?
A. Most decidedly.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected 2
A. By law.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed?
A. Yes; the value of the pieces in Stivers were reduced to cents by multiply-
ing each stiver by five.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with or after, the change?
A. The change in accounts was, as already stated, effected in 1821, and the
coinage was changed five or six years ago.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new P
A. All the old coins were at different times called in and new coins substi-
tuted; for instance, the daalders (pieces of 1%fi.) were called in to be
exchanged on a certain day for new guilder pieces, and pieces of 50 cents,
and in this manner the whole coinage was gradually changed ; the pieces
not called in remained in circulation simultaneously with the new issued
money until their turn came round.
. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2.
y b
A. The gulden (the standard) alone retained its old name, although the
pieces themselves were changed for new ones. No new names could be
given to the old coins, as they were all withdrawn.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies?
A. No ; in the old accounts the pennings were the small figure, 16 to a stiver,
although one penning could not be paid, as the only copper coin in circula-
tion was the duit, equal to two pennings. In the new accounts the half-
cent, 10 to a stiver, is the lowest denomination ; the half-cent piece is in
circulation ; the former pennings were imaginary, whilst the half-cents
are real.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new P Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements?
A. The provisions were not difficult ; the gulden remained the same ; the
stivers were as stated reduced to cents by multiplying them by five. With
regard to tolls, etc. of less than one Stiver, some arrangement was effected
by reducing the number of duiten (two pennings) as nearly as possible to
cents; for instance, a toll of two duiten (four pennings) was paid with l;
No. 42.
Netherlands.
J. Annesley, Esq.
R. 1:
314 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 42.
Netherlands.
J. Annesley, Esq.
cent, this was, of course, a loss to the public of a quarter cent ; a toll of
three duiten (six pennings) by two cents, and one of four duiten was paid
by 2% cents.”
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate 2 Was it optional or
compulsory? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it effectually
enforced?" or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language 2
A. The change in money of accounts was from a date fixed, and in all public
transactions compulsory ordinances were issued at the time specifying the
penalties for noncompliance. The old system was entirely discontinued,
and the new system effectually enforced. In popular language (among the
lower classes only), the old denominations are still made use of, but
rarely.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently for
any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently P
A. The change was willingly adopted. The old system, has ceased ; it did
not then, nor does it now, continue in use concurrently with the new.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use P How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange?
A. The inconvenience is little, and only to a trifling amount, and is princi-
pally confined to the lower orders. For instance, a greengrocer sells his
cabbage at so many dwits and is paid in cents; even these instances are
becoming every day of more rare occurrence. In accounts, bank notes, or
bills of exchange, there is no such concurrent use.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts?—.
A. The books are kept in guldens and cents.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts P--
A. Most effectually.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society P If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting P. Does it now exist?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness?
A. It was rather unpopular with the unlettered and old; this unpopularity
has been transitory. I am not aware of the change having caused any
commotion ; uneasiness it may have caused, as the Dutch are for the most
part always opposed to innovations of every kind.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages,
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts— (a) In large transactions. (6) In small transactions P
A. Certainly more convenient. Formerly large sums of money were often
paid in ten different sorts of coin, which caused much trouble and loss of
time. At present the payments can only be made in the new coin above
mentioned ; in small transactions, the convenience is also very great ; the
old small silver coins were numerous and badly divided, whilst the new
25 cents and 10-cent pieces and the copper coins are very convenient.
Weights amd Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally 2 If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money? or was it in any and what way connected
with it 2
A. Yes; it accompanied the decimal division in account (1st January 1821).
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money 2––
y * - e. g * º º e g ſº
A. The division of Weights and measures correspond with the division of
money.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commo-
dities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom *
A. The division of money corresponding with the division of weights, the
case does not arise.
* Tolls of 2 duiten = 14 cents, paid by 1% cents. Increase, 20 per cent.
35 3 22 F. 1% Cents, 92 2 35 22 # per Cent.
DECIMAL COIN AGE COMMISSION. 315
General Qwery.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
A. The medicinal (apothecary, weight was left unchanged for fear of acci-
dents. I have endeavoured to procure copies of Ordinances issued in 1821,
the period at which the compulsory change in the money of accounts was
effected, but have not been able to do so. There is no doubt that penalties
more or less stringent were attached to a noncompliance; in fact, the law
remaining unchanged, the penalties are in force up to the present hour.
These Ordinances are more likely to be obtained at the Hague than at
Amsterdam. --
JAMES ANNESLEY,
Her Majesty's Consul.
No. 43.
PORTUGAL.
ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the KINGDOM OF PORTUGAL.
Sent by HER MAJESTY's MINISTER at LISBON,
Present Money of Accowmt.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law f--—
A. In Portugal accounts are kept in reis, with the following notation :-
1.000 : 000$000 (one thousand contos or millions of reis), the symbol Š
following the place of thousands; a colon (:) the place of millions (contos):
and a period (.) the place of thousands of millions.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account P
A. The rei is the lowest unit. In ordinary language a milreis (18000) and a
conto (1:000$000) are spoken of, but these words mil and conto are also
ordinarily used as numerical nouns.
Q. 3. Are more than two deno inations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations f
A. No other denomination of money of account besides that of reis is prac.
tically used in recording payments and receipts; but in expressing them it
is usual, where the amount is less than a moidore (45800), to state them in
cruzados ($400), cruzados novos, or pintos ($480, quartinhos (13200),
testoons or tostöes ($100), and vintems (20 reis). Larger amounts are
expressed in the moidore and its multiples, and sometimes in pounds
sterling (libras), at the rate of 43500.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account
estinated in money of the United Kingdon)
A. The value of the highest unit of the money of account practically used in
expressing payments and receipts is Il. 18, 3d. (the moidore), of the lowest
ºr of a penny (five reis). In recording payments and receipts the rei, 44 of
a penny, is the only unit.
Present Cy?','ent Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal P
A. The coins current by law at present are the following : —
Gold.
Coróa, 105000 = 492 4 5 = 2; sovereigns.
Meia Coróa, 55000 - 1 2 23 = 14 3)
Quinto de Coróa, 25000 = 0 8 103 = 0+ 3)
Decimo de Coróa, 15000 = 0 4 54 = 0; 52
Peça, 85000 - 1 15 64 = 1%. ,
Meia Peça, 4$000 - 0 17 94 = 0} 55
Soberano, 4S500 - 1 0 0 = the English sovereign.
Meio Soberano, 23250 = () ) () O = the half-sovereign.
No. 42.
Netherlands.
J. Annesley, Esq.
No. 43.
Portugal.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
R r 2
316 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 43. Silver.
Portugal. S. d.
: ~~1–2 Cinco tostóes, $500 tºº tº ſº = 2 23
Hºº'. Dois tostóes, $200 - - - = 0 103.
( ; Tostão, $100 ſº gº tº g gº - 0 54.
Meio tostão, $0.50 tºº 4- * F. 0 23
Comparing these coins with those of Great Britain, as by law established,
the piece of S.
5 tostöes will be equivalent to ſº 2' 19 nearly.
Of 2 tostóes Eº tº &_* ’876 of a shilling.
I tostão º sº º tºp 438 3.5
Meio tostão * * wº 219
This calculation is based upon the weight of pure silver in the shilling (80'727
grains), (see M*Culloch, Art. Coins), and the weight of the like metal in the
piece of 5 tostöes (11:4583 grammes) as deduced from the legal gross
weight of the piece 12.5 grammes, and the fineness of +4.
Besides the following, which were called in by a law passed on 29th July 1854,
but permitted to continue current until 31st March 1857.
Silve)
Coróa, Iş000 - tº- - 4 54 = 4:38 shillings.
Cruzado Novo, $480 - - 2 13.
12 vintens, $240 tº- - 1 04.
6 vintens, $120 – gº F. 0 63.
Tostão (old), $100 - == 0 54.
3 vintens, $060 - es = 0 34.
# tostão (old), $0.50 - - 0 23.
It is not practicable to give the corresponding value of the last six coins in
English coins on account of the want of uniformity in their weight.
Copper.
Wintem - tº tº tºº tº - lººd.
Meio vintem, or 10 reis sº - # = one halfpenny and
e # of a penny.
Cinco reis tºº gºme - +} =
= one farthing and
* e * * * +++ of a penny.
Patacáo, or 40 reis 23-d., mixed metal. ©
5
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use ?
A. No coin representing the lowest denomination of the money of account
exists.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use P –
A, The coin of lowest value in common use is the piece of five reis.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society P
A. There are trifling inconveniences resulting to the poor from the lowest
coin in common use being too high in value ; but, whether it proceeds from
ignorance or from patient endurance, they make no complaint.
Former Momey of Account and Coins. $.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions P
A. The present system of money of account is the same which has always
prevailed.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account P--—
A. See No. 9.
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account 2—
A. See No. 9.
Change of Momey.
Q. 12. When did the change take place?
A. The change of money is not yet completely carried out. It was originally
enacted by law, bearing date 24th of April 1835; and subsequent laws
passed on the 15th February 1851, and 29th July 1854, on the subject of
the issue of new coin, followed the same principle of decimal division.
Copies of these laws are annexed.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change?--
4. The cause of the change is the desire to bring the coinage into conformity
with the decimal system of the money of account.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 317
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the
previous currency?—
A. It was not caused by the inconveniences, confusion, and complexity in the
state of the previous currency.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units or in their proportions to each other?
A. There were inherent inconveniences in the previous currency from the
circumstance that some of the coinage were according to a decimal, others
according to a duodecimal, system.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any) which caused or promoted the change inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money, or in account keeping 2
A. These inconveniences were not felt practically either in paying or receiving
money, or in account keeping. Indeed to some classes of the community
the variety was a convenience, as dispensing in many instances with the
necessity of using copper in Small payments.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt 2–
A. See the previous answer,
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law P
A. The change is not caused by any desire to assimilate the currency to that
of the neighbouring country.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a decimal
division of money over a non-decimal division?
A. It is stated to be caused altogether by an abstract preference for a decimal
division of money Over a non-decimal One.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected 2–
A. The carrying out of the change is effected by the introduction of new coins
into circulation, and by calling in at a fixed period a portion of the old
coinage.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed?
A. During the progress of the change the relative value of two of the coins
previously in circulation (the pega and its submultiple the meia pega) has
been changed. This alteration, however, as will be more particularly
explained in the answer to the last question in this return, was occasioned
by other causes than those connected with the decimal division of the
coin.
Q. 22 Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of simultaneously with,
or after the change 2
A. During the progress of the change the following new coins have been
issued in contemplation of and simultaneously with it, viz.:-
Gold.
Coróas de Ouro of - º - 53000
Meias coróas of tº- w a - 2S500
Gold pieces of - - - ISO00
Silver.
Coróas of º - * . - 18000
Meias corðas of º gº - $500
Pieces of --> - emº - $200
New pieces of gº tºº ~ $100
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any and
which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new 2––
A. The following coins have been withdrawn from circulation, viz.:-The
coróa of gold of 5$000, and the meia coróa of gold of 23500, coined under
the law of 24th April 1835. And the following coins are called in by the
law of 29th July 1854:—
The coróa of gold of 58000, and its submultiples, coined under the law of
15th February 1851.
The coróa of silver of 18000, and its submultiples, coined under the law of
24th April 1835.
The cruzado novo of $480, and its submultiples.
The old coins of $100 reis, and 50 reis. But the period for carrying out this
provision, fixed Originally at two months for Lisbon, and four months for
the provinces, from the date of publication of the law, was successively
prolonged until the 2d February 1855, 31st January 1856, and 31st
March 1857. -
No. 43.
Portugal.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
R p 3
3.18 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 43. Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins P
Portugal. A. The names of coróa and meia coróa, given by the laws of 24th April 1835
and 15th February 1851 to gold coins of the value of 55000 and 25500
Her Majesty's respectively, are by the law of 29th July 1854 given to coins of the respective
Minister. value of 105000 and 55000.
*
The silver coins denominated according to the last-mentioned law, pieces of
five testoons (cinco tostoës) were styled in the law of 24th April 1835
meias corfias.
Qs. 25–33. The monies of account not being changed these questions require
InO 3, InSW6'1'.
Weights amd Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally 2 If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money? or was it in any and what way connected
with it 2
A. The weights and measures actually in use are not divided decimally.
It is, however, provided by law that the French metrical system shall
be established, and this measure is to take effect at the close of the year
1862.
The weight of the coins issued under the law of 29th of July 1854 is
also fixed according to this system.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money P
A. The low value of the unit of the money of account obviates any incon-
venience which might arise from the division of weights and measures not
corresponding with the divisions of money.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes P Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
A. It is doubtful whether any retail dealer in Lisbon, having transactions
with the poorer classes, gives himself the trouble of reconciling the diffi-
culties arising from the incommensurability of the weights and measures
with the division of coins, or whether his poor customers are aware of any
loss or inconvenience from them. In those commodities which are sold by
weight or measure it is quite possible so to adjust the price as that the
dealer shall not receive more than his reasonable profit.
Gemeral Qwery.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents, bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
A. The general want of statistical information in Portugal makes it difficult
to furnish satisfactory answers on many of the subjects of the present
inquiry. Indeed in their Parliamentary discussions on questions relating
to the monetary system the entire absence of arguments of this practical
nature is remarkable, even where it appeared more particularly applicable,
and might be thought, à priori, to be easily attainable.
Notwithstanding the various enactments already referred to for the
issue of gold and silver coinage the former is hardly ever seen in circulation,
English sovereigns being employed all but exclusively in the specie trans-
actions both of the cities and provinces. The value assigned to the
sovereign when made current by law in the law of 1846, of 4$500, while
it had the advantage of being a multiple of the silver coinage issued in
conformity with the law of 24th April 1835, has occasioned much fluctua-
tion and confusion in the value of the other gold coins in circulation. It
became necessary in the following year to increase the representative
value of the pega (see the answer to the question No. 20) from 7#500 to
8$000 (i.e. from 1, 13s. 4d. to Il. 158. 63d.), and all the legislation herein
referred to Subsequent to the law of 24th April 1835 has been called for
by the consequences of this original false estimate.
But as the details of these measures, and the inquiries on which they
were based, seem to be foreign to the object desired by Her Majesty's
Commissioners for inquiring into decimal coinage, any further allusion
to them is deemed unnecessary.
Only in a single instance in the course of the debates in the Chambers
on these subjects was the topic of the division of the coin brought forward,
and that for the purpose of recommending the continuance of coin of the
duodecimal system, in concurrence with that of the decimal system, on the
ground of the former being more convenient for the uses of common life
from the greater number of divisions in the number 12.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 3.19
The convenience of the Portuguese system of money of account in
recording payments and receipts is generally acknowledged, as well by
official, scientific, and commercial men as by private individuals in their
ordinary transactions; and this circumstance will in some measure account
for the general absence of practical investigation and information concern-
ing it, since it is commonly only when difficulties present themselves that
the ingenuity of practical and scientific men is exerted for the purpose of
inquiring into the subject matter in which these difficulties occur, and in
suggesting remedies for them. It will therefore perhaps be sufficient to
point out one trifling difference between this money of account and that of
other countries using the decimal system, namely, the use of a single
denomination, that of reis, instead of two, as francs and centimes, or dollars
and cents, as in France and the United States.
The documents of which copies are annexed to this return are as
follows:—
Law of 24th April 1835.
Law of 15th February 1851.
Law of 29th July 1854.
Law of 13th December 1852.
Law of 24th April 1854.
--am-msm-wº-e sºme
Note.—The following is a summary of the principal provisions of the laws referred to
above —
1. By the law of 24th April 1835,-
All coins coined after the 30th June 1835 were to be decimal.
Both gold and silver coins were to be a legal tender. Silver +, fine to be coined
at the rate 75750 per marc. Gold of the same fineness at the rate of 1205000
€l D18.1°C.
Tº gives the relative value of gold to silver as 15:48 : I, being the proportion
which in England would give 5s. 1d. as the price of standard silver.
1$000 in silver = 29'608 grammes in weight = 6:03 francs (French) in value.
1$000 in gold = 1912 grammes in weight = 57.44 pence (English) in value.
English sovereign = 4$178 in gold.
The coins were to be,
Silver – - 15000. $500. $200. $100.
Gold - - - 5$000. 25500.
These were to circulate concurrently with the coins previously in circulation.
2. By the law of the 15th of February 1851,–
The quantity of gold in 55000 was reduced from 23 oitavas to 2% oitavas, i.e. by
++ or 64 per cent. This gave the relative value of gold to silver as 16:513: 1,
being the proportion which in England would give 4S. 9d, as the price of an
ounce of standard silver.
1$000 in gold = 1793 grammes in weight = 53.44 pence in value.
English sovereign = 46456 in gold.
Gold coined under the law of 24th April 1835 was to be current at 25000 per
oitava.
3. By the law of 13th December 1852 the French metrical system of weights and
measures was introduced, but the coinage was not affected.
4. The law of the 29th July 1854 was occasioned by the change in the relative
commercial values of gold and silver operating on the double standard in force, and
driving the silver out of circulation.
Its object was to introduce the English system, by which gold is the sole standard and
the only legal tender above a limited amount, and by which silver coins are tokens
circulating at a value above their intrinsic value, but are only a legal tender for a limited
amount.
By this law any person may send gold to the mint to be coined, paying a seignorage
of 1$000 per kilogramme or 17735 per thousand.
Silver and copper are to be coined and issued only for and by the State.
Silver is to be a legal tender to the amount of 5$000 only.
The following changes were made in the weight of the coins:—
1$000 in gold was to be = 1-7735 grammes in weight, i. e. =53:28 pence in value.
This gave the English sovereign, weighing 7.988 grammes, equal to 45504. It
was made a legal tender for 4:#500, while of the weight of 7.981 grammes.
25 grammes of silver (+4 fine) were to be coined into 15000.
At this rate a pound troy of silver, at the English standard of ##, would be coined
into 66896 shillings, instead of as in England 66 shillings.
Many of the coins previously in circulation were to be called in ; they were to be legal
tenders for two months in Lisbon and four months in the provinces, and received at
Government offices for one month afterwards.
A. S.
No. 43.
Portugal.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
*=s****
R r 4
320 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 44. No. 44.
Russia. R. U S S I A
Her Majesty's ANSWERs to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Minister. Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the EMPIRE OF RUSSIA.
(Transmitted by HER MAJESTY's MINISTER at ST. PETERSBURGH.)
Present Momey of Account.
Q. I. What is the money of account at present established by law P--—
A. The unit of money which is used in Russia as the standard of value is the
silver ruble, with its subdivisions.
sºmsºmºsº
Q, 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account 2
A. The silver ruble is divided into 100 parts, each of which bears the name
of copeck; each copeck is subdivided into half copecks and quarter copecks.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations 2
A. The money of account employed in payments only bears, as indicated in
Question 1, a single denomination, that of silver ruble ; consequently all
accounts, payments, and in general transactions in silver of all sorts, both
with the Crown and between individuals, are only expressed in this one
unit of money.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account
estimated in money of the United Kingdom *
A. The silver ruble forms the highest unit of money of account. It contains
4. Zolotnicks 21 dolis, i. e. 405 dolis of fine silver of the lawful weight
established in Russia ; i. e. it contains 278 grains of fine silver. (N.B.
1 poud contains 40 (Russian) pounds, 1 pound = 96 Zolotnicks, and I Zolot-
nick = 96 dolis.) Its value in British money varies according to the
course of exchange, generally within the limits of 37 to 39 pence.
The lower unit of money, the copeck, represented by a copper coin, is, as
mentioned above, the hundredth part of a ruble, and consequently corre-
sponds in value to 4-05 dolis of fine silver. The lowest subdivision of the
copeck, the quarter copeck forms the rººm part of a ruble, and therefore
4 () ()
expresses a value of 1.0125 dolis of fine silver.
Present Cwrrent Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal 2
A. The coins at present current in the empire consist of the following gold,
silver, and copper coins, struck after designs approved of by His Majesty
the Emperor :—
º
Gold Coimage.
The Half Imperial,—Its value, in respect to the unit of money, i. e. in
silver rubles, = 5-15; it is, therefore, equivalent to 5 rubles 15 copecks.
The relation between the value of gold and silver is generally fixed in
Russia as 1 to 15-45. The legal standard of half imperials is fixed in
Russia at 88 in 96, taking the subdivision of the Russian weight, i. e. a
zolotnick of gold must contain 88 dolis of fine metal and 8 dolis of alloy.
This standard is altogether analogous to the standard of English sovereigns;
it is a little higher (14; dolis) than that of the French 20-franc pieces,
which are of the standard of 864 (according to the Russian division).
Each half imperial must contain I Zolotnick 39 dolis, -that is, 135 dolis of
fine gold.
The weight of a half imperial with the alloy is 147 ºr dolis, and each pound
of alloyed gold must therefore contain 62 half imperials 2 rubles 88;
copecks, at the standard of 88.
The following Table indicates the principal relations between the half
imperial and the English sovereign ; these relations, expressed in Russian
weight, and according to Russian standard, will allow of a better appre-
ciation of the real value of the former : —
Weight of Alloyed Weight of the Fine Val d i
* * Metal contained in Standard. Metal contained §. j 1I].
the Coin. in the Coin. 11VCT ICubleS.
Russian # Imperial - 147 fºr 88 135 5 15
English Sovereign - 179-Éir 88 1641%, 6'27+}}s

DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 32I
Silver Coimage.
The ruble, which is the unit of money, and is divided into 100 copecks.
The poltinnick = 50 copecks or 0:50 of a ruble.
The tehetwertak, or piece of 25 copecks = 0.25 of a ruble.
The dwougrivenny, or piece of 20 copecks = 0:20 of a ruble.
The griwennick, or piece of 10 copecks = 0.10 of a ruble.
. The piatachek, or piece of 5 copecks = 0.05 of a ruble.
he standard of all these different species of silver coins, that of the ruble as
well as of the odd money, is fixed at 83+ (in each 96 parts of the Russian
division); it is inferior to that of the French 5-franc coin, which, according
to Russian weight, is of the standard of 86+ºr dolis; the Russian standard
is, however, superior to that of the Austrian and Prussian dollars, whose
standard, according to the above weight, is 80 dolis for an Austrian and
72 dolis for a Prussian dollar.
Each ruble must contain 4 Zolotnicks 21 dolis, or 405 dolis of fine silver; and,
in conformity with this proportion, the odd silver coins which, as we have
seen form the subdivisions of the ruble, ought to contain, of fine silver:—
The poltinnick 2 zolotnicks 104 dolis, i. e. 2024 dolis.
i
The tehetwertak = 1 35 5+ 25 1014 ,
The dwougrivenny= 8] 22
The griwennick = 40%. ,
The piatatehek - 20 !.
The weight of a silver ruble with the alloy is equal to 4 zolotnicks 82; dolis.
The weight of a poltinnick 2 Zolotnicks 41 dolis.
2) tohetwertak = 1 25 20%. ,
3) dwougrivenny= 93%. ,
22 griwennik – 46%. ,
piatehek F 234%. ,
In general 100 silver rubles must contain 5 pounds 6 Zolotnicks of silver with
alloy, according to the above-mentioned standard.
The above is sufficient, with the knowledge of the real amount of metal in
each of these coins, to determine the value which corresponds to each of
them according to the rate of exchange of the English coinage.
Copper Coimage.
The copper coinage, indicating a value in silver, has been struck in Russia
since the 7th February 1849 at the rate of 32 silver rubles per poud of
copper; it bears a stamp conformable to the designs approved of by His
Majesty the Emperor. Its subdivisions are:– -
A piece of 5 copecks = 0.05 rubles, weight 6 Zolotnicks 0 dolis.
32 3 , = 0.03 53 , 3 53 573. ,
25 2 3, F 0.02 22 55 2 3) 383. 55
25 I 3, F 0.01 }} 25 I 25 194. 55
55 # 3, F 0.005 , 573. 25
35 + 3, F 0.0025, 283. 55
Observation.—Besides the above-mentioned coins there are also some old
coins, struck at different periods, which have not been withdrawn from
circulation, viz. – -
A.—Gold Coimage.
The Imperial= 10 rubles 30 copecks, or 10:30 silver rubles. Its standard is
the same as that of the half imperial, but it contains twice the weight of
fine gold, besides the corresponding weight of alloy.
B.— Silver Coimage.
Struck between the 1st May 1834 and the 5th May 1841, and containing,
according to the regulation of the Government, a quantity of fine silver and
alloy in proportion to its nominal value, and of the same standard as the
present silver coinage:–
1. Piece of a ruble and a half = 1 ruble 50 copecks, or 1:50 rubles; it
contains 6 Zolotnicks 314 dolis of fine silver.
2. Piece of 30 copecks = 30 copecks, or 0.30 rubles. It contains 1 zolot-
nick 25+ dolis of fine silver.
3. Piatialtynny or piece of 15 copecks = 0:15 rubles; amount of fine
silver 60; dolis.
No. 44.
Russia.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
S s
322 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
§: 44. C.—Copper Coimage.
ussia. (a) Struck in accordance with the dispositions of the Ukase of the 1st June
Her Majesty's 1832, at the rate of 36 rubles of assignation per poud of copper.
Minister. This coinage was of four kinds:—
*g The grivna formerly represented 10 copecks of assignation, and contained
10 Zolotnicks 64 dolis of copper.
The piatak formerly represented 5 copecks of assignation; its weight = 5
zolotnicks 32 dolis.
The grosch formerly represented 2 copecks of assignation; its weight
2 Zolotnicks 12-iºn dolis.
The copeck formerly represented 1 copeck of assignation; weight 1 Zolotnick
6++ dolis.
As long as this coinage remains in circulation, the following nominal value is
to be attached to it, in order to introduce unity into accounts :—
A grivna = 3 copecks = 0.03 rubles.
A piatak = 1% copecks = 0.015
A grosch = 4 copeck = 0:005 ,
A copeck = 4 copeck = 0.0025 ,
(b) Coinage struck in accordance with the dispositions of the Imperial
Manifesto of the 1st July 1839, at the rate of 16 silver rubles per poud of
copper ; viz., pieces of 3, 2, 1, #, and + copecks.
The “billon’ coinage is not struck in Russia, and is not taken there.
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use ?
A. The copeck and its subdivisions, established by law, i.e. $ and 3 copecks
are represented by coins in general circulation.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use 2
A. The coin of lowest value mentioned above (Question 5) is copper, and
represents the rºg part of a ruble, or 4 of a silver copeck.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
niently high in value by any and which classes in Society P
A. The circulation of the Russian gold, silver, and copper coinage presents
no inconvenience.
22
Former Money of Accowmt and Coims.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions?
A. Before the introduction of the present system the money of account was
the ruble of assignation, 3.5 times less than the present silver ruble. It
was divided like the silver ruble into 100 copecks, and each copeck was
subdivided into 2 dićniéjky, and each dićniéjky into 2 polouschki.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account P
A. The value of the former ruble of assignation which was in circulation
before the introduction of the present system relatively to the value of the
present silver ruble was as 100: 350.
All accounts, contracts, and engagements, both of the Crown and between
individuals, were made, up to the introduction of the silver money of
account, in rubles of assignation.
Q. 11. What coins were current and of what value, in the former money of account 2
A. The same gold, silver, and copper coins which are in circulation at present
having a fixed relation to the ruble, were also current before the introduc-
tion of the present system, but the calculation was made by taking as a
basis the ruble and copeck of assignation; so that the value of the coinage in
assignation money was, -
Gold. Assignation.
I’. C.
An imperial, containing 10:30 silver rubles, worth - ... 36 5
A half imperial, 55 5-15 25 º- - 18 2%
Silvey.
Piece of a ruble and a half, containing 1:50 silver rubles, worth - 5 25
A ruble 92 1.00 32 – 3 50
Piece of 75 copecks 25 O-75 25 – 2 62
A poltinnick 22 0.50 23 - 1 75
A piece of 30 copecks 55 0.30 » - I 5
A tehet wertak 52 0.25 22 - 0 87%
A dwougrivenny * 5 0-20 35 – 0 70
A zloty 32 0-1 5 35 - 0 52%
A griwennick 25 0.10 25 - 0 35
A piatatehek 22 0-05 » . - 0 17%
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 323
The copper coinage representing the fractional divisions of the ruble had the
following nominal value in assignation –
The grivna corresponded to 10 copecks of assignation.
A. piatak 22 5 }}
A grosch 22 2 22
A copeck 25 l 22
The dićniéjka 2 3 # 55
The poloutchka , + 55
Change of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place?
A. The change took place in 1840, in consequence of the Supreme Manifesto
of the 1st July 1839 relative to the regulation of the monetary system
in the empire.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the previous
currency P
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping 2
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt 2
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries, and if so had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law
A. 13–18. The cause of this change was the necessity of putting an end to the
rise in the value of paper money (assignation) which had begun to take place
in several parts of Russia, owing to different circumstances, and which
threatened to give it, contrary to the original intention, a pre-eminence
over the silver which forms the fundamental coinage of the empire.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a non-decimal division ?
A. The former, as well as the present coinage, was founded on the decimal
System.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected
A. The change was effected by the following arrangements of the Govern-
ment:—The unit of money was fixed in silver; the assignations were with-
drawn from circulation, as no longer corresponding with the actual division
of the unit of money ; all the gold, silver, and copper coins which were in
circulation in the empire were converted into value in silver.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed ?
A. The modification effected in the relative value of the coins in their fixed
relation to the ruble, i. e. the unit of money, has been mentioned above.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change 2
A. No new coins were struck either before, or during, or after the period of
the modification of the monetary system, except the copper coins expressing
sums in silver, the old copper coinage having a direct relation only with
the ruble of assignation, the divisions of which it represented.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new 2
A. None of the previous coins were withdrawn from circulation on the
Occasion of the introduction of the new monetary system. On the con-
trary, they all remained in circulation except the copper coinage, which was
to be abolished in proportion as the new copper coinage was issued.
Observation.—In accordance with the disposition of the Supreme Ukase of the
22d June 1845, the platina coinage, which had been struck in Russia in
pieces of 3, 6, and 12 silver rubles, was withdrawn from circulation ; to
effect which a term of six months was assigned. But this abolition had
nothing to do with the introduction of the new system.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins ?
A. All the coins preserve their previous names. .
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies 2 .
A. According to the general relation of the old ruble to the new, which was
as 100 : 350, the silver copeck was valued at 3% copecks of the old copper
coinage. In general as the coins of inferior denomination were copper,
expressing only parts of the ruble, no difficulty occurred in the establish-
ment of the relation between the old and new coinage.
No. 44.
Russia.
Her Majesty's
Minister.
S S 2
324 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 44.
Russia.
fler Majesty's
Minister.
ammºº
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new 2 Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages, duties,
&c., belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the right to
which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements 2
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate 2 Was it optional or
compulsory? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced ? Was it effectually
enforced ? or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language 2
A. The Supreme Manifesto of the 1st July 1839 fixed terms for the introduc-
tion of the change, which was to be effected simultaneously all through the
empire, and which, being a governmental measure having the force of a law,
admitted of no exception, and was to be obligatory on every one. Nor
did the putting into execution of it necessitate any compulsory measure
neither was there need of having recourse to any penalty.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently
A. The two systems only existed simultaneously during the term fixed by
the Government.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use ? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
A. The relation between the old and new coinage being established in the
proportion of 100 to 350, the transfer of accounts from one system to
the other could be effected without difficulty.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts 2
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any and
what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts 2
A. In arrangements between individuals, as well as in the affairs of the
Crown, the new system is universally adopted. In the language of con-
versation and in Settling accounts between individuals the denominations
of the old system are still sometimes used ; this is, however, only the case
in certain distant provinces of the empire and among individuals of the
lower class.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society 2 If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting 2 Does it now exist
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness —---
A. The change in the monetary system has caused no discontent.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages 2
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums. .
2d. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. The new system reckoned in silver thus answers entirely the proposed
aim, since by it the most fractional calculations can be expressed.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money 2 or was it in any and what way connected
with it 2—
A. No.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money 2
A. No inconveniences have been found to arise from this.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of commodi-
ties in the retail transactions of the poorer classes 2 Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?
A. As there exists no relation between the division of money and that of
weights and measures, and as the latter are not at all divided according to
the decimal system, consequently the articles of consumption do not adopt
the latter system of division, so that neither loss nor profit can arise
therefrom to the poor classes.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
A. No answer,
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 325
No. 45. - No. 45.
e Russia.
ANSWERS to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into *
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the EMPIRE OF RUSSIA. E. Morgan, Esq.
*
By Edward MoRGAN, Esq., Treasurer of the BRITISH FACTORY, St. Petersburg.
Present Momey of Accownt.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law P-
A. Silver rubles and copeaks.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account 2–
A. One hundred copeaks equal one ruble.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations?
A. No : two only, the ruble and copeak.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom 2
A. 1 silver ruble = 3s. 2d. Sterling.
A. 1 copeak – 0.38d. ,
Present current Coims.
Q, 5. What are the coins current by law, and in eneral circulation, and what is their respec
tive value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal?
(At 380. per silver ruble.)
Gold.
Russian. d. English.
Imperial= silver rubles 10:30 =ll, 128.74 ll. = silver rubles 6-31-58
Half imperial 3) 5:15 = 16 3.7
Quarter 35 3'09 – 9 9:42
Silver.
Silver ruble 1:50 = 4: 9 5s. 35 I-57-89
35 I – 3 2
Copecks 75 = 2 4-5 2s. 6d. , 78-94
32 50 = 1 7
39 30 = 114 1s. 0d. , 31°58
}} 25 = 9.5 6d. , 1579
}} 20 = 7:6
} } 15 = 5.7
32 10 = 3.8
55 5 = I-9
Copper. 35 10 = 3-8 ld. , 2-63
35 5 = I '9
55 3 = l'I 4 0%d. , I-32
35 2 76
5 5 l = 38 04d. , '66
35 0+= I9
5 y 0+= 095
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account, in common use 2 —
A. Yes.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use 2–
A. One quarter of a copeak, or polushka.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society 2
A. Their use is confined to the lowest classes.
Former Money of Account and Coims.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system P What
were its subdivisions?
A. Banco rubles and copeaks.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account 2
A. Two sevenths of the present currency, say b.r, 3.50= s.r. I.
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account?
A. The coins were the same as the present ones, and they circulated at an
agio of from 250 to 300 per cent. - -
S S 3
326 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 45. Change of Money.
Russia.
Q. 12. When did the change take place P
E. Morgan, Esq. A. In 1839.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change?—
A. To avoid agio.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the previous
currency?
A. The variations of the agio were the sole inconveniences.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected?
A. By imperial ukase.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed?—
A. Copper was re-coined, otherwise no changes in the coins.
Q. 22., Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously with,
or after the change 2
A. New copper was issued.
Q. 23, Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new P
A. The old copper was gradually withdrawn. Platina, which was valued
above its intrinsic worth, was withdrawn, and ceases to be a currency.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate? Was it optional or
compulsory 2 If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it effectually
enforced 2 or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language?
A. Gradual and optional.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently P
A. They still continue in use concurrently.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use 2 How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
A. No inconvenience results.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts 2
A. In the new or silver currency.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts 2
A. Most of the lower orders and many of the native merchants in the interior
of the country keep accounts in the old currency, and quotations of goods
are very frequently given in Banco currency.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes or
society 2 If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting 2 Does it now exist 2
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness 2––
A. No.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages 2
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large Sums, (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts— (a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. From being of a higher denomination it is more convenient generally.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided deciinally P. If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money? Or was it in any and what way connected
with it?
A. Weights and measures are not decimally divided.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money?
A. A scale of weights and measures to correspond with the decimal currency
would doubtless have its advantages.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a nondecimal division of commo-
dities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?—
A. Custom prevents any inconvenience being felt.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 327
General Query. No. 45.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the Russia.
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
A. I do not know of any documents which would assist the present inquiry.
The money is simple, and of easy management. The decimal calculator
(a portable frame with beads running on wires), is in universal use in
Russian shops, and is employed throughout the empire for arithmetical
E. Morgan, Esq.
computation.
ED. MORGAN,
St. Petersburgh, 24th March (o.s.) 1856. Treasurer of the British Factory.
No. 46. No. 46.
Greece.
GREECE.
C. W. Merlin, Esq.
ANSWERS to Queries proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the KINGDOM OF GREECE.
Sent by HER MAJESTY's MINISTER at ATHENS.
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law Ż
A. The drachme (Apaxtº).
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account 2–
A. The drachme is divided into 100 parts called lepta (Xerra).
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations f
A. Two denominations only are used, the drachme and lepton.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom ?
A. The value of the drachme is 84d. (say eightpence and º), and that of the
one-lepton piece is about one third of a farthing, being the gºrg part of a
pound sterling.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respec-
tive value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal 2
Greek Currency. s. d.
A. Gold.—The otho, value 20 drachmes * * tº = 14 2;
Silver.—The five-drachme piece - º sº &- == 3 7
The one-drachme piece tº gº sº gº - 0 84
The half-drachme piece * * sº - 0 4}
The quarter-drachme piece &= tºº sº ~ 0 2%
Copper.—The ten-lepta piece, value - * sº +% of a penny.
The five-lepta piece, , - tº sº -Fºr 55
The two-lepta piece, , tº &_{ * # 53
The one-lepton piece , - dº l
wº T-3 55
Note.—The gold and silver coins cannot be said to have any existence. The copper
coinage is alone abundant, and for the real metallic currency of Greece, see
following extract of tariff:--
Tariff value Sterling
Gold coins. in drachmes. money.
Spanish doubloon - gº Drs. 92 60 = £3 5 10
Portuguese moja dobras gº sº - 50 25 - 1 15 8;
English sovereign tº-e * => – 28 12 - 1 0 ()
New Turkish sovereign * = ſº - 26 () = () 18 6
Napoleon - tº-3 sº - 22 33 - 0 15 104
Venetian ducat or sequin gº ſº – 13 24 ~ () 9 5
Austrian do. sº Gº- tº- – 13 06 – 0 9 3}
Dutch do. - gº º sº – 13 0 F: O 9 3
Silver.
Mexican or Spanish dollar sº – 6 () – 0 4 34.
German and Imperial dollar tºº - – 5 78 F 0 4 13.
Five-franc piece tº e º tºp – 5 58 = 0 4 0
New Turkish dollar (current at) * – 5 20 ~ O 3 8
Russian silver rouble tºº ſº - 4 4l ~ 0 3 1:
English shilling sº tºº fºg - 1 28 = 0 0 1 1
Franc - tº - tº-º – l 11 – 0 0 94.
Mixed metal.
Austrian Zwanzigers • . tºº – 0 95 - 0 0 8
Copper.
The use of all foreign copper money is prohibited by law.
S s 4
328 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 46. Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denomination of money of account in common use —
Greece. A. The one-lepton piece, although in circulation, cannot be said to be exactly
in common use.
C. W. Merlin, Esq.
a- a -ss-
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use 2
A. The two-lepta piece.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconve-
niently high in value by any and which classes in society
A. No, they are not.
Former Money of Account and Coins.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 7 What
were its subdivisions 2
A. The phoenix. The phoenix was divided into 100 parts called lepta.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account 2
A. The value of the phoenix was ninety-three lepta of the present money of
account, or ºr of the drachme.
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account 2—
A. The silver phoenix, worth 8d., and the twenty-lepta piece, worth 1; d.,
which were destined by the President Capodistrias to replace the old Turkish
piastres and paras, but which never existed in any quantity, and the Turkish
currency continued to be the real one till the establishment of the Royal
Government.
Change of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place?
A. By a Royal Ordinance dated the 8th (20th) February 1833.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2
A. The phoenix did not contain the legal quantity of silver.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency P
A. No, the system was the same as the present.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of
the principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other ?
A. No, it was the decimal system as established at this day.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money or in account keeping 2
A. No more inconvenience was felt then than at the present day, as neither
the phoenix nor the drachme have ever existed in quantities sufficient to meet
the requirements of trade and commerce.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt P
A. See reply to the preceding question.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries ; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law?
A. Neither the one nor the other was the case.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a nondecimal division ?
A. No, the former system, as well as the present, was a decimal one.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected ?—
A. By a Royal Ordinance regulating the currency, dated the 8th (20th)
February 1833.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed?
A. The relative value of the old lepton to the phoenix was the same as that of
the new lepta to the drachme, namely +} part of each.
TÜ O'
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously
with, or after the change
A. Simultaneously with the publication of the Royal Ordinance changing the
currency the new coinage was issued, which was struck at Munich and Paris.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any
and which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new 2
A. By the Royal Ordinance on the currency, published on King Otho's arrival,
the phoenix was declared to be no longer a legal tender.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2–
A. Yes, the name of the subdivision of the phoenix (lepta) was retained.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies?
A. Not exactly, but very nearly so.
DECIMAL COIN AGE COMMISSION. 329
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new * : Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements? —
A. The phoenix, although it was declared to be no longer a legal tender, was
received by the new Government at its intrinsic value of 93 new lepta, in
payment of customs taxes, &c.
Debts contracted during the Revolution were paid by the Government at
the rate of 100 paras (2% piastres) to the drachme. iº
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate 2 Was it optional or com-
pulsory 2 If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced? Was it effectually enforced?
or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular language 2
A. Immediate.
Compulsory according to law.
By a Royal Decree, dated the 17th (29th) August 1833, prohibiting the
use with the addition Turkish money, under the penalty of confiscation of
such of coin, of a fine of 100 to 500 drachmes.
Notwithstanding which accounts were for several years after often kept in
piastres and paras.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently?
A. See reply to preceding query.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use P. How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange P
A. The inconvenience principally felt is, that while accounts are now univer-
sally kept in drachmes and lepta, the copper coinage (lepta) only exists, and
almost every denomination of foreign gold and silver coins passes current at a
fixed tariff.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts 2–
A. All accounts in Greece are now kept according to the new system.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any and
what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping accounts 2
A. In accounts, although not in coins, the change has been effectual, with the
exception of some of the border villages of Northern Greece.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society 2 If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting 2 Does it now exist 2
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness?
A. The change was decidedly popular.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages 2
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. The new money, if it really existed, would be extremely convenient in
every way.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally P. If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money & Or was it in any and what way connected
with it 2
A. A new decimal system of weights and measures was decreed by a Royal
Ordinance, dated the 28th September (10th October 1836,) but this has
never been carried out, and all commodities are bought and sold by the
old Turkish measure and weight.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money
A. The simplicity of the Turkish system prevents any great inconvenience
arising.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a nondecimal division of commoditios
in the retail transactions of the poorer classes? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them therefrom ?
A. Nearly every article in Greeee is sold by weight. Even spirits, wine, and
oil are sold by the oke, which is equal to forty-five ounces avoirdupois.
The oke being divided into 400 drachmes all retail transactions are
extremely easy.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
A. I have nothing to add which is not contained in my answers to the pre-
ceding inquiries.
British Vice-Consulate, Athens, 24th March 1856. C. W. MERLIN,
Vice-Consul.
No. *} 6.
Greece.
C. W. Merlin, Esq.
* =e
T t
330 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 47.
United States.
J. R. Snowden,
Esq.
gººmsmº,
No. 47.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
ANSWERs to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
By JAMEs Ross SNOWDEN, Esq., Director of the Mint of the United States.
Department of State, Washington,
SIR, 24th April 1856.
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 21st ultimo,
asking for certain information for the use of the Commissioners appointed by Her
Britannic Majesty to inquire into and report upon the question of Decimal Coinage, as
applicable to the United Kingdom.
Having referred your communication to the Secretary of the Treasury, I now have the
honour to transmit to you a copy of that officer's reply, with the answers given by the
Director of the Mint to the queries, a list of which accompanied your note.
I avail, &c.
John F. Crampton, Esq., (Signed) W. L. MARCY.
&c. &c. &c.
SIR, Treasury Department, 24th April 1856.
I HAD the honour to receive your letter of the 25th ultimo, together with a letter
from Mr. Crampton, the British Minister, enclosing a number of interrogatories prepared
by his Government, the object of which is to obtain information upon the subject of a
Decimal Currency, as applicable to Great Britain, and now beg leave to transmit replies
which have been prepared by the Director of the Mint, and which I trust will be found
sufficiently full and explicit.
I am, &c.
The Hon. W. L. Marcy, (Signed) JAMES GUTHRIE,
&c. &c. &c. Secretary of the Treasury.
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law Ż
A. The money of account of the United States was established as the dollar,
first, by resolution of Congress under the Confederation, dated July 6, 1785,
and subsequently, under the present constitution, by the Act of April 2,
1792, organizing the Mint. In the language of the latter Act, “the money
of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units,
dimes or tenths, cents or hundredths, and mills or thousandths.”
The dollar or unit has its legal representative in a gold coin of 25+, grains,
nine tenths fine, and in a silver coin of 412; grains, nine tenths fine, either
of which are legal tenders of payment.” But the dollar of silver being
undervalued by law, in comparison with gold, no longer circulates, and is
sold as bullion at a premium of about five per cent. It is rarely coined,
and only for the use of manufacturers of plate, or of merchants in foreign
trade. Practically, the only legal tender is the dollar of gold, and its
multiples of the higher denominations. The silver coinage inferior to the
dollar was by the Act of February 21, 1853, reduced in weight, and pur-
posely overvalued in relation to gold, being made legal tender only to the
amount of five dollars.f Our system in relation to the silver coinage is, in
fact, substantially the same as that of Great Britain.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account 2–
A. In silver, the half dollar or fifty cent piece (weighing 192 grains, nine
tenths fine), the quarter dollar or twenty-five cent piece, the dime or ten
cent piece, the half dime or five cent piece, and the three cent piece, all of
weight proportional to the half dollar. In copper, the cent (of 168 grains),
and the half cent.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing
or recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations f
A. In general terms it may be stated that we have but two denominations
of money of account, the dollar and cent. Below the cent we do not
usually reckon in mills or decimals, but in binary fractions of a cent.
Sugar and cotton, for example, will have their prices named, not in cents
* This gives the value of gold to silver as 15-988 : 1, at which value one ounce of English
standard silver is worth 58'98d.
+ In this coinage the value of gold to silver is as 14.883 : 1, at which value one ounce of
English standard silver is worth 63.357d.
A. S.
DECIMAL COIN AGE COMMISSION. 331
and mills, but in cents and halves, fourths, eighths, or sixteenths per pound.
Above the cent we count generally by multiples of a cent up to the dollar.
Thus, we should not say one dollar eight dimes Seven cents five mills, but
one dollar eighty-seven and a half cents. In legal enactments, however,
the fractions of a cent are usually expressed in mills or decimally.
The custom still obtains in many, if not most of the older States of the
TJnion, of expressing small prices colloquially in shillings and pence. This
custom is continued, apparently, only in consequence of the retention in
our circulation of the small fractions (fourths, eighths, and sixteenths) of
the Spanish dollar. These pieces had, before the establishment of our
present currency, been very generally introduced into the country, and
were circulated at a customary valuation expressed in shillings or pence of
the colonial currency. The eighth of a dollar or real was named in New
York and North Carolina as a shilling, in South Carolina and Georgia as
sevenpence, in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland as
elevenpence, in the New England States and Virginia as ninepence. With
the retention of the coins, which has been partly due, perhaps, to their
expressing binary divisions of the dollar, to which the popular mind
appears to attach itself, the old names are still retained. It should be
observed, however, that these names have no association with any pound
of account of which they are constituents, but only with the dollar, to
which alone they have relation ; the words shilling, elevenpence (or levy),
ninepence, sevenpence, as used in different States, being now but cant
terms expressing an eighth part of the unit or dollar. In book-keeping
and accounts prices indicated in this way are always carried out in cents
and fractions, that is, as 12# or 64 cents for the eighths and sixteenths
respectively.
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account
estimated in money of the United Kingdom P
A. Assuming gold as the basis of comparison, and the sovereign and
dollar to be conformed to their respective legal standards of weight and
fineness, the dollar is equal to 49-316 pence, or (not carrying the fraction
to a great nicety) to 49-3 ; and hence the cent is equal to 0.493 pence,
or very nearly a halfpenny, the mill to 0.049 pence.*
Present Owrent Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respective
value in the money of account, as well as in coins of the United Kingdom, distinguishing gold,
silver, copper, or mixed metal P
A. The following table is presented as an answer to this query:-
Species of Coin. Names of the Coins. Value in Dollars. Value in Pence.
Gold coins º - Double eagle - - º $ 20.00 986 - 4
Eagle - º º 10 : 00 493 - 2
Half eagle - º º 5 : 00 24.6 6
Three dollar º gº 3 • OO 147 - 9
Quarter eagle - º º 2 - 50 123° 3
Dollar - - º I • OO 49 3
Passes at premium,
Silver Coins - - - | Dollar - gºs º { See answer to
Query 1.
Half dollar º º O 50 24-7
Quarter dollar - º º O - 25 12' 3
Dime tº- º º O - 10 4 - 9
Half dime sº tº sº O O5 2 - 5
Three cent - tº &º O 03 1 : 5
Copper Coins * - - Cent - tº ems de O OI O 5
Half cent - - º 0.00% 0.2%
Among the coins generally current in the older States are the fourths, eighths,
and sixteenths of the Spanish and Spanish American dollar, which pass at
25, 12% and 63 cents respectively. If of full weight, these are a legal cur-
rency at these rates, but as they are greatly worn this is never the case,
and they consequently retain their circulation by custom only.
Q. 6. Are coins representing the lowest denominations of money of account in common
use P
4. We have no coin representing the mill, the lowest money of account
designated by law.
* This gives ll, sterling = &4'86656.—A. S.
No. 47.
United States.
J. R. Snowden,
Esq.

T t 2
332 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 47. Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use 2
Uuited States. A. The cent. A few half cents are occasionally coined, but they have no
Gºtºmº
CUITI'êIlCV.
J. R. Snowden, y
Esq. Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
—- high in value, by any and which classes in society?
A. In the Southern States copper coins are not much used, as being incon-
veniently low, the half dime being the smallest piece generally current.
In the Northern, Middle and Western States, the cent is in general use,
and is not found inconveniently low, but the half cent is not current.
Former Money of Accowºut and Coims.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions 2
A. The principal money of account before the introduction of the present
system was pounds, divided into shillings and pence. Originally the value
of the pound was the same as in England, but a diversity afterwards arose
in the colonies, in consequence of the greater or less issue of paper money
by the colonial authorities. The Spanish American dollar, being familiar
to the people, might be considered as a concurrent money of account, for
which reason, and in consequence of the diversity of meaning of the word
pound in the different colonies, the acts and proceedings of the Continental
Congress, assembled at the Revolution, when referring to money, adopt the
term dollars, in which unit also the paper currency issued by Congress
was expressed.
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account 2
A. So far as the dollar may have established itself as a unit, its legal value
was substantially the same with the present dollar unit. The colonial
pounds had the following values, as compared with the pound sterling and
dollar:-
New England and | New York and - South Carolina and
|Unit of Comparison. virginia. North Carolina. Middle States. Georgia.
£ s. d. if s. d. .# s. d. £ s. d.
Pound Sterling º - I 6 8 1 15 63 1 13 4 1 O 8;
l)ollar -e * - () 6 O O 8 O O 7 6 O 4 8

Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account 2–
A. Under the former system we had no coins of our own, if we except a
series of silver, from the shilling downward, coined in Boston from 1652
to about 1700, and another class issued in Maryland, to much less amount,
about the same period; and also a variety of copper coins, issued by the
various States, after the treaty of peace (1783), and before the adoption of
the federal constitution in 1789. Our circulation, apart from our paper
currency, was, therefore, a heterogeneous mixture from abroad, such as the
gold and silvercoins then current in Great Britain, Spain, Spanish America,
Portugal, and France ; taken and received without much exactness, at rates
based on the colonial pounds, shillings, and pence. But the dollar and its
parts, the half, fourth, eighth, and sixteenth, and the fifth (or pistareen),
tenth, and twentieth, were the prevalent coins. 2
(). 12. When did the change take place?
A. See answer to Query 1.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change?
A. The necessity and the constitutional duty imposed on Congress of esta-
blishing a uniform currency for the United States.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the
previous currency *
A. It was . The previous answers will have shewn the complexity in the
state of the currency anterior to the change.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units, or in their proportions to each other?
A. There was great inconvenience, confusion, and complexity in the previous
currency, not only because of the different value put upon pounds, shillings,
and pence in the Several states, but because any system which has an irre-
gular ratio of multiplication or division must be complex and tedious,
whilst one which is founded on the common way of writing numbers,
which is by tens, must be easy and simple and less liable to error. As an
DECIMAL COIN AGE COMMISSION. 333
instance of the complexity of the former custom it may be interesting to
state, that in the printed facsimile of General Washington's account book
we have the pounds, shillings, and pence of Pennsylvania, the Spanish
dollars, and paper dollars, all stated, and reduced to Virginia currency, to
which he was most accustomed.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any) which caused or promoted the change inconveniences
felt in paying and receiving money, or in account keeping 2
A. The inconveniences of the former system were great, as well in paying
and receiving money as in keeping accounts.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt 2
A. By all classes.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency
to that of neighbouring countries; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use,
either as a money of account or of exchange before it was established by law P
A. The change was not recommended, apparently, with a view to assimilate
our coinage to that of other countries, but from the necessity of correcting
the inconveniences of the existing currency. By reference to the answers
under Queries 9, 10, and 11 it will be seen that the people were familiar
with the dollar, both as a money of exchange and of account, before the
question of a uniform currency had been raised, and the adoption of the
dollar as a unit was in consequence of this familiarity alone.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what cºtent by an abstract preference for a decimal
division of money over a non-decimal division f
A. The introduction of new decimal coins, fractions of a dollar, was the result
of such an abstract preference.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected 2 —
A. By a law requiring the public accounts, and all proceedings in the
courts of the federal Government, to be kept and had in accordance with
the decimal system, and by issuing coins from the National Mint, in
accordance with that system. Such a law did not operate upon accounts
and legal proceedings in the respective State Governments, but most of
the older States came to the aid of the general Government in this matter,
by legislation similar to that of Congress. This legislation did not, how-
ever, follow very promptly on the establishment of the federal money,
the delay being from two to ten, and even twenty years, and as a conse-
quence the banishment of the old pound unit was but slowly effected.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed 2–
A. They were not.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of, simultaneously with,
or after the change 2
A. The money of account of the federal Government (as has been stated in
the answer to Query 1) had been established as the dollar and its decimal
parts, in 1785, under the confederation, and subsequently under the present
constitution, in 1792, and the accounts of the federal Government had con-
formed thereto ; but no issues from the Mint began to be made until 1795.
The query is therefore answered by stating that no new coins were issued
in contemplation of or contemporaneously with the change, but that they
were issued after the change. Anterior to such issue the coin which
represented the unit of moneys to the public mind was the Spanish
American dollar. The new issues were the dollar of silver and its half.
fourth, tenth, and twentieth, with the copper cent and half cent, and in
gold, the eagle of ten dollars, its half and quarter. Subsequently the
dollar, three dollar, and twenty dollar pieces, in gold, have been added, and
the three cent piece in silver.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any and
which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new P
A. None of the coins were called in, nor was their circulation prohibited
except in the case of copper. By an Act of Congress of 1792, which became
operative in 1795, the currency of any other copper coin than the cent and
half cent was prohibited under penalty of fine and forfeiture.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2
A. The dollar was a new coin as to devices and proportions, but was designed
to contain the same value of pure metal as the Spanish dollar, and was
Substantially the same coin. The dime and half dime also corresponded
to the half and quarter pistareen in current value, but were new names; so
likewise the eagle, half eagle, and quarter eagle were new names.
No. 47.
ljnited States.
J. R. Snowden,
Esq.
gºmºsºsºmsºmºsº
T t 3
334 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 47. Q. 25. Were the old moneys of account of the lower denominations commensurable with, and
United States. exactly expressible in the new moneys?
. A. By reference to the answer to Query 10 it may be seen that the dollar
J. R. Snowden, - was equal to 72 pence, local currency, in the New England States and
Esq. Virginia, to 96 pence in New York and North Carolina, to 90 pence in the
— Middle States, and to 56 pence in South Carolina and Georgia. It follows
consequently that the penny in the States named respectively was equal to
14+ cents, to lººr cents, to 14 cents, and to 1++ cents, and was not commen-
surable with the new money of account in either cases.
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new 2. Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c., belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the state, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements 2
A. No provision appears to have been made in the laws either of the general
or state governments to regulate the ratio of the old to the new currency,
except in New York, where, by an Act passed in 1801, the dollar was
rated at six shillings currency. In computations the old valuations of the
dollar in pence were kept up. In payments of SImall sums, which required
liquidation in copper, it is not certainly known in what way the incom-
mensurability of pence with cents was adjusted. But it is believed that
the copper coins in circulation were substantially regarded as cents; penny
and cent were colloquially synonymous, and indeed are generally so at
present. The fractional loss of value as between the penny and the cent
was borne by the buyer or seller as the case might happen, in the same
manner as is now done relative to the half and quarter cent fractions when
payments are made in the small denominations of Spanish silver. Tolls,
postages, and other fixed dues rated to the penny were doubtless adjusted
in this manner. Our postages and duties being established under the
federal Government were expressed in dollars and decimals, so that no
difficulty could arise. In New York, where the cent was 49% of a penny,
the pieces doubtless replaced each other in Small payments from the
beginning. In the Southern States copper did not circulate, so that no
trouble from the incommensurability of the copper coins could have arisen.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate 2 Was it optional or
compulsory 2 If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it effectually
enforced 2 or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language 2––
A. The change was compulsory and immediate, so far as related to the
accounts and judicial proceedings of the federal Government, but was not
enforced by penalties. In the States the change was introduced in the
same way at longer or shorter intervals. See on this point the answer to
Query 20. The use of the system in public accounts was effectually
enforced ; but in private accounts and in popular language the old system
has only passed out with the present generation. In an arithmetic pub-
lished in 1818 by Dr. Patterson, at that time Director of the Mint, it is
stated, that “In all the public offices of the United States, and in those of
many of the particular States, as well as among merchants generally,
accounts are now kept in federal money, dollars, and cents. There are,
however, many merchants, as well as mechanics and others, who still keep
their accounts as before the Revolution in the old nominal money of pounds,
shillings, and pence.”
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently for
any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently
A. The systems were concurrently in use among the people for a generation
from the establishment of the new money, and, as before stated in the
answer to Query 3, the names shilling and pence are still retained, but ex-
clusively as the names of current coins, binary fractions of a dollar, and
not with any reference to a pound unit, which has entirely vanished from
the popular remembrance.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use ? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank notes, and bills of exchange 2
A. There is at present no concurrent use of two units; when such was the
case the inconveniences affected accounts and exchanges by complicating
calculations in the conversion of one money into the other. Bank notes
have always represented dollars.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts 2
A. Accounts are now always in dollars and cents. Formerly, during the
concurrent use of the two units, accounts were sometimes in dollars, some-
times in pounds, shillings, and pence, and sometimes in both currencies.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 335
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any No. 47.
and what parts of the country, continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping United States.
accounts 2 -
A. The change has been effectual as to the use of dollars and cents, but not J. R. Snowden,
of the mill, the fractions of a cent being expressed binarily. Esq.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of *—sº e
society? If any such unpopularity existed has it been transitory or lasting 2 Does it now exist?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness P--
A. The change was popular, and approved by all classes of the community;
but, notwithstanding, experience showed, as we have seen, that the former
habits of the people were very slowly supplanted, although the advantages
of the new money were unanimously conceded.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages 2–
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums. (5) Small sums.
2d. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (b) In small transactions.
A. The conveniences and advantages of the new money as compared with the
old are very great. It is believed there are no advantages required in a
monetary system which ours does not possess. The unit is sufficiently
large to be represented in a gold coin, which is a favourite with the people,
and its hundredth is small enough to represent the least prices at which it is
desired or desirable to sell articles by retail. In accounts it indicates the
sum of ordinary transactions without the multiplicity of figures which a
smaller unit (as the franc) involves ; while it is unnecessary to use a
notation extending beyond the hundredth, as would be required in case
the unit decimalized had been of large value (as the pound sterling). The
query proposed may be answered affirmatively in all its particulars.
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally 2 If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money P Or was it in any and what way connected
with it P
A. We have no decimal weights and measures provided by law. In the
business of the Mints it is customary to express the weight of precious
metals in ounces and decimals, and the same system is followed to some
extent by bullion dealers. -
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money P
.1. The inconveniences of the non-decimal division of weights and measures
are very great, but they are not aggravated by the concurrent use of
decimal money.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes 2 Does inconvenience or loss arise to
them therefrom ?
A. The concurrent use of non-decimal division of commodities with a decimal
coinage tends, in reckoning prices, to a result expressed in a binary
fraction of a cent. In such cases, if payment be made, three fourths of a
cent is liquidated with a cent ; a half cent is sometimes paid the same way,
sometimes not noticed. The quarter cent is not liquidated. In accounts
the three quarters, halves, and fourths of a cent are generally entered, and
added in on footing the columns, the total being carried to the cents, a
fraction above half a cent being counted as a cent. It is believed that no
sensible loss to either party arises in the long run from this practice. Even
in a complete decimal system of weights, measures, and coins it would be
impossible to liquidate accurately all reckonings, unless the least coin were
smaller than the public would endure.
General Query.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be of use ?
A. The scope of this inquiry may admit of the suggestion, that if the deci-
malization of the British coinage were effected by adopting, in place of the
pound sterling a new unit of the value of one hundred of the present
divisions of the pound (say 100 farthings, halfpence, or pence) all prices
and coins under the present system would be exactly measured in the new
unit and its parts, which would also be almost exactly commensurable
with the dollar of the United States. A unit of 100 halfpence, for
example, which might be called a dollar, would be equal to 81 013 of the
United States, an approximation to our unit so close that the moneys of
the two countries, under such a system, might be deemed substantially
identical.
The suggestion may also be thrown out that the system of British
moneys would be greatly improved if the occasion of its decimalization
T tº 4
336 APPENDIX, TO REPORT OF THE
No. 47. were availed of to make a change from a binary to a decimal notation in
United States. the fineness of their coins. In such a case the fineness adopted for the
coins of the United States and France, namely 900 fine, would seem to
J. R. §ºwden present superior advantages.
Sq. The following documents, bearing upon the system of the United States
&=º-ºº-ºº ºne-sumº in money, weights, and measures, may be referred to :—
1. Notes on the Money Unit of the United States, by Mr. Jefferson;
resented to the Congress of the Confederation in 1782. See his works as
published by Congress in 1853, vol. 1, pages 53 and 162. The Report of
the Financier, which called out these notes of Mr. Jefferson's, if ever
printed, has not fallen under notice.
2. Report of Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury, addressed
to Congress in 1792 on the Establishment of a Mint.
3. Report to Congress in 1790 by Mr. Jefferson, Secretary of State, on
a uniform System of Weights, Measures, and Coins. }
4. Report of a Committee of the House of Representatives on Weights
and Measures in 1819. o
5. Report of John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State, on Weights and
Measures in 1821.
JAMES ROSS SNOWDEN, Director.
Mint of the United States, Philadelphia,
12th April 1856.
No. 48. No. 48.
United States. ANswers to QUERIES proposed by Her Majesty's Commissioners for inquiring into
Ed. Everet, Esq. Decimal Coinage, so far as regards the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
cºmmemººsº
By EDWARD EVERETT, Esq.
Present Money of Account.
Q. 1. What is the money of account at present established by law Ż
A. The Spanish dollar.
Q. 2. What are the subdivisions of such money of account?
A. Nominally dimes Tº cents rég, and mills tº ; but practically dollars
and cents only.
Q. 3. Are more than two denominations of money of account practically used in expressing or
recording payments and receipts, and what are those denominations Ž
A. Only two; dollars and cents. -
Q. 4. What is the value of the highest and of the lowest unit of such money of account estimated
in money of the United Kingdom *
A. The pound sterling was declared by Act of Congress in 1842 to be equal
in account to 4 dollars tºº.
Present Current Coims.
Q. 5. What are the coins current by law, and in general circulation, and what is their respec-
tive value in the money of account, as well as in coins, of the United Kingdom, distinguishing
gold, silver, copper, or mixed metal?
A. The most common coins in circulation are eagles, half-eagles, and
quarter-eagles of gold; the eagle being ten dollars. We have also
gold dollars, pretty common of late, and double eagles of 20 dollars. A
large gold piece of 50 dollars has been struck in California, ; but I have
never seen it. The silver coins are dollars (not often seen of the United
States coinage), half-dollars, quarters, eighths (Spanish), dimes, sixteenths
(Spanish), half-dimes; and a 3-cent piece of base metal struck for the
convenience of paying postage, a simple rate being 3 cents.
Q. 6. Are coins respecting the lowest denomination of money of account in common use 2
A. The lowest coins in use are copper cents and half-cents, Tºrº and ### of
a dollar. The former are common, the latter rare.
Q. 7. What is the coin of lowest value in common use ?
A. The copper cent.
Q. 8. Are the lowest coins in common use complained of as inconveniently low or inconveniently
high in value by any and which classes in society P
A. I never heard either complaint.
Former Money of Account and Coim8.
Q. 9. What was the money of account before the introduction of the present system 2 What
were its subdivisions
A. The money of account in the United States, while they were British
Colonies was, I suppose, the pound sterling ; but the “pound lawful,"
which was 25 per cent, less than sterling, was also much used in account.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 337
Q. 10. What was its legal value relatively to the present money of account?—
A. I believe the legal value of the pound sterling expressed in dollars before
the revolution was 4+...ºr ; in other words, the Spanish dollar was reckoned
at 4s. 6d. Sterling.
Q. 11. What coins were current, and of what value, in the former money of account 2
A. The Spanish dollar and all its parts chiefly ; but all the common
European coins were known here, both gold and silver, the former gene-
rally passing by weight.
As early as 1652, silver shillings, sixpences, and threepences were coined
in Boston, and continued to be till 1686. This was under the authority of
the colony of Massachusetts Bay.
- Change of Money.
Q. 12. When did the change take place —
A. The Continental Congress early in the revolutionary war issued paper
money, of which the dollar was the unit. In 1785 the same Congress
formally adopted the dollar as the unit. No coinage of silver took place
till 1794, nor of gold till 1795 ; both after the adoption of the present
Government in 1789.
Q. 13. What was the cause of the change 2
A. The inconvenience of the different valuations of the pound sterling as
expressed in the pound lawful in different States; the great advantage
of a uniform system ; the uncertain valuation of foreign coins, which filled
the channels of circulation; and the Superior simplicity of the decimal
notation.
Q. 14. Was it caused by any inconveniences, confusion, or complexity in the state of the pre-
vious currency r——
A. See the preceding answer.
Q. 15. Were there in the previous currency any inherent inconveniences in the value of the
principal or subordinate units or in their proportions to each other ?
A. All the inherent inconveniences of the pound sterling, and its sub-
divisions, with the additional complication of the various colonial cur-
rencies. Thus a Spanish dollar was 68, in one colony, 4s. 6d. in another,
5s, in a third. After the establishment of the independence of the United
States it was almost a matter of course to establish a national currency.
Q. 16. Were the inconveniences (if any), which caused or promoted the change, inconveniences
ſelt in paying and receiving money, or in account keeping?
A. Both ; but the last-named inconvenience would be most felt in keeping
accounts between parties living in different States.
Q. 17. If such inconveniences existed, by what classes of society were they chiefly felt P
A. The first-named inconvenience would be most felt in small purchases,
the last by tradesmen whose business was somewhat extended.
Q. 18. Was the change caused to any and what extent by a desire to assimilate the currency to
that of neighbouring countries; and if so, had the new money been rendered familiar by its use
either as a money of account cr of exchange before it was established by law 2–-—
A. I do not think the change was made from any wish to assimilate our
currency to that of the country whose currency we adopted (Spain and
her American colonies), but we took their dollar because we were familiar
with it ourselves, and knew it to be well understood throughout the com-
mercial World.
Q. 19. Or was the change caused to any and what extent by an abstract preference for a
decimal division of money over a nondecimal division :'——
A. The dollar was not adopted from any preference of the decimal system ;
because that system did not coexist with the dollar in the countries
from which we borrowed it. But the decimal system was adopted at the
same time with the dollar from considerations of convenience, simplicity,
and numerical beauty.
Q. 20. In what way was the change effected :
A. By a resolve of the Continental Congress (before the adoption of the
Federal Constitution in 1789), having the force of law.
Q. 21. Were the relative values of any of the coins previously in circulation changed?
A. No.
Q. 22. Were any and what new coins issued before and in contemplation of simultaneously
with, or after the change f
A. After the establishment of the Mint of the United States (in 1792), we
began to coin eagles and half-eagles in gold, and dollars, half-dollars
No. 48.
United States.
Ed. Everett, Esq.
ammº
U u
338 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 48. quarter-dollars, and dimes in silver. The gold coins were new coins. The
United States. silver coins (except dimes) corresponded with Spanish coins of the same
value, but had new devices; half-dimes were coined later. Copper cents
Ed. Everett, Esq. had been coined by some of the States before the revolution, but there is
*º-º-º-º-º-º-º: now no State coinage.
Q. 23. Were any and which of the previous coins withdrawn from circulation, and were any and
which of the old coins permitted to circulate simultaneously with the new P
A. None withdrawn or forbidden to circulate; but nothing is a legal tender
except the gold and silver coins of the United States. -
In point of fact no foreign gold circulates, but the Spanish (Mexican)
silver coins circulate freely.
Q. 24. Were any old names given to new coins, or new names to old coins 2
A. No.
Q. 25. Were the old monies of account of the lower denominations commensurable with and
expressible exactly in the new monies?
A. They were not. *
Q. 26. If not exactly expressible, what provision was made for debts contracted under the old
system, and to be discharged under the new P. Or, in the case of fixed money tolls, pontages,
duties, &c. belonging to private persons, to municipal or other public bodies, or to the State, the
right to which was acquired under the old system, or any other fixed engagements 2
A. It was provided by law that the pound sterling should be 4+4 ºr dollars; of
course all the subdivisions of the pound sterling could be expressed by
close approximation in the dollar and its decimal parts. In local laws
fixing tolls, a revision took place in order to their expression in the new
currency.
Q. 27. Was the change in the money of account gradual or immediate? Was it optional or
compulsory? If compulsory, how and by what penalties was it enforced 2 Was it effectually
enforced 2 or did the old system continue in use for any and what time in accounts or in popular
language 2––
A. The public accounts of the United States were, I think, kept in dollars
from the commencement of the revolution, and before the formal enactment
of the change. It was of course compulsory on the public officers, but on
no others. It was gradually adopted by the people, but one still occa-
sionally hears the old denominations because we retain the coins (+, +, +,
Tº of a dollar) to which they belong. A shopkeeper will more readily
say two shillings and threepence than 374 cents.
Q. 28. If the change was optional, did the old and new systems continue in use concurrently
for any time, and do they still continue in use concurrently 2–-
º A. The old and new system still remain in concurrent popular use, but all
accounts, public and private, are, and for two generations have been, kept
in dollars and cents.
Q. 29. Have any and what inconveniences been found to arise from such concurrent use? How
does such concurrent use affect accounts, bank-notes, and bills of exchange f
A. There is some trifling inconvenience in this concurrent popular use, but it
is very trifling, because the +, +, +, and Fºr parts of a dollar are instan-
taneously converted into cents in the mind of buyer and seller; it is
perfectly indifferent whether you call a quarter of a dollar by that name or
25 cents. In accounts, bank-notes, and domestic bills of exchange dollars
and cents alone are used.
Q. 30. Under such concurrent use, how do merchants and bankers keep their accounts?
A. There is no concurrent use in the accounts of merchants. They use
nothing but dollars and cents, except in their dealings with Europe.
Q. 31. Has the change been effectually made, or do any and what classes of persons in any
and what parts of the country continue to use the old denominations in speaking or keeping
accounts 2
A. In accounts the change has been effectually made; but see 29th
2LIOSVéI’.
Q. 32. Was the change at the time of its introduction unpopular with any and what classes of
society 2 If any such unpopularity existed, has it been transitory or lasting 2 Does it now exist?
Did the change cause any popular commotions or uneasiness 2
A. I think everybody was prepared for the change by the previous customary
use of the dollar, and the simplicity and beauvy of the decimal system were
immediately felt by all; but the change not being compulsory could have
aggrieved no one.
Q. 33. Is the new money more or less convenient than the old, and what are its advantages or
disadvantages 2
1st. In paying and receiving—(a) Large sums, (b) Small sums.
2nd. In keeping accounts—(a) In large transactions. (6) In small transactions.
A. The decimal system is in all respects the most convenient and simple;
and its convenience would be still more obvious but for the retention of
the ancient 3, 4, and Tºr of a dollar. These are retained from the difficulty of
abandoning a habit, though a bad One.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 339
Weights and Measures.
Q. 34. Are weights and measures divided decimally P. If so, did such decimal division precede,
accompany, or follow the decimal division of money? or was it in any and what way connected
with it P
A. They are not.
Q. 35. If not, are any inconveniences found to arise from the division of weights and measures
not corresponding with the divisions of money 2
A. There would no doubt be a great convenience in extending the decimal
system to weights and measures, but I am not aware of any inconvenience
like that alluded to in the query.
Q. 36. How is a decimal division of money reconciled with a non-decimal division of com-
modities in the retail transactions of the poorer classes? Does inconvenience or loss arise to them
therefrom ?—
A. There is no inconvenience in applying the decimal notation to the non-
decimal division of commodities, though an overcharge takes place in small
transactions. Thus a pound of nice breakfast tea in Boston costs fifty
cents (half a dollar); a person who wished to buy an ounce would certainly
not be charged 3 cents, 1 mill, and quarter of a mill, but 5 or 6 cents.
But this always happens in retail trade; it is not a matter of currency, but
it is to pay the seller for the trouble and waste of breaking his package
and selling in driblets.
General Qwery.
Q. 37. Add any other statement or information which you may consider to be useful in the
present inquiry, and forward with your replies to these questions copies of any laws, ordinances,
reports, or public documents bearing on the subject, by describing the change of coinage, the
reasons for its adoption, and the mode in which it has been carried into effect.
EDWARD EVERETT.
No. 49.
EXTRACT from a REPORT of the DIRECTOR OF THE MINT of the UNITED STATES to the
SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY.
Mint of the United States,
Philadelphia, December 13, 1854.
SIR,--In compliance with the request contained in your letter of the 11th instant, I
have caused to be struck, and herewith forward, one hundred specimens of the proposed
cent therein referred to, and have the honour now to recapitulate the various points of
information on that subject which have hitherto been communicated to the department.
In so doing, it will, perhaps, best subserve the wishes of the department, and of the com-
mittees in Congress, if I should present the projet of a law in several sections, with expla-
natory remarks appended to each section.
AN ACT RELATING TO THE COINAGE OF CENTs.
Sec. 1. Be it enacted, &c., That from and after the passage of this Act, the standard
weight of the cent coined at the mint of the United States shall be ninety-six grains, or
two tenths of one ounce troy, with no greater deviation than four grains in a single piece;
and that the coinage of the half cent shall cease.
Remarks,—The present weight of the cent is 168 grains; at the current price of copper,
the government is barely saved from loss by the coinage, and is every day liable to become
an actual loser. Yet the experience of every country has settled this point, that the lowest
denominations of coin are not made acceptable on account of their market value, but on
account of the government stamp, and the convenience of having such pieces for small
transactions. For the proposed reduction of the weight of the cent we have abundant pre-
cedents. In 1792 the legal weight was 264 grains; early in 1793 it was reduced to 208
grains; in 1796, in pursuance of legal authorization, President Washington issued a pro-
clamation reducing the cent to 168 grains—the present legal standard. In France at this
day the piece of ten centimes—say two cents of our money—weighs less than our cent, yet
it passes freely. Dealers all over the country will feel obliged for such an unloading of
copper as the change from 168 to 96 grains would produce. The allowance of four grains
for deviation is a customary “remedy of the mint,” and is necessary for practical operations.
The omission of the half cent scarcely needs a remark. It is useless. People will not take
the trouble to make a cent with two pieces of money.
Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, That the said cent shall be composed of copper, with any
admixture, not exceeding five per cent. in weight, of metals which may render it more
suitable for the purposes of coin. And the devices upon said cent shall express its country,
denomination, and date of coinage.
Remarks,—In regard to the various experiments recently made here, as to the desire-
No. 48.
United States.
Ed. Everett, Esq.
No. 49.
United States.
sºmº
Report, &c.
TJ Ul 2
340 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 49.
United States.
Report, &c.
ableness of introducing a German silver cent, I presume it will not be necessary here to
recapitulate the correspondence which is already in the possession of the department, and
which I presume will be laid before the committee in Congress to whom it is your desire to
refer this subject. A decided preference for the copper coin, if its weight can be reduced
to 96 grains, is the conclusion to which my mind is brought, after a careful consideration
of the advantages and objections on both sides. The allowance of five per cent. for the
admixture of other metals—tin and zinc being intended—is to make an alloy which will
improve the colour and reduce the liability to corrosion and foulness. It is the same mix-
ture which the French are using for coinage under the name of bronze, but I have avoided
that term as being vaguely applied among us to very different metallic mixtures and
colourings.
Sec. 3. Be it further enacted, That it shall be at the discretion of the Director of the
mint, with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Treasury, to cause the planchets for the
cent coinage to be prepared at a private manufactory, as hitherto prescribed by law, or
more directly under the supervision of the Director, or such officer of the Mint as he may
designate. And the profits arising from the sale and distribution of said coinage, after
deducting expenses of transportation as provided for in the 36th section of the Act of
Jan. 18, 1837, relative to the Mint, shall be paid, from time to time, into the treasury of
the United States.
Remarks,—It seems quite obvious that the mint ought not to be compelled, as it now is
by law, to procure its copper planchets for coinage from a private or remote manufactory,
and especially if the planchets are to be alloyed to a definite per-centage. This section
will only confer the choice upon the Director, with the approbation of the Secretary of the
Treasury, of having this business done under his own direction. It is not intended to find
any fault with the present manufacture of planchets, which, in fact, is quite satisfactory.
Sec. 4. Be it further enacted, That it shall be at the discretion of the Director of the
Mint, with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Treasury, at any period not earlier than
one year after the passage of this Act, and upon due public notice, to exchange the cents
provided for by this Act for those now current, upon such terms as may ensure a sufficient
supply of copper from that source, and with a view to the gradual withdrawal of the old
coins from circulation. But no other copper coins or tokens shall be so received.
Remarks—The impolicy and incongruity of having two cents of quite different weights
current at the same time, suggests the propriety of conferring this discretionary power.
The coinage of cents and half cents, up to May last, amounted in round numbers to
81,520,000—equa to, say 1,620 tons—the larger part of which are probably now in cir-
culation; and it is well known that some parts of the country are crowded with them.
On this subject we have frequent complaints, without the power of providing a remedy.
The proposed cent of 96 grains, assuming the planchcts to cost 414 cents a pound avoir-
dupois, would afford a profit of 43 per cent. The new bronze coinage of France, assuming
the same cost of planchets, yields a profit of 54 per cent. We are therefore within the
line of safe precedent, considering that the French coin passes freely. But in addition to
this it should be noted that much of the importance of the new cent project consists in
relieving the country from the present ponderous cent; and if it will require, as is probable,
50 cents a pound to get in the old cents, and a considerable per-centage for working them
up into new planchets, the profit, as above stated, will be considerably diminished; so much
so as to obviate objection on that score. It is quite important to keep in view the two
objects of the law, namely, the issue of a light and convenient coin, and the withdrawal of
a cumbrous one; and to accomplish both objects a considerable apparent profit will be
necessary. In the matter of making the exchange the Mint should have a sort of ubiquity,
by paying the expenses of transportation both ways; so that our fellow citizens at
Milwaukie or Tallahassee would be placed on the same footing as those in Philadelphia.
I may say, in regard to the danger of counterfeiting, that it would seem impossible to
push into circulation to any profitable extent a coinage of so low a denomination. The
numerous copper tokens of 1837 were openly issued in the exigency of the times; but the
issue of a public notice that the law would be enforced against them, immediately put a
stop to their circulation.
Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That the coin provided for in this Act shall be a legal
tender in payment of debts to the extent of ten cents in any one payment.
Remarks.-The object of this section is to give a legal importance and value to the new
cent, in addition to the authoritative stamp of the Mint. The present cent is not a legal
tender.
In conclusion I may remark that whilst I at present prefer the proportions of 95 per
cent. copper, and 5 per cent. of zinc and tin, as composed in the specimens presented, yet
I have purposely avoided naming these metals in the 2d section, in order that we may, if
we think proper, use nickel in the composition, as to which point I will cause some expe-
riments to be made for the purpose of ascertaining whether a further improvement is not
attainable; but these inquiries need not prevent immediate action upon the proposition
herein presented.
I have the honour to be, with great respect, your faithful servant,
JAMES ROSS SNOWDEN, Director.
Hon. James Guthrie, Secretary of the Treasury,
Washington City.
DECIMAL COIN AGE COMMISSION. 341
No. 50.
THE NEW COINAGE LAW IN THE UNITED STATES.
January 15, 1857.
THE following Act of the United States Legislature has been passed for the regulation
of foreign coins in circulation in that country.
AN ACT relating to FOREIGN COINs and to the CornAGE OF CENTs at the Mint of the
United States.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America, in Congress assembled, That the piece commonly known as the quarter, eighth,
and sixteenth of the Spanish pillar dollar, and of the Mexican dollar, shall be receivable
at the Treasury of the United States, and its several offices, and at the several post
offices and land offices, at the rates of valuation following, that is to say, the fourth of a
dollar or piece of two reals, at twenty cents; the eighth of a dollar, or piece of one real,
at ten cents; and the sixteenth of a dollar or half real at five cents.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the said coins, when so received, shall not again
be paid out or put in circulation, but shall be recoined at the mint. And it shall be the
duty of the Director of the Mint, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, to
prescribe such regulations as may be necessary and proper to secure their transmission to
the mint for recoinage, and the return or distribution of the proceeds thereof, when
deemed expedient, and to prescribe such forms of account as may be appropriate and
applicable to the circumstances: provided, that the expenses incident to such trans-
mission or distribution and of recoinage shall be charged against the account of silver
profit and loss, and the net profits, if any, shall be paid, from time to time, into the
Treasury of the United States.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That all former Acts authorizing the currency of
foreign gold or silver coins, and declaring the same a legal tender in payment for debt,
are hereby repealed ; but it shall be the duty of the Director of the Mint to cause assays
to be made, from time to time, of such foreign coins as may be known to our commerce,
to determine their average weight, fineness, and value, and to embrace in his annual
report a statement of the results thereof.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That from and after the passage of this Act the
standard weight of the cent coined at the mint shall be seventy-two grains, or three-
twentieths of one cent troy, with no greater deviation than four grains in each piece;
and said cent shall be composed of eighty-eight per centum of copper and twelve per
centum of nickel, of such shape and device as may be fixed by the Director of the
Mint, with the approbation of the Secretary of the Treasury; and the coinage of the
half-cent shall cease.
Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That the Treasurer of the Mint, under the instruc-
tion of the Director of the Mint and with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury,
shall, from time to time, purchase from the bullion fund of the mint the materials
necessary for the coinage of such cent piece, and transfer the same to the proper operative
officers of the mint to be manufactured and returned in coin. And the laws in force
relating to the mint, and the coinage of the precious metals, and in regard to the sale
and distribution of the copper coins, shall, so far as applicable, be extended to the
coinage herein provided for : provided, that the net profits of the coinage, ascertained
in like manner as is prescribed in the second section of this Act, shall be transferred to
the Treasury of the United States.
Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That it shall be lawful to pay out said cent at the
mint in exchange for any of the gold and silver coins of the United States, and also in
exchange for the former copper coins issued: and it shall be lawful to transmit parcels
of the said cents, from time to time, to the Assistant Treasurers, Depositories, and other
officers of the United States, under general regulations proposed by the Director of the
Mint, and approved by the Secretary of the Treasury.
Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That the Secretary of the Treasury, under such
rules and regulations as he may from time to time establish, shall have power to autho-
rize and require medals to be struck at the mint for the several States, incorporated
companies, and societies that may apply for them, at a reasonable price for the labour
and materials, striking two copies in bronze for a cabinet of medals to be kept in the
mint ; and out of the profits obtain duplicate copies in bronze for said cabinet of all
medals which have been struck at the mint. The accounts of the medals shall be
rendered quarterly, and the profits paid into the Treasury, and appear in his annual
reports.
gº 8. And be it further enacted, That hereafter the Director of the Mint shall make
his annual report to the Secretary of the Treasury up to the thirtieth of June in each
year, so that the same may appear in his annual report to Congress on the finances.
Passed the Senate April 16, 1856. - -
Passed the House, with amendments, January 15, 1857.
No. 50.
United States.
New Coinage Law.
U u
3
342 - APPENDIX, TO REPORT OF THE
No. 51.
United States.
Letters, &c.
No. 51.
TJNITED STATES.
EXTRACT from Letter from SAMUEL EwARD, Esq., to THOMAS BARING, Esq., M.P.
Boston, 28th April 1856.
Notwithstanding the long time that has elapsed since the decimal currency was
adopted, there remains the local usage, in the two great centres of New York (city) and
Boston, of two separate forms of old currency ; not as a matter of account, but of retail
use in shops. In New York this is simply the division of the dollar into eighths, the
\th, or 12.4 cents, being called a shilling, and represented by the old Spanish coin ; but
in Boston the shilling is represented by no coin in existence; it is simply the 20th part
of the old pound of 83.33% ; consequently a shilling is 16; cents. And in this
denomination and its divisions sums not greater than $1.50 are usually named in the
shops. The matter is further complicated by the common use of the Spanish = 124 cents,
and Tºr-64 cents, called respectively 9d, correctly and 4d incorrectly, whilst 6d. is
called 83 cents correctly. This singular confusion, however, creates no real trouble,
because the simple decimal currency can always be referred to in case of difficulty.
EXTRACT from a Letter from R. B. MINTURN, Esq., to Lord MONTEAGLE.
New York, 16th June 1856.
I however sent the Director of the Mint a copy of the inquiries in your letter of
the 20th March, and he has sent me two letters in reply, of which copies are enclosed.
I am sure of his readiness to render any assistance in this matter that may be in his
power ; and if there should be any other point upon which you desire information which
you suj.pose he can furnish, I beg that you will inform me, when I will at once endeavour
to obtain it and forward it to you.
Mint of the United States,
DEAR SIR, Philadelphia, 24 May 1856.
As I was leaving the Mint yesterday, at the close of the business of the day,
Mr. Hutchinson placed in my hands your favour of the 14th instant, enclosing a copy of
a letter from Lord Monteagle to yourself. A copy of the interrogatories to which his
lordship refers was forwarded to me from Washington, to which I have very fully
replied. As these answers will be communicated to the Royal Commission on a Decimal
Coinage, of which Lord M. is chairman, it is unnecessary to repeat them here.
The objections which he states as having been made to the decimal system of money are,
I am quite convinced, of no practical moment. As long as we have the decimal system
of reckoning numbers by tens, there is every leason, both in theory and practice, why we
should also have combined therewith a decimal system of money, weights, and measures.
The partial use in our country of non-decimal coins results from the retention in our
currency of the old Spanish coins—fractions of a dollar, to which the prices of minor
articles are attached. I have reason to believe that we will be relieved from this incon-
venience, inasmuch as a bill has passed the U. S. Senate, and is now pending in the
House of Representatives, providing for the withdrawal of this irregular and inconve-
nient currency from circulation. It must be, I believe, generally conceded, that to
express all prices decimally, and to exclude all non-decimal monies, would be of great
public advantage. -
In answer to one of the points suggested by Lord Monteagle I may add, that although
the Spanish non-decimal monies have been permitted to circulate, yet the United States
have never issued any other than decimal money. I include among the decimal coins
the 3 cent, 5 cent, 25 cent, and 50 cent pieces, which, though not decimal divisions of
a dollar, are simple multiples of the cent.
I will be happy to receive a copy of the blue book when printed, containing the
report of the Decimal Coinage Commissioners, with the replies which their interrogatories
have evoked.
I recur with pleasure to the agreeable interview I had with you at the Mint, and will
be glad to see you at any time you may be in Philadelphia.
I am, &c.
Robert B. Minturn, Esq. (Signed) JAMES ROSS SNOWDEN,
New York. Director U. S. Mint.
Mint of the United States,
DEAR SIR, Philadelphia, 13th June 1856.
I have to acknowledge the receipt of your favour of the 10th inst.
I must claim your indulgence for not answering more fully Lord Monteagle's inquiries,
because, as stated in my letter of the 24th ultimo, I had elaborately and fully replied to
the printed interrogatories to which he refers.
The point to which you now recall my attention was considered by me in replying to
the former communication, inasmuch as I regard all “the coin of the United States,
issued or in circulation, as referring to the decimal system.” But if by decimal system is
meant tenth of a unit, or ten times a unit, then we only have four coins referring to the
decimal system, viz., the dollar as the unit, the dime or tenth part of the dollar, the cent
or tenth part of the dime, and the eagle or ten dollars. But this meaning of the expres-
DECIMAL COIN AGE COMMISSION. 343
sion “decimal system ’’ is too rigid and confined, and both mathematically and in
common life a decimal system is one in which simple multiples of To of a preceding unit
follow each other. A decimal system of coinage is one in which these multiples are
rarely carried beyond the third decimal figure, and more generally only to the second
figure. In this sense every coin issued by the United States refers, or rather belongs
to the decimal system, because each can be expressed by a single decimal or multiple.
Thus the coins are, -
- 20 twenty dollars.
I () ten dollars.
5 five dollars.
3 three dollars.
2-50 two dollars and fifty cents.
| one dollar.
50 fifty cents.
25 twenty-five cents.
10 ten cents.
05 five cents.
'03 three cents.
01 One cent.
While all our coins, therefore, are simple multiples or decimals of the dollar, all of the
latter except one—the three cent piece—are simple vulgar fractions of the dollar.
Thus:– Decimals. Vulgar Fractions.
I • 00 *º tº- 1 unit.
50 - *º- # the ,
25 - tº- } 3) }}
10 -> tºº Tº 2 3 3 3
05 - pº - #y 53 22
Ol º e- Tºº 5 3 23
I beg to add, that I am happy to give any information in my power on the important
subject which occupies the attention of the Royal Commission, and I entertain the hope
that the answers I have made to the printed interrogatories will be found to contain the
information his Lordship seeks in regard to the decimal system of coinage and accounts
so happily adopted in the United States. I am, &c.,
(Signed) JAMES ROSS SNOWDEN,
Robert B. Minturn, Esq., &c. &c., New York. Director U. S. Mints.
No. 52.
CANADA.
ExTRACT from Answer to Circular Queries by R. N. CASSELS, Esq., Manager of the Bank
of British North America, Montreal.
Previous to the passing of the Currency Act of 1841 the metallic currency of the two
provinces was in a very unsatisfactory state. In Lower Canada the principal coins in
circulation were French crowns and half crowns, and which were a legal tender for 5s. 6d.
and 2s. 9d., and, as compared with American dollars and half dollars, the French half-
crowns, in consequence of being much worn, were worth about 3 and 4 per cent. more
than their intrinsic value. In Western Canada, British silver was a legal tender to any
amount at 25s. currency for the pound sterling, or 3 per cent more than its real value,
and in consequence of its over valuation drove out of circulation every other coin.
It would be a public benefit if the currencies of all the colonies were assimilated.
During the last ten years in every one of the North American provinces new Currency
Acts have been passed ; but this desirable object has been entirely lost sight of. It is
believed that the Imperial Government has the power of regulating the currencies of all
the colonies of Great Britain. By the exercise of this power only will they be assimi-
lated, as the different Colonial Legislatures are each prejudiced in favour of their own
particular views in such matters. Should a general Currency Bill be thought of to take
effect in all the North American provinces, the currency of the United States should be
introduced. It is convenient ; it is well understood by the inhabitants of the colonies;
and is in every respect the best which we could have.
The change from the present currencies to that of Britain is not desirable. The
sterling currency is one of the most inconvenient in Europe, and is only tolerated
because the difficulty of changing it to a more convenient mode of computation is so
great, and probably would, among the lower orders of the people, be productive of much
dissatisfaction. It is, however, very probable, before many years have elapsed, that a
decimal currency will be introduced.
Its advantages are apparent to the intelligent classes of the community, and the
attention of the public is now directed to this subject. -
With reference to the Public Acts and documents bearing on, the subject of these
queries, I beg to refer to the Currency Acts of the province repealed by that passed in
1841, and to the correspondence on the subject between the Imperial and Colonial
Governments in 1851. R. N. CASSELS,
Bank of British North America, Montreal, Manager.
30th April 1856.
No. 51.
TJnited States.
Iletters, &c.
No. 52.
Canada.
R. N. Cassels, Esq.
U u 4
É
No. 53.
ABSTRACT of ANSWERS received from Countries where a Decimal System has been adopted.
(I.)—PRESENT and ForMER MoniES and their VALUES.
| Intrinsic Values of Coins.
| Weights and (£1 = 113a; a grains fine gold.
* n+1-3 Monies of Account tº º gº g * & Comparative • ( "A? Date of * | *M g º “. = 7-3224 grammes do.
Countries. by Law. Coins in circulation by Law. Former Monies of Account. Values. Former Coins. Change. Masºnal Shilling = 80 ºr grains fine silver.
& = 5:2310 grammes do.)
* - & - º { g gº & Franc = 4.5 grammes fine silver.
PRANCE - | Franc Gold, 100, 50, 20, 10, 5 frs. Ilivre = 20 sous. S 1 livres = 80 Gold, 48:24 livres. 1 l Dec. 1793. I}ecimal. = 69 4456 grains do
= 100 centimes. Silver, 5, 2, 1 fr. Sou = 12 deniers. francs. Silver, 6-3 livre; 30, 11 Aug. 1795. | The metrical system = * 2903 o6 g fi id
º *A Swn 4- e * grammes fine gold.
*y º gº as 50. 20 centS. 15, 24, 12, 6 sols. 28 Mar. 1803. introduced in &
(p. 207–225.) C ; : 3 Copper, 2. 1 sols 1793 =4' 48036 grains do.
opper, 10, 5, 2, 1 c. pp 2. I'd º ** *… a = 9 - 51 56d.
, I deniers. £1 = 25 - 2215 francs.
SARDINIA - | Lira di Piemonte | Gold, 100, 80, 50, 40, 20, 10 frs. Piedmont : Gold, 120, 60, 24, 12, Piedmont Decimal, 1845. Same as France.
(or franc) Silver, 5, 2, 1, #, frs. 1. Lira = 20 sols. 1. 100 = 1 18% 6 lira. By the French,
(p. 225–259.) = 100 centimes. | Mixed, 40, 20 cs. sol = 12 deniers. of present. Silver, 6, 3, 1 }, +, sol. 1793;
Copper, 5, 3, 1 cs. Sardinia : Copper, 7, 6, 2, 6, 1, 5, Suppressed
2. Lira = 20 sols. 2. 1 00 = 192 2 deniers. 1814;
sol = 12 deniers. re-established,
Liguria : Genoa and Sardinia 1816.
3. Lira = 20 sols. 3. 100 = 83; had also their dis- Genoa, 1826.
sol = 12 deniers. tinct coinage. Sardinia, 1842.
BELGIUM - | Franc No gold coins. 1. Liere de gros = 20 schillings. 1. = 12-69 frs. 43 coins were recog- || By Napoleon, Decimal. French | Silver same as France.
= 100 centimes. Silver, 5, 24, 2, 1 frs. Schilling = 12 gros. mised as legal ten- 1803. metrical system,
(p. 259–276.) 50, 20 cs. gros = 8 deniers. ders by Act of Suppressed in 1816. No gold.
!). * , ºe Copper, 10, 5, 2, 1 c. denier = 3 mittes. 8 December 1824; 1816.
|B'rench coins current. 2. Florin = 20 sous. 2. = 2·l 164 frs. among these were Re-established
sou = 16 deniers. the legal coins of in 1832.
3. Florin de Brabant = 20 sous. 3. = 0.857 1 frs.] the Netherlands.
sou = 12 deniers.
4. Livre tournois = 20 sols. 4. = ## frs.
sol = 12 deniers.
5. Florin des Pays Bas = 100 cents. 5. = 2·l 164 frs.
Fach of the 22 cantoms had its own f. • * * ---------- - – ----- * * *
SwitzERLAND | Franc No gold coins. * * * * * 1. Frane = 1°43 | Gold, 2, I, § louis-d'or. 1850–2. Mixed. Silver same as France.
e g system, and consequently there & º * 7 l - º
= 100 centimes | Silver, 5, 2, 1 frS. e * & r 2. Florin = 2^32 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1%, Measures decimal.
3 *, * ~ * existed a great variety. The . . • K * e * *
(p. 276–297.) or rappes. 50 C.S. rincipal were— 3. Crown = 3-57 2+ ducats. Geneva, Weights and liquid | No gold.
p. 2 / 6–297. Copper, 20, 10, 5, 2, 1 c. p p Silver, 4, 2, 1, 4 frc. 1840. IOC3SureS 70t
3 - v 5 a v 5 v 5 - 5 1. Franc = 10 batz. S’ “ &
2, 1, #, #, # florin. decimal.
batz = 10 rappes. a! ? 8 Adopted in 1835
2. Florin = 60 kreutzer. Besides these, French i. 185 7. a & e
kreutzer = 4 deniers. and German coins ld g
3. Crown = 25 batz. circulated largely.
LOMBARDY - | Lira Austriaca Silver, 6, 3, 1, #, # lira. (Previous to 1803.) 1. l 13:# = 100. 1803. French metrical |Lira=3; 39783 grammes fine silver.
= 100 centesimi. Copper 15, 10, 5, 3, 1 c. Lira Milanese = 20 soldi. system introduced = 60- 1526 grains do.
(p. 297-300.) soldo = 12 denari. gºmme 1823. in 1803. = 0 8662 francs.
& ºms & te = 0.25497 grammes fine gold.
g (Adopted in 1803.) 2. 87 = 100 = 3’9348 grains do.
Lira Italiana = 100 cents. -" = 8° 356d.
:
was the unit.
Two SICILIES | Ducat No gold coins. Present system has always existed. Decimal by law; Silver :
= 10 carlins. Silver, 12, 6, 4, 3, 4, 1, # carlins. Ducat seldom seen. * IIl &: bºat-º! 19 grammes * silver.
= ains. Copper, 5, 4, 3, 2%, 2, 1%, 1, 3, * cºmmº * cept in Uustom = 29.5°05 grains O.
(p. 301.) L.; º gr. , 4, 3, 2%, 2, 1%, 1, #, House. Eº.
Virtually ducat
= 100 * No gold.
TUSCANY - | Florin Gold, 80 florins. Scudo = 7 lires. Florin = 400 | Gold, 40 0 0 1826; Not decimal. Silver:
= 100 CentS. Silver, 3, 1, #, #, florins. Lira = 20 soldi. denari. 13 6 8 but has virtually Lira = 3 7786 grammes fine Wer.
Copper, 40, 24, 20, 12, 8, 4 denari | Soldo = 12 denari. 6 13 4 never been car- = 58' 313 grains do.
(p. 302.) and old coins. Accounts are still kept even by 3 6 8 ried out. = 0 °84 francs.
Government in lires, soldi, denari. 0 13 4
0 6 8 No gold.
Silver, 10, 5, 2, 1, § lire.
NETHERLANDs Guilder (florin) | No gold coins. Guilder = 20 Stivers. No change in Gold, 16-5 guilds. ; Accounts, 1821. Decimal, 1821. Silver; -
= 100 cents. Silver, 2}, 1, # fls.; 25, 10, 5 cents. Stiver = 16 pennings. value of unit. Silver, 3.3 ° 0; 3 ; Coins, 1851. Guilder=9'45 grammes fine silver.
=200 y-cents. Copper, 1, # cents. 1 - 10; 1 8; 1; 2. 12; = 145 '83 grains do.
(p. 306–315.) * 6-8; 2. 10; 0 12-8; = 2 * 10 francs.
0-6-0; 0'5.8; 0.2 ; -
0 1 ; No gold.
Copper, 2 p.
Besides many other
provincial coins too
numerous to mention.
Portugal, - | Reis g Decimal by law, but not yet issued. | The present decimal system of accounts has always Silver, 1.3000,3480, 29 July, 1854, At present, not |Milreis -1.6257 grammes fine gold.
1000=1 milreis Gold, 10 28, 5.8, 23, 1:8. existed, with a duodecimal system of coins. *240, 8120, & 100, but not yet decimal, French =25' 089 grains do.
Notation— Silver 00 &o 00. X 100 50 à060, 8050. carried out. metrical system to = 53 - 28d.
(p. 315.) ... oonsooo sº. 83%. 8. s , 8050. cºver, sºoxolo be established in
$ representing Coppe , 802 0.8 010. º: A. ,3010, 1862. Silver coined as a token at the rate
thousands English sovereign current by law ºvo. of 66'95d. per oz. of English
(:) millions, at 43 500. English gold current. Standard silver.
(..) thousands of
millions.
Ruble = 17.99 grammes fine silver.
RUSSIA - || Ruble Gold, 10:30, 5-15, 3:09. Banco rubles = 100 copecks. 2 banco rubles | Coins same as at pre- 1839. Not decimal. =277. 62 grains do.
= 100 copecks. Silver, l'50, 1-75 rubles. A decimal system has always = 7 rubles. sent; but, to avoid =4 francs.
75, 50, 30, 25, 20, 15, 10 copecks. existed. agio, values changed. Imperial = 10' 30 rubles.
(p. 320–327.) Copper, 10, 5, 3, 2, 1, #, c. = 12 grammes fine gold.
= 185:18 grains do.
Ruble = 38 18d.
GREECE - || Drachme Gold, 20 dr. Phoenix = 100 lepta. 93 phoenix = Silver phoenix and 18 3 Decimal by law, Drachme=4' 0293 grammes fine
= 100 lepta. Silver, 5, 1, 3, # dr. 100 drachme 30-lepta piece. 1836, but not in silver.
(p. 327.) Copper, 10, 5, 2, 1 lepta. Turkish coins current. IIS6. e =62. 18 grains do.
* *-* * g e English, Turkish, and French gold Old Turkish sys- = 0 °8954 francs.
circulates at values fixed by law. tem in use.
- 1785. &
UNITED STATES Dollar Gold, 20, 10, 5, 3, 2%, l ds. 1. f. s. d. currency varying in value A mixture of English, Issues of coin 1795. Not decimal. Dollar = 23:22 grains fine gold.
= 10 dimes. Silver, 50, 25, 10, 5, 3 c. in the different States to the Spanish, French, The Continental Same as in England. =49 - 32d
(p. 330–341.) | T 100 cents. Copper, I c., §c. amount of 15s. and Portuguese | Congress early ge e
º = 1000 mills. 2. Dollars and reals, the Spanish coins. in the revolution- Silver coined as a token at rate
Virtually only coinage. tºº ary war issued of 63-364 per oz. of English
dollar = 100 paper money of standard silver.
CentS. which the dollar
§

§

(II.)—CAUSES of CHANGE and its RESULTs.
*
Was it unpopular 2
Is the present a System
Countries. Causes of cine of former §..." by what the New System. compulsory and immediate 2 Has it been effectual 2 if so, with whom ? In Ore º; than the
FRANCE : 1. A wish for unity. It was 1. By all classes. - A marked preference for a | For private persons the 2. Sou is still used by small | 1. Popular with all, save | 1, 2, 4, 5. Far more con-
- part of a great system 2, 3, 5. The inconveniences decimal system. º change was not obligatory. shopkeepers. a few. venient, especially in
1. Ambassador. comprising weights and of a non-decimal system, The adoption of the unit was There were no penalties to 4. Everybody uses the new 3. Yes; with lower keeping accounts.
2. M. Chevalier. IOle2LSUll’OS. felt by merchants and connected with the metrical enforce it till 1837. system ; Sou used instead classes at first, but 3. Yes; except in small
3. M. Delessert. 3. To simplify the system of employées of finance. system. The introduction of the new of 5 cents. not at present. transactions, for which
4. Commercial monies, and perhaps |4. None. coins was very slow. e 5. In some parts of France, 2, 4. No. • , - e. a duodecimal system is
agent. through hatred of exist- The old system continued in Britanny, and Auvergne, 5. Yes; with ignorant preferred by many.
5. M. St. Hilaire. ing order of things. use many years in pro- the old system has been classes.
vinces—less so in Paris.
preserved.
- €2S6.
§: and merchants’ books are kept
T* in double columns.
BELGIUM - - | 1. The French introduced Before 1803 there were at . The first system was intro- The ancient coins were gra- 1, 3. The change has not yet | None of the changes | 1. Far more convenient
Inconveniences, if any,
Reasons for selecting
Was the Change
5. The confusion in the pro-
vinces, and a desire for
uniformity.
SARDINIA - -
1. H. M. Minis-
ter at Turin.
2. Cattaneo, In-
tendent of
the Mint.
3. M. Despine,
Inspector of
The French introduced their
system in 1793; this was
suppressed in 1814, but
the habits contracted during
the French occupation, and
the evident advantages of
an uniform monetary sys-
tem were the causes of its
re-establishment.
Great inconvenience was
felt in returning to the sys-
tem which existed before
the French occupation.
The French occupation, and
the constant intercourse
with France, had rendered
the new money familiar to
the public, and induced the
wish to assimilate the cur-
rency with that of France.
The change was so far gra-
dual that the public had
been accustomed to it from
the time of the French
occupation. It was made
compulsory in 1827, and
enforced by fine of 50
francs.
The old system continued in
use concurrently with the
new many years. At pre-
sent, with exception of the
Noverese and Liguria, the
new is generally adopted.
At Genoa, lower classes and
retail dealers use old de.
nominations, and sometimes
Unpopular with lower
classes at the outset,
but they are gradually
becoming familiar with
the new system.
2. It caused no popular
disturbance, and was
received generally with
More convenient both in
large and small trans-
aCtlODS.
Sums are more easily di-
vided, multiplied, or
added up.
1. Minister at
Brussels.
2. Through T.
Baring, Esq.
M.P.
3. Through
Minister.
their system during their
occupation in 1803. In
1816, at the formation of
the Kingdom of Nether-
lands, the Dutch guilder
was adopted for the
whole country. At the
separation of Belgium in
1830, the adoption of a
monetary system was
again the subject of con-
sideration.
least four different legal
systems of account. The
inconveniences were felt by
all classes. The number of
coins lead to confusion and
complexity. Losses fell on
working classes.
There does not appear to
have been any practical in-
convenience in the system
that was adopted in 1816
to 1830.
duced by the French for
sake of unity.
At the last change in 1832,
the French system was
chosen, in order to facilitate
commercial relations with
France,
return to the principle of
unity, which characterizes
the French system.
and in order to
SWITZERLAND -
1. Federal
Council.
2. Messrs. Mar-
cuard & Co.,
Berne.
3. M. Trümpler,
Zurich.
4. Capt. Pictet,
Consul, Ge-
Iſle Va.
1. The necessity of change,
caused by the circulation
of French and German
coins at excessive values.
The quantity of base bul-
lion current.
2. The confusion of the
different monetary sys-
tems of the cantons.
3. The desire to have one
kind of money, that of
one of neighbouring States.
1. The lower classes suffered
from being compelled to
accept these coins at more
than their value.
2. Inconvenience in account-
keeping of former system,
and in paying and receiv-
ing.
1. A change being decided on,
Switzerland was thought
too small a country for a
separate system, and had to
choose between French and
German. Her dealings
with France were the
largest, and Geneva had
already adopted the French
system.
dually withdrawn from cir-
culation,
The change was not obli-
gatory for private trans-
actions.
For a long time every one
kept his accounts in the
moneys he preferred with-
out inconvenience, the dif-
ferent moneys being valued
by law.
been radical and complete.
Small sums connected with
country people's daily deal-
ings are reckoned in
guilders, stivers, or cents.
Cent is used by them to de-
signate 2 centimes.
2. People are still obliged to
have tables of reduction of
various monies past and
present.
appear to have been
unpopular.
The country was al-
ready accustomed to
the new system. There
was no commotion.
than that anterior to
1800, as well in small as
in large accounts.
2. The advantages of a
decimal system need
scarcely be pointed out.
3. An uniform system has
been substituted for a
multiplicity of coins.
Each canton fixed a day for
the change, and prohibited
the use of the old system.
The old system continued to
be in use at cattle fairs
and markets till recently.
I. Yes; with the exception of
lowest classes in the agri-
cultural districts, where
“batz” are still spoken of
The new system is exposed
to this danger, that the sil-
ver coinage is being re-
placed by French gold,
which is not “en rapport”
with the metrical system.
.1. There was, at first, an
aversion on part of
those cantons border-
ing on Germany to
use the French sys-
tem, but it has gone
off, and people are
well satisfied.
2. Popular because it was
well understood.
1. The uniformity through- |
out the cantons has ren-
dered transactions far
more easy, as is also the
case with France.
2. The numerous subdivi-
sions of the unit facili-
tate small transactions.
*
w \. |
.
The
Austrian lira was
chosen, being equal to one
third of a florin, the coin
current in Austria.
It was left to the arrange-
ments of individuals to em.
ploy in payments money
not in legal circulation, or
to make any special agree-
ments as to value of coins
comprised in the tariff.
In small retail transactions
the lira Milanese at 20
soldi (12 den. to soldo) are
still used.
The new system was
received on the whole
willingly. It met with
no resistance, and its
introduction did not
require to be enforced
by compulsory mea-
SUlreS.
It is more convenient, in-
asmuch as the new money,
regard being had to the
component parts of the
province, corresponds in
every respect to rest of
monarchy.
TUSCANY
Through H.M.
To do away with the ima-
ginary unit, the “scudo.”
To adopt a decimal system.
Complexity in accounts.
The florin, being equal to
400 denari, was chosen.
A penalty was ordered for
the non-observance of the
law.
Averseness to change, and apathy, both of the people and the Government, have
allowed the law to be simply a dead letter.
The only result has been that the “scudo” is disused; accounts are kept in lire,
soldi, and denari.
The florins are in circulation without inconvenience.
Minister at Flo-
Irence.
NETHERLANDs - | 1. A prevailing opinion that | 1. Great confusion and in- The florin was retained as | The change in accounts was
the decimal system would convenience were expe- the unit, but was decimally compulsory and immediate,
I. Sir J. H. be beneficial forarithmetical rienced in having too divided ; the excellent and enforced by law.
Turing, Bart.,
Consul at Rot-
terdam.
2. J. Annesley,
Esq., Consul at
Amsterdam.
purposes, &c.
2. The deterioration of the
coin by unlawful practices
(clipping), and the greater
convenience of the decimal
system.
many coins of different
practical values; felt in
paying and receiving,
and also in account keep-
Ing.
2. Chiefly by labouring
classes.
working of the decimal
system in France being ac-
knowledged, and the new
mode of calculation having
been familiar, by instruction
at the public schools.
The old system was entirely
discontinued.
The coins were changed
gradually.
1. In popular language,
among the lower classes
only. The old denomi-
nations are still used, but
rarely.
2. Most effectual.
1. The change was ac-
complished without un-
popularity or uneasiness.
2. Rather unpopular with
unlettered and old ; but
this feeling has been
transitory.
The Dutch are for the
most part opposed to
innovations.
Certainly more convenient
both in large and small
payments.
The
1. The people were familiar
with the Spanish dollar.
The decimal division of it
was the result of an abstract
preference for a decimal
system. -
2. The dollar was not adopted
from any preference of the
decimal system, for it was
not so divided.
decimal system was
adopted from considerations
of convenience and simpli-
city.
Compulsory and immediate
for all federal courts and
offices. The law did not
operate in respective State
Governments. These came
to the aid of the Federal
Government by special le-
gislation, but at intervals
varying from two to twenty
years, and consequently the
banishment of the old
pound unit was but slowly
effected.
2. It was compulsory on pub-
lic officers but on no others.
LOMBARDY -
Through H.M.
Minister at Wi-
€Il Dia.
In 1803 the French intro-
duced the lira Italiana,
equal to the French franc,
and decimally divided. In
1823 the Austrians made
the last change for the pur-
pose of harmonizing the
system with the Austrian,
and at the same time to
retain the decimal division.
The circulation of different
systems, which was felt by
commercial classes.
GREECE
H.M. Minister at
Athens,
The phoenix was adopted at
the separation of Greece
from Turkey, by the Presi-
dent Capodistrias. When
the Government was settled
it was necessary again
to fix on a monetary
system.
No inconvenience was felt,
as neither the phoenix nor
the drachme have ever
existed in quantities suffi-
cient to meet the require-
ments of trade.
The phoenix did not contain
the legal quantity of silver.
Immediate and compulsory.
The use of old or Turkish
was under penalty of fine
and confiscation; but, not-
withstanding this, accounts
were kept for several years
in piastres and paras.
UNITED STATES
1. T. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director
of Mint of U.S.
2. Edw. Everett,
Esq.
1. The necessity and the con-
stitutional duty imposed on
Congress of establishing an
uniform currency for the
States at the separation of
the States from the mother
country.
2. The uncertain valuation
of foreign coins which filled
the channels of circulation,
and the superior simplicity
of the decimal notation.
1. The different value assign-
ed to the old currency in the
several States which creat-
ed inconvenience and con-
fusion, and the complexity
of a system which has an
irregular ratio of multipli-
cation and division.
Felt by all classes in paying
and receiving and account
keeping.
2. All the inherent inconve-
niences of the pound sterling
and its subdivisions, with
the additional complications
of the various colonial cur-
rencies.
Accounts are now univer-
sally kept in drachme and
lepta,...except in some of
the border villages of
Northern Greece. The
copper coins only are in
existence ; no gold or
silver.
The change was deci-
dedly popular.
\
If the coins really existed
it would be very conve-
nient; as it is, there is
inconvenience, for the
copper coinage only exists,
and every denomination of
foreign coin circulates at
values fixed by law.
1. Effectual, as to abandon-
ment of £ sterling and use of
dollars and cents, but not as
to use of mills. Fractions of
cents are expressed binarily.
The old Spanish silver coin-
age of #, #, ++, of a dollar,
expressing 25, 12#, 6+
cents, still circulate and are
ased in market transactions.
2. It was gradually adopted
by the people, but one occa-
sionally hears the old deno-
minations, because we re-
tain the coins #, #, # of a
dollar.
Shopkeepers more readily
say two shillings and six-
pence than 37% cents.
1. The change was po-
pular with all classes,
but notwithstanding the
habits of the people
were very slowly sup-
planted, although the
advantages of the new
system were unani-
mously conceded.
2. The simplicity and
beauty of the decimal
system were imme-
diately felt by all. The
change not being com
pulsory could have ag-
grieved no one.
1. Far more convenient.
The unit is sufficiently
large to be represented
in a gold coin, and its
hundredth part is small
enough to represent the
least price at which it is
desired to sell by retail.
2. There is some trifling
inconvenience in the con-
current popular use of the
binary divisions of the
dollar, but these are in-
stantly converted into
cents in the mind of buyer
and seller.
§
348 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 54.
Values of Coins.
No. 54.
NoTES on the relative WEIGHTS and VALUES of the principal ENGLISH and FOREIGN
CoINs (prepared for the use of the Decimal Coinage Commission).
As some schemes for Decimal Coinage propose alterations in the value of some of the
present coins, either for the purpose of assimilating them to foreign coinages or for other
purposes, the following notes are intended to assist in judging of the effect of such
changes.
ENGLAND.
Since a time anterior to the 43d of Elizabeth all English silver coin has been of the
standard of 11oz. 2dwt. fine, and 18dwt. alloy, or # fine, all English gold coin of the
standard of 11oz. fine and loz. alloy, or +;ths, fine.
From the 43d of Elizabeth, down to the year 1816, llb. troy of standard silver was
coined into sixty-two shillings. Until 14 Geo. 3. c. 42. it was a legal tender for any
amount after that Act to the amount of 25l.
In the 43d of Elizabeth, the gold sovereign or piece of 20s., contained 171-940 grains of
standard gold, giving the relative values of gold and silver as 10-904 to 1, or 21, 15s. 10d.,
as the price of an ounce of standard gold.
As the value of gold relatively to that of silver increased the amount of gold in the gold
coinage was from time to time diminished, or the value of the gold coinage raised, both
gold and silver being a legal tender, until in the 18 Charles II. the gold-piece called the
guinea was coined containing +++ of a pound troy, or 129# grains of standard gold.
This was originally intended to be of the value of 20 shillings, but its value was not then
fixed by any Royal proclamation; and the value of gold relatively to silver still rising, it
circulated at a higher value determined by usage. In 1717 it was current by usage for
21s. 6d., giving 31. 19s. 83d. as the price of an ounce of standard gold, and the relative
values of gold and silver, as 15:57 to 1.
Gold being overvalued relatively to silver, the silver coinage was disappearing, and the
method of preventing the melting down of the silver coinage was referred to Sir Isaac
Newton, then Master of the Mint, who, in a report made to the Lords of the Treasury,
dated the 21st September 1717, showed that the commercial values of gold and silver in
Europe were as 14-8 or 15 to 1, giving the value of the guinea from 20s. 5d. to 20s. 8%d.
He recommended that 6d. should be taken off the value of the guinea. This was accord-
ingly done in 1718 by a Royal proclamation, and the guinea was made a legal tender for
21 shillings, giving 46l. 14s. 6d. as the price of 11b. troy of standard gold, and 31. 17s. 10%d.
as the price of one ounce of standard gold, the price which it has ever since retained.
This gave the relative values of gold and silver as 15-2096 to 1. Gold was still somewhat
over-valued, and it became in consequence the principal coin. Silver coins, rubbed and
worn down below their nominal relative value to gold, circulated as change.
From 1718 to 1774 both gold and silver were a legal tender. After 1774 silver, as
above mentioned, was only a legal tender for sums not exceeding 25l.
This state of the coinage continued until the year 1816, when, by the Act of 56 Geo. 3.
c. 68, the present system was established, by which the pound troy of silver is coined
into 66 shillings, but silver coin is a legal tender only for sums not exceeding 40
shillings.
Since the 18 Charles II. c. 5, there has been no seignorage on any coin coined at the
English Mint. Since 1816 silver has only been coined for the Government.
The comparison of the values of the silver and gold coins of a country involves the
relative values of silver and gold in that country.
This may be either stated as a ratio, as in the preceding part of this paper, or it may be
conveniently stated by giving the price per ounce of English standard silver to which it
is equivalent. These are connected by the following equation:—
Let r be the ratio.
p the price in pence of one ounce of standard silver (## fine).
r p = ## x ++ x 934} = 942:9954 log. = .974.5096,
This gives the following table:–
~

Price per Ounce of Standard
Silver - º -- * 59tl. 60d. | 60° 83d. 61d. 62d. 63d. 64d. 65d. 66d.
Value of Fine Gold, Value
of Fine Silver being = 1 15 ° 458 15° 210 | 1.4 ° 968 || 14 ° 734 | 1.4° 508
5
5
15 ° 983 15° 716 15 °
14 ° 2878
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 349
For the comparison of coins expressed in the weights of the metrical scale and in troy No. 54.
weight we have the following determination of the relation between the kilogram and the
troy grain, made by Professor Miller for the Commissioners of Weights and Measures.—
See “Philosophical Magazine,” January 1857.
Values of Coins.
1 kilogram = 15432:34874 grains. log. = 1884320
This gives—
1 grain = '064799 grammes, log. = -8115680
1 dwt. = 1.55517 35 log. = 1917792
1 oz. = 31° 1035 55 log. = 4928092
1 lb. troy = 373-242 55 log. = 57.19904
From the above data we have—
English Gold Coins.
1 lb. troy of gold +4ths fine=44; guineas –46l. 14s. 6d.
1 oz. 39 35 =3l. 17s. 10%d.
f:1 = 1234%; grains gold +4ths fine, log. = ′ 0908732
=7'98806 grammes do. ,, = '9024412
= 113+++ grains, fine gold ,, = ′ 0530845
=7'3224 grammes, do. , - '8646527
No retention made for seignorage.
English Silver Coins.
1 lb. troy silver ## fine=66 shillings.
I Oz. 53 53 =66 pence.
1 shilling = 87°iºr grains silver #4ths fine, log. = ‘9408785
= 5’ 65518 grammes do. , , = 7524.465
= 80 fºr grains, fine silver ,, = '9070203
= 5' 23104 grammes do. . , - '7185883
FRANCE.
The franc contains 5 grammes of silver 42,ths fine. For the expense of coinage a
seignorage of 1 50 francs is retained out of every kilogram of silver or out of 200 francs.
Gold is coined at 15 5 times the value of silver. For the expense of coinage a seignorage
of 6' 70 francs is retained out of every kilogram of gold, or out of 3,100 francs.
This gives—
SILVER.—Intrinsic Values.
1 franc = 5 grammes silver 42,ths fine.
=77 16175 grains, do. log. = '887.4020
= 4' 5 grammes fine silver.
= 69°4456 grains, do. log = '84.16446
Taking seignorage into account :
1000 grammes silver 42,ths fine=198'50 francs.
1 franc = 5' 0378 grammes silver 42,ths fine, log. = '7022395
=4' 534 grammes, fine silver, log. = '6564820
Comparison of Intrinsic Values of Franc and Shilling:
1 shilling=1' 16245 francs, log. = ′ 0653757
1 franc = 0°86025 shilling, log. = '9346243
GOLD.—Intrinsic Values.
Napoleon of 20 francs = 19.99 grammes gold ºths fine.
= 6' 4516 do. do. log. = '8096683
= 99 5636 grains do. , = '998 1003
=}}} grammes fine gold.
= 5' 8064 do. do. , , = "7639.108
=89' 6072 grains do. , = '9523428
10 francs = 3° 2258 grammes gold Hºrths fine, , = 5086383
= 49' 7818 grains do. , - '6970703
= 2'9032 grammes fine gold ,, = " 4628808
= 44'8036 grains do. , = 6513 128
25 francs = 8° 0645 grammes gold-ºuths fine , = '9065783
= 124'4545 grains do. , - 0950 103
= 7'2580 grammes fine gold , - '8608208
= 112'009 grains do. , - '0492528
Values taking seignorage into account :
1,000 grammes gold bullion ºths fine=3093-30 francs.
10 francs=3' 2328 grammes gold bullion ºr ths fine, log. = '5095780
= 2* 9095 25 fine gold bullion , = "4638205
X x 3
350 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 54. . Comparison of intrinsic values of francs (in gold) and sovereign :
Values of Coins. - 491 =25°2215 francs, log. = '4017719
- 10 francs=90°396486, log. = '5982281
Franc = 9'5156d.
Comparison of values of franc (in gold) and sovereign, taking the seignorage on the
French gold coinage into account:
£1=25' 16705 francs, log. = 4008322
Franc =9 5363d.
SARDINIA.
The silver and gold coinage is the same as in France, the unit, the lira di Piemonte, being
the same as the franc, except that the retention for seignorage is in silver 2'45 lire out of
200 lire, in gold 7' 60 out of 3,100 lire.
Hence, taking seignorage into account,<-
1,000 grammes silver bullion ºths fine=197' 55 lire
1 lira=5° 062 grammes silver bullion ºths fine, log. = '7043230
= 4 556 5 y fine silver bullion , = '6585655
1,000 grammes gold bullion ºths fine=3092°40 lire
10 lire=3°2337 grammes gold bullion ºaths fine, log. = 50970.43
= 2 * 9.103 95 fine gold bullion, , = " 4639468
gé'1 = 25 1597 lire.
I lira = 9° 5390d.
BELGIUM.
No gold coinage.
The silver coinage in weight, standard and seignorage is the same as that of France.
SWITZERLAND.
No gold coinage.
The silver coinage in weight and standard is the same as that of France.
LOMBARDY.
Both gold and silver are a legal tender.
Silver.
4-330}} grammes silver, ºths fine.
66'836 grains do.
3-89783 grammes fine silver.
60° 1526 grains do.
0.8662 francs.
Lira Austriaca
-
ld
4 sovrano = 20 lire 5'666 grammes gold, ºths fine.
87°44 grains do.
5' 0994 grammes fine gold.
78-696 grains do.
Lira (gold) 8 : 35626d.
This gives the relative values of gold and silver as 15: 2875 to 1, equivalent to a price of
61-68614 per oz. of English standard silver. &
TWO SICILIES.
No gold coinage.
Ducat 22:943 grammes silver, #ths fine.
19. 119 grammes fine silver.
295.05 grains do.
4' 25 francs.
TUSC ANY.
No gold coinage.
Lira 3:9443 grammes silver, 958 fine.
3-7786 grammes fine silver.
5S 313 grains do.
0.84 francs.
NETHERLANDS.
On the union of Holland and Belgium by a law of the 28th September 1816, a new
monetary unit was established for both countries, represented by the florin, containing
9.613 grammes of fine silver, equal in value to the ancient florin of the United Provinces,
and a ten-florin piece containing 6-0561 grammes of fine gold.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 351
This gave the relative values of gold and silver as 15'873 to 1, equivalent to a price of No. 54.
* 59:408d, per oz. of English standard silver. Values of Coins.
Silver being undervalued went out of circulation, to remedy which, by the law of —
22d March 1839, the quantity of fine silver in the florin was reduced to 9:45 grammes, or
145.83 grains.
This gave the relative values of gold and silver as 15' 604 to I, equivalent to a price of
60-432d. per oz. of English standard silver.
Finally, by the law of 26th November 1847, gold ceased to be a legal tender.
The florin containing 9:45 grammes fine silver, and 0° 55 grammes alloy, and weighing
10 grammes, and equal in value to 2: 10 francs, became the sole monetary unit.
The seignorage was fixed at 1:20 florin per kilogram; therefore, taking the seignorage
into account,
945 grammes fine silver bullion = 98-80 florins.
) florin = 9° 5647 grammes fine silver bullion.
= 10 121 grammes silver bullion '945 fine.
PORTUGAL.
By the law of 24th April 1835 both gold and silver were legal tenders.
Silver -
1 milreis = 1$000 = 29'608 grammes silver, #ths fine
= 456'92 grains do.
= 27 141 grammes fine silver.
= 418.85 grains do.
= 6' 03 francs.
Gold.
1 milreis = 1$000 = 1 - 912 grammes gold, 44ths fine.
- = 29° 506 grains do.
= 1 .753 grammes fine gold.
= 27' 047 grains do.
£1 = 4;178
This gives the relative values of gold and silver as 15:484 to 1, equivalent to a price of
60-901d. per oz. of English standard silver.
By the law of 15th February 1851, the silver coin was not altered. The gold coin was
depreciated, so that,
1 milreis = 1$000 1 793 grammes gold, Hºths fine.
27.670 grains do.
1 644 grammes fine gold.
25-364 grains do.
This gives the relative values of gold and silver as 16'513 to 1, equivalent to a price of
57' 106d. per oz. of English standard silver.
Finally, by the law of the 29th of July 1854, silver was reduced to a token coinage,
and made a legal tender to the amount of 55000 only. The value of the gold coinage
was slightly reduced, so that the English sovereign should be current for 45.500 exactly.
Under this law, -
Gold.
17735 grammes gold, +4ths fine.
27:370 grains do.
1:6257 grammes fine gold.
25-089 grains do.
53°28d.
sé’l 4$504.
The seignorage on the coinage of gold was fixed at 15000 per kilogram, or 1-7735 per
thousand.
This gives, taking the seignorage into account, L
1773.5 grammes gold bullion, ++ths fine = 998-2265 milreis.
1 milreis = 1$000 = 177665 grammes gold bullion, 4ths fine.
English sovereign = 4;496
Milreis = 1$000
:
Silver.
Legal tender to the amount of 55000 only.
Milreis = 1$000 = 25 grammes silver, 4ths fine.
This gives the relative values of gold and silver as 14.096 to 1, equivalent to a price
of 66-896d. per oz. of English standard silver.
X x 4
352 - APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 54.
Values of Coins.
RUSSIA.
Both gold and silver a legal tender.
Silver.
Ruble - 20:724 grammes silver, ###ths fine.
– 17.99 grammes fine silver.
= 277-62 grains do.
- 3.998 francs.
Gold.
Imperial = 10:30 rubles 13:09 grammes gold, 4ths fine.
202.01 grains do.
12 grammes fine gold.
185:18 grains do.
Hence ruble (gold) 38 - 180. 53
These values give the relative values of gold and silver as 15:45 to 1, equivalent to a
price of 61.035d. per oz. of English standard silver.
GREECE.
No gold coinage. W
Silver Coins.
Drachme 4'477 grammes silver, ºths fine.
69.09 grains do.
4.0293 grammes fine silver.
62-181 grains do.
‘8954 francs.
:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
The dollar of the United States of America was originally equivalent to 24; grains of
fine gold, or 371} grains of fine silver.
The reasons for the selection of these amounts appear from the following extracts from
a Paper communicated to the House of Representatives of the United States on the 28th
of January 1791, by Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury.—See American
State Papers (Finance), vol. i. p. 91. -
“That species of coin (the dollar) has never had any settled or standard value according to
weight or fineness, but has been permitted to circulate by tale without regard to either,
“ very much as a mere money of convenience, while gold has had a fixed price by weight,
“ and with an eye to its fineness. This greater stability of the value of the gold coins is
“ an argument of force for regarding the money unit as having been hitherto virtually
“ attached to gold rather than to silver.
“24 grains and ºths of a grain of fine gold have corresponded with the nominal value
“ of the dollar in the several states, without regard to the successive diminutions of its
&
&
“ intrinsic worth.” # % % * $
% * The new dollar (of Spain) appears to contain about 368 grains of fine silver,
“ and that which immediately preceded it about 374.” % %
“A resolution of Congress of the 6th of July 1785, declares that the money unit of
“ the United States shall be a dollar; and another resolution of the 8th of August 1786
“ fixes that dollar at 375-64 grains of fine silver. The same resolution, however, deter-
“ mines that there shall also be two gold coins, one of 246-268 grains of pure gold equal
“ to 10 dollars, the other of half that quantity of pure gold equal to 5 dollars.” + #
“Contrary to the ideas which have heretofore prevailed in the suggestions concerning a
coinage for the United States, though not without much hesitation arising from a
deference for those ideas, the Secretary is upon the whole strongly inclined to the
opinion that a preference ought to be given to neither of the metals for the money
“ unit.” + k º: % Sk 3% %
“If, then, the unit ought not to be attached exclusively to either of the metals, the
proportion which ought to subsist between them and the coins becomes a preliminary
inquiry in order to its proper adjustment. * % % * 3%
““The ratio of 1:15 will probably be found the most cligible.” % # # %
“ 1 part alloy to 11 parts fine, whether gold or silver, appears to be a convenient
rule.” % # 3% # 3% º
“The conclusion to be drawn from the observations which have been made on the
“ subject is this, -
“That the unit in the coins of the United States ought to correspond with 24; grains of
“ pure gold, and with 371+ grains of pure silver, each answering to a dollar in the mone
“ of account. The former is exactly agreeable to the present value of gold, and the latter
“ is within a small fraction of the mean of the last emissions of dollars, the only ones
{
6
&
6
6
&
6
G
6
&
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. - 353
“ which are now to be found in common circulation, and of which the newest is in the No. 54.
“ greatest abundance. The alloy in each case to be ºrth of the total weight, which will Values of Coins.
“ make the unit 27 grains of standard gold and 405 grains of standard silver.”
In accordance with these recommendations, by the Act of 2d April 1792, a silver dollar
was directed to be coined containing 371} grains of fine silver, and a gold coin, the eagle,
of 10 dollars, containing 247; grains of fine gold.
This gives (comparing the pound sterling with the dollar in gold),
£1 = $4' 5657
$1 = £0.219023
= 52 56552d.
By an Act of Congress of 28th June 1834 the amount of fine gold in the dollar was
diminished to 23-2 grains.
This gave the relative values of gold and silver as 16 to 1, equivalent to a price of
58.937d. per Oz. of English standard silver, and
, *. 21 = $4.871
$1 = 90.205307
= 49 272d.
In 1837 the amount of gold in the dollar was raised to its present amount of 23.22 grains
fine gold, or 25 °8 grains of gold, ºths fine.
This gave the relative values of gold and silver as 15'988 to 1, which is equivalent to a
price of 58.98d. per oz. of English standard silver, and
sºl = $4.86656
$1 = 490 - 205484
= 49 316d.
Finally, the rise in the value of silver relatively to gold, causing the silver coin to be
exported and melted down, by the Act 21st February 1853, the silver coinage inferior to
the dollar was reduced in weight, silver coins making up a dollar containing 345 6 grains of
fine silver.
This gives the relative values of gold and silver as 14'888 to 1, equivalent to a price of
63' 357 per oz. of English standard silver.
TABLE of the Value in Sterling Money of the Principal Foreign Silver Coins according
to the Price per Ounce of English Standard Silver.
Value in Pence of Foreign Silver Coins.
e e Grains, Grammes, º e e
Name of Silver Coin. Fine Silver.|Fine Silver. Price per Ounce of English Standard Silver. e
59d. 600. 61d. 62d. 63d. | 64d. 65d. 66d.
* = a-mºmºsºme"
Franc - tºº tº º 69 ° 4456 4 * 5 9 * 22 || 9 3S 9 - 54 || 9 70 || 9 - 85 10 Ol 10 - 16 || 10 - 323
Lira Austriaca (Lombardy) || 60' 1526 || 3' 89783 || 8
0
8 - 13 8 - 27 || 8 - 40 || 8 - 53 | S • 67 S - S0 | 8 9.4
Lira Toscana (Tuscany) - || 58' 313 3 7786 7 * 75 7 - 88 || 8 ° 01 || 8 - 14 || 8 - 27 | 8 - 40 | 8 53 8 66
Ducat (Two Sicilies) - 295 ° 05 19 - 119 39 ° 21 39 - 87 40 - 53 || 4 || - 20 41 ° 86 || 42 - 53 4.3 ° 20 43' 86
Florin (Netherlands) - || 145 ' 83 9 * 45 19 - 39 19 71 20 * 03 | 20 36 | 20 - 69 || 21 - 02 || 21 ° 35 ; 21 68
Drachme (Greece) - - 62 - 1 S 4 * 0.239 8'26 8:40 8: 54 8: 68 8' 82 8.96 8: 10 9:24
Ruble (Russia) º - || 277 62 17 - 99 36 °88 37 ° 50 | 38 - 12 38° 75 || 39 - 37 | 40' 00 40" 62 41 ° 25
Dollar (United States)
4-
3
7
l
2
5
2
4
• 057 49 - 34 50 - 17 || 51 - 0 || 51 - 84 52' 67 || 53 - 51 54' 35 55 ° 19
-
Shilling - - - - 80 ºr 5' 23104 || 10 fºr 10+; ll ºr 11 ºr l l ºr 11+"r llºr 12
No. 55. No. 55
REPORT from Sir ISAAC NEWTON, Master of the Mint, (in pursuance of which the Sir Isaac Newton,
price of Standard Gold was fixed at 31, 17s. 10}d. per ounce.) Report, &c.
a. ammº-ºne
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS OF HIS MAJESTY'S
TREASURY.
May it please your Lordships,
IN obedience to your Lordships Order of Reference of August 12th, that I should
lay before your Lordships a state of the gold and silver coins of this kingdom in weight
and fineness, and the value of gold in proportion to silver, with my observations and
opinion, and what method may be best for preventing the melting down of the silver coin,
I humbly represent, that a pound weight troy of gold eleven ounces fine and one ounce
alloy is cut into 44; guineas, and a pound weight of silver eleven ounces two penny-
weights fine and eighteen pennyweights alloy is cut into 62 shillings. And according to
y
354 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
* No. 55.
Sir Isaac Newton,
Report, &c.
this rate, a pound weight of fine gold is worth fifteen pounds weight six ounces seventeen
pennyweights and five grains of fine silver, reckoning a guinea at 1, 18. 6d. in silver
money. But silver in bullion exportable is usually worth 2d. or 3d. per ounce more than
in coin. And if at a medium such bullion of standard alloy be valued at 58.4%d. per
ounce, a pound weight of fine gold will be worth but 14 lb. 11 oz. 12 dwt., 9 gr. of fine
silver in bullion. And at this rate a guinea is worth but so much silver as would make
20s. 8d. When ships are lading for the East Indies, the demand of silver for exportation
raises the price to 5s. 6d. or 58. 8d. per ounce or above; but I consider not those
extraordinary cases.
A Spanish pistole was coined for 32 rials or four pieces of eight rials, usually called
pieces of eight, and is of equal alloy and the sixteenth part of the weight thereof. And
a doppio moeda of Portugal was coined for ten crusados of silver, and is of equal alloy and
the sixteenth part of the weight thereof. Gold is therefore in Spain and Portugal of
sixteen times more value than silver of equal weight and alloy according to the standard
of those kingdoms; at which rate a guinea is worth 228. 1d. But this high price keeps
their gold at home in good plenty, and carries away the Spanish silver into all Europe; so
that at home they make their payments in gold, and will not pay in silver without a
premium. Upon the coming in of a plate fleet, the premium ceases or is but small; but
as their silver goes away and becomes scarce the premium increases, and is most commonly
about six per cent, which being abated, a guinea becomes worth about 20s. 9d. in Spain
and Portugal.
In France a pound weight of fine gold is reckoned worth fifteen pounds weight of fine
silver. In raising or falling their money, their Kings' Edicts have sometimes varied a
little from this proportion in excess or defect; but the variations have been so little that I
do not here consider them. By the Edict of May 1709 a new pistole was coined for four
new Louises, and is of equal alloy and the fifteenth part of the weight thereof, except the
errors of their mints. And by the same Edict fine gold is valued at fifteen times its
weight of fine silver; and at this rate a guinea is worth 20s. 84d. I consider not here the
confusion made in the monies in France by frequent Edicts to send them to the mint and
give the King a tax out of them. I consider only the value of gold and silver in proportion
to one another.
The ducats of Holland and Hungary and the Empire were lately current in Holland
among the common people in their markets and ordinary affairs at five guilders in specie
and five stivers, and commonly changed for so much silver monies in three guilder pieces
and guilder pieces, as guineas are with us for 21s 6d sterling; at which rate a guinea is
worth 20s. 7#d.
According to the rates of gold to silver in Italy, Germany, Poland, Denmark, and
Sweden, a guinea is worth about 20s. 7d., 6d, 5d., or 4d, for the proportion varies a little
within the several governments in those countries. In Sweden gold is lowest in proportion
to silver, and this hath made that kingdom, which formerly was content with copper
money, abound of late with silver, sent thither (I suspect) for naval stores.
In the end of King William's reign and the first year of the late Queen, when foreign
coins abounded in England, I caused a great many of them to be assayed in the mint, and
found by the assays that fine gold was to fine silver in Spain, Portugal, France, Holland,
Italy, Germany, and the Northern Kingdoms, in the proportions above mentioned, errors
of the mints excepted.
In China and Japan one pound weight of fine gold is worth but nine or ten pounds weight
of fine silver; and in East India it may be worth twelve. And this low price of gold in
proportion to silver carries away the silver from all Europe.
So then by the course of trade and exchange between nation and nation in all Europe,
fine gold is to fine silver as 14+ or 15 to 1; and a guinea at the same rate is worth
between 20s. 5d. and 20s. 8d. except in extraordinary cases, as when a plate fleet is just
arrived in Spain, or ships are lading here for the East Indies, which cases I do not here
consider. And it appears by experience, as well as by reason, that silver flows from those
places where its value is lowest in proportion to gold, as from Spain to all Europe and from
all Europe to the East Indies, China, and Japan; and that gold is most plentiful in
those places in which its value is highest in proportion to silver, as in Spain and
England.
It is the demand for exportation which hath raised the price of exportable silver about
2d or 3d. in the ounce above that of silver in coin, and hath thereby created
a temptation to export or melt down the silver coin rather than give 2d, or 3d.
more for foreign silver. And the demand for exportation arises from the higher
price of silver in other places than in England in proportion to gold, that is, from the
higher price of gold in England than in other places in proportion to silver; and therefore
may be diminished by lowering the value of gold in proportion to silver. If gold in
England or silver in East India could be brought down so low as to bear the same propor-
tion to one another in both places, there would be here no greater demand for silver than
for gold to be exported to India. And if gold were lowered, only so as to have the same
proportion to the silver money in England which it hath to silver in the rest of Europe,
there would be no temptation to export silver rather than gold to any other part of Europe.
And to compass this last there seems nothing more requisite than to take of about 10d. or
12d. from the guinea, so that gold may bear the same proportion to the silver money in
England which it ought to do by the course of trade and exchange in Europe. But if
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION. 355
only 6d. were taken off at present, it would diminish the temptation to export or melt
down the silver coin, and by the effects would show hereafter, better than can appear at
present, what further reduction would be most convenient for the public.
In the last year of King William, the dollars of Scotland, worth about 4s. 6%d., were
put away in the north of England for 5s, and at this price began to flow in upon us. I
gave notice thereof to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, and they ordered the
collectors of taxes to forbear taking them, and thereby put a stop to the mischief.
At the same time the Louis d'ors of France, which were worth but seventeen shillings
and three farthings apiece, passed in England at 17s. 6d. I gave notice thereof to the
Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, and His late Majesty put out a proclamation that
they should go but at 17s., and thereupon they came to the mint and i,400,000l. were
coined out of them. And if the advantage of 5}d in a Louis d'or sufficed at that time to
bring into England so great a quantity of French money, and the advantage of three
farthings in a Louis d'or to bring it to the mint the advantage of 9}d in a guinea or above
may have been sufficient to bring in the great quantity of gold which hath been coined in
these last fifteen years without any foreign silver.
Some years ago the Portuguese moidores were received in the west of England at 28s.
apiece. Upon notice from the mint that they were worth only about 27s. 7d., the Lords
Commissioners of the Treasury ordered their receivers of taxes to take them at no more
than 27s. 6d. Afterwards many gentlemen in the west sent up to the Treasury a petition
that the receivers might take them again at 28s, and promised to get returns for this
money at that rate, alleging that when they went at 28s. their country was full of gold
which they wanted very much. But the Commissioners of the Treasury, considering that
at 28s, the nation would lose 5d. apiece, rejected the petition. And if an advantage to
the merchant of 5d, in 28s. did pour that money in upon us, much more hath an advantage
to the merchant of 94.d. in a guinea or above been able to bring into the mint great quan-
tities of gold without any foreign silver, and may be able to do it still, till the cause be
removed.
If things be let alone till silver money be a little scarcer, the gold will fall of itself, for
people are already backward to give silver for gold, and will in a little time refuse to make
payments in silver without a premium, as they do in Spain, and this premium will be an
abatement in the value of the gold. And so the question is, whether gold shall be lowered
by the government or let alone till it falls of itself by the want of silver money.
It may be said that there are great quantities of silver in plate, and if the plate were
coined there would be no want of silver money. But I reckon that silver is safer from
exportation in the form of plate than in the form of money, because of the greater value
of the silver and fashion together. And therefore I am not for coining the plate till the
temptation to export the silver money (which is a profit of 2d, or 3d an ounce) be dimi-
nished. For as often as men are necessitated to send away money for answering debts
abroad, there will be a temptation to send away silver rather than gold, because of the
profit, which is almost four per cent. And for the same reason foreigners will choose to send
hither their gold rather than their silver.
All which is most humbly submitted to your Lordships' great wisdom.
(Signed) ISAAC NEWTON.
Mint Office, 21st Sept. 1717. .
Mote.—In pursuance of this report and of an address from the House of Commons a Royal
Proclamation was issued making the guinea a legal tender for twenty shillings. This gave the
value of the pound troy of standard gold 46l. 14s. 6d., and of the ounce of standard gold
3l. 17s. 10%d., the value which it has ever since retained.
No. 55.
Sir Isaac Newton,
Report, &c.
Y y 2
356 APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 55. No. 55.
List of
Books, &c.
LIST OF
BOOKS, PAMPHLETS, LETTERS, AND ARTICLES ON DECIMAL COINAGE,
Communicated by Dr. John Edward Gray, F.R.S., F.L.S., &c., of the British Museum,
and chiefly in his Collection.
f
The Works are arranged chronologically; those of each year alphabetically, according to the Name of the Author.
The Letters in the Newspapers are arranged chronologically, after the Works of each Year.
STEvin, SIMON. — La Pratique d'Arithmetique de
De Bruges, 12mo. Leyden, 1605. (In B.M.)
PLAY Ford, John. —Wade Mecum ; or, the Necessary
Companion. The Reduction of Weight, and Measure, the
ready Casting-up of any Number of Farthings, &c. 12mo,
London, 1679.
Brown, GEoRGE.-Arithmetica Infinita; or, Accurate
Accountant's Best Companion. 8vo. 1717–1718. (A Table
of Decimals of a Pound.)
SMART, JoHN.—Tables of Interest, Discount, Annuities,
&c. 4to. London, 1726. Enlarged and republished by
Brand, 1780; by Baily, 1808.
SHERwin’s Mathematical Tables.
W. Gardner. 8vo. London, 1741.
HEwiT, John.—A Treatise upon Money, Coins, and
Exchange, and also Tables relative to the conformity of
different Weights and Measures. 8vo. London, 1755.
HARRIs, Rich ARD.—An Essay upon Money and Coins,
and P.S. on Standard Measures. 8vo, London, 1757.
Part II., 1758.
HARDy, J.-Theory of Arithmetic, Useful Arts, Applica-
tion to Custom-house Computation. 8vo. London, 1760.
Jon courts, E. D.E.-De Natura et praeclaro Usu Sim-
plicissimi Speciei Numerorum Trigonalium. 4to. Hango,
1762.
RAMsbottom.–Fractions Anatomized, to which is added
Duodecimal Arithmetic. 8vo. 1762.
SNELLING, THoMAs.-A View of the Coins Current in
Europe. 8vo. London, 1766.
MoRRIs, Rob ERT.-Report to Congress, 15th January
1782. In American State Papers. Vol. v., p. 101.
JEFFERson, THoMAs.-Notes on the Establishment of
a Money Unit of a Coinage for the United States. 1784.
In “Randolph, Mem, and Correspondence,” 1829, p. 133.
A Treatise on Money, Coins, Weights, and Measures,
proposed for the United States of America. Philadelphia,
1789.
Third edition. By
Plan of Establishing Uniformity in the Coinage,
Weights, and Measures of the United States. Commu-
nicated to the House of Representatives, July 13, 1790.
Postscript to the above. Communicated to the House
of Representatives, Jan. 18, 1791. gº
Report on Money, Weights, and Measures. Phila-
delphia, 1790.
HAMILTON, ALExANDER.—Secretary of the Treasury
of the United States. Report to the House of Represen-
.tatives on the Establishment of a Mint. 28th January 1791.
In American State Papers. Vol. v., p. 91.
KEITH, G. S.—On Coinage and Weight. 8vo. 1791.
BornA, &c.—Rapport fait a l’Académie des Sciences, par
MM. Borda, Lagrange, Lavoisier, Tillet, et Condorcet, le
27 Octobre 1790. In “Hist. de l'Acad. Royale des Sciences,”
1788, p. 1.
/88, p Rapport fait à l’Académie des Sciences, sur le Choix
d’une Unité de Mesures. Par MM. Borda, Lagrange,
Laplace, Monge, et Condorcet. “Hist. de l'Acad. Royale
des Sciences.” Ann. 1788. p. 7. *
Exposé des Travaux de l'Académie sur le Projet
de l’Uniformité des Mesures et des Poids. “Hist. de
l'Acad. des Sciences.” 1788. p. 17.
Rapport fait à l’Académie des Sciences, sur le Sys-
teme Général des Poids et Mesures. Parles Citoyens Borda,
Lagrange, et Monge. “Hist, de l'Acad, des Sciences.”
Ann, 1789. (1793, p. 1.)
Rapport de la Comité des Finances. Imprimépar Ordre de
l’Assemblée Nationale. 8vo. Paris, 1790, 1791.
JzARD, MR.—Report from the Committee to whom was
referred the Report of the Secretary of State communicated
to the Senate, March 1, 1791.
Second Report, communicated to the Senate, April 4,
1792. In “American State Papers,” Class X. p. 38,48.
MoRRIs, Rob ERT. — Financier of the Confederation.
Report to Congress, 1792.
Exposé des Travaux de l'Academie sur le Projet de
l’Uniformité des Mesures et des Poids. In “Mem. Acad.
Sciences,” 1795.
HARRIsson, MR. — Report from Committee to whom
was referred the Report of the Secretary of State, made
13th of July 1790; and so much of the Message of the
President of the 8th of January 1795 as related to Weights
and Measures. Communicated to the House of Repre-
sentatives, 12th April 1796. In “American State Papers,”
Class X. p. 148.
THE PRESIDENT of THE UNITED STATES.-Message
from, on Weights and Measures. Communicated to Con-
gress, Jan. 8, 1795. In “American State Papers,” Class X.
p. 113.
Mon GEz.—Considerations Generales sur les Monnaies.
Paris, An IV. (1796).
ANON.—Table pour Convertir les Sous et Deniers en
Decimes et Centimes. 8vo. Paris, Ann. IV. (1796).
Pouch ET, L. E.—Metrologie Terrestre, ou Table de Nou-
veaux Poids, Mesures, et Monnaies de France, les Rapports
qu'ils ont avec les Poids de l’Europe, &c. 8vo. Rouen,
An V. (1797).
ANON. (AUBRY, L. C.)—Le Calepin des Administrateurs,
des Hommes de Loi et d’Affaires, des Banquiers et des Com-
mergans. 8vo. Paris, An VI. (1798).
AUBRY, L. C.—Metrologie Lineaire Universelle, ou Trans-
formation Generale des Mesures et Monnaies detous les Pays
de la Terre, par le moyen du Comparateur. 8vo, Paris,
An VII. (1799).
BLonD, A. S. L.E.--Sur le Système Monétaire Décimale.
8vo. Paris, An VI. (1798).
RUSHAMMER, F.—Manuel Général pour les Arbitrages
des Changes, &c. pourvu d'une Collation de Cour de
Change. 8vo. Paris, An VIII. (1800).
Bo ILEAU and AUDEBERT, RAMB.—Bareme Général, ou
les Comptes faits de tout ce qui concerne les nouveaux Poids,
Mesures, et Monnaies de la France, &c. 8vo. Paris,
An. XI. (1803).
BEwick, R.—Table of European Exchanges. 2 vols.
4to. 1802.
Potti ER, F.—Manuel de la Banque. Paris, 1805.
Bon NEVILLE, P. F.—Traité des Monnaies d’Or et d’Ar-
gent, &c. Paris. fol. 1806.
ANON. (PLAY FAIR, JoHN).—Review of MM. Mechains
and Delambre, Measurement of an Arc of the Meridian. In
“Edinburgh Review,” 1807.
BAILY, FRANCIS.—The Doctrine of Interest and Annui-
ties analytically investigated. 4to. London, 1808.
Bonn ET, AUGUSTE.—Manuel Monétaire et d’Orfevrerie,
ou Nouveau Traité des Monnaies de France et Etrangère,
selon l’Ancien et le Nouveau Système. 4to. Paris, 1810.
Report on Weights and Measures. “Report, House of
Commons,” July 1, 1814, fol, London,
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
357
CALCULATOR.—Observations on the Report of Weights
and Measures. 8vo. London, 1814. In “Pamphleteer.”
ELIoT.—Letters on the Political and Financial Situation
of the Country. 8vo. London, 1814. In “Pamphleteer.”
MERCATor.—Sketch for a New Division and Subdi-
vision of Monies, Weights, and Coins. 8vo. London,
1814. In “Pamphleteer.”
Report of the Lords of the Committee of Council ap-
pointed to take into consideration the State of the Coin
of this Kingdom, and Constitution of His Majesties Mint,
to His R. H. the Prince Regent, dated 21st May 1816.
Reprinted in the “Times,” 6th June 1816.
Report of the Lords Commissioners of Council appointed
to take into consideration the State of the Coins of this
Kingdom, and the present Establishment and Constitution
of His Majesty’s Mint. Dated 21st May 1816. Copied
in “Times,” 6th June 1816.
PRINCE REGENT. — Message on State of Coinage.
“Times,” 29th May 1816. ,
Silver Coinage Bill. Debate in Commons, May 30, June 7;
in Lords May 30. “Hansard,” XXXIV. p. 912–1018.
STANHoPE, EARL.—Address to appoint Commissioners
to reform the System or Standard. In “Times,” 25th May
1816.
ANON.— Leaders on New Silver Coinage.
31st May, 8th and 17th June, 1816.
LIBRA.—Two Letters on Mr. Croker’s Plan to “Times,”
31st May and 13th June 1816.
CRoKER, J. WILson.—Speech on Coinage, and Replies.
Reported “Times,” 8th June 1816; “Hansard,” xxxiv.
1023.
ANON.—Observation on the Report of the Council, and
in favour of a Silver Standard.
1816.
“Times,”
ANON.—Leader on Croker’s System of Decimal Coinage.
“Times,” 11th, 25th, and 28th June 1816.
LAUDERDALE, Lord. — Speech, and Leader on in
“Times,” 18th June 1816; “Hansard,” 1816, 1,235.
Debate on Silver Coinage, June 7, 1816, House of
Commons; June 17, House of Lords, &c.; “Hansard”
and “Times.”
GooDwyN, H. — Account of a Plan for a New Silver
Coinage, for introducing the Decimal Principle. 4to.
London, 1816.
A Plan for a New General System of Weights of
the Kingdom, formed upon a perfect Table of Decimals, as
a Supplement to the Plan for the New Silver Coinage.
4to. London, 1816.
KELLY, R.—Metrology.
London, 1816.
ANoN.—Plan of Decimal Weights and Measures sub-
mitted to the Dutch States General by the King of Holland.
“Times,” 17th June 1816.
ANoN.—Proposals for a New Money System.
21st June 1816.
ANoN.— Remarks on the Proposal for a New Money
System. “Times,” 25th and 28th June 1816.
MARTIN, C. F.—Les Tables de Martin, ou la Regulation
Universelle des Calculs, la Conversion des Monnaies
Etrangères en Monnaies de France, et vice versá, &c. 8vo.
Paris, 1817.
PRESTON, THoMAs. – A New System of Commercial
Arithmetic of such Construction as to obviate all the Incon-
veniences arising from the Irregularity in the Division of
our Money, Weight, and Measures. 12mo. London, 1817.
Report of Commissioners appointed to consider the
Subject of Weights and Measures. First Report. 24th
June 1819. Reprinted “Pamphleteer,” xvi. 135.
LowNDES, MR.—Report on Weight and Measures, Com-
mittee to the House of Representatives, Jan. 25, 1819.
Report of the Royal Commissioners on Weights and
Measures. London. fol. 1819, 1820, 182].
ANoN.—The British Metre and its Derivatives, being a
Sketch of a Proposed Reformation of the British Measures,
Weights, and Coins. 8vo. London, 1820. “Pamphleteer,”
xvi. 203.
ADAMs, J. Q.-Reports to Congress on Weights and
Measures. Washington, U.S., 1821.
8vo,
“Times,”
“Times;” 15th March
ADAMs, J. Q.-Reports on Weights and Measures by the
Secretary of State, to whom it was referred by the Resolution
of the Senate, Feb. 22, 1821. In “American State Papers,”
Class X., Y., 566–759. Printed separately. Washington.
8vo. 1821.
ANoN. (CLARK T.)—On Weights and Measures, &c. In
“Westminster Review,” No. xxxi. 8vo. 1822.
ANDERSON.—Universal Calculator for India.
cutta, 1823.
WESTGATE, JoHN.—A New and Complete Set of Deci-
mal Tables on an Improved System for Calculating Money
and Weights. 4to. London, 1823. -
WRoTTEs LEY, SIR John.—Discussion on Decimal Sys-
tem of Accounts and Coinage. “Hansard’s Parliamentary
Debates,” 25th February 1824.
Act of Parliament for the Assimilation of the Cur-
rency and Monies of Account throughout the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Passed June 27,
1825. 6 Geo. IV. c. 79.
MERCADo, D.—Bengal Table of Exchange, viz., Bengal
Currency into English Money, &c. Calcutta. 8vo. 1825.
Report on Circulating Paper Species and Current Coin
in Ireland. “Report, House of Commons,” 26th May 1826.
fol. London.
GIRoD, J.-Dictionnaire Spécial et Classique des Mon-
naies des Anciens avec Notre Système Décimale. 8vo. Paris,
1827.
FARBE DEs SUBLONs, S. A.—Manuel Pratique et Elé-
mentaire des Poids et Mesures des Monnaies et du Calcul
Décimal. 18mo. Paris, 1827.
GEORGE. — Arithmetic in Encyclopaedia
4to. London, 1829.
KELLY, R.—The Universal Cambist. 4to. London, 1821.
Two Supplements, 1827 and 1835. Second edition, 2 vols.
4to. 1831.
ANON.—Minutes of Evidence taken at the Board of Trade
on Coin. “Report, House of Commons,” Feb. 12, 1830.
YouNG, THoMAs, M.D.—Life of 8vo. 1831. p. 31.
BABBAGE, CHARLEs.-Economy of Manufactures. 8vo.
London, 1832.
HASs LER, F. R.—Comparison of Weights and Measures
of Length and Capacity reported to the Senate of the United
States. 8vo. Washington, 1832.
PAUCKER, GEORGE.-Inhalts Ubersicht des Werkes
uber Maas, Gewicht, und Munze des Russischen Reichs, und
seiner Deutschen Ostseelander, 8vo. St. Petersburg, 1832
M’Culloch, J. R.—Commercial Dictionary. 1832, 1854.
PASLEY, SIR CHARLEs.--Observations on the Expediency
and Practicability of Simplifying and Improving the Mea-
sures, Weights, and Money used in this Country. London,
#) (An Abstract was lithographed and distributed in
31.
Report of the Managers of the Franklin Institute of the
State of Pennsylvania for the Promotion of the Mechanic
Arts, in relation to Weight and Measure. 8vo. Phila-
delphia, 1834.
Report on Weight and Measure. “Report, House of
Commons,” 7th May, 1834. June 17, 1835.
MoRRIson, W. H. — Observations on the System of
Metallic Currency adopted in this Country. Second edition.
8vo. London, 1837.
WATT, J.--A System of Tables on British Money,
Weights, and Measures. 8vo. London, 1837.
CoRY, J. P. — Proposal for the Introduction of the
Tecimal Division of Money. Paper read before the Numis-
matic Society, May 24, 1838. “Numismatic Chronicle,”
vol. I., 1839.
AIRY, G. B.-Extract of Papers printed and MSS. for
Restoration of the Standard of Weight and Measure
printed by order of the Lords Commissioners of the Trea-
sury. 4to. London, 1840.
RUDING, R.—Annals of the Coinage of Great Britain
and its l]ependencies. Third edition. 3 vols. 4to.
London, 1840.
SHORT, THOMAS VowLER.—Hints on Teaching Vulgar
and Decimal Fractions. 12mo. London, 1840.
Report of the Commissioners appointed to consider the
Steps to be taken for Restoration of the Standard of Weight
and Measure. fol. London, 1841.
BETHUNE, J. E. DRINKwater.—Letter to the Right
Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, 21st Dec. 1841.
DE MoRGAN, A.—Decimal Coinage. “Companion to the
Almanac * for 1841.
Cal-
8vo.
PEA cock,
Metropolitana.
No. 55.
List of
Books, &c.
º
Y y 3
358
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 55.
List of
Books, &c.
MAsleN, DEcIMUs.—A new Decimal System of Money,
Weights, Measures, and Time, 8vo. London, 1841.
Report of the Commissioners on Restoration, of the
Standards of Weights and Measures. 1841. (Redelivered
1855.
* F. R.—Report as Superintendent of the Con-
stitution of Standard Weight, Measure, and Balances.
Dated Dec. 1842. Printed by House of Representatives,
Jan. 31, 1844.
TATE, T.-Modern Cambist, 8vo.
WATERstos, A. W.-A Manual of Commerce.
Edinburgh, 1844.
TARBE, M.–Nouveau Manuel Complète des Monnaies.
12mo. Paris, 1845.
HAusch ILD, J. F.—Francfurter Geschafts Handbuch.
8vo. Franc, 1845.
DE MoRGAN, AUG.—Appendix to the Fifth Edition of
the Elements of Arithmetic. 8vo. 1846.
TAYLoR, HENRY.—Observations on the Current Coinage
of Great Britain. 1846. From “Banker’s Magazine.”
Simple Arithmetic as Connected with the National
Coinage, Weights, and Measures. London, 1847.
ANoN.—Remarks on Decimal System of Keeping Ac-
counts; by the late Mayor of Bewdley. Bewdley, 1847.
Bonn Evil LE, ALPHoNSE. – Nouvelle Encyclopédie
Monétaire. Paris, fol. 1847.
BowRING, Jo HN.—Discussion on Resolution to intro-
duce Decimal System, in House of Commons. 27th April,
1847. “Hansard,” xcII. 13.
TAYLoR, HENRY.—Arithmetic connected with Coinage,
or Decimal Arrangement of our Circulating Coinage. Svo.
London, 1847.
ANoN. (PENNINGTON).--The Currency of the British
Colonies. 8vo. London, 1848. Printed by the Treasury.
DE MoRGAN, A.—Decimal Coinage. Companion to the
Almanac for 1848.
ANoN.—Report of the Commissioners appointed to In-
quire into the Condition, Management, and Expenses of
the Royal Mint. fol. London, 1849.
Correspondence respecting the Scale for the Ord-
nance Maps. fol. London, 1850. . . Presented to both
Houses of Parliament by command of Her Majesty.
Bundes Gesetz, uber das Eidgenössische Munzwesen
Worn 7 Mai 1850.
CHEvALIER, MICH.-Cours d’Economie Politique fait au
Collége de France. 8vo. Paris, 1850. De Monnaie, vol. 3.
OATEs, GEoRGE.—Tables of Sterling Exchanges in
Federal Money. 4to. London, 1851.
TAylor, H.-The Decimal System applied to the
Coinage, Weights, and Measures of Great Britain. Fourth
edition. London, 1851.
ANoN.—Decimal Coinage. “Chambers’ Journal,” March
13, 1852.
Live Rpool, CHAMBER of CoMMERCE.-Address to the
President of the Board of Trade. 1852.
Report of Special Committee.
JAMEs, E.-Decimal Coinage.
March l852.
W. G. (GURGoN, W.)—Letter on the Pound Unit. In
“ Economist,” 12th September 1852.
A MEMBER of THE CoMMIssion For THE RESTORA-
Tion of THE Lost STANDARDS OF WEIGHTS AND
MEASUREs.-Letter on the Florin. In “Times,” 1852.
HENRIcks, P.—On the Advantages of a Common Lan-
guage and a Common Monetary System to be used by
Ågreement between Several States. 1852. Notices. “Daily
News,” 18th September 1855.
ALExANDER, JAMEs.-Suggestions for a Simple System
of Decimal Notation and Currency after the Portuguese
Model. Paper read before the Royal Scottish Society of
Arts, December 12th, 1853. 8vo. London, 1853.
CoopFR, CoLLINGwooD. – Decimals and Decimal
Coinage. 12mo, London, 1853.
J. D.—Letter in “Times,” 2nd September 1853.
J. W. C.—-Letter in “Times,” 14th September 1853.
FRANKLIN, J. A.—The Decimal System Facilitated and
Adapted Intermediately to Routine Methods of Account,
Money, and the Precious Metals; with Tables, &c. 4to.
London, 1853.
Forr, Ludwig.—Neuste Muntzkunde.
1853.
London, 1842.
12mo.
1852,
“Daily News,” 12th
Vienna. 8vo.
GALBRAITH, J. A.—On a Decimal Currency. Paper read
before the Dublin Statistical Society, May, 1853. Dublin.
H. B.--Table for a Decimal System of Accounts. fol.
London, 1853.
Hogg, JAMEs.-Decimal Coinage, Weights, and Mea-
sures. “Hogg's Instructor;” Edinburgh, November, 1853,
JAck, PROFEssoR.—On Uniform Weights, Measures, and
Moneys. Paper read before the Society of Arts, 23rd
February 1853. “Journal of the Society of Arts,” vol. 1.
p. 157.
LAURIE, J.-Customs Tariff and Currency Reforms,
with Decimal Currency Tables. “Manchester Commercial
Association Memorial.” 4to. 1853.
MEARs.—Decimal Coinage Tables. London, 1853.
MILwARD, A.—A Letter to the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, advocating the issue of a Five-farthing Piece. London,
1853.
RATH BoS E, THEo. W.-An Examination of the Report
and Evidence of the Committee of the House of Commons
on Decimal Coinage. London, 1853. (Second and third
Editions, with a preface and postscript, 1854.)
ANoN.—Report of the Select Committee of the House
of Commons on Decimal Coinage. fol. London, 1853.
RozzELL.--Practical Suggestions for Facilitating the
Adoption of a Decimal Currency. 8vo. 1853.
RYLEY, E.-Decimal Coinage. A brief comparison of the
existing System of Coins and Money of Account, of that pro-
posed by Decimal Coinage Committee, and of another System.
8vo. London, 1853.
ANoN.—The New Decimal Money. From the “Phonetic
Journal,” 1853.
VRoLIK, A.—Le Système Monétaire du Royaume des
Pays Bas. 8vo. Utrecht, 1853.
ANoN.—Pounds and Dimes, Cents and Mils; or a Real
Decimal Coimage vindicated. By an experienced Commercial
Clerk. 8vo. 1853.
A Table for a Decimal System of Accounts adapted
to the Current Coinage of the Realm. 8vo. 1853.
TARTT, W. W.-The Decimal Computation. “Journal
of the Society of Arts,” 11th March 1853.
Twin ING, T., junr.—The Decimal Currency. “Journal
of the Society of Arts, 11th March, 1853.
SoLLY, EDw.—Memorial of the Council of the Society
of Arts to the Treasury, “Journal of the Society of Arts,”
25th March 1853. -
DECIMAL.—The Decimal Currency.
Society of Arts,” 25th March 1853.
H.—Decimal Currency. “Journal of the Society of Arts,”
25th March 1853.
TURNER, J. As PINAL...—Memorial of the Directors of the
Manchester Commercial Association to the Right Hon.
W. Gladstone, 3rd May 1853.
ANoN. (W. HAGGARD).—Plan of a Decimal Coinage
(Pound and Mil), with Observation of Editor. In “Banker’s
Circular,” 19th February 1853. “Times,” 15th July 1853.
Notice of Decision of the Committee of the House
of Commons on Decimal Coinage. “Times,” 15th July 1853.
Observation on “The Decimal Coinage Association.”
In “Economist,” 29th July 1853.
Abstract Report of Parliamentary Committee.
“Times,” 2nd August 1853.
House of CoMMons.—Report from the Select Com-
mittee on Decimal Coinage, together with the proceedings
of the Committee, Minutes of Evidence, Appendix, and
Index. Ordered, by the House of Commons, to be printed,
1st August 1853.
ANON.—Leader on Select Committee on Decimal Coinage.
“Times,” 3rd August 1853.
E. B.-Letter in “Times,” 20th August 1853.
J. E.-Letter in “Times,” 22nd August 1853.
ANOTHER OF THE WITNEsses.—Letter in “Times,”
22nd August 1853.
J. E. G. (J. E. GRAY)-Observations on Report of Com-
mittee on Decimal Coinage. “Times,” 22nd August 1853.
J. L.-Letter in “Times,” 23rd August 1853.
ANON.—Letter in “Times,” 27th August 1853.
Observations on the Report of Committee on
Decimal Coinage. In “Economist,” 27th August 1853.
L. L.-Letter in “Times,” 3rd September 1853.
“Journal of the
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
359
SMITH, J. B.-Letter recommending a Universal System
of Money, Weight, and Measures, “Manchester Examiner.”
and “Times,” 24th August 1853.
ONE of THE WITNEsses (A. DE MoRGAN ?)-Letter in
“Times,” 1st September 1853.
ANoTHER of THE WITNESSEs (G. B. AIRY)-Letter in
“Times,” 1st September 1853.
J. D. (John DILLoN ?)-Letter in “Times,” 2nd Sep-
tember 1853.
T. W. R. (THEobor E. W. RATHBONE). — Letter to
“Athenaeum,” 3rd September 1853.
A. B. G. (G. B. AIRy).—Leader in “Athenæum,” 10th
September 1853.
ARITH Mos.-In “Economist,” 10th September 1853.
F. R.—Letter to “Times,” 16th September 1853.
J. W. C.—Letter to “Times,” 14th September 1853.
L. F. C. M.–Letter to “Daily News,” 17th September
1853.
A CoNsrANT READER.—Letter to “Daily News,” 19th
September 1853.
ANoN.—New Coins not to be issued.
September 1853.
E. E. S.–Letter to “Times,” 22nd September 1853.
“Times,” 21st
ANoN. No further Discussion to be inserted. “Athe-
naeum,” 24th September 1853. e
Leader against Change of Coinage. “Morning
Post,” 4th November 1853.
- Observations on De Morgan’s article in British Al-
manack, 1854. “Spectator,” 27th November 1854, p. 1142.
TATE, W.-Letter in “Times,” in support of the Penny.
11th December 1853, in Money Article.
BRowN, W.—Letter to Francis Shand, of 13th December,
1853. 4to. Circulated by Decimal Association.
RICHARDsoN, SAMUEL.—On Decimal Coinage, Weight,
and Measures. In “Liverpool Mercury,” 16th December
1853. On separable fol.
ANoN.—Review of Theodore W. Rathbone’s Pamphlet.
In “Liverpool Mercury,” 16th December 1853.
YATEs, JAMEs.-Letter to Mr. Rathbone.
Mercury,” 20th December 1853.
DELTA.—Reply to Mr. Yates.
23rd December 1853.
ANoN.—Report of Liverpool Town Meeting to consider
Decimal Coinage. In “Liverpool Times,” 29th December
1853, and “Liverpool Mercury,” 30th December 1853.
Advertisement of Resolutions of Town Meeting.
In “Liverpool Mercury,” 30th December 1853.
“Liverpool
In “Liverpool Mercury,”
RATH Bon E, T. W.-Letter to “Liverpool Mercury,” 30th
December 1853.
CoMM on SENSE.-Letter against Decimal Coinage. In
“Bristol Mirror,” 1853.
SPARKEs, G.-Letter against Decimal Coinage. “Nu-
mismatic Chronicle,” 1853.
Amtliche Reduction des Zuger Currentgeldes. In das
* Neue Schwitzergeld,” 1854.
ALEXANDER, JAMEs.-Decimal Ready Reckoner, 1854.
A card with slides.
“As LITs '' (HAM Mos D).-Decimal Coimage, with a Pro-
posal for Decimalizing our Weights and Measures. 12mo.
London, 1854.
BEw LEY. —Decimal Interest Tables. 1854.
BIs Hop, S. H.-Decimal Coimage and Accounts. 4to.
London, 1854.
Bow RING, Sir J.-The Decimal System in Numbers,
Coins, and Accounts, especially with reference to the Deci-
milization of the Currency and Accountancy of the United
Kingdom. 12mo. London, 1854.
BRow N, W.-Letter to Francis Shand, Esq.
edition. London, 1854.
CALDER, FRED.—The proposed Decimal Coinage. 12mo.
London, 1854.
DAvidson, ALEx. BRAND.--The New Decimal Coinage.
Aberdeen, 1854.
DE MoRGAN, AUG.—Decimal Coinage. “Companion to
the Almanack’ for 1854.
DEcIMAL Association.—Proceedings; with an Intro-
duction by Professor De Morgan. 8vo. London, 1854.
Second
ANoN. (HARE, J.)—Review of the Report of the Select
Committee of the House of Commons. “Eclectic Review,”
November, 1854.
E. R. A.—Suggestions for a Complete Decimal System.
Reprinted from the “Patriot,” 1854.
FERRARI, SYLVIA.—Calcolo Decidozzinale. Dedicata alla
Natione Inglese, fol. Turin, 1854.
FRANK LIN, J. A.—Letter to Mr. W. Brown, M.P., on the
Impracticability of the Franc or the Tenpenny Unit. Read
before the Statistical Section of the British Association at
Liverpool, September, 1854. “Report of the British Asso-
ciation,” 1854, p. 144; Liverpool Mercury,” 22nd Sep-
tember 1854; “Observer,” 24th September 1854; “Morn-
ing Advertiser,” 26th September 1854.
GIB Bo N.—Report on Utility of a Uniform System in Mea-
sures, Weights, Fineness, and Decimal Accounts. Charles-
town, U.S., 1854.
GoDw1N, EDwARD.—A Manual of Decimal Monetary
Calculations, No. 1. London, 1854.
ANON. (GRAY, J. E.)—Decimal Coinage; what it ought,
and what it ought not to be. By One of the Million.
London, 1854.
GRAY, J. E.-Comparative Statement of the Value of
the Pound and Penny Systems of Decimal Coinage, 1854.
Second and third editions, 1854.
HoARE.-Mensuration made Easy, or the Decimal System
and its Application to the Daily Employments of the Artizan
and Mechanic. 1854.
LAURIE, JAMES.–Manual of Foreign Exchanges. 12mo.
London, 1854.
Universal Exchange Table. 8vo. 1854.
A Practical Analysis of the Comparative Merits of
the One Pound and Tenpence as the Ruling Integer of a
Decimal Currency for the United Kingdom. With Tables
of Merchandise, 8vo. London, 1854.
LEoNov.1, J. L.-The Coin Chart Manual. New York,
1854.
MEARs.—The Decimal Calculator.
Syo.
London, 1854.
MILLER, W.-Decimalization of Coins and Accounts.
Paper read before the Society of Arts, May 5th, 1854.
“Journal of the Society of Arts,” vol. 11. p. 414.
Letter to Mr. Brown, M.P. Read before the Sta-
tistical Section of the British Association at Liverpool,
September 25th, 1854. “Report of the British Association,”
1854, p. 143. “Liverpool Mercury,” 29th September 1854.
MINAs.I., F. J.-A Word in Behalf of the Poor Man’s
Penny. London, 1854.
On a Decimal Coinage for the United Kingdom.
Paper read before the Statistical Society of London, 19th
June 1854. “Journal of the Statistical Society” for Sep-
tember 1854.
MoS Ro, A.—Letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Glasgow, 1854. (Second edition, 1855.)
PITMAN, Is AAc.—A Brief Account of the New Decimal
Money, with Report of Dr. Bowring’s Address on a Decimal
Currency, at Manchester. London, 1854.
“RETIRED MERCHANT.”—A Short and Easy Method
of Changing the Present Currency into the Decimal System.
London, 1854.
RATH Bon E, THEO. W.-Comparative Statement of the
Different Plans of Decimal Accounts and Coinage. London,
1854.
On the Different Plans of Decimal Accounts and
Coinage. “Report of the British Association,” 1854, p. 145.
“Liverpool Mercury,” 25th September 1854.
Rich ARDSON, SAMUEL.—Decimal System in Coins,
Accounts, Weights, and Measures. Liverpool, 1854.
STRACHAN, JAMES.–A Short Exposition of the Pro-
posed Decimal Coinage System. Aberdeen, 1854.
Scott, WILLIAM.–Arithmetic for Use of Schools, with
Tables for the Reduction of Compound Numbers to Deci-
mals. 12mo. London, 1854.
SMITH, J. B.-Should Decimal Coinage be adopted with-
out a Decimal System of Weights and Measures 2 Man-
chester, 8th March, 1854.
SMITH, B.—Arithmetic for Use of Schools. 8vo. London.
TALLANT and ALLEN.—Decimal Money Tables, 1854.
ANON. (TAYLOR, Jo HN). — Decimal Money Table to
enable any one to Convert at Sight English Money into
Decimal Money without any immediate Change in the pre-
sent Coin of the Realms. 12mo, London, 1854.
No. 55.
List of
Books, &c.
Y y 4
360
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 55.
List of
Books, &c.
TATE, T.-The New Coinage considered in Relation to
our School Arithmetics. Reprinted from the “Educational
Expositor.” 8vo. London, 1854.
TEGETMEIER.—Arithmetical Tables, including those of
the Decimal Coinage. 1854. -
THOMson, W. T.—Decimal Numeration and Decimal
Coinage. Paper read before the Institute of Actuaries,
January 30, 1854. Edinburgh, and “Assurance Magazine”
for April.
YATEs, J.-On the French System of Measures, Weights,
and Coins, and its Adaptation to General Use. Paper read
before the Institute of Civil Engineers, Feb. 28, 1854.
London.
On a Method of Substituting Francs and Cen-
times for the Present English Metallic Currency. Paper read
before the Statistical Section of the British Association at
Liverpool, Sept. 25, 1854. “Report of the British Asso-
cciation,” 1854, p. 146. “Assurance Magazine” for Jan.
1855. “Liverpool Mercury” 10th Nov. 1854.
ANoN.—Memorial to Congress from the American Geo-
graphical and Statistical Society for a Uniform Decimal
System, Feb. 1854.
Report of the Commissioner appointed to Superintend
the Construction of the New Parliamentary Standard of
Length and Weight. fol. 1854.
P. Q. R.—On Different Systems of Decimal Coinage.
“Journal of the Society of Arts,” 1854.
RICHARDson, S.—On Decimal Coinage, &c. “Liver-
pool Mercury,” lst and 20th Jan. 1854. And separate, 4to.
Diagrams to Illustrate Decimal Coinage, Weight,
and Measures. Large folio sheet. 16th Jan. 1854.
J. P. — Letter on Decimal Currency.
“Times,” 10th Jan. 1854.
Bow RING, John.—Speech at a Meeting of the Man-
chester Chamber of Commerce. “Times,” 14th Jan. 1854.
ANoN.—Letter to the “ Glasgow Citizen,” 1854. Re-
printed in “Liverpool Mercury,” 13th Jan. 1854.
Petition of the Citizens of the United States at present
in Paris to the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America for the Universal Adoption
of a Common System of Weights, Measures, and Money.
30th Jan. 1854.
ANON.—Notice of Borradaile’s Tables.
Jan. 1854.
LINGEN, R. W.-Order of Committee of Council of Edu-
cation, of 21st Jan. 1854. Reprinted in “Daily News,”
10th Feb. 1854.
ANoN.——Report of Meeting of Institute of Actuaries.
“Journal of Institute,” 1854. “Morning Post,” 31st Jan.
1854. “Athenaeum,” Jan. 1854.
- Review of Mr. Rathbone's Postcript in “Liverpool
Mercury,” 17th Feb. 1854. -
DAVIDson, ADAM.–Letter to Lord Aberdeen, dated
20th Feb. 1854. Abstract in “Morning Advertiser,” 24th
March 1854. Short Notice in “Athenaeum,” April, 1854.
MUNRO, ALEx-Letter to the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer. 1st March 1854.
ANON.—Letter to “Athenaeum,” 10th March 1854.
FACT.-Letter (lithographic) on the Paper on Decimal
Coinage, at the Institute of Actuaries. 4to. Jan. 1854.
A REForMER.—Decimal Coinage. In “Liverpool Mer-
cury,” 17th March 1854.
NEMO. —Letter on Mr. Rathbone's Plan.
Citizen,” 1st April 1854.
ANON.—Notice of Decimal Coinage in Sweden.
News,” 27th April 1854.
Notice of Pamphlet by One of the Million. “Liver-
pool Standard,” 9th May 1854.
Review of Pamphlet by One of the Million. “Liver-
pool Mercury,” 19th May 1854.
Leader on Mr. Rathbone’s Plan.
cury,” 19th May 1854.
GooD, S. A.—Decimal Notation of Money. In “Journal
of the Society of Arts,” 19th May 1856.
YATEs, JAMEs. On the Decimalization of Coins and
Accounts. “Journal of the Society of Arts,” 29th May
1854.
ANoN.—Notice of Thompson’s Decimal Numeration and
Decimal Coinage, by One of the Million. “Times” Money
Article, 21st April 1854.
(T. W. RATH Bon E). Article in reply to S, R,
“Liverpool Mercury,” 15th May 1854.
Money Article,
“ Times,” 16th
In “ Glasgow
“Daily
“Liverpool Mer-
G. C.—Letter in “ Glasgow Citizen,” 21st May and 5th
June 1854.
RATH Bon E, T. W.-Reply to G. C. In “ Glasgow Citi-
zen,” 27th May 1854, and 7th June 1854.
DECIMAL Association.—List of Signatures of Peers,
Members of Parliament, Merchants, and others, in favour
of the Adoption of a System of Decimal Coinage. 12th
June 1854.
— Report of Meeting at London Tavern, 12th June
1854. “Morning Advertiser,” 13th June; “Morning Post,”
lºth June; “Liverpool Mercury,” 11th June; “Morning
Chronicle,” 13th June 1854.
MINAsr, F. J.-Letter to “Liverpool Mercury,” 19th
June 1854.
M.–Observations on Meeting of 12th June.
Post,” 19th June 1854.
DECIMAL Association.—Address to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer; with List of Members of Parliament, &c.
who have given their Names as Members of the Associa-
“Morning
tion. fol. June 1854.
Account of Deputation to Mr. Cardwell on 19th
|; “Times,” 20th June 1854; “Spectator,” 21st June
54.
A Word with Mr. Gladstone.
21st June 1854.
Account of Deputation to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer on 19th July. “Daily News,” 20th July 1854.
J. A. F. (J. A. FRANKLIN ?)—On Metal for Small Coins.
“Journal of the Society of Arts,” 13th August 1854.
“A HALF CENT.”—Shall we adopt the Decimal System?
“ Daily News,” 29th August 1854.
PASLEY, SIR. C. W.-Improved System of Measures,
Weight, and Money. In “Journal of Society of Arts,” 8th
and 22nd September 1854.
ANON.—Notice of Laurie's Pamphlet.
September 1854.
R. (RICHARDsoN, S.?).—Decimal Coinage Tables; or
Helps to the Decimal System and Pence Table. Liverpool,
10th August 1854. On card.
ANoN. (RoRINsoN, J. W.)—Decimal Coinage (Pound
and Mil). 24th September 1855. One sheet 8vo.
J. P.-On the Price of Gold in Decimals of a Pound.
In “Times,” 21st September 1854.
R.— Is the Decimal System worth the Issue of a Silver
2: Coin, a Copper 13 Coin, and the Risk of losing a
Farthing by the Change? “Liverpool Mercury,” 25th
September 1854.
MILLER, W.-Letter to “Liverpool Mercury,” 20th
October 1854.
GRAY, J. E.-Reply to Mr. Miller, in the “Liverpool
Mercury,” 21st October. Further Reply, with Postscript
by W. T. Rathbone, 25th October 1854.
A MEMBER of THE BRITISH Association.—Reply
to Dr. Gray. “Liverpool Mercury,” 24th November 1854.
GRAY, J. E.-Reply to Mr. Franklin.
cury,” 10th November 1854.
MILLER, W.-Reply to Dr. Gray. “Liverpool Mercury,”
14th November 1854.
DELTA.—Reply to Dr. Gray.
10th November 1854.
ANoN.—On Decimal Coins and Measures. “Inquirer,”
October 1854. Copied in “Morning Chronicle,” 7th Octo-
ber 1854. -
Review of “Laurie's Decimal Coinage.”
pool Mercury,” 16th October 1854.
P. M. P. (F. MINAs.1).—On the Difficulties of Deci-
mals, in “Papers for the Schoolmasters.” No. XLV., No-
vember 1854.
In “Daily News,”
“Times,” 23rd
“Liverpool Mer-
“Liverpool Mercury,”
& & Liver-
SLATTER, R. D.—On Decimal Coinage.
Spectator,” 4th November 1854.
AN on.—Notice of Gray’s Comparative Merits of Pound
and Mil and Tenpenny and Cent Systems. “Liverpool
Mercury,” 14th November 1854.
A BAN KER.—On Decimal Currency.
cury,” 20th November 1854.
FRANKLIN, J. A.—Reply to Dr. Gray.
Mercury,” 21st November 1854.
PHILALETHES.–Decimal Coinage and Accounts. “Li-
verpool Mercury,” 24th November 1854, 7th December 1854,
and 23rd December 1854.
“Liverpool
“Liverpool Mer-
“Liverpool
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
361
De MoRGAN, AUG.—Summary of the Decimal Coinage
Question. “Liverpool Mercury,” 1st December 1854;
“Morning Advertiser,” 2nd December 1854.
GRAy, J. E.—On “Mercator's ’’ Plan. “Journal of
the Society of Arts in 1814,” 8th December 1854.
A BANK ER’s CLERK.—Letter in the “Liverpool Mer-
cury,” 19th December 1854.
Second Letter, 26th December 1854.
DELTA.—Reply to Philalethes. “Liverpool Mercury,”
19th December 1854.
ANoN.—Review of Rathbone's Comparative Statement.
In “Liverpool Mercury,” 19th December 1854.
DELTA.—Reply to Mr. Yates. “Liverpool Mercury,’
26th December 1854.
YATEs, J.-Decimal Coinage. In “Liverpool Mercury,’
16th December 1854.
5
3.
ANoN.—Review of Yates on the French System, &c.
“Inquirer,” 2nd December 1854.
AN OcTog ENARIAN.—On the Introduction of the Deci-
mal Coinage in France. “Liverpool Mercury,” 29th De-
cember 1854.
“OB's ERVER.”—Letter to the “Liverpool Mercury,”
23rd December 1854.
R.—Letter to “Liverpool Mercury,” 26th December
1854.
AN on.—Review of Decimal Association Proceedings and
Laurie’s Decimal Coinage. “Economist,” 1854.
ANoN. (T. C. HARINGTON).-First Steps towards an
Universal System of Decimal Coinage. London, 1855.
ANoN.—Remarks upon a Decimal System of Accounts
and the Coinage. 8vo. Glasgow, 1855.
(SLATER, R.) — Reasons against the Pound
being adopted as the Integer of a System of Decimal
Coinage. Reprinted from the “Times,” City Article,
May 3, 1855.
(R. SHAw). — Rationale of our present Subdivision
of the Pound Sterling, with Strictures on a Decimal Coin-
age. 8vo. London, 1855.
Annuaire pour l’An 1855.
Longitude. 12mo. Paris.
A NoN. (ARBUTHNOT, G.)—Observations on Mr. T. W.
Rathbone's Pamphlet on Decimal Coinage. Reprinted from
“Bowring’s Decimal System.” 1855.
BAN FIELD, T. C.—A Letter to Mr. W. Brown, M.P., on
the Advantages of his Proposed System of Decimal Coinage.
8vo. London, 1855.
BIs Hop, S. H.-Decimal Coinage Tables. London, 1855.
Publié par le Bureau de
Borro DAILE, H.—Plan for adapting the Currency of
India to a Decimal System of Accounts. London, 1855.
BROwn, W. —Answers to Fallacies. Balance of Trade
Exchanges, and Common Coins. London, 1855.
International Moneys. London, 1855.
CRAU for D, J.-Memorandum on the Currency of the
Straits Settlement. 4to. London, 1855.
DAVID so N, ADAM.—A Circular to Bankers and Mer-
chants, showing that the “Pound and Mil” Scheme is vir-
tually impracticable and dangerous; that the Farthing is
the true Basis; and that immediate Consideration and
Action are now necessary on the Part of all who would secure
the best System that can be devised. Edinburgh and
London, 1855.
Debate in House of Commons, June 12, 1855.
Sard.”
DE MoRGAN, A.—Reply to Statements in Favour of a
Tenpenny Unit. In the “Times,” City Article, of May 3.
London, 1855.
- Reply to Mr. Lowe’s Speech in the House of Com-
mons, June 12th, 1855. (Reprint of the Decimal Coinage
Debate, by the Decimal Coinage Association.)
DECIMAL Association.—Address, with Petitions and
Brief Explanations of Decimal System. March, 1855.
Address to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. 1855.
Fitch, J. G.-A Chapter on Decimal Money.
well and Fitch’s “Science of Arithmetic,” 1855.
FRANKLIN, J. A.—On the Expediency of at once Deci-
malising English Moneys and Weights. Paper read before
the Society of Arts, Feb. 14, 1855. “Journal of the
Society of Arts,” vol. III. p. 211.
- Decimal Money and Accounts as a Banker’s Ques-
Reprinted from the “Banker’s Circular,” May 12,
“Han-
In Corn-
tion.
| 855.
GQDDARD, S. A.—Four Letters on a Decimal-Currency
based upon the Crown. “Birmingham Journal,” May
and June, 1855.
Goop, S. A.-Principles of a Decimal Coinage. “Jour-
nal of the Society of Arts,” May, 1855.
Good, S. A.—Synopsis of the Chief Proposals for a
Complete Decimal Currency. Also a Proposal for a Deci-
mal Notation without altering the Present Coinage. Sug-
gested by the Parliamentary Discussion of June 12th, 1855.
Printed for private circulation. A card.
GRAy, J. E.-On the small Unit and the Comparative
Merits of the Three Principal Decimal Systems. London,
1855. From the “Spectator.”
G. H.-Letter, “Morning Advertiser,” 13th March, 1855.
HARE, J. Middleton, junr.— Letter to the Chancellor
of the Exchequer. London, 1855.
HoARE.-Decimal System for the Million. 1855.
Holla NP, J. S.-Letter in “Journal of the Society of
Arts,” 7th Sept. 1855.
HUNT.-“Merchant's Magazine,” New York, 1851–
1855.
IRWELL, E. B.-Letter.
March 1855.
JELLICoE.-An Examination of the Objections urged
against the Plan of Decimal Coinage proposed by the Royal
Commissioners and by the Select Committee of the House
of Commons. Paper read before the Institute of Actuaries,
26th March 1855. “Assurance Magazine” for July.
JEssop, W. H. R.—A Complete Decimal System of
Money and Measures. 12mo. 1855.
MANN, W. W.-Description Historique et Populaire du
Système Métrique et Décimale en France. 8vo. Paris,
1855.
MINAS1, F. J.-On the Basis of a Decimal System of
Money for the United Kingdom. Paper read before the
Society of Arts, 14th February 1855. “Journal of the
Society of Arts,” vol. III. p. 219.
Lecture on Decimal Coinage, delivered before the
Metropolitan Society of Schoolmasters, at Westminster,
21st April 1855. Printed in the “Journal of the Society of
Arts,”. Nos. 139, 140, and 141. Reprinted by permission,
with Mr. Croker's plan referred to by “Libra.” 8Ao.
“Liverpool Mercury,” 2nd
*
OLIPHANT, G. H. H.-Proposed System of Internationa
Decimal Coinage. London, 1855.
PAULSON, K. J. W.-Decimalism.
1855.
RATH Bon E, THEo. W. — Objections to Mr. Brown's
Scheme, and Proposed Substitution of a more Simple and
Practicable Plan. fol. May, 1855.
Letter addressed to the Honourable the Commons
of the United Kingdom, on the Discussion in the House,
12th June 1855, on Decimal Accounts and Coinage. “Re:
port of the British Association,” 1855, p. 184.
REID, HUGo.—On Decimal Coinage.
the Society of Arts, 14th February, 1855.
Society of Arts,” vol. III. p. 222.
Part I. London,
Paper read before
“Journal of the
SLATER, R.—An Enquiry into the Principles involved
in the Decimalization of the Weight, Measures, and Monies
of the United Kingdom. 8vo. London, 1855.
SIGMA.—Observations relative to the Possibility of having
an International Uniformity of Money. Reprinted from
the “Liverpool Mercury,” 8th June 1855.
STAINTON, J. J.-A Familiar Conversation upon Deci-
mal Coinage, written especially for the Lower Orders. Lon-
don, 1855.
TURNER, JAMES H.-The Penny considered as the
Foundation of a Decimal Currency. Cambridge, 1855.
TAYLER, S.S.-Letter in “Inquirer” Newspaper, 8th
September 1855.
WIN.ING, C.-A System of Decimal Coinage and Cur-
rency, without Fractions. 8vo. London, 1855.
WALFORD, C.-Decimal Coinage Familiarly Explained,
with Tables. London, 1855.
YouNG, PROFEsso R.—On the Decimal Coinage founded
on the Farthing. Belfast, 1855.
MACR Eszi.e.- Third and Fourth Report of the Standing
Committee on Public Accounts on Decimal Currency,
Weights, and Measures. Printed 12th April 1855.
Quebec.
No. 55.
List of
13ooks, &c.
Z
Z
362
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 55.
List of
Books, &c.
ANoN.—Loi sur les Poids et Mesures, suivie des Arrêts
Royals et des Instructions Ministériels qui en reglent
l’exécution. Bruxelle, 1855.
The Currency adapted to the Straits Settlements,
with Remarks on Act XVII. of 1855. Published under
the direction of a Committee. 8vo. Singapore, 1855.
Patterns of Victoria Florins in “Willis’s Current
Notes,” January 1855, called Decade, Centum, and Dime,
before Florin.
MINAs.I., F. J.-Letter to “Liverpool Mercury,” 2nd
February 1855.
FITCH, Josh UA.—On Decimal Coinage.
Record,” January, 1855, p. iii.
ANON.—Notice of Alexander’s Suggestions, &c.
donian Mercury,” 8th February 1855.
Swedish Decimal Coinage.
26th February 1855.
Notice of approaching Discussion at Society of
Arts. “Daily News,” 14th February 1855.
FRANKLIN, J. A.—On the Expediency of at once Deci-
malizing English Money and Weights, and Discussion
thereon. “Journal of the Society of Arts,” 16th February
1855.
MINAs.1, F. J.-On the Basis of a Decimal System of
Money for the United Kingdom. “Journal of the Society
of Arts,” léth Feb. 1855.
ANoN.—On German Conference.
Feb. 1855.
MR. HEADLAM’s Question on Coinage of Florins.
“Times,” and “Daily News,” 20th Feb. 1855.
A BAN KER (S. SHARPE).--The Inconveniences of Florins
(with Observations of Editor). “Times,” Money Article,
22nd February 1855.
MUNRo, A.—Letter to Chancellor of the Exchequer on
a Decimal Coinage. Second edition. 1st March 1855.
REID, Hugo.—The Discussion on the Decimal System.
“Journal of the Society of Arts,” 2nd March 1855.
VALE, BENJ.—Reply to Mr. Minasi. “Liverpool Mer-
cury,” of 2nd February and 2nd March 1855.
YATEs, JAMEs.—Reply to “Delta,” “Liverpool Mer-
cury,” 2nd March 1855. -
MINAs.I., F. J.-Reply to Discussion on Decimal System.
“Journal of Society of Arts,” 2nd March 1855.
TURNER, J. H.—Licensed Victuallers and Decimal Coin-
age. In “Morning Advertiser,” 3rd March 1855.
ANoN.—The American and French System. “ Liverpool
Mercury,” 5th March 1855. -
RATH Bon E, T. W.—The Discussion on Decimal Coinage
(at Society of Arts). “Journal of Society of Arts,” 8th
March 1855.
ANoN.—Decimal Coinage of Sweden.
10th March 1855.
G. H.-" Morning Advertiser,” 13th March 1855.
Licensed Victuallers and Decimal Coinage.
RATH Bo N.E., T. W.-Observations on Discussion on
Decimal System. “Journal of Society of Arts,” 16th
March 1855.
TRIPP, J. S.—The Decimalizing of our Currency and
Accounts. “Journal of Society of Arts,” 16th March
1855.
REID, HUGo.—Comparative View of the different Sys-
tems of Decimal Coinage. “Journal of Society of Arts,”
23rd March 1855.
DECIMAL Association.—Circular of Decimal Associa-
tion of the 29th March 1855, with Forms for Petitions.
Brief Explanations of the Simplicity and Importance
of a Decimal System of Coins and Accounts. 1855.
MILLER, W.-Decimalization of Coins and Accounts.
“Journal of Society of Arts,” 20th March 1855.
GRAy, Joh N EDwARD.—On the “Times” Recommenda-
tion of the French System in 1816. “Journal of Society
of Arts,” 30th March 1856.
DECIMAL Association.—Notice of Deputation of, to
the Chancellor of the Exchequer. “Times,” 14th April 1855.
“ Educational
“Cale-
In “ Daily News,”
“Daily News,” 17th
“Daily News,”
ANoN. – “The Pound and Mil Scheme of Decimal
Coinage.” “Liverpool Mercury,” 17th April 1855.
DEcIMAL Association.—Notice of Deputation of, to
Board of Trade. “Times,” 19th April 1855.
TAylor, HENRY.—The Decimal System of Coinage.
“Journal of Society of Arts,” 27th April 1855.
ANON-Decimal Coinage Question “Liverpool Mer-
cury,” 27th April 1855.
Review of “ Hare’s Decimal Coinage Questions.”
“Liverpool Mercury,” 27th April 1855.
(R. SLATER). Reason against the Pound as
the Integer. Money Article, “Times,” 3rd May 1855;
“Liverpool Mercury,” 7th August 1856. Reprinted in 8vo.
by the Decimal Association, with Mr. De Morgan’s Obser-
vations.
BROWN, W.—Notice of Motion in House of Commons,
May 3, 1855.
A BANKER (S. SHARPE).--Objection to Decimal of
Pound. “Times,” 3rd May 1855.
MILLER, W.-Reply to Banker.
l:855.
ANON.—The Decimal Coinage Question.
Mercury,” 8th May 1855.
DE MORGAN, AUG.—Reply to Statement in Favour of a
Tenpenny Unit. Issued by Decimal Association, 5th May
1855.
ANON. (Owen, W.)—Leader on the Decimal Question.
“Morning Advertiser,” 7th, 8th, and 10th May 1855.
FRANKLIN, J. A.—Decimal Money and Accounts as a
Banker's Question. From the “Banker’s Circular,” 12th
May 1855. See also “The Sun,” 12th May 1855.
ANON.—Review of Pamphlets on Decimal Coinage. In
“Cambridge Independent,” 12th May 1855.
YATES, JAMES.–Letter (inclosing one of M. M. Cheva-
lier's) to “Liverpool Mercury,” 25th May 1855.
CLERICUs on Decimal Coinage.—In “Liverpool Mer-
cury,” 25th May 1855. Printed separately.
DENARIUS (F. J. MINAs.1).-Tenpence One Shilling.
In “Finsbury Chronicle,” 26th May 1855.
SIGMA.-Decimal Coinage and Exchanges. “Liverpool
Mercury,” 8th June 1855.
DENARIUS (F. J. MINASI)-Twenty-four Tenpennies
One Pound. “Finsbury Chronicle,” 9th June 1855.
ANON.—Review of Turner’s “The Penny Considered as
the Foundation, &c.” “Liverpool Mercury,” 12th June
1855.
“Times,” 7th May
“Liverpool
“Liverpool Mer-
Leader on Decimal Coinage.
cury,” 12th June 1855.
Report of Debate on Mr. Brown’s Motion, 12th
June. “Times,” 13th June. “Morning Advertiser,”
13th June. “Daily News,” 13th June. “Galignani’s
Messenger,” 15th June 1855.
SMITH, J. B. — Speech in House of Commons, 17th
June. Reprinted separately, Manchester. June 1855.
ANON.—Leader on Debate of the 12th of June (in favour
of the Penny). “Times,” 15th June 1855.
WRAGSBURY, H.-Protesting against the Issue of Cents.
“Daily News,” 14th June 1855.
ANON.—Observations on the Debate of the 12th of June.
“Liverpool Mercury,” 16th June 1855.
Decimal Coinage; a Practical Question. “Econo-
mist,” 16th June 1855.
Notice of Deputation to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, 26th June. “Times,” 27th June 1855.
G. (J. E. GRAY).—Observations on the Discussion of the
12th June. “Liverpool Mercury,” 29th June 1855.
GRITTON, Jos EPH.-Letter in favour of the Tenpence.
In “Times,” 4th July 1855, and “ Economist,” 4th July
1855.
H. (HARINGTON). — Letter on Decimal Coinage. In
“Spectator,” 14th July 1855.
A BANKER’s CLERK.—Letter respecting the Commis-
sioners appointed. In Money Article, “Times,” 26th July
1855.
D. M. G. (AUG. DE MoRGAN).-Letter on Decimal
Coinage. In “Globe,” 16th July 1855.
SMITH, J. B.-Question respecting the Commission,
and Reply. “Times,” and “Morning Chronicle,” 28th
July 1855.
ANON.—Leader on Mr. Smith’s Question respecting the
Commission. “Morning Chronicle,” 28th July 1855.
Leaders on Decimal Coinage. “Globe,” 9th and
12th July 1855.
X. (T. W. RATHBon E). — Letter on Decimal Coinage.
“Globe,” 14th July 1855.
DUNDAs, G.--When the Commission is to be appointed;
and Reply. “Times,” 21st July 1855.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
363
CoMMIssion ERs. – Nomination of Commissioners ar-
ranged. “Times,” 10th July. Copied “Carlisle Journal,”
17th July. “Galignani's Chronicle,” 20th July 1855.
The Commissioners objected to. Article in “Liver-
pool Albion,” 23rd July 1845.
Mr. HAMILTON.—Inquiring the Names of Commis-
sioners; and Reply. “Times,” 23rd and 24th July 1855.
RICARDo, MR.—Question respecting Duties of Commis-
sioners; and Lord Palmerston’s Reply. “Times,” 12th July
1855. *.
ANoN.—The Decimal Question again; approach to a
Settlement. “Liverpool Albion,” 15th July 1855.
Leader objecting to any Change.—“ Daily News,”
10th July 1855. tº s * * * * *
The Decimal System, proposing to divide the Shilling
into Cents. In the “Irish Economist,” 24th July 1855.
G. N. W.-Decimal Coinage. Change in our Monetary
System. Three Letters. “Worcester Journal,” 27th and
28th July 1855.
AN on.—Decimal System of Weights and Measures.
“Worcester Journal,” 18th and 20th August 1855.
SMITH, J. B.-Question to the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer respecting the Commission, and Debate thereon.
* Times,” and “Daily News,” 28th July 1855.
ANON.—Observations on the Commission. Money Article
in “Times,” 30th July 1855.
MINAs.1 and GRAY, &c.—List of Books and Pamphlets
on the Decimal Coinage Question. In “Journal of Society
of Arts,” 20th August 1855.
MUNRo, ALEx.—On Decimal Weights and Measures.
In “ Glasgow Herald,” 6th August 1855.
ANoN. (J. E. GRAY).—Review of Paulson’s Decima-
lism. In “Liverpool Mercury,” 28th August 1855.
DECIMAL Money.—Letter on Decimal Money. “Morn-
ing Advertiser,” 23rd and 24th August 1855.
PENNY (J. E. GRAY).—The Decimal Money Question.
“Morning Advertiser,” 29th August 1855.
ANoN.—The Penny and the Pound.
18th August 1855.
(W. Owen)—Leader in Favour of the Penny Sys-
tem of Decimal Coinage. “Morning Advertiser,” 22nd
August 1855.
G. E. J. (J. E. GRAY).—The Introduction of the Decimal
Coinage in America. “Liverpool Mercury,” 14th August
1855.
G. (J. E. GRAY).—Reply to H. on Decimal Coinage.
In “Spectator,” 1st September 1855.
SUBscRIBER IN BRITISH GUIANA-Introduction of
a Decimal Coinage simplified. In “Economist,” 25th
August 1855.
ANON.—Notice of Pamphlet. Debate on the Decimal
Coinage Question. “Economist,” 25th August 1855.
Notice of Decimal Coinage, by Adam Davidson.
In “Economist,” 25th August 1855.
GRAY, J. E. — An Erroneous Statement of Mr. Rath-
bone’s Letter in List of Books, &c. In “Journal of Society
of Arts,” 28th September 1855. -
LEv1, LEONE.-Letter on International Statistical Con-
gress at Paris. In “Journal of Society of Arts,” 28th Sep-
tember 1855.
Association INTERNATIONALE.-Notice of, in “Moni-
teur Universel,” 25th September 1855, and 18th November
1855.
ANoN. —— Letter on Decimal Accounts, Coinage, and
Weights. In “Spectator,” 13th October 1855.
CoMMIssion ERs. – Appointment of Decimal Coinage
Commission. “London Gazette,” 26th October; “Times,”
27th October ; “Journal of Society of Arts,” 2nd November
1855.
INTERNATIONAL Association.——Report of Meeting,
25th September 1855. In “Patriot,” 19th November 1855;
“The British Banner,” 20th November 1855.
RATH Bon E, T. W.-Reply to H. In “Spectator,” 8th
September 1855.
G. E. J. (J. E. GRAY).—Observations on the Introduc-
tion of the Decimal System on the Continent. “Liverpool
Mercury,” 7th September 1855.
Holla ND, JoHN SOMIs (“As LITs”).-Letter recom-
mending the Guinea Unit. “Journal of Society of Arts,”
7th September 1855.
“The Inquirer,”
H. (HARINGTON). — Letter on Decimal Coinage. In
“Spectator,” 29th September 1855.
LoNDON MERCHANT (R. SLATER). — Answer to Mr.
De Morgan’s Reply to “Statement in Favour of a Ten-
penny Unit.” In “Journal of Society of Arts,” 21st Sep-
tember 1855. - -
ANON.—Notice of Establishment of International Asso-
ciation in Paris. “Daily News,” September 1855.
Notice that Snow and Mellon kept their Accounts
in Decimals in 1672. In “Morning Advertiser,” 4th Oc-
tober 1855.
BALLY, Fálix,−Association Internationale.
Pays,” 17th October 1855.
W. S.-The Decimal Coinage, recommending a Four-
Shilling Dollar. In “Daily Telegraph,” llth October
1855. .
ANON.—Leader recommending American Dollar as the
Unit. “Daily Telegraph,” 11th October 1855.
A. C. — Letter in “Daily Telegraph * recommending
American Currency. “Daily Telegraph,” 4th October
1855.
RATHBONE, T. W.-- Reply to Mr. Good.
of the Society of Arts,” 26th October 1855.
BENARD, T. N.- Les Monnaies Décimales. “Le Siècle,”
20th October 1855.
RATHBONE, T. W.-Reply to Dr. Gray respecting letter
in “Athenaeum ” of 1853. “Journal of the Society of
Arts,” 12th October 1855.
BENARD, T. N.—Unité de Titre et d’Etalon Monétaire.
“Le Siècle,” 24th October 1855.
MUNRo, ALEx-On Decimal Weights and Measures.
Third edition. In “Glasgow Herald,” I7th October 1855;
and printed separately as Letter to Council of the Insti.
tute of Civil Engineers. London, 13th October 1855.
H. (HARINGTON).-Letter on Decimal Money of Account,
Qoinage Proper, and Standards of the Thousand Penny
Unit. “Spectator,” 20th October 1855.
BANCKs, C. P.-Letter showing how the Pound bears the
ºtion. stated by H. In “Spectator,” 20th October
55.
SYMONS, J.-A Word on Behalf of the Penny. “Spec-
tator,” 20th October 1855.
A. D. M.–Reply to H.
1855.
SHIRREFs, W.-Decimal Coinage and Accounts. “ Spec-
tator,” 27th October 1855.
Gyrºpon, W-Letter on Decimal Coinage, and reprint
of Letter in “ Economist,” 11th September 1852. In
“Journal of the Society of Arts,” 19th October 1855.
GooD. S. A.—Is a Complete Decimal System Practicable
in this Country? “Journal of the Society of Arts,” 19th
October 1855.
MINAs, F. J.-Number of Figures requisite to express
different Decimal Systems of Coins. In “Journal of the
Society of Arts,” October 1855. Printed separately.
DE MoRGAN, AUG.—Reply to “London Merchant.” In
“Journal of the Society of Arts,” 5th October 1855.
In “Le
In “Journal
In “Spectator,” 27th October
GooD, S. A.—The Penny in a Decimal System. “Jour-
nal of the Society of Arts,” 5th October 1855.
Decimal Coinage; the Tenpenny System. “Journal
of the Society of Arts,” 2nd November 1855.
GRAY, J. E.-Reply to Mr. T. W. Rathbone, and reprint
of Mr. Rathbone's Letter to “Athenaeum,” 3rd September
1853. “Journal of the Society of Arts,” 9th November
1855.
RATHBONE, T. W.-Reply to Mr. S. A. Good. In
“Journal of the Society of Arts,” 16th November 1855.
ANON. (HARE, J. M.)—The Decimal Coinage Question.
“The Patriot,” 21st November 1855.
Booth, J.-Address of the Council of the Society of
§º In “Journal of the Society of Arts,” 23rd Novem-
er 1855.
ANON. (OWEN, W.)—Leader on Advantages of a Com-
plete and International System. In “Morning Advertiser,”
4th December 1855.
GRAY, J. E.-The Decimal System in France. “ Spec-
tator,” 8th December 1855.
No. 55.
List of
Books, &c.
Z z 2
364
APPENDIX TO REPORT OF THE
No. 55.
List of
Books, &c.
W. H. R. J. — Money and Measures of England and the
United States. “Morning Advertiser,” 11th December
1855.
GRAY, John Edward.—Decimal Coinage in Sweden,
with Official Ordinances. In “Spectator,” 15th December
1855.
ANoN. — Improved Weights, Measures, and Monies.
“ Economist,” 15th December 1855.
ANoN. Trade and Currency of China. “Economist,”
15th December 1855.
CLARKE, HYDE.—On Decimal Coinage. “Journal of the
Society of Arts,” 21st December 1855.
FRANKLIN, J. A.—Relations between the German and
English Monetary Systems. “Journal of the Society of
Arts,” 21st December 1855. Reprinted separately with alter-
ations and additions.
Good, S.A.—Observations on Tract lately issued by the
Liverpool Financial Reform Association. “Liverpool Mer-
cury,” 31st December 1855.
Astos, H.-The Non-decimal Coinage, Weight, and
Measures of England, contrasted with the Decimal Coin-
age of the United States and the Decimal Weight and
Measure of France; with the Recommendation of the
Victoria and the Metre. 8vo. London, 1856.
ADAM, GeoRGE URE. — Indian Tables of Exchanges,
arranged Decimally. Calcutta. 8vo. 1856.
DE MoRGAN, Aug.—Report of a Lecture on the ap-
proaching Simplification of the Coinage, and of a Discus-
sion. London, 1856. Svo. In the “Proceedings of the
Decimal Association.”
Notes on the State of the Decimal Coinage Ques-
12mo, 1856. From the “ British Almanack,” 1856.
tion.
CLAYTON, John.-Observations on the Proposed Deci-
mal Coinage. 8vo. 1856.
GRAY, SAMUEL Oct Avus.--Table of Monetary Units
and their Decimal Divisors. Table of Monetary Units,
their Divisors and their Names, as expressed in Accounts.
“Journal of the Society of Arts,” 9th May 1856, p. 425.
GRUB B.—On Decimal Systems. “Journal of the Royal
Dublin Society,” April 1856.
MEEKINs, T. C. Mosso M.–Decimal Coinage, should
it be International? 8vo. London, 1856.
PASLEY, SIR CHARLEs W.-Plan for Simplifying and Im-
proving the Measures, Weights, and Money of this Country
without materially altering the Present Standards. “Journal
of the Institute of Actuaries,” xxv. Oct. 1856.
SHIRREFF, W.-Decimal without Displacing the Penny.
London, 1856.
SLATER, R., junr. — Observations on Professsor De
Morgan's Lecture of the 23rd of July. From “Journal
of the Society of Arts,” 20th August 1856.
SLATTER, R. Dov ER.—The Decimal System as a Whole.
London, 1856. -
TAYLoR, John.—Gold Decimal Money with the Use of
our Present Coin. 8vo. London, 1856.
TENNANT, CHARLEs.--Suggestions for the Renewal of
the Bank Charter, and for a Decimal Coinage. 8vo. 1856.
YATEs, JAMEs.-Narrative of the Origin and Formation
of the International Association for obtaining a Uniform
Decimal System of Measures, Weights, and Coins. 8vo.
London, 1856.
ANON. (Fitch, J. G.)-Decimal Coinage. “Educational
Record,” 1st January 1856. From “Science of Arithmetic.”
Decimal Weights and Measures.
GRAy, J. E.-Reply to Mr. J. A. Franklin. Relations,
&c. “Journal of the Society of Arts,” 4th January 1856.
The United States System of Decimal Coinage. In
“Spectator,” 19th January 1856.
SMITH, J. B.-Address to the King of Sardinia from
International Association, and Reply. “The Empire,” 9th
February 1856. 22nd January 1856.
A. D. M.–Observation on Dr. Gray’s Letter on American
Coinage. In “Spectator,” 26th January 1856.
Good, S. A.—Synopsis of the Chief Proposals for a
Complete Decimal Coinage, 31st January 1856. On a card.
Asos. (Joses, W. ARTHUR).-The Decimal System of
Weights, Measures, and Moneys. In “Taunton Courier,”
January 1856, Reprinted in 12mo, Taunton, 1856,
ANON. (Jones, W. ARTHUR)—Lecture on the Difficul-
ties and Disadvantages of our present System of Weights,
Measures, and Coins, contrasted with the Simplicity and
Superiority of the Decimal System. Taunton, 13th Fe-
bruary 1856.
BROWN, W.-Introductory Remarks on Decimal Coins,
Weights, and Measures, 4th February 1856. 8vo. Single
leaf.
MERRIFIELD, C. W. — Decimal System of Money.
“Journal of the Society of Arts,” 8th February 1856.
FRANKLIN, J. A.—Relation of the Kilogramme, &c. to
English Standards. “Journal of the Society of Arts,” 15th
February 1856.
GRAY, J. E.-On Decimal Coins of Sierra Leone Com-
pany of 1791. “Journal of the Society of Arts,” 15th Fe-
bruary 1856.
ANON. (W. Owen). — On International and Decimal
Coinage. “Morning Advertiser,” 14th February 1856.
Notice of Appointment of Secretary to the Com-
mission; Journal of the Society of Arts,” 15th Fe-
bruary 1856.
WARNER, MR.—Inquiry when the Resolution of the
House of Commons was to be carried out, with the
Chancellor of the Exchequer’s Reply. “Times,” 16th Fe-
bruary 1856.
GooD, S. A. Reply to M. Macqueen's Tract. “Liver-
pool Mercury,” 15th February 1856.
MELLOR, JAMEs.-On Decimal Tables in School Books.
“Liverpool Mercury,” 15th February 1856.
ANON.—Review of Mr. Yates' Narrative, &c. “Athe-
naeum,” 16th February 1856.
Review of Tate’s “The New Coinage,” &c. “Athe-
naeum,” 23rd February 1856.
GRAY, Jon N EDwARD. Irish Decimal Coins. In
“Journal of Society of Arts,” 29th February 1856. Re-
printed in Evidence.
H. (HARINGTON, T. C.)—Decimal Coins and Accounts.
“Spectator,” 20th February 1856.
MA cauBEN, C. E.-Reply to Mr. Good.
Mercury,” 29th February 1856.
TRAVERs, J. J. (of Decimal Association).--Circular to
Country Dealers asking for Witnesses. 7th March 1856.
MACQUEEN, C. E. (Liverpool Financial Association). The
Advantages of a Complete System of Money, Weights, and
Measures. In “Liverpool Mercury,” 10th March 1856.
Printed separately.
TRAVERs, J. J.--Circular to the Grocery Trade on De-
cimal Coinage. 15th March 1856.
ANON.—Imperial Decree, withdrawing liards, sous, &c.
from Circulation. “Moniteur,” March, and “Times” and
“Daily News,” 18th March 1856.
MINASI, F. J.-On Table in Wingate's
“Journal of Society of Arts,” 21st March 1856.
MERCATOR (J. E. GRAY). On Decimal and International
Coinage. “Economist,” 22nd March 1856.
DECIMAL Association.—Circular and Form of Peti-
tion. 27th March 1856.
Good, S.A.-Decimal Coinage; Penny System. “Journal
of Society of Arts,” 26th ? March 1856.
BENNETT, John.-Women and Watchwork. “Times,”
28th March 1856. Printed separate.
ANON. (MINAS1, F. J.)—Decimal Money. In “Leisure
Hour,” April, 1856.
ANON: Discussion on the Dollar Currency in China.
“Times,” 3rd April 1856.
SMITH, V-Reply to Mr. Gregson respecting Abolition
of the Dollar Currency in Singapore. “Times,” 5th
April 1856.
ANON.—Decimal System in Sweden.
28th April 1856.
ALBEMARLE, EARL of.-Petition in Favour of Retention
of the Dollar Currency in Singapore. “Times,” 22nd
April 1856.
ANON.—Decimal Coinage.
1856.
Good, S.A. – Decimal System; Weight of Coins.
“Journal of Society of Arts,” IGth May 1856.
ANON. (T. C. M. MEEKING).-Review of Narrative of
Origin. “Morning Herald,” 17th May 1856.
“Liverpool
Arithmetic.
“Daily News,”
“The Atlas,” 26th April
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION.
365
~,
PHILALETHEs. – International and Decimal Money,
Weights, and Measures. In “Liverpool Mercury,” 20th
May 1856.
DEcIMAL Association. — List of Council; Circular
Forms of Petition, and Brief Explanation. Dated 28th
May 1856, 4to.
MEEKINs, T. C. Mosso M.–Decimal and International
Coinage, Weights, and Measures. “The Empire,” 31st May
1856; “ Glasgow Herald,” 18th June 1856; “Glasgow
Courier,” 21st June 1856; “Hampshire Independent,” 14th
June 1856.
ANoN. (AUG. DE MoRGAN). — State of the Decimal
Coinage Question. “Athenaeum,” 30th May 1856.
(DE MongAN ?).-On the Necessity of Issuing Half
Shillings. “Athenaeum,” 7th June 1856.
A. S.—Coinage, a National Memento of Peace. “Hamp-
shire Independent,” 14th and 2Sth June 1856.
SAIEE, ALFRED.—Plan for Introducing Decimal Coins
into our Monetary System. “Journal of Society of Arts,”
13th June 1856. Reprinted separately in 4to.
ANON.—Notice of Mr. Clayton’s Pamphlet.
Article “Times,” 19th June 1856.
PHILALETues.—Reply to State of Decimal Coinage
Question, with Observations by the Editor. “Athenaeum,”
21st June 1856.
YATEs, JAMEs.--A Uniform System of Weights, Mea-
sures, and Coins. “Hampshire Independent,” 21st June
1856.
— “Mercator,” Author of the Pound and Mil Scheme.
“Notes and Queries,” 21st June 1856.
TAUNToN, EDMUND.—The Goldmongers are making
Catspaws of the Lovers of Decimals to Increase their Gigan-
tic Plunder of our Nation by Robbing our Silver also. 24th
June 1856. A Broadside.
INTERNATIONAL Association.—Report of Meeting at
Society of Arts. “Hampshire Independent,” 28th June
1856.
ANoN. (DE MoRGAN).-Decimal Money, or Tenpence
for a Shilling. “Family Herald,” June 1856, p. 828.
The Approaching Simplification of the Coinage.
“The Metropolitan,” 5th July 1856.
(AUG. DE MoRGAN).--Common Coinage in Europe
not Practicable. “Athenaeum,” 12th July 1856.
MEEKINs, T. C. M.–Decimal Coinage. “Morning
Herald,” 7th July 1856. “Hampshire Independent,” 26th
July 1856.
ANoN.—On the Advantages of Uniformity in Weight,
Measures, and Coins throughout the World. “Athenaeum,”
12th July 1856.
HAMILTON, MIR.—Inquiry when Report would be Pre-
sented; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s Reply.
“Times,” and “Daily News,” 18th July 1856.
CITY BANKERs.-The Resolution of the, deciding that
any Legislative Alteration in the Coinage would be inex-
pedient. “Times,” 18th July, “Daily News,” and “Spec-
tator,” 19th July 1856.
Money
DE MoRGAN, AUG.—Lecture at Society of Arts, 16th
July. “Times,” 18th July; “Daily News,” 19th July;
“Journal of Society of Arts,” 25th July; “Athenaeum,”
26th July 1856. These Reports are very different.
Bowes, ARTHUR.—Ingenious System of Decimal Coin-
age. “Times,” 29th July, and “Globe,” 29th July ;
ge. -> Yº...? Y }
“Litterarium,” 6th August 1856.
ANON. (AUG. DE MORGAN).-Observations on Resolution
of City Bankers. “Athenaeum,” 2nd August 1856.
FRANKLIN, J. A.—Silver Currency of Germany. “Times,”
31st July 1856.
ANON. (T. C. M. MEEKINs).-Notice of Mr. Yates’ Re-
union of the International Decimal Association at Highgate.
“Morning Advertiser,” July 1856, &c., &c.
DE MoRGAN, AUG.—Reply to Mr. Yates’ Pound and
Mil Scheme. “Notes and Queries,” 9th August 1856.
ANON. (AUG. DE Morg AN).--Observations on “Mer-
cator’s” and Mr. Bowes’ Plans. “Athenaeum,” 9th Aug.
1856.
SLATER, R., junr. — Reply to Mr. De Morgan at
Society of Arts. “Journal of the Society of Arts,” 29th
August 1856.
ANoN. (YATEs, JAMEs).—Illustrations of the Metrical
System of Measures, Weights, and Coins. Report in “Athe-
naeum,” 31st August 1856.
Copy of the humble Petition of the Merchants, &c.
of City of London, 1856. fol.
Decimal Coinage Question.
October 1856.
HARVEY, F.—Russian Currency and Finland Posting.
“Daily News,” 20th November 1856.
ANON.—The Petition of the Merchants and other Inha-
bitants of Singapore to the Commons of Great Britain
and Ireland, 1856. Singapore.
ANoN.—Notice of Publication of Professor De Morgan’s
Lecture. “Athenaeum,” 1st November 1856.
(AUG. DE MoRGAN). — Division of Concretes.
Athenaeum,” 22nd November 1856.
GoDDARD, S. A.—Letters on the Monetary System.
8vo. London, 1857.
“Daily News,” 1st
ANoN. (T. C. M. MEEKINs).-On International and De-
cimal Monies. “Morning Herald,” 12th January 1857.
Good, S. A.—On Decimal Coinage. “Pembrokeshire
Herald,” January 1857.
BEAMISH, MIR.—Question to the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer relative to Report of Commissioners. “Times,”
27th February 1857.
YATEs, JAMEs.-First Report of the Council of the
International Association, 26th February 1857. 8vo.
ANoN. (AUG. DE MoRGAN).-On the Loss of the Three-
fold Division. “Athenaeum,” 7th March 1857.
H. B.-Reply to Observations on the Loss of the Threefold
Division. “Athenaeum,” 14th March 1857.
No. 55.
List of
IBooks, &c.
Q U E S T I O N S
COMMUNICATED BY
LORD OVERSTONE
TO THE
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSIONERS,
WITH
A N S W E R. S.
$3tegented to floti) #}ougeg of jarliament tip (Tommand of #3 ºr ſºlaje.gtp.
~~~~
L O N D O N :
PRINTED BY GEORGE EDWARD EYFE AND WILLIAM SPOTTISWOODE,
PRINTERS TO THE QUEEN'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.
FOR HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE.

1857,
CONTENTS.
REPORT º - - • , - º e º rº,
QUESTIONS COMMUNICATED BY LORD OVERSTONE wº tº º 4.
ANSWERS BY-
AIRY, G. B., Astronomer Royal º G- t- tº tºº - 17
ARBUTHNOT, G. e- º - - tº- º - 20
BENNETT, J. J. sº tº tº- - - -0 º - 21
CHISHOLM, H.W. º º - gº tº- º - 27
DE MORGAN, Professor º - tº- º * - - 30
FRANKLIN, J. A. --> - -> - º tº- sº - 61
GODDARD, S. A. º - -> wº -g - - - 70
GRAY, Dr. J. E. wº tº tº - tº •º - 80
HEMMING, G. W. ºp * * sº wº tº sº - 85
HERSCHEL, Sir J. F. W. º - º --> º - - 94
M“CULLOCH, J. R. - -> º tº- - gº - 120
MILLER, Professor W. H. tº º º gº tº - * > - 120
MILLER, W. - tº tº- * º - º ... 125
OUVRy, Rev. P. T. º g- <-> - - - - - 133
PATERSON, JOHN, Albany, U.S. tº --> - - tºº - 139
PEACock, Very Rev. GEO., Dean of Ely - -> º - - 142
SLATER, ROBERT tº- -> - º - º - - 145
SLATER, ROBERT, Jun. - - -> tº - - - 149
SMITH, J. B., M.P. º - - sº - º - 153
SNOWDEN, JAMEs Ross, Director of the Mint of the United States tº- tºº - 155
YATES, JAMES cº º - - º - dº - 173
HAMILTON, Sir W. R., Draft of a Bill gº {º tº- º - 181
PAGE, JULIUS, on Foreign Exchanges - - º - * = - 183
R EP o RT.
TO THE QUEEN’s MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.
WE, Your Majesty's Commissioners for considering how far it may be
practicable and advisable to introduce the principle of Decimal Coinage into
the Coinage of the United Kingdom, humbly beg to submit to Your Majesty
the following Statement:-
In our First and preliminary Report we stated that a series of questions
had been laid before us, prepared by one of our number, Lord Overstone,
described by their author as being drawn up with a view of bringing under
distinct notice and examination some of the advantages of the present system
of coinage, and some of the principal difficulties and objections which have
been suggested with respect to the introduction of a system of Decimal Coinage.
We further stated, that we did not consider that it would be expedient that
the Commission should express, or that any grounds should be given to infer, an
opinion on the subject of that paper, and that, therefore, we felt it would be
open to misconception if it were made part of our Appendix, but that we had
directed it to be printed as a separate document communicated to the Commis-
sion by its framer, and humbly submitted to Your Majesty.
Since the publication of that Report, a number of papers of great value, some
in the form of answers to the questions drawn up by Lord Overstone, and
others in the form of dissertations on points suggested by those questions, have
been communicated to us.
In pursuance of the course adopted by us with regard to the questions them-
selves, and with the view of further promoting the purpose for which the
questions, as stated by the framer of them, had been drawn up, namely, the
thorough and effectual investigation of the validity or invalidity of the argu-
ments submitted by the opponents of the proposed change, we have directed
these answers, and other papers so communicated to us, to be printed, and we
now humbly submit them for Your Majesty's gracious consideration.
2. Tº
MONTEAGLE. ( S
)
/
L.S.
\,...”
OWERSTONE.
J. G. HUBBARD. L.S
º
A 2
4. g DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
QUESTIONS
Lord Overstone. Drawn up with the view of bringing under distinct Notice and Examination some of the
Advantages of our present System of Coinage, and some of the principal Objections
and Difficulties which have been suggested with respect to the proposed introduction
of the Decimal Principle.
They are to be understood as intended to promote a thorough and effectual investiga-
tion of the validity or invalidity of the arguments submitted by the opponents
of the proposed change ; and they are not to be taken as intimating any conclusive
opinion on the points referred to.
“The best opportunity is thus (by written memoranda), afforded for a mature consideration of statements
“ made and of arguments adduced in support of (or in opposition to) measures proposed for consideration, and
“ the most effectual precaution taken against misconstruction and hasty inconsiderate decision.”—
Peel Memoirs, vol. II. p. 99.
I.
1. Do you think any change in our present system of Coins desirable %
2. On what grounds does your objection to our present system of Coins rest ?
3. Do you consider them as defective or inconvenient for any of the purposes of Retail
transactions, i.e. for paying or receiving? Or is your objection restricted to the
inconvenience of our present Coinage for the purposes of Account keeping and
Calculation?
4. What do you consider to be the primary purpose of Coins ? Do you consider them
as fractional subdivisions of the Integer created for the purpose of adjusting Retail
payments 2 or do you consider their primary character to be that of Instruments
the purpose of which is to facilitate Accounts and Calculation ?
5. If one of those purposes must to some extent be sacrificed or made subordinate to
the other, which do you think is entitled to the priority in our estimation ?
6. Is not the Coinage chiefly concerned in the process of buying and selling by Retail?
and must not the question of the merit or demerit of any system of Coinage be
decided by its fitness or unfitness for adjusting with readiness and simplicity the
multiplied variety of small payments 2 Are you aware of any complaint against
our present system of Coins in this respect 2
Is not the use of the Coimage, that is, the fitness of the Coins to perform their proper
purpose of facilitating the division and distribution of Commodities in the Retail
markets, and adjusting the small payments which arise, the consideration of
primary importance, rather than the improvement of a system of Account keeping,
by which the convenience of the affluent and educated classes, of those who keep
large and extensive accounts, may be principally promoted ?
II.
7. Do you recommend the introduction of the Decimal principle into our Coinage 7
8. Is it not impossible under the Decimal system to break the Integer into as many
clear fractional parts as we now obtain under our present system of Coins ? Do
you not consider that this is an objection to the Decimal system :
9. In an old but very remarkable treatise on Coin and Coinage (Waughan, 1675) this
passage occurs : — •
“Of all the numbers, Twelve is the most proper for Money, being the most clear
“ from fractions and confusion of Account, which ought not to be neglected, by
“ reason that of all other numbers it is most divisible, being divisible into units
“ as all numbers are; into two parts as no odd number is; into three parts as no
“ even number is but six, and the numbers that consist of sixes; into fourths,
“ into which six is not divisible; and into sixths.”
In the memoir dictated by Napoleon at St. Helena, on the new French system is
this passage —
“On avait préféré le diviseur 12 au diviseur 10, parceque 10 n'a que deux facteurs
“ 2 et 5, et que 12 en a quatre, Savoir, 2, 3, 4, et 6. Ilest vrai que la numération
“ décimale, généralisée et exclusivement adaptee au mètre comme unité, donne
“ des facilités aux astronomes et aux calculateurs; mais ces avantages sont loin
“ de compenser l'inconvénient de rendre la pensée plus difficile, Le premier
LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. - 5.
“caractère de toute méthode doit étre d'aider la conception et l’imagination, Lord Overstone.
“ faciliter la mémoire, et donner plus de puissance à la pensée.” -
What validity is there in these considerations as objections to the introduction of a
Decimal system of Coinage Or, in what does the fallacy of them consist?
10. Must there not be an inferiority as regards fractional divisibility in any Decimal
system of coins, as compared with a Coinage founded on a combination of the Binary
with the Duodecimal Scale 2
II. Is there not great force and truth in the remark of Napoleon, that a Decimal system
of dividing the Integer and of expressing the fractional parts, must be less
favourable to distinctness of conception, to facility of recollection, and to readiness
and ease in mental calculation, than a Binary or than our present system ?
12. Ex. gr. : Which is the more easy for Conception, for Recollection, or for Addition
mentally 7–
S. d. Mils. Pence.
7 6 - 375 - 90
2 6 - 125 - 30
I 3 - 62 - J 5
O 9 – 37 - 9
I 2 () 599 144
Again; we at once know that the half of 7s. 6d. is 38.9d., but what is the half of
375 mils?
The half of 2s. 6d. is 18, 3d., but what is the half of 28. 6d. estimated decimally,
3.e., 125 mils, &c. &c. ?
Take another case. Any number of yards–7, 8, or 9 yards at 1s., 1s. 6d.,
or 2s. 6d. per yard, or the same number of yards at 50 mils, 75 mils, and 125
mils per yard : -
Which calculation will be made with the greater readiness and accuracy, mentally
and in the open market {
Take half-a-crown—double it—treble it—halve it—divide it by 3—and add
all these products together. Is not this easily done by any common person, in his
head, without pen and ink or pencil, and in the midst of confusion ?
But try the same process upon the same sum in Decimal notation, namely, as
125 mils. Will the calculation be equally simple and easy %
Now try it in pence, namely, as 30 pence. Is it not obvious that the calculation
again becomes perfectly simple and easy %
Again: Price's Patent Candles are advertised in 12lb. boxes at 31 shillings each.
Every one knows that this gives. 11d. per lb. for the candles. But what will be
the calculation taken decimally 12lb. boxes at 5' 50 mils each ; how much
per lb. ?
Again:
S. d. Pence. Mils.
1 yard or lb. = 2 6 = 30 = 124, for more easy calculation
than 125 mils.
% do. = 1 3 = H 5 = 62
# do. = 0 10 = 10 = impossible.
} do. = 0 71 = 7% = 31
# do. = 0 5 = 5 = impossible.
# do. = 0 3% = 3; = impossible.
+'s do. = 0 3 = 3 = impossible.
Tº do. = 0 2% = 2} = impossible.
T's do. = 0 2 = 2 = impossible.
++ do. = 0 1% = 1% = impossible.
|- do. = 0 1 = 1 = impossible.
Now, consider the comparative convenience in making the necessary payments.
2s. 6d. is paid with one Coin. How many Coins will be required to pay 124
mils?
1s. 3d. is paid with two Coins. How many Coins will be required to pay
62 mils 2
Is it not by cases of this kind that the relative convenience of different systems of
Coinage must be tested ?
13. The defectiveness of any system founded on the Decimal principle consists in the
imperfect divisibility of its Integers.
Is not the construction of Coinage necessarily a divisional process 2 Is it not the
metrical subdivision of the Integer for fractional payments in connection with retail
transactions? *
“While decimal arithmetic for the purposes of “ computation shoots spontaneously
“ from the nature of man and things, it is not equally adapted to the numera-
“ tion, the multiplication, or the division of material substances.”—J. QUINCY
ADAMs, Secretary of State. Report to Senate of United States, 1821, p. 8.
A 3
§
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Börd overstone, 14. In the following table compare the three systems, the present, the mil, and the penny
zºº’ee-se
*
15.
system. With which does the superiority rest as regards,-
1. Number of figures used ?
2. Conciseness of expression in words or in writing 2
3. Facility for mental conception of the sum stated?
4. Tendency to promote accuracy in copying or calling over ?
5. Facility for calculations, especially those which must be made in the head?
6. Interchangeability at equivalent value with the Coins now in use ?
49 S. d. Mils. Pence.
I () () = 1,000 == 240
I7 8 +: 883 F 212
I5 6 F. 775 = I86
9 9 -: 487 = 1 | 7
6 3 +: 312 E. 75
5 7 = 279 F 67
4 10 +. 241 F. 58
3 8 - 183 F 44
2 4 F. I 12 – 28
I 5 - 70 F 17
4 7 0 4,342 1,044
27 figures. 34 figures. 28 figures.
If we now proceed to subject these total sums to division, which system will be found
the most convenient 7
4l. 7s., divided by 3, 4, 6, and 12, gives the respective sums, Il. 9s., 11. 18, 9d.,
14s. 6d., 7s. 3d.
Pence 1,044, divided by 3, 4, 6, and 12, gives the respective sums of 348 pence,
261 pence, 174 pence, 87 pence.
But 4,342 mils is not divisible without a remainder by any of these divisors.
S. d. Pence. Mils.
1 9 = 20 0 = 240 = 1,000
+ £ = 10 0 = 120 = 500
+ £ = 5 0 = 60 = 250
+ £9 = 4 0 = 48 = 200
# £ = 3 4 = 40 = tºº
+ gº = * == *º- F. *
+ £ = 2 6 = 30 = I25
# & = * - sº = tºmº
+ £ = 2 0 = 24 = 100
H 49 = *smºs - * = sºmº
+1, 9 = 1 8 = 20 = sº
Tºr gº = gººms - * = - gººse
i', gº = *=º - *===g = *sº
++ 36 = I 4 = 16 = wºssºm
+'s g? = 1 3 = 15 = tº sºme
++ sº = 4-ºxº- - ººm-mº - tº-sº-sº
T'g g? - * – *º - tº-mºmºmº
Tw sº – tº-ººmsº - * – *
z's gº = 1 () = 12 = 50
By this table it appears that going down as far as the shilling the £ is divisible
under our present system, and under the penny system, into eleven distinct aliquot
parts; whilst under the mil system, it is divisible only into six aliquot parts.
But observe further the subdivisibility of the quotients obtained under the
present and the penny system, compared with those obtained under the mil
system.
The , 39 represented by 2s. 6d. or 30 pence, or 120 farthings, is divisible by 2,
3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 24, 30, 40, 60, giving respectively 18. 3d, 10d., 7#d.,
6d., 5d. &c.; whilst the same sum represented by 125 mils is divisible only by 5
and 25, giving as the result 25 mils and 5 mils.
Again : the ºr 49, represented by 28, or 24 pence, or 96 farthings, is divisible by
2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, and 48, giving respectively 18, 8d., 6d, 4d, 3d., 2d.,
1%d., 1d., #d., and #d.; whilst the same sum, represented by 100 mils, is not
divisible into a third or an eighth part, or any of their subdivisions.
The same may be said again of the shilling, which, represented by 12 pence
or 48 farthings, may be divided by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, giving respectively
the sums 6d, 4d., 3d., 2d., 1+d., 1d., #d., #d. ; whilst the same shilling, represented
by 50 mils, is divisible only by 2, 5, and 25, giving the sum 25 mils, 5 mils,
and 2 mils.
, LORD, OWERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. ğ
...Now let us compare the three systems with reference to the number of figures requisite Lord Overstons.
16.
17.
I8.
19.
21,
for stating the fractions of a £ which are obtainable 'under each of the three
systems:—
S. d. Pence. Mils.
I gº = 20 0 = 240 = 1,000
# £ = 10 () = 120 – 500
# £ = 5 0 = 60 = 250
+ £ = 4 () = 48 = 200
+º, + = 2 () = 24 = I00
Y 2%, 48 = I () = 12 = 50
2 4 6 544 2,225
19 figures. 19 figures. 25 figures.
III.
Is the introduction of the Decimal principle into our Coinage desirable without
reference to what may be the System of Weights and Measures in this country :
Commodities are divided for the Retail purposes of the market by means of our
Weights and Measures, and the practical purpose of Coins is to effect the payment
for those Retail purchases. Can the adjustment of our System of Coinage be
properly disconnected from the adjustment of our System of Weights and
Measures 2
At present our System of Weights and Measures, and our System of Coins, may be
considered as Binary. Can it prove consistent with public convenience to abandon
the Binary, and to adopt the Decimal system in our Coinage, unless we have
decided on the same course in our System of Weights and Measures?
If the Retail transactions of the community originate in a System of Weights and
Measures, by which the hundredweight is divided into 4 quarters, the quarter
into 28 pounds, and the pound into 16 ounces; and in which, again, the lineal
measure, the yard, is divided into 3 feet, and the foot into 12 inches: will a
Coinage, founded on the Decimal principle of division, afford greater facility for
the adjustment of such Retail transactions than the Coinage which now exists 2
. Take the case of an Article now selling at a shilling per pound or per yard, and
retailed in halves, quarters, ounces, or inches, these fractional quantities are easily
and readily paid for in our present Coins. But if our Coinage be subjected to
the Decimal principle of division, will not that facility be lost
Under our present system,--
Mils. Pence.
11b. = one shilling 50 I 2
#lb. = sixpence 25 6
# lb. = threepence I 2 - 5 3
| lb. or 2 ounces = three halfpence 6:25 l;
++ lb. or 1 ounce = three farthings 3 125 #
In cases of this kind, will the Ordinary transactions of the market be carried on
under a Decimal system with simplicity or convenience comparable to that which
is obtained by the present system ?
22. Would a change from our present to a Decimal system of Notation and of Coins
secure any advantages in Brevity of Expression, in Facility of stating Accounts,
in Simplicity of form, in Speed or Accuracy of Calculation, or in Facility of
payments 3
23. In the Report of the discussion, at the Institution of Civil Engineers, of Mr. Yates'
Paper on the French system of Measures, Weights, and Coins, the following passage
occurs (p. 60):—
“The pound sterling, consisting of 960 farthings, admits of 19 divisions” without
“ a remainder; but if divided into 1,000 parts, it only admits of 8 divisions.
“Existing Weights and Measures are chiefly reckoned by 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 36,
“ &c., which admit of divisions by existing monies; but if a monetary decimal
system be adopted, without also adapting it to weights and measures, it
must be evident that the number of fractions will be greatly multiplied.
Decimal coins will not accord with the fractions of a pound of 16 ounces, nor
with those of a yard of 36 inches. Purchases of 4, 3, §, Tºr, &c. of any integer
could not be paid for decimally without incurring a loss by fractions not
“ represented by Coins. Now those are precisely the quantities in which the
working classes principally make their purchases; consequently they would be
the chief sufferers by the introduction of a Decimal Coinage, unless there is
&
%
* Qy. 960 admits of 27 divisions, not 19 ; 1,000 of 15 divisions, not 8.
A 4
8 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Lord Overstone. “ a simultaneous adoption of Decimal Weights and Measures. This anomaly
* “ was severely felt in the United States, and to obviate the inconvenience,
“ Spanish pieces of 63 and 124 cents, although illegal coins, were of necessity
“ employed.”
Must the truth and force of this statement be admitted, or, if not, what answer
can be given to it !
24. In the retail transactions of the Shop or Market, is not division into halves
quarters, thirds, eighths, twelfths, &c. more convenient, and more in unison with
the natural habits of mankind, than the division into tenths?
“The decimal numbers, applied to the French weights and measures, form one of
“ its highest theoretic excellences. It has, however, been proved by the most
“ decisive experience in France, that they are not adequate to the wants of man
“ in society, and, for all the purposes of retail trade, they have been formally
“ abandoned. The convenience of decimal arithmetic is in its nature merely a
“ convenience of calculation ; it belongs essentially to the keeping of accounts,
“ but is merely an incident to the transactions of trade. It is applied, therefore,
“ with umquestionable advantage, to monies of account, as we have done;
“ yet, even in our application of it to the Coins, we have not only found it
“inadequate but in some respects inconvenient. The divisions of the Spanish
dollar, as a Coin, are not only into tenths, but into halves, quarters, fifths,
“ eighths, sixteenths, and twentieths. We have the halves, quarters, and
“ twentieths, and might have the fifths, but the eighth makes a fraction of the
“ cent, and the sixteenth even a fraction of a mill. These eighths and six-
“ teenths form a very considerable proportion of our metallic currency and
although the eighth, dividing the cent only into halves, adapts itself without
“ inconvenience to the system, the fraction of the sixteenth is not so tractable ;
“ and in its circulation, as Small change, it passes for six cents, though its value
“ is six and a quarter, and there is a loss by its circulation of four per cent.
“ between the buyer and the seller. For all the transactions of retail trade,
“ the eighth and sixteenth of a dollar are among the most useful and convenient
“ of our Coins; and, although we have never coined them ourselves, we should
“ have felt the want of them, if they had not been supplied to us from the
“Coinage of Spain.”—QUINCY ADAMS's Report to Senate of United States,
1821, p. 81.
&
&
Ç
6
6
&
C
&
C
(
C
25. The late Lord Ashburton, in a debate in the House of Commons on this subject,
remarked, “That the capacity of division by halves and quarters which attends
“ our shillings is extremely convenient for the common purposes of life, which
“ upon the whole is the best criterion of any system.” Is this correct or other-
wise ?
How is the shilling expressed as 50 mils to be divided into quarters, or the
sixpence expressed as 25 mils to be divided into halves
26. It is stated by Sir John Herschel, in his evidence before the Committee of the
House of Commons, (qu. 594,) that in his opinion “it is a great misfortune that
“decimal coins will never fit the fractions of a yard and of pounds and of measures.”
Must we concur in that opinion, and if so, must we concur in the further view of
Sir John Herschel, that “a Decimal System of Weights and Measures, as well as of
Coins, ought to form a part of the same integral system " ?
27. In the evidence given before the House of Commons Committee, Sir John Herschel
gives his opinion, that the Decimalization of Weights and Measures and of Coins
should go hand in hand (qu. 598); but if that be impracticable, he inclines to the
opinion that Decimalization of Weights and Measures should be a step towards
that of Coinage (qu. 600).
Professor De Morgan would adopt a Decimal Coinage first, leaving the other
(Decimal Weights and Measures) for a future period (qu. 765).
Mr. Airy thinks that the adoption of a Decimal system of Weights and Mea-
sures desirable to some extent, and probably concurrent with the Binary system
u. 481).
wº is the correct view on those points 2 Is the adoption of a Decimal system
of Weights and Measures essential to the efficiency and usefulness of a Decimal
Coinage : Ought it to precede, to accompany, or to follow, as a necessary con-
sequence, the introduction of Decimal Coinage 2
28. Is it not the fact that, next to addition, the most important operation performed
on numbers representing broken sums of money is the finding the price of a
broken quantity of material when the price of a given unit of the material is a
given broken sum ?
Is not this operation in theory the multiplication of a broken quantity of material
by a broken sum of money? Is it not usually performed, and with great facility,
by the rule denominated “Practice”
LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 9
Is it not the fact that one of the great advantages of a completely 1)ecimal Lord Overstone.
system of Money, Weights and Measures, would be that such operations would be
performed by simple Multiplication ?
Is it not the fact that this result would not be attained unless weights and
measures were decimalised as well as money?
If money alone were decimalised, would not such operations be still performed
by “Practice,” and would the operations be much or at all simplified ?
Take, for example, the following case, given by Sir Charles Pasley in his evidence
before the Committee of the House of Commons, as showing the advantage of
the Decimal system. *
215 tons, 17 cwt., 3 qrs., 9 lbs., at #9 11s. 64d. a ton ?
Under the present system we should say—
215 tons, 17 cwt., 3 qrs., 9 lbs.,
3é s. d.
at £1 per ton 215 17 10 — ºr
at £8 35 = 1,727 2 8 — *r
at 10s. = } -: 107 18 11 — ºr
18. = +'s - 10 15 10 +7.
6d. = # - 5 7 11 +%
#d. *- *r - 0 4, 6
at #9 Ils. 6+ d. = £2,067 7 8,
If weights and measures as well as coins were decimalised, the question might be :—
Required, the price of 483,597 lbs. at £4.275 per 1,000 lbs., which would be a
question of simple Multiplication.
But if only coins were decimalised, then in the pound and mil system we should
have 215 tons, 17 cwt., 3 qrs., 9 lbs., at £9'576 per ton, which we should probably
work in the following manner: —
100 tons == 957-600
100 , -: 957-600
10 , - 95.760
5 , = + = 47-880
10 cwt. = Tº = 4-788
5 , = + = 2-394
I = +3 = •478-8
I , = 1 = •478-8
2 qrs. = + = •239.4
I , = + = -119.7
7 lbs. = + = -020-925
1 , = + = •004-275
1 , = + = •004:275
-*-mm.
215 tons, 17 cwt., 3 qrs, 9 lbs. = £2067-377
Is much or anything gained in this case wºnless weights and measures as well as coins
are decimalised ?
29. Will not the introduction of a Decimal system of Coins and Accounts necessarily
tend to render the present system of Weights and Measures very inconvenient, and
thus to force the country into the application of the Decimal principle to Weights
and Measures for the sake of necessary correspondence with the Coinage 2
“The concurrent use of non-decimal division of commodities with a Decimal
“Coinage tends, in reckoning prices, to a result expressed in a binary fraction
“ of a cent. In such cases, if payment be made, three fourths of a cent is
“ liquidated with a cent ; a half-cent is sometimes paid the same way, some-
“ times not noticed. The quarter cent is not liquidated. In accounts the
“ three quarters, halves, and fourths of a cent are generally entered, and added
“ in on footing the columns, the total being carried to the cents, a fraction above
“ half a cent being counted as a cent. It is believed that no sensible loss to
‘ either party arises in the long run from this practice. Even in a complete
“ Decimal system of weights, measures, and coins it would be impossible to
“liquidate accurately all reckonings, unless the least coin were smaller than
“ the public would endure.”—Answer to No. 36 of Circular Queries, by J. Ross
SNOWDEN, Director of the Mint of the United States.
30. A great practical authority, Mr. Slater, has stated that one consequence of the
introduction of Decimal Coinage will be, that articles will be made up in parcels
of ten each, instead of dozens as at present. Will not this be less convenient for
subdivision than the present practice of making up articles in dozens ?
31. Does not the anticipation of the change in this respect afford a practical illustration
of the tendency of a Decimal Coinage to force the country into the adoption of
Decimal Weights and Measures?
Ç
B
10.
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
Lord Overstone. 82. Is not this an inversion of the natural and proper course ? Ought not the country
pºº ºn. •
to decide in the first instance what system is most properly applicable to Weights
and Measures, and then proceed to adjust Coinage and Accounts to that system,
Coins and Accounts being the means for adjusting and registering the Retail
payments which arise out of transactions which have had their origin in Weights
and Measures 2
33. The Select Committee of Parliament of 1821 recommended that the subdivision of
Weights and Measures employed in this country be retained, as being far better
adapted to common practical purposes than the Decimal scale. If this recom-
mendation be founded on sound reason, is it not equally applicable to the case of
Coinage as it is to Weights and Measures 2 Is it not fully as true of Coins as it is
of Weights and Measures, that the present subdivision of them is well adapted to
all common practical purposes?
See Evidence of J. E. Gray, Esq. (qu. 378)
Dr. Peacock, speaking of the introduction of the French Metrical System, says,
Encycl. Metrop. Art. Arithmetic, p. 448.--"The decimal subdivision of these
“ measures possessed many advantages on the score of uniformity, and was calcu-
“ lated to simplify in a very extraordinary degree the Arithmetic of concrete
“ quantities. It was attended, however, by the sacrifice of all the practical
“ advantages which attend subdivisions by a scale admitting of more than one
“ bisection, which was the case with those previously in use, and it may well be
‘ doubted whether the loss in this respect was not more than a compensation for
“ every other gain.” Must we admit the weight of this authority and the con-
clusion to which it leads 2
C
IV.
34. Is it not the fact that in all matters of abstract number and multiplication of
material things there appears to be a general instinctive tendency to adopt the
Decimal system, whilst in dealing with material subdivision, whether in length,
capacity, or weight, there is an equally strong tendency to adopt the Binary
system,-the Decimal system in arithmetical calculation, the Binary system in
weights and measures, and the retail transactions of the market arising out of
them 2 Are not all the integers of our Weights and Measures multiplied deci-
mally, but divided by the Binary scale Z Do we not speak of ten yards, a hundred
yards, a thousand yards? But when we come to subdivide the yard, do we not
think and speak of half a yard, quarter of a yard, &c., and similarly in all other
cases 2
“The earliest and most venerable of historical records extant, in perfect coincidence
“ with speculative theory, prove that decimal arithmetic, as founded in nature,
“ is peculiarly applicable to the standard units of weights and measures, but
“ not to their subdivisions or fractional parts, nor to the objects of admea-
“ surement or weights.”—QUINCY ADAMS's Report to Senate of United States,
1821, p. 16.
35. Is it not then natural and convenient that our Integer of money, the #' sterling,
should be similarly treated ? That whilst we speak of ten pounds, one hundred
pounds, one thousand pounds, we should Subdivide the £ sterling into half a
pound, or 108. ; a quarter of a £, or 58.3 And again, that we should sub-
divide a shilling into half a shilling, or 6d. ; a quarter of a shilling, or 3d., and
so on ?—thus applying Decimal Arithmetic to the standard unit of our Coinage,
the £ sterling, but not to its subdivisions or fractional parts.
36. In the JReport of the Legislative Assembly of Canada on Decimal Currency (p. 14)
is the following statement :-
“The Decimal Currency admits of but one aliquot division—into halves; but the
“ New York shilling, an eighth of a dollar, can be divided into sixths, quarters,
“ thirds, halves, &c., and although Congress has never coined any shillings, the
“American people during sixty years have clung to their well-worn shillings
“ and sixpences, perceiving them to be a great public convenience. Your Com-
“ mittee are of opinion that Coins representing the eighth and sixteenth of a
“ dollar are indispensable in Small transactions in Canada, and that the smooth
“ British sixpences will continue to pass extensively as the eighth of a dollar
“ unless a better Coinage is provided.”
In a communication from the Rev. Joshua Leavitt of New York (p. 48 of the
same Report), this further remark occurs :—
“I have no doubt of the superiority of the Decimal system for the purposes of accounts,
“ and am astonished that other countries have so long delayed its adoption. Our
“ experience of the benefit of our federal currency in this respect is all one way.
“ The saving of time and labour is prodigious, and the advantage in point of
“ correctness and of the facility of detecting errors unquestionable. But for the
“ purposes of small circulation, in marketing, huckstering, and the like, I am
“ persuaded that a Duodecimal Currency like that of England, or like that which
:LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. Il
37.
“ formerly prevailed in the city of New York, is far preferable. These small
“ transactions of daily life outnumber the transactions of commerce almost infi-
“ nitely. And it seems impossible to make a Decimal Currency as: convenient
“ in these as the old currency. One reason is, that the Decimal Currency admits
“ of only one aliquot division, that is, into halves. The shilling can be divided
“ into halves, quarters, thirds, sixths, and twelfths; and if it were needed, a
“ coin of the value of two thirds of a shilling would be found manageable. In
“ all these countless small transactions which I have referred to, and in which
“ every man is employed many times every day, this capability of subdivision is
“ of great convenience. . We are constantly buying a half of a thing, or a quarter,
“ the eighth, the one third, and so on... If the price is a dollar, we can make
the change for one half, for one quarter, and if one, two, or more pence, with
our Decimal Currency; but we cannot pay the exact price of one third, one
“sixth, one eighth, one twelfth, or any other of the fractional parts. If the price
“ is half a dollar, we can only pay for one half, one fifth, and one tenth. If the
price is a quarter of a dollar, we can pay for no aliquot division whatever.
This is a constant inconvenience, and can be got along with in no other way
“ than by disregarding small differences,”
If a Decimal Coinage be introduced into this country, is there any reason to suppose
that the inconveniences here stated as the result of practical experience in the
United States will not equally occur in this country
Will it be possible to obtain the eighth or the sixteenth of a florin, or the quarter
of a shilling, or the half of a sixpence, under the proposed Decimal System 7
If the Small differences, necessarily arising from this imperfect divisibility of the
Decimal Coins, must be disregarded, upon whom will the unavoidable loss fall?
With the tradesman will it not be an accumulating loss, consuming his profits; and
will it not be impossible therefore for him to bear it? . -
Must it not therefore necessarily fall upon the small purchaser .
The principle of the objection is, that the Decimal system substitutes the divisors
2 and 5 for the divisors 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, which are the natural divisors for material
things, and are also the divisors of our present money, giving us the third, fourth,
and half parts of every thing.
That the effect of this will be, in the sale of broken parcels of commodities, a small
money remainder involving loss to shopkeeper or customer.
This, we see, is a source of constant inconvenience in the United States.
Let us take the descending steps from 8s.
88, or 400 mils, or 4 florins, is not divisible by 32, the divisor of , oz.
4S., or 200 mils, or 2 florins, is not divisible by 16, the divisor of 1 oz.
2s., or 100 mils, or 1 florin, is not divisible by 8, the divisor of 2 oz.
18., or 50 mils, or #-florin, is not divisible by 4, the divisor of 4 lb.
6d., or 25 mils, is not divisible by 2, the divisor of 4 lb.
In each of these cases, in the purchase of a broken quantity of material, 4 oz., 1 oz.,
# lb., 4 lb., will there not necessarily arise a broken sum of money, which cannot be
paid in any Coin ; a small “ difference which must be disregarded,” to the loss of
buyer or seller ?
Mark how under a Decimal Coinage the difficulty occurs in an earlier stage, and
in a more serious form, than under the present Coinage, precisely as we descend to
the lower amounts, to those which are the usual prevalent prices with the middle
and lower classes.
If it be assumed that, instead of these prices, “competition will determine prices in
“ decimals conveniently divisible by 2, 4, 8, or 16,” and therefore in prices not
corresponding to the Decimal money of Account; if instead of one shilling, or 50
mils, the price of the unit of the material is taken at 48 mils, is not this in itself
an admission that in introducing Decimal money we shall have introduced a money
not conveniently adapted to the purposes of the market 2
And in so doing shall we not have incurred a new set of objections, namely, the
inconvenience of being obliged to use several Coins with which to pay the 48 mils,
instead of one Coin with which 50 mils may be paid
Again : Mr. Leavitt bears testimony to the admirable qualities of the Decimal Currency
for accounts, but asserts that for small circulation and payments in marketing,
huckstering, and the like, a Duodecimal Coinage is also wanted and preferable to the
other. These small transactions of daily life far out-number the dealings of
commerce. And this statement is Sanctioned by the concurrence of the Committee .
of the Legislative Assembly of Canada.
Does not this statement distinctly point to the necessity of not abandoning a Duode-
cimal System of Coinage, but of introducing, if possible, in connection with our
present system of Coins, some means by which money transactions may be recorded
in a Decimal System of Notation, thus retaining the present system of Coins
undisturbed, but combining with it a Decimal System of Reckoning or Account
keeping 2 - - * - - -
Tord Overstone.
- -- ** , . * * *
E 2
12 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Lord Overstone. “Perhaps it may be found by more protracted and multiplied experience that the
- “ same material instruments shall be divisible decimally for calculations and
“ accounts; but in any other manner suited to convenience in the shops and
‘ markets; that their appropriate legal denominations shall be used for computa-
‘tions, and the trivial (or customary) names for actual weight and mensuration.”
—QUINCY ADAMS's Report, p. 90.
38. Are not the following the primary requirements of a good system of Coinage 7 viz.:-
1st. That the Integer should be divisible into the greatest number of clean frac-
tional parts to correspond with the endless variety of retail transactions which
they are to be the means of adjusting:
2nd. That these fractional parts should be expressible in the shortest and most
simple form of words, and with the smallest number of figures:
3rd. That the Coins should be such, both in denomination and relative value,
as may pass with the greatest facility in valuing or summing them up when
presented in great numbers:
4th. That they should be such as may afford the greatest facility for mental con-
ception, for recollection, and for the ordinary processes of arithmetic which the
people are daily called upon to perform mentally in the tumult of the market
or shop, and without the opportunity of recording them in writing:
5th. That they should harmonize with the natural tendency of mankind to subdi-
vide commodities for retail purposes by continual halving.
{
&
39. Is not the following a just description of the present system ?
In the ultimate subdivision, where the binary division is alone useful, we have
two binary steps, viz., two farthings=l halfpenny, two halfpence = 1 penny.
In rising to the next unit, the shilling, we have again the factor 2 introduced twice,
giving four 28, besides the number which, next to 2, is most frequently required
as a divisor, viz., 3. In rising to the next unit, the £1, we have again the factor 2
introduced twice, giving six 28, besides the prime number which, next to 2 and 3
and their products, is most frequently required as a divisor, viz., 5.
Thus giving the following table of the factors of the number of each of our
present units contained in the superior units:—

Farthing. 2 x 2 || 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × 3 || 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × 3 × 2 × 2 × 5
Penny. 2 × 2 × 3 2 × 2 × 3 × 2 × 2 × 5
Shilling 2 x 2 x 5
Pound
Does not this system fulfil to a greater degree than any other possible system some
of the above requirements Can this system be justly considered as accidental or
unscientific 2
There must have been some valid reason for the adoption and long retention of our
present peculiar system of Coins instead of the obvious plan of making the
progression of Coins correspond to the progression of figures according to our Arabic
notation.
What is that reason 2 Is it to be found in the above explanation, and in the varied
and infinite divisibility of the Integer obtained through this system ?
40. Does it not necessarily follow that a System of Coinage based upon a Binary or
Duodecimal scale must answer these requirements more completely than a Decimal
Coinage, seeing that 12 is divisible by more factors than 10, and that the quotients
of such division are again more divisible under the present than under a Decimal
system 2 And does not our present Coinage afford peculiar facilities for continued
division into clean fractional parts 3
41. If in place of our present division of the £ sterling, a Decimal division be substituted,
shall we not in many cases lose the power of obtaining an exact result
What is the 3rd, the 6th, the 12th, or the 16th part of a £ sterling under decimal
division of the Coinage 7
Under our present system it is exactly 6s. 8d., 38. 4d. 18. 8d., 1s 8d. .
Again, what is the 3rd, 6th, 12th, and 16th part of a shilling in decimal coinage 2
Under our present system it is exactly 4d., 2d., la, 3 farthings.
V.
42. If it be admitted that for all ordinary retail transactions, for the purposes generally
of paying and receiving, our present Coinage is satisfactory, whilst the inconvenience
is found to arise when we come to processes of Account-keeping and Calculation,
LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. I 3
does it not follow that our present Coins ought if possible to be retained without Lord Overstone.
any change, that some Decimal system of recording the various sums should be -—
introduced, and that we should decimalize our Accounts, retaining our present
Coinage in all respects unchanged ?—See No. 37.
43. How far will this be accomplished by writing down all money values in the number
of pence of which they consist, eac. gr. :—
.# s. d. Pence. Mils.
I () () = 240 = 1,000
O 6 8 = 80 - v 333' 333
0 5 () = 60 - 250
0 3 4. - 40 = 166. 666
0 2 6 - 30 - 125
I 18 9 465 l,937 - 499
See the following answer to No. 37 of the Circular Queries by J. Ross Snowden, Esq. :-
“A. The scope of this inquiry may admit of the suggestion, that if the decimalization
“ of the British coinage were effected by adopting, in place of the pound sterling,
“a new unit of the value of one hundred of the present divisions of the pound (say
“100 farthings, halfpence, or pence) all prices and coins under the present system
“would be exactly measured in the new unit and its parts, which would also be
“ almost exactly commensurable with the dollar of the United States. A unit of
“100 halfpence, for example, which might be called a dollar, would be equal to
“ &l:013 of the United States, an approximation to our unit so close that the
“ moneys of the two countries, under such a system, might be deemed substantially
“ identical.”
44. Does not every Decimal System of Accounts necessarily consist in taking the lowest
Money Unit, and stating in Arabic notation the cumulative amount of that Coin
contained in any given sum.
45. In the £ and mil scheme do we not take the farthing (changed in its value and called
a mil) as the basis of the system, and then proceed to state all values in the number
of these new farthings contained in that value * *
In the penny Scheme do we not take, in a similar manner, the penny as the basis
but without any change in its value ;
In addition to this advantage, will not the statement of values by the number of
pence contained in them, rather than by the number of farthings or mils, necessarily
involve greater conciseness and simplicity of expression, there being only one
fourth the number of pence as compared with the number of farthings in any
value 2
Is it not an advantage in any Decimal System that it does not necessarily involve the
introduction of a farthing column into all Accounts, seeing that all sums under
a penny are now voluntarily omitted from a sense of convenience in a very
large proportion of Accounts?
In those cases in which it is found desirable to introduce fractions of the penny, is
there not reason to believe, that it will be found more convenient to express those
fractions Binarily than in a Decimal form, seeing that such has been the result
of practical experience in the United States ?
The Director of the Mint states (qu. 31), “The change has been effectual as to the use
“ of dollars and cents, but not of the mil, the fraction of a cent being expressed
“ Binarily.”
46. If the Penny be taken as the lowest unit of a Decimal System of Accounts,
and if all sums be written down in the number of Pence of which they consist,
will not this afford a Decimal System of Accounts which may be used in conjunction
with and without involving any disturbance of our existing system of coinage,
or changing the character of the £ sterling as the great Unit of Account, as the
basis of our system of exchange with all the world, and as the great Integer by
which all our principal calculations and estimates of property and of obligations are
made 7
47. The fractions of a penny would be written as fractions #, 4, #. Is this a
disadvantage 2 Is it not the case, that practically in all countries, even in those in
which the Decimal System is most completely carried out, the ultimate sub-
division of coins is binary 2 Is not this shown by the fact that in France, Portugal,
&c., the 5-centime piece and the 5-rei piece are the lowest coins in general use or
generally expressed in accounts? In the United States is not a # cent universally
expressed instead of 5 mils? What is the inconvenience of writing such values as
fractions? Are they not as easily added in this as in a decimal form, and are they
not more easily multiplied ?
* Keeping accounts in farthings reduced 4 per cent. in value, as stated by Dr. Gray (385).
B 3
“I;4
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
3Ford-Overstone.
48.
49.
5.I.
52.
53.
This system would not include fractions of the Penny otherwise than as fractions. Is
it desirable to incur the inconveniences of the £ and mil scheme, the abolition of
our present Copper Coinage, the abandonment especially of the penny, &c., for the
purpose of comprehending in a Decimal system of Notation and Account-keeping
the fractions of a penny, which under the present system are so seldom required,
which, when required can be so easily expressed as fractions, and which, are in
so many cases voluntarily omitted for the sake of convenience 2
If the Decimal system is to be tried for the sake of simplicity and convenience in
Account-keeping and Calculation, isit not the most prudent and safe course to make
the trial of it, in the first instance at least, as a system of Account only, without
disturbing the Coinage 7 -
How far would this be accomplished by simply authorizing the expression of all sums
of money in the number of pence of which they consist 2
VI.
. If the Decimal system of Coinage recommended by the Committee of the House
of Commons (£ and mil Scheme) be adopted, will it not necessarily involve
the introduction of more than two Monies of Account 2 . . .
Will not this necessarily give rise to difficulty, trouble, and confusion ?
Is there any country with a Decimal Coinage in which more than two Monies of
Account are now in practical use ? -
Is it not important, with a view to the simplicity and facility in calculation which
are supposed to constitute the great recommendation of a Decimal system of
Coinage, that there be not more than one hundred steps between the highest and
lowest monies of account 7 -
Is not this the case in all the principal decimal coinages now in use, ea. gr., franc
and centime in France, dollar and cent in the United States, &c. ? -
By an Act of Congress passed in the year 1792, it was ordained that “the mone
“ of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units, dimes
“ or tenths, cents or hundredths, and mills or thousandths.”
Notwithstanding this long-existing state of the law, we are now told, upon the
authority of the Director of the Mint, that in that country they “ have but two
“ denominations of Money of Account, the dollar and cent.” And further, we
are told “ that below the cent they do not usually reckon in mills or decimals, but
“ in binary fractions of a cent,” that is, in vulgar fractions.
What inferences are to be drawn from these facts :
Do they indicate that, be the law what it may, in Decimal Coinage more than two
Monies of Account, and more than one hundred steps between the highest and
the lowest unit, are found to be practically inconvenient, and, in truth, unworkable.
And further, that the broken parts of a low unit, such as the cent in the United States
and the penny in this country, are more conveniently represented by Vulgar Frac-
tions than by Decimal notation.
|Upon what other supposition can this established departure in practice from the
55.
millesimal division of the dollar distinctly laid down by the law be accounted for 2
The annexed statement deserves attention; it appeared in “The Times,” April 4:-.
“ New Orleans, March 19.
“Cotton.—Sales to-day, 3,500 bales, at an advance of Ac., the market closing
“ firm. New Orleans, middling, 13 c. to 13+c.
“Sugar has advanced ; c., and sells for 10, c., to 10}c.
“ Breadstuffs quiet. Pork firm. Lard advanced #c.; kegs, 143c.
“ Freights.-Cotton to Liverpool, 0.3d., and to Havre, c.” *. -
The broken parts of the cent are all stated in Vulgar Fractions, in opposition to the
law already quoted. w
These fractions, , #, #, #, g, can none of them be stated accurately in tenths of a
cent.
In the case of a rise of cent in cotton, this, stated decimally, must be given as a
rise of 1 mill or 2 mills. There is, however, a small difference ; the first is
too little, the second is too much. What must be the effect of this unavoidable
difference, small per lb., when multiplied into the number of lbs. contained in
3,500 bales of cotton ? What is the lesson to be derived from these considerations 2
54. If with us the £ sterling be retained as the principal Money of Account, does not
a subdivision into one thousand parts become unavoidable, with the addition of
intermediate Monies of Account between the £ and the mil?
Will not this constitute an important difference between the Decimal Coinage
of this country and the Decimal Coinages now in use in other countries, much to
the disadvantage of our Decimal system as regards simplicity and convenience of .
calculation, and especially of mental as distinguished from written calculation,
which the middle and lower orders are constantly called upon to perform in their
daily transactions 2
LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. I5
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
Under our present system is not the high value of our Integer, the £ stering, a
source of great convenience and advantage, especially as compared with the lower
value of the franc in France and the dollar in America, -
First, as facilitating the conception in the mind of large values, and expression
of them in fewer figures and with fewer words;
Second, as admitting of a greater multiplicity of clean fractional divisions !
By the adoption of the Decimal system will not this advantage be converted into a
great inconvenience :
Will not our high Integer, by necessitating the intervention of one thousand
steps between the top and the bottom of the scale, instead of one hundred steps as
in other countries, become the source of confusion and inconvenience, and render
the adoption of the Decimal Scale in its most advantageous form impossible
with us ;
And further, will there not necessarily be a less number of clean fractional parts
under a system which resolves the sº sterling into one thousand mils, than under
the present system, by which it is resolved into 960 farthings, inasmuch as 1,000
admits only of fifteen divisions without a remainder, whilst 960 admits of twenty-
seven divisions without a remainder; and the results thus produced are again
susceptible of division under the present system, but will not be so under the
Decimal system ; ea. gr., the eighth part of 960 is 120, which is again divisible
by 2, 4, &c. without remainder ; but the eighth part of 1,000 is 125, which is
not susceptible of further division by 2, 4, &c. without remainder ?
In Commercial, Trading, and Banking accounts all sums less than a penny are now
omitted from considerations of convenience and saving of time in account-keeping.
But under a Decimal system, which divides the £ integer into mils, the fourth
or mil column must in all cases be retained, as the omission of it would involve
the omission of all sums up to 23d. The effect of this will be an increase of 10 per
cent. in the number of figures used in all such accounts. Will not this increase
in the number of figures used in such accounts interfere with the brevity and
simplicity of expression, and the Saving of time in account-keeping which are
anticipated from the Decimal system P
The Decimal scheme now under our consideration will retain the shilling and sixpence
as fractional Coins, but will it not destroy the peculiar advantage which now attends
them, namely, their convenient divisibility ? A shilling resolved into 50 mils is
divisible only by 2, 5, 10, and 25 ; but the same shilling, resolved by our present
system into 48 farthings, is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24.
Is it not a serious objection to the proposed scheme that it will deprive the lower
classes of their divisors 2, 3, 4, 8, and 16, as applicable to the coins most familiar to
them, thus interfering with the facility with which they now obtain the third and
fourth parts of every thing which they require, and to the use of which they are
well accustomed; whilst, on the other hand, it will give them the divisor 5, which
is wholly useless as a divisor of the commodities which they purchase, or of the
money which they use ?
“A glance of the eye is sufficient to divide material substances into successive
“ halves, fourths, eighths, and sixteenths. A slight attention will give thirds,
“ sixths, and twelfths. But divisions of fifth and tenth parts are among the
“ most difficult that can be performed without the aid of calculation. Among
“ all its conveniences the Decimal division has the great disadvantage of being
“ itself divisible only by the numbers two and five. The duodecimal division,
divisible by two, three, four, and six, would offer so many advantages over it,
“ that while the French theory was in contemplation, the question was dis-
“cussed, whether the reformation of weights and measures should not be extended
“ to the system of arithmetic itself, and whether the number twelve should
“ not be substituted for ten as the term of the periodical return to the unit.”—
QUINCY ADAMS's Report, p. 71.
The proposed scheme involves an absolute change in the value of all the lower Coins.
The penny and all multiples of the penny other than six and twelve will not be
interchangeable at equivalent values with the new Decimal Coins; and again, the
two lowest monies of account in the Decimal System, cents and mils, will be
uninterchangeable at equivalent value with any of the present copper coins, although
these latter form parts in odd pence of a large proportion of existing contracts,
especially amongst the lower classes, and constitute an immense proportion of the
existing Coinage. *
From this cause it is anticipated by some persons that confusion and difficulty in
their accounts, some unavoidable loss and injustice, and a vague but dangerous
impression of more extensive injustice will arise amongst the mass of the people.
Whereas a decimal scheme founded upon the penny or the halfpenny would
involve no real change in the value of any of our coins, but would only involve
some additional trouble to the richer classes by giving a new numerical form to
Lord Overstone,
B 4
I6 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Lord Overstone. their high integer, the # sterling, but not involving any absolute change in its
value.
Do you think these apprehensions well founded, and what is your opinion of the
extent and importance of this difficulty?
63. Will not the advantage of the change be experienced, if at all, by the commercial and
higher classes, those who keep extensive Accounts, and enter into large Calcula-
tions,—and not by the lower classes, who usually employ the smaller coins, and
are familiar principally with the penny and its multiples and subdivisions !
64. In connexion with the foregoing considerations, it has been suggested that a vast
majority of the smaller money transactions in a community are not transactions
of written account at all ; that they arise out of Retail purchases made in the
market or the shop, the calculations connected with which are necessarily performed
in the head, and are not reduced to writing. That for these purposes, namely,
adaptation to the existing division of our Weights and Measures, for distinctness
of mental conception and facility of calculation in the head, our existing Coinage is
better adapted than a Decimal Coinage; whilst the supposed superiority of a
Decimal Coinage for purposes of written accounts and calculations is not appli-
cable to such transactions, and would not prove beneficial to the great mass of the
people with whom such transactions are of constant daily occurrence.
How far do these considerations constitute a just ground of objection to the intro-
duction of a Decimal Coinage 2 or what reply can be made to them P
65. Looking to the considerations alluded to in the preceding questions, the superior
facility of division possessed by 12, the further very convenient and almost unli-
mited facility of division arising from our peculiar mode of reckoning the #' integer
into shillings, pence, and farthings; the harmony which exists between our fractional
Coins and our Weights and Measures, the doubtful advantages in facility of calcu-
lation to be obtained from Decimal Coins unaccompanied by Decimal Weights and
Measures, and the brevity and convenience of expression, oral and written, which
attaches to our present Coins;–duly weighing, on the other hand, the advantage
of assimilating the progression of Coins to that of figures, the simplicity and
facility in keeping Accounts and making Calculations, the saving of time in educa-
tion and of labour by the substitution of simple for the proverbial inconvenience
of compound arithmetic, which it is expected will arise from the introduction of
Decimal Coinage;—
Is it on the whole prudent to make the experiment 2 Is the result sufficiently
certain Will the increase of convenience be sufficiently great and fairly diffused
over all the classes upon which the inconvenience of the change must fall ? Or
must we come to the conclusion that the advantage of the change is neither so
important nor so well ascertained as to justify the disturbance of our existing
system, and of the habits and computations founded upon it 2
I submit these questions to the consideration of my colleagues, with great diffidence
as regards their incompleteness, and the mistakes which, I doubt not, will be
found to be involved in them ; but, at the same time, with a full assurance that
they are calculated to promote that “further sifting in public opinion ” which both
the Chancellor of of the Exchequer (Mr. Gladstone) and the President of the Board
of Trade (Mr. Cardwell) alluded to in their remarks, quoted in our Preliminary
Report, as necessary to “secure a right understanding of the subject by the public
“ without which it would not be safe for the Government to take any steps in
“ regard to it.”
The advantages of our present system of Coinage, the difficulties necessarily involved
in a change, and the objections which may be reasonably urged to each separate
system of Decimal Coinage, constitute a branch of the subject which has not
perhaps been sufficiently regarded in preceding investigations. Hence these Ques-
tions, the object of which is to draw attention to considerations which must be
thoroughly sifted and weighed before the subject can be correctly understood by
the public, or a decision be safely taken by the Government.
April 1857. OWERSTONE.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 17
ANSWERS TO LORD overston E's QUESTIONs.
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
G. B. AIRY, Astronomer Royal.
Answer to Question 1. I do.
2. Because the present system is not convenient for calculations, whether the small calculations
which are made mentally in the streets or in shops, or the larger calculations which are made on
paper. i. -
3. If, in the retail transactions, by “paying or receiving” is meant only “the transfer of coins from
one purse to another,” all coins are equally convenient. If the words are meant to include “the
small calculations which always accompany that transfer,” our coins are inconvenient. For
instance, in adding mentally or on paper 1s. 9d, to 2s. 7d., when I have added 9d, to 7d. and form
16d., I have the trouble of converting the 16d. into 1s. 4d., which trouble I ought not to have in
a well-arranged coinage. *
In the account-keeping, &c. the objections are still stronger.
4. I consider the primary purpose of coins to be, to afford means of exchanging known
quantities of precious metal, of all conceivable magnitudes, for other commodities; and I
consider the object to be aimed at (in establishing a relation among different coins) to be, that
when the number of petty coins becomes inconveniently great, they may be converted into a few
large coins by the easiest process; or when the large coins must be subdivided, the subdivisions
may be expressed in petty coins by the easiest process. -
The apparent alternative in Question 4 appears to me incomplete.
5. I do not conceive the possibility of the supposed opposition of claims, and am therefore
unable to answer.
6. I do not conceive that there can be the opposition which the division of this question seems
to imply. So far as retail transactions imply the use of the same coin throughout (as if oranges
are bought at one penny each, and 5 pennies are paid for 5 oranges,) all systems are alike.
So far as they imply a change of coin (as if 23 oranges were bought and paid for by one shilling
and eleven pennies), the retail transactions come under the same category as the account keeping.
I think that the distinction which the question insinuates is without foundation.
7. I do.
8. It loses the division by 3, which is of little importance; while it gains that by 5, on which the
score depends: and it partially loses the continuation of divisions by 2, which is important, but, in
my opinion, greatly inferior in importance to the advantage of decimal multiplication or division
throughout (it being always borne in mind that above 11, the multiplication must be decimal).
9. First, I may remark that in the course of my life, to the best of my recollection, I have
never had occasion to divide by 3, 6, or 9, and rarely by 12; and in any case the treatment would
come under the following sentence, viz.:-
Second, if I have occasion to divide 27 l. 17s. 9d. by 4, I am in no degree benefited by the cir-
cumstance that 20 and 12 are divisible by 4. I say, 4 goes 6 times in 27 with 3 remainder ; I
turn the 3 into shilings, and then I say 4 goes 19 times in 77, with 1 remainder ; I turn the 1
into pence, and then I say 4 goes 5 times in 21, with 1 remainder ; I turn the 1 into farthings,
and here (where it is unimportant) I have a divisible number.
The fallacy in the remarks cited consists in the assumption that extreme benefit is derived from
certain divisibilities, which practically is not so derived.
10. On the inferiority there is no doubt. On the consequent inconvenience I remark as
follows:—
Doubtless when the mind of man is quite frce to choose, and when there is to be no combination
of multiples and sub-multiples by addition, multiplication, or division, the binary division suits
him better than any other. The scales of avoirdupois weight, and of measures of capacity (both
which run up to 256) are strong evidence of this. But when the combination by addition, multi-
plication, or division comes in (as it does in money transactions at every step) the charm is
broken.
I attach no importance to the division by 12. I think it has come in only because 8 is rather
small and 16 rather large.
11. Napoleon's infantry, cavalry, guns, rations for troops, requisitions in francs for their support,
were all expressed on a decimal scale ; and he never failed in “distinctness of conception,”
“facility of recollection,” “readiness and ease in mental calculation,” or in making “fractional
parts” in dividing an army, from that circumstance. So far as I see, the same applies to smaller
numbers.
12. The questions here given are put in a form which has no bearing whatever upon the merits
of two systems. Divisions are to be made by 2 and 3, and for these is selected a sum which in
present coinage is particularly favorable (90d.), and in decimal coinage is particularly un-
favorable (375 mils.). Instead of this, try round numbers in both, as 8s.-400 mils, and either
exclude 3 (which, as I have said, is useless), or include 5 as well as 3. The appearance of the
result would be very different.
Probably Price's firm would put their candles in 10 lb. boxes if the coinage were decimal.
To the last question but one I would oppose this, “On the new system 10 mils is paid by one
coin; how many coins would be required to pay it on the old system *
It clearly is not correct to compare two systems when all the amounts to be expressed, &c. are
based upon notions taken from only one of them.
C
G. B. Airy,
Astronomer Royal.
18 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION ... . . .
G. B. Airy,
Astronomer Royal.
tº mºsºmº
13. I do not certainly understand the purport of the question. Possibly what I have said under
No. 4 may have a bearing on it. -
14. There are in this question, as it appears to me, two fundamental misconceptions in the way
of putting it, which totally invalidate the implied conclusion.
The first is that, in estimating the labour of addition by the number of figures, the mental effort
of converting a sum of pence into shillings and pence is totally put out of sight, and this is the
very step in which blunders most frequently occur.
The second is, that round sums are taken in the first and third columns (excluding farthings)
while the mils are driven to the last integer. -
I would propose either that round sums be taken in mils, or that both systems be taken to the
last coin (farthings and mils). The mils would have the advantage in every particular.
15. The divisions on which so much stress is laid are, I believe, never wanted. I refer to my
note on No. 9. - -
In the comparison at the end, eleven of the figures counted up among the mils are cyphers,
presenting no labour of the mind whatever. -
#. ºnvaiºn by mere number of figures (see beginning of my note on No. 14) is not
SUITT1C1GIlt. *
16. I think it is desirable without such reference.
17. Certainly the adjustment of coinage can be properly disconnected from the adjustment
of weights and measures, as will be seen on trying any case. If an avoirdupois pound of any
commodity costs 4l. 17s. 10d., what will an avoirdupois ounce cost 2 Now, without waiting for
any change of the avoirdupois scale, all that I want to know is, how I can most easily divide
4l. 17s. 10d. by 162 And I assert, as a thing which nobody can doubt who tries, that this is
much the easier on the decimal scale of money ; and therefore the introduction of the decimal
scale of money is advantageous, without modification of weights and measures.
18. Fully included in the answer to 17.
19. Fully included in the answer to 17.
20. At 1s per pound the statement is correct; at 1s. 5%d. it is not correct.
21. The same remark.
22. Yes, in all the five points mentioned.
23. In regard to the first part of this, I refer (as before) to the considerations in my answer to
No. 9, with due extension. \
In regard to the notion that the working classes would be the sufferers, I am surprised. The
transactions of tradesmen with the working classes are as completely subject to the rules of com-
petition as those with the highest men of business, and far more so than with men of fashion.
This competition renders such oppression as Mr. Yates fears totally impossible.
24. Certainly it is as regards commodities; but as regards monies I again refer to No. 9.
I believe that the unit of America is unfavorable to Decimal Coinage, the cent being too large
to end with, and the mil too small. Binary division of the cent is almost necessary, and this
helps to introduce it in every part of the scale.
25. If this had been the sole consideration I would have divided a shilling not into 12 but into
16 parts; but there are things much more important to be considered.
26. I refer to my answer to No. 17.
27. I refer to my answer to No. 17.
28. In the instance adduced the advantage at first sight is with the old system ; but upon
closer examination I believe it will be found that it is not so ; for, first, in the division of the
sums of the old system there is the constant mental change of one coin carried forward into
another coin (thus in the ºth there is 8s. to be changed into 96d.), which is a severe and
dangerous addition to the labour.
Secondly, the lower operation is not given in the most advantageous form; the 200 tons should
occupy one line, the 2 cwt. should occupy one line; 8 lbs. should occupy one line.
Thirdly, in the addition, the lower is much the easier and safer.
29. As regards the question I think not.
As regards the citation, I refer to my note to No. 24.
30. Generally speaking parcels of 10 would be less convenient than parcels of 12, and therefore
I do not expect them to come into use very much.
31. No. -
32. The natural and proper course, it appears to me, is to begin the change where it is easiest
to begin, and where the convenience will be immediately felt. It is easy to change the coinage,
and the change would be convenient immediately ; it is almost impossible to change weights and
measures, and the change would be inconvenient.
33. The advantage of the existing subdivisions of weights and measures in this country is great,
so long as, when mixed denominations are used, they are not subject to the processes of long
addition, multiplication, or division. When these come in, the existing subdivisions are excessively
inconvenient, and all who use them have been compelled to abandon them and resort to the
decimal scale. Thus— *
The Civil Engineers, one and all, have long since abandoned the use of inches on the levelling
staves, and have adopted decimal parts of the foot.
The Bank of England, the Royal Mint, and bullion dealers generally, have abandoned the
pennyweight and grain, and have adopted decimal parts of the Troy ounce. -
Her Majesty's officers of Customs have abandoned the avoirdupois ounce and dram, and have
adopted decimal parts of the avoirdupois pound.
Coins require the decimal division even more imperatively, because they are more frequently
treated in long addition, multiplication, and division.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QūESTIONS. I9
34. I most fully agree with this, as applied to measures, &c., not combined by long additions,
&c. See the last note. - • ,
35. See note to 33, which fully answers this.
36. The American experience tells little, for this reason : they had the dollars, and they had
the shillings and sixpences, and they easily established a not inconvenient relation between them ;
and then naturally they disliked the trouble of change. To this is to be added (as I have before
said, note on 24,) that the dollar is a bad coin for continued decimal subdivision. f
I give no attention to the one third or two thirds. . -
If the divisions by such numbers as 16 were to be strictly carried out, the existing coinage
would frequently be more convenient than the Decimal Coinage. I imagine that the divisions are
not strictly carried out, and that in general a small packet of goods is sold dearer than a large
one ; and that the Decimal Coinage would not be inconvenient for this system.
37. If it were possible, I should be glad to have two concurrent systems of subdivision of the
florin (like the binary and decimal subdivision of the avoirdupois pound, &c., mentioned in my
note to 33), but I do not think it is possible ; and in this war of extermination the question
is, which system shall be established, to the absolute exclusion of the other ? I prefer to establish
the Decimal System.
38. These are some of the primary requirements, but not all. Add to them,-
6th. That sums expressed by several denominations of money shall be easily added in long
columns;
7th. That such sums shall be easily multiplied ;
8th. That such sums shall be easily divided ;
39. The statement is correct ; but as to the notion that there must have been “some valid reason,”
let me oppose another statement. To the year 1834, I think, accounts were kept at the Exchequer
by means of wooden tallies. There must have been “some valid reason.” What is that reason 2
I believe the reason to have been the same in both ; that in earlier ages people did not write so
generally as to feel the pressing want of the change, and that in later ages the matter has depended
immediately on the Ministers of the Crown, whose tenure of office is uncertain, who are over-
worked in politics, and who are desirous to tide over any avoidable change.
40, 41. Not so very important. See my note on No. 9.
42, 43. Impossible, in my opinion. While the sovereign exists, and while people exist with
their old habit of entering the sovereign as the unit in their books, they will continue to do so.
This is because the sovereign is regarded by everybody as the fundamental unit of British money.
There would be some difficulty, but I apprehend infinitely less, in inducing people not to enter the
shilling. Indeed, I consider this as the only difficulty in decimal scale ; but I have no fear of
quickly overcoming it. -
44. Yes. I do not see the import.
45. The change of the farthing is unimportant. The poorest creature in the streets refers
everything to a larger coin, and these are not changed.
All evidence and all experience show that coins down to something like a farthing cannot be
neglected, even in tradesmen’s bills. -
The fraction of an American cent is too small for decimals. See note on No. 24. The instance
proves nothing.
46. As I have said, Nos. 42 and 43, I do not think this possible.
47. The Portuguese subdivisions are liable to the same remark as the American, the thousandth
part of a dollar is too small: and the hundredth part of a franc is too small. The English coinage
is adapted with peculiar felicity to a Decimal System.
48. I think that the farthing or mil is required as a member in the same Decimal System as the
rest ; and that the present copper coinage might be well retained, the halfpenny and light penny
becoming two and four mils, and the heavy penny becoming five mils, till new coins should be
provided.
49. I do not think it possible. Nobody would use the permission.
50. Sometimes people would say “so many florins,” just as we now say “thirty shillings;” and
“so many mils,” as we say “so many pence.” No more difficulty, trouble, or confusion, than at
present.
51. I know not ; nor do I think it important.
52. I do not see that it is.
53. I do not draw the same inference. I only remark that their fundamental unit is much
smaller than ours.
I have referred repeatedly (see No. 24) to the unfitness of the American cent for further
decimalization.
54. Yes; the monies of account to the same number as at present.
55. No disadvantage that I perceive.
56. The first question is doubtful; I think unimportant.
The second has been abundantly treated above.
57. I do not see the least reason for assenting to these two conclusions.
58. Certainly ; but this has been abundantly discussed above. -
59. In the present system there are two columns for shillings and one for pence, three in all,
and great trouble in passing from one to the other. In the Decimal System there are also three
columns (of which one would be a little more troublesome than the first column of shillings), no
trouble in passing from one to the other, and four times the accuracy.
60. It will, in some measure.
61. Omit the 3, and I assent to this. -
62. I do not think the apprehensions well founded. Everybody regards the copper coin merely
as change for silver. -
I think it is unnecessary to compare it with the decimal penny scale, which I regard as totally
impossible.
5
G. B. Airy,
Astronomer Royal.
C 2
20 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
G. B. Airy,
Astronomer Royal.
Geo. Arbuthnot,
Esq.
63. The advantage would be experienced by all who buy multiples at a shop, that is, by
everybody. e fe o e
I think the assumption in the last clause is quite unfounded. I do not believe that there is
any class to whom the penny and its divisions are important, except as change for silver.
64. I believe that the decimal scale is the superior for these calculations. See an instance, in
my evidence before Committee of House of Commons, relating to the price of gas.
G. B. AllRY.
April 17, 1857.
OBSERVATIONS ON SOME OF LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS.
(Communicated by Lord Overstone.)
GEO. ARBUTHNOT, Esq.
Answers to Questions 4, 5, and 6. The primary use of coins is to make payments, and there can
be no doubt that a system of coinage would be imperfect which does not give facility for settling
retail transactions.
It is not essential that current coins should correspond in all repects with the money of account;
but it is at least convenient that the principal coin should represent or coincide with the integer
of the money of account, and that the subordinate coins should represent or be readily convertible
into the fractional denominations of the same money.
Our present monetary system meets every requirement in respect of suitableness for retail trans-
actions and harmony between the coinage and money of account. I conceive that the questions
for consideration are, whether the Decimal System could be substituted for the subsisting one
without material loss of these advantages, and whether it offers in itself such marked advantages as
to render it desirable to incur the risk of change.
I and 7. I should be disposed on these considerations to answer the first and seventh questions
in the negative. At the same time I do not think that the inferences to which many of the suc-
ceeding questions lead are fully borne out.
8, 9, 10, and 11. There can be no doubt of the facility which the duodecimal scale affords, from
its greater power of subdivision, for retail dealings; and it may not be unworthy of remark that it
has been adhered to throughout all the changes of our coinage since the time of the Conquest.
The first gold coin which obtained general currency, namely, the noble, represented the multiple of
a penny, its value being 6s. 8d. It was followed by the mark, value 13s. 4d.
The pound sterling, the integer of our money of account, did not obtain a permanent represen-
tative in the coinage until its settlement in 1816. The fixed habits of centuries ought not to be
disregarded, more especially when they are obviously founded on considerations of popular con-
venience. Yet I think that it cannot be held that a Decimal System “must be less ſavourable to
“distinctness of conception, to facility of recollection, and to readiness and ease in mental calcula-
“tion, than our present system.” (I omit the word “binary,” because a strictly binary system of
coinage does not exist.) In small retail transactions the opportunity of computation by aliquot parts
affords great facility; but when large sums are involved 1 conceive that a decimal scale could be
worked mentally with greater ease, either in multiplication, addition, subtraction, or general
computation. -
12. The illustrations in the twelfth question overlook the aid which coins afford, as material
signs of value in mental calculations. The proportion which they bear to each other is borne in
mind by those who use them, and in common dealings they supersede figures. There is even a
tendency to make prices conform to the principal current coins. Thus when the guinea was the
gold coin in use, fees and high-priced commodities were usually reckoned by guineas and half
guineas in preference to the pound, notwithstanding that, from the odd numbers of shillings con-
tained in them, they afforded less facility for binary division than the money of account, and that
the expression of their multiples in accounts required a computation in each case. Eighteenpenny
tokens formerly occupied a similar position in small transactions. If a Decimal System were
established, the coins adapted to it would become the common signs and measure of value. People
would not generally speak of 375 mils, but of 3 florins and 75 cents, or perhaps 1} shilling. The old
names would generally be retained in the case of equivalent coins, and popular names would be
given to new ones, if the decimal nomenclature should be found inconvenient.
Section III. I am inclined to think that a Decimal Coinage would not work satisfactorily with
our existing system of weights and measures, and that it is to these that the principle, if it be
adopted, should be applied in the first instance.
(Section IV.) It is, however, to be observed that the defect which attaches to a Decimal System
from the want of facility for binary division may be materially diminished, or even removed alto-
gether, by the adoption of an integer of small value, or by the addition to a larger one of an
increased number of decimal places. The advantage afforded by the Decimal System is that
computations are carried on without break from a low figure, and the place at which the decimal
point should be introduced is in fact arbitrary.
In the examples afforded in question 36, the inconveniences experienced in the United States
are referred to, and it is asked, whether, if a decimal coinage be introduced into this country, the
same inconvenience will not equally occur : By the term “a Decimal Coinage,” it seems to be
assumed that the Mil System would be adopted without modification. Now, of all the systems of
Decimal Coinage which have hitherto been established, that of the United States affords the
strongest example of the practical inconvenience pointed out. The cent, which is the lowest
denomination in the coinage of that country, is nearly equivalent to our halfpenny: the dollar
being the unit, the power of binary division stops at a quarter of that coin, or 25 cents, equivalent
to 1s. 0#d. We do not find that the inconvenience referred to exists to the same extent in France
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS 21
where the franc being the unit, the cent of that coin represents one fifth of a sous piece, and
binary division of the unit may be carried down to 5 sous. Still less does it exist in Portugal,
where the decimal subdivision of the unit, the milrei, equivalent to a dollar, is carried down to three
decimal places, the rei being equivalent to one-fifth of our farthing.
But although the particular inconvenience referred to may be avoided by the adoption of a low
decimal scale, it may be objected that inconvenience of another character would arise from the
great addition to the number of figures in accounts.
A Decimal Coinage, with the pound sterling for the unit, subdivided into mils, would occupy an:
intermediate position, in respect to the value of the lowest denomination, between the systems of
the United States and of France. Binary division of the pound would be carried down to 25 mils,
equivalent to 6d. . Without, however, interfering much, with the simplicity of the system, the
inconvenience which is dwelt upon in Lord Overstone's paper might be greatly mitigated by the
recognition of half mils in the coinage. The binary subdivision could then be carried down to
12; mils, equivalent to 3d. of our present money, and the stumbling block of the impossibility of
dividing the florin by the divisors of the ounce would be overcome.
G. ARBUTHNOT.
June 3, 1857.
J. J. BENNETT, Esq.
It is right that I should state that my qualifications for offering an opinion upon the subject
consist solely in an acquaintance with the ordinary transactions of every-day life, a great
fondness for reckoning, and a considerable amount of practice in calculations both decimal
and mixed.
Answer to Question 1. I am decidedly of opinion that no change in our present system of coins
is desirable; and I believe it to be the general opinion, as it is my own, that the florin was a
useless addition to the existing coinage.
2. See my answer to Question 1.
3. I consider “our present system of coins” as the most convenient system in existence “for
the purposes of retail transactions, i.e., for paying and receiving.” In mental calculations it is
in my opinion greatly superior to any Decimal System, and infinitely so to the pound and mil
scheme. In account-keeping, I believe that the supposed advantages of greater facility in a
Decimal System are more than counterbalanced by the greater risk of error attached to it from
the wearisome monotony of its operations, and the misplacement of the decimal points by ignorant
or careless computers. In calculations of a higher order, decimals are of essential importance,
and are already extensively used by the educated men engaged in such calculations, who find no
difficulty in the conversion of our present currency into decimals, and the re-conversion of these
into pounds, shillings, and pence, whenever this is needed in their calculations.
4. I consider coins (whether they be regarded 'as fractional subdivisions of an integer or as
aggregations of smaller integers) as destined primarily to facilitate payments. It is only in a
secondary point of view, and where (as in the case of our present coinage) there is a perfect
coincidence between the coins and the system of accounts, that they become of importance in
facilitating accounts.
5. From my answers to the preceding questions it will be seen that I consider our present
system to be the most desirable both for retail trade and for the keeping of accounts. But even if
it were otherwise, and it became necessary to subordinate the one to the other, I cannot hesitate
for an instant to regard retail trade as the primary object to the uses of which the currency
should be made subservient. The transactions of retail trade are in the proportion of at least a
thousand to one to wholesale dealings; they are in the great majority of instances the subject of
immediate payment in money ; and they constitute the entire sum of the pecuniary dealings of the
poorer and less instructed classes, as well as a large share of the dealings of all.
6. I believe the existing coinage to be admirably adapted for “adjusting with readiness and
simplicity the multiplied variety of small payments.” And I never heard from any person
practically engaged in retail trade “any complaint against our present system of coins in this
respect.” . I may add that in the whole circle of my acquantance, so far as I am aware of their
opinions on this subject, (and I have taken much pains to ascertain them,) a very small minority
indeed, and those, as it appears to me, entirely on theoretieal grounds, are at all favourable to
any change.
7. I do not recommend, but on the contrary deprecate most strongly, “the introduction of the
decimal principle into our coinage.”
8–10. The impossibility under the Decimal System of breaking “the integer into as many
clear fractional parts as we now obtain under our present system of coins" has always appeared to
me an insurmountable objection to its introduction. Its great “inferiority as compared with a
coinage founded on a combination of the binary with the duodecimal” and vicesimal scale is so
obvious, and the extreme importance of this fractional divisibility in the great mass of the
transactions of every-day life is so familiar to all practical men, that on this account alone a
Decimal System would be at once rejected by the great bulk of the community as an impolitic,
inconvenient, and retrograde measure.
11. There can be no doubt of the correctness of this remark. The form 12s. 6d., for example,
(and the same may be said of almost every other ordinary element of calculation,) is much more
distinct in the conception, facile in the recollection, and capable of ready and easy use in
mental calculation, than when represented by 625 mils.
12–15. I agree so entirely with the conclusions which would naturally be drawn from these
questions, as here stated, and from the tables and other calculations by which they are illustrated,
Geo. Arbuthnot,
Esq.
J. J. Bennett, Esq.
C 3
22 DECim AL CóñNAGE CóMMISSION: "* • … .
;- *
# -
J. J. Bennett, Esq.
that I consider it quite unnecessary to reply to them in detail. All the advantages in regard to
mental calculation (which is from its great comparative frequency by far the most important
object) are in favour of our present mixed system. Among these, not the least depends upon
the extent of the divisibility of the larger units. In this respect we have some reason to regret
even the loss of the guinea, which it was perhaps desirable' to withdraw from circulation on
account of its incommensurability with the system of accounts, but which was capable of still more
numerous subdivision than even the pound, adding, as it did, the divisors 7 and 9, at the expense
only of the loss of the division by 5; for which reason, among others, it still continues in nominal
use for various purposes. - - t
16. I am decidedly opposed to the introduction of the Decimal Principle either into our
coinage or into our system of weights and measures, but I should presume that it must be obvious
to the supporters of a Decimal Coimage that its adoption without the concurrent introduction of
a Decimal System of Weights and Measures, would necessarily deprive it of nearly all the advan-
tages which they anticipate from it, and add to (instead of diminishing) the existing difficulties
of calculation, even upon paper.
17––24. There can be do doubt that in the subdivision of articles for sale which admit of such
a mode of division the natural system (or that which is most consonant with the wants and habits
of mankind) is binary, consisting of a continual halving or doubling. In this manner the stone of
14 lbs. has originated from three successive halvings of the hundredweight, and the stone of 8 lbs.
and gallon of 8 pints have originated from three successive doublings of the pound and pint. In
this manner the pound, the pint, and the yard (in the measurement of drapers’ goods) are sub-
divided by continual halvings. This is so directly foundéd in the nature of things that any
system (such as the Decimal) which will not admit of it is obviously unsuited to the requirements
of retail trade, and could only serve to embarrass and confound. It scarcely needed the experience
of the United States and of France to prove this almost self-evident truth ; but the experience of
both is so clear and distinct as to admit neither of denial nor of doubt.
25–27. With the highest deference for the opinions of Sir John Herschel, Professor De Morgan,
and the Astronomer Royal, on purely mathematical questions, I must confess that on a question
entirely practical regarding the most convenient system of coinage, or of weights and measures,
I have a much greater confidence in the opinions of practical men, such as the late Lord
Ashburton ; on such questions I appeal from those who are chiefly conversant with abstruse calcu-
lations to those whose avocations make them thoroughly acquainted with the business transactions
of every-day life. For these, I consider the Decimal System, whether applied to the coinage or
to weights and measures, as peculiarly unfitted. Let me add that astronomers and mathematicians
themselves practically confess that there are subjects for which a decimal mode of division is not
desirable, inasmuch as they steadily hold fast by the mixed and duodecimal systems which have
prevailed from all antiquity in regard to the division of the circle by 360 degrees and by 24 hours.
Before they insist so pertinaciously on compelling others to abandon a mixed system for a decimal,
they should in common decency set the example by adopting an exclusively Decimal System in
their own proper pursuits. -
28. The increased amount of calculation required for the solution of this question, propounded by
a warm supporter of the pound and mill)ecimal System, affords a striking illustration of the increased
labour which would result from the introduction of that system, even in regard to calculations
upon paper, to which I have adverted in my answer to Question 16. -
30. On this point I regret to differ from so great a practical authority as Mr. Slater, but the
facility of subdivision being the principle upon which articles are now sold in dozens, and the
practice being thus founded in the nature of things, I feel convinced that they would still continue
to be sold in dozens, notwithstanding the difficulties in calculation to which a decimal division of
the coinage would give rise ; and the examples both of the United States and of France confirm
by long experience the soundness of this conclusion.
33. Most of the great mathematicians, past and present, have concurred in regarding the
duodecimal scale of notation as more perfect than the decimal, and the practice of all ages proves
that a combination of the two has always been considered as the most useful for the common
purposes of life. This combination we possess in a very perfect form in our system of coinage
and accounts, and in our measures of length. The division of the circle into 360 degrees, of each
degree into 60 minutes, of each minute into 60 seconds, and so forth, affords another striking instance
of the advantages of this combination, which no other scheme that has been propounded has ever had
the smallest chance of superseding. The successive divisions by 360--60-i-60,&c., and by 24-i-60-i-60,
&c., seem at first sight very embarrassing, but they are found in the highest and most abstruse calcu-
lations to answer their purpose better than any others that could be devised. The relations of
space do not afford us any easy and natural means of comparing one unit with another ; but the
relations of time (as regards the earth, the sun, round which it revolves, and the moon its
satellite) furnish a near approximation to a natural division, which begins with the duodecimal
and is continued through a mixed system of decimal and duodecimal. Thus the year is naturally
divided into twelve months, and the months into an average of about 30 days; and the practice
of all ages has further concurred in dividing the day into 24 hours, the hours into 60 minutes,
and so forth. These divisions, founded on nature, and fixed by practice, have an important
bearing upon the question of deserting a mixed decimal and duodecimal system of coinage for one
purely decimal, inasmuch as they enter as essential elements into a great variety of monetary
transactions. No proposal for decimalizing the divisions of the year or the hours of the day, and
such have frequently been made, has ever met with the slightest acceptation ; nor is it likely
that such a change will be made while nature, custom, and convenience are allowed to outweigh
the prestige of a merely theoretical uniformity.
34–41. My concurrence in the inferences which appear to me to be inevitable from the premises
contained in these questions has been already so strongly stated, that on many of the points
contained in them I consider it unnecessary to do more than refer to my former answers. “In
all matters of abstract number and multiplication of material things,” we are compelled to employ
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 23
the notation in common use, which is the decimal; “whilst in dealing with material subdivision J. J. Bennett, Esq.
in weights and measures, and the retail transactions arising out of them” the binary system is by - .
far the most convenient and influential, and has consequently become the prevalent mode of
division. The necessity of providing for thirds and sixths in many of the most ordinary transac-
tions of life renders the duodecimal division the next in order of importance ; while the rarity of
those occasions on which a division by 5 becomes necessary, combined with the impossibility of
subjecting the number 10 to a second halving, or to subdivision by any other number, detracts so
much from the value of the decimal mode of division as to make it the least convenient of all.
In our existing system of coinage we have the means of applying all these different modes of sub-
division in the most complete and perfect manner. The argument in favour of adopting the purely
decimal system to the exclusion of all others appears to be founded solely upon its coincidence
with the system of notation in common use; whence it is inferred that with a Decimal System of
coinage all monetary calculations would be made with greater facility, and accuracy than under
the present mixed system. Now if this be true at all it is true of the Decimal System in the
abstract, and consequently equally true of every decimal system that has been propounded. But
what faith have the Decimalists themselves in this proposition, which lies at the very root of their
argument 2 Are the supporters of any of the numerous decimal schemes that have been suggested
ready and willing, if unable to obtain that which they themselves propose, to accept any other
decimal scheme in its place (no matter which) rather than retain the existing system 2 Or,
rather, do they not one and all proclaim that if they are refused the particular scheme on which
they have set their hearts they would rather, much rather, remain as they are 2 What becomes,
then, of the abstract value of the Decimal System even in the estimation of those who use it as a
main argument in favour of a change 2 For myself I altogether deny this supposed abstract
superiority of the Decimal System as regards all the ordinary transactions of life. To mental
calculations, in the market or over the counter, it is wholly inapplicable. And, even in regard to
the great majority of ordinary business calculations made upon paper, I maintain that under an
unmixed Decimal System they would be at least as laborious and at least as liable to error as
under the present mixed system of accounts. Ask any clerk who has been in the habit of adding
up long columns of pounds, shillings, and pence, where his greatest liability to error occurs, and
he will tell you that it is in the column of pounds. And it is natural that it should be so. In
adding up the columns of shillings and pence the attention is kept alive by the varying values of
the different denominations, and errors seldom take place ; but in the column of pounds the
unvarying succession of units and of tens wearies the attention, and mistakes occur much more
frequently from the wearisome uniformity of the mental effort. How much more frequent would
these mistakes become if there were no interruption at all to this dreary monotony. In the
processes of multiplication and division, too, a new source of error (and that a large one) would
arise from the misplacement of the decimal point. Every one who is conversant with decimal
calculations knows well how necessary it is to keep the attention constantly alive to this important
element, and may readily judge for himself how frequently ignorance or carelessness would
mistake its proper position. Of the difficulty of guarding against this source of error, one single
instance, supplied by a work connected with the present discussion, may suffice. Among the
examples illustrative of the greater accuracy and facility of the Decimal System appended to a
clever pamphlet in its favour, there is one in which (by an error in this important particular) the
number of pounds sterling contained in a given number of francs is decupled. On the subject of deci-
mal points I will only add, that in many scientific works published in France, Belgium, and Holland,
in which the metrical system is employed, and the measurement of objects is given in metres and
their decimals, the continual blundering in the placing of the decimal point, together with the
false value given to the decimals by a mistake in the number of 0's by which they are preceded,
are fertile sources of innumerable errors.” So much for the supposed greater facility and accuracy
* I see it constantly stated by the advocates of a Decimal System of Coinage that it is quite independent of
decimal points, and that consequently no mistakes can possibly occur in relation to them. This assertion is quite
beyond my comprehension, when I consider the infinite variety of questions which cannot be correctly worked
without a strict attention to that important particular. I quote from a circular issued on the 1st of July 1857, by
Mr. William Brown, the Chairman of the Decimal Association, the simple, unmodified statement that “there is no
puzzle about the decimal point connected with the system,” together with the two following sums (the only oncs there
given) in illustratation of its advantages. - -
The question to be solved is, “What is the duty upon three butts of currants weighing gross weight, 59 cwt. 1 qr.
16 lbs, - 6,652 lbs., the duty being 15s. per cwt., and 5 per cent, added, the tare being 14 [lbs.] per cent. ” [cwt.]
lbs.
#) 6,652
831 - 5 tare 12% per cent. = }.
5,820. 5 nett.
7 duty 14s. per cent. = 7 florins.
40,743' 5
, 20
14,870
12
10,440 duty £40 14s. 10d.
lbs.
# ) 6,652
831 ° 5 tare.
5,820' 5 -
7 duty 7 florins per cent.
4:40° 743 answer
The practised mind, acquainted with decimals, will readily detect the means by which the conclusions are arrived at;
but to the unpractised I will venture to say that a greater “puzzle,” and that “puzzle about the decimal point,” has
seldom been presented. No explanation is attempted to be given of the process by which the position of the decimal
point is determined. -
C 4
24 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J. J. Bennett, Esq. *
| -
of decimals in the abstract. But over and above these objections the pound and mil system
proposed for our coinage and accounts is liable to many important objections peculiar to itself, to
which I shall recur in my answers to some of the following questions.
42. I do not admit that any inconvenience is felt in the processes of account-keeping and of
ordinary calculations under the existing system, which would not be increased, rather than
diminished by a Decimal System of recording the amounts ; and, therefore, I see no advantage
but a positive disadvantage in the introduction of such a system. And I believe that in Portugal
for instance, where a Decimal System of recording amounts co-exists with a coinage bearing in
some of its denominations a duodecimal relation to the lowest integer, the two concurrent systems,
although working harmoniously together, are found to embarrass rather than facilitate the
ordinary processes of calculation.
43. The advantage of the penny system over the pound and mil system, is strongly evidenced
in the example given ; but the penny system shows no superiority to the existing system, the
number of figures (rejecting the five unnecessary 0's in the column of £’s) being the same in
both, and the process of addition quite as easy in the one as in the other; while there is a positive
disadvantage in the necessity of conversion into the lower denomination, and a loss of that
distinctness of comprehension which has been before so justly insisted on as one of the charac-
teristics of the present system.
45. I have not the smallest doubt of the great superiority of the penny system over the pound
and mil system, for many reasons which are quite conclusive in my mind, but which it is
unnecessary for me to state, inasmuch as I object to the introduction of any Decimal System
whatever. Of all the Decimal Schemes proposed that which takes the penny for its basis is the
only one which I consider possible ; but it is liable to all the objections which, in my opinion,
render a Decimal System in the abstract (and consequently all Decimal Systems) the most
unfitted that can be imagined for the common purposes of life.
49. If the Decimal System were really so simple and convenient in account-keeping and in
ordinary calculation as it is represented, would it not long ere this have been generally employed
for that purpose ? The difficulty of conversion is not great, the process is simple and well known,
and every one is at liberty to keep his accounts and make his calculatfons in Decimals if he thinks
fit. But practical men have not thought it worth their while voluntarily to adopt the Decimal
System—for what good reason then should they be compelled into it 2
50–57. The Decimal System of Coinage recommended by the Committee of the House of
Commons and by the Decimal Association, contemplates four monies of account. These are thus
stated in a circular signed by Mr. William Brown, the Chairman of the Association, dated
July 1st, 1857. “Our money-table would stand thus:–Ten farthings = a cent ; ten cents = a
florin ; ten florins = a pound.” In this extract it will be seen that the word mil is abandoned in
favour of the farthing ; but as the identification with the existing farthing is not correct, that
term cannot properly be applied to the system, which must still be called for distinction “the
pound and mil scheme.” Of these four monies of account one only, the cent, could possibly be
dispensed with in practice: to speak of hundreds of mils in the ordinary transactions of trade would
be simply to render the language of commerce unintelligible ; the florin must consequently be used
in common parlance, and thus an intermediate term would be introduced between the integer
and its ultimate subdivisions—a thing unknown in practice to any of the Decimal Systems in
existence, and highly calculated to embarrass and confuse. Even the lumping together of the
two lower denominations, which the experience of all existing Decimal Coinages proves to be a
practical necessity, would be attended with the extreme disadvantage of yielding unmanageable
sums, the combinations of which could scarcely be borne in the recollection, although they would be
continually required in the most ordinary transactions. Every sum exceeding 24d. of our present
money would be expressed by two places of figures, and every amount exceeding 2s. by three.
By this means “facility of recollection ” would be entirely lost, and all the mental calculations
founded upon it must in minds of ordinary capacity be given up. Let us take a single example
from the business of a butcher's shop. Here, in nine cases out of ten, the butcher's wife keeps
the accounts and makes the calculations, which under the existing system are performed with
such facility that the wife's enunciation of the price of the joint follows instantly, and as it were
in the same breath, with her husband's statement of the weight and price per pound. Thus, for
instance, the butcher's wife requires no appreciable time for calculating that the price of a
leg of mutton, weighing 9 lbs. 6 oz., at 8tl. per lb. is 6s. 8d. But suppose the price converted into
mils, the butcher would call the weight and price “9 lbs. 6 oz., at 33 ;” the wife could not trust
herself to make a mental calculation, but would require a calculating paper ; it would of course
Let me add, that the same computation, professedly worked under the existing system, is in the same circular spun
out to 174 figures, while any practical man would work it as follows in 46; 10 of waich depend on the addition of 5 per
cent., which does not enter into the formula by which the decimal sums are compused:—
cwt. qrs. Ibs.
8) 59 1 16
7 1 20 tare.
51 3 24
Add 4
52 0 0 at 15s. = 4:39 0 0
1)2duct 4 = H's cwt. (;
38 19- 6
1 18 11
§40 18 5
--------
A multitude of similar instances of exaggeration of the labour of computation under the existing system occur
throughout the publications of the decimalists.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. - 25
involve a considerable loss of time to put upon paper the following sum, and a hundred similar J. J. Bennett, Esq.
OneS :- s
Q 33
9
297
12
309
and the result would be that in a shop of large custom, instead of the wife being capable, as at
present, of keeping the accounts, the butcher would find it necessary to employ one or more clerks
for the purpose ; while the customers would also have to go over the calculations upon paper to
check their correctness. The baker would be equally puzzled with the butcher to make his
calculations on the new system, the figures of which are the most inconvenient possible for these
transactions of every day life ; and the remark applies with equal force to the chief commodities
sold by the grocer, the cheesemonger, the draper, &c. These tradesmen would one and all consider
that person as little better than a madman who should tell them that they would find a great
advantage in making their calculations in farthings instead of in pence; and yet this is essentially
the proposal of the advocates of the pound and mil system. It is only necessary to place in
parallel columns the range of prices through which the quartern loaf, the pound of meat, the
pound of sugar, the pound of cheese, the pound of butter, the pound of soap, the pound of candles,
the cwt. of coals, the yard of calico, &c., usually vary, to show the infinite superiority of the
present system over that which it is proposed to substitute in its place.
d. mils. d. mils. d. mils.
5 - 21 9; ~ 40 14 -: 58
5% ~ 23 1() – 42 14; - 60
6. = 25 10% = 44 15 = 63
6# F' 27 11 == 46 15% - 65
7 – 29 11% = 48 16 = 67
7% = 31 * 12 = 50 &c. &c.
8 = 33 12]. - 52
8% = 35 ig" - 54
9 F 38 13; - 56
It is unnecessary to point out how vast a proportion of the retail business of the country is
represented by the articles to which these figures apply; or how injurious must be the effect of
the conversion of pence into mils on these the most important transactions of the great bulk of the
community. -
56. It cannot be doubted that the high comparative value of our highest denomination' of
account is a source of great advantage for both the reasons stated in the question, irrespective of
other considerations which make it desirable that it should be retained. But if the alternative
should ever arise of abandoning either the pound or the penny, which I sincerely trust will never .
occur, the balance of “convenience and advantage” is so vastly in favour of the penny that I can
have no hesitation in regarding its preservation as of infinitely greater importance.
57. This is one of the many evil consequences which would result from the pound and mil
scheme, and which render it, of all the decimal schemes proposed, the most inconvenient for
COIſlDſlOIl Ulse.
58–61. These questions can only be answered affirmatively, and present in themselves sufficient
objections to the pound and mil scheme to establish its extreme inconvenience in comparison with
the existing system. *
62 and 63. This “absolute change in the value of all the lower coins,” or, in other words, the
incommensurability of the pound and mil scheme with the existing system in regard to all the
ordinary transactions of retail trade, affords one of the strongest objections to its introduction,
on account of the never-ending confusion, contention, and injustice to which it could not fail to
give rise. Those who speak of such a change in the coinage and accounts of a country as a
fact accomplished as soon as commanded, as a thing done “once for all,” or even as the work of
a month, a year, or an age, ignore alike the experience of every country in which it has been
attempted, and the plain dictates of common sense. The idea of the existing coinage and system
of accounts is too strongly imprinted in the minds of all to give place, without a long and
weary struggle, to any new system ; the prices of commodities would for a very long period be
comprehended with difficulty without a constant reference to their values under the old ; and, as
these (under the pound and mil scheme) would very rarely coincide with each other, there would
be added to the doubts and difficulties of calculation the certainty that either the seller or the
buyer must lose by the change. In itself this would be felt, as it is, as gross injustice. I admit
freely that under the pressure of necessity, were our system of coinage and accounts so confused
or imperfect (as has been almost universally the case wherever a change has been made) as to
give rise to greater injustice,—then, and for that reason only, the lesser evil must be preferred.
But firmly believing, as I do, that our existing system is the best that could be devised, or ever,
going no farther than admitting (as the advocates of the change are themselves compelled to
admit) that the existing system is complete in itself, and fulfils all its purposes with certainty
and precision, I maintain that there is no necessity, that there is not even an excuse, for the
perpetration of this injustice. It is said, however, that the amount of injustice would be smail,
and that what was lost on one side might be gained on another ; but the soundness of this
argument, derived from the school which teaches us to “rob Peter to pay Paul,” seems to me
pretty nearly on a par with its morality. It is certain that in this, as in all doubtful cases, the
weakest would go to the wall. A single illustration will suffice to show the working of the
change in this particular ; it is not one selected by myself, but one which has been adopted by
the most active of the promoters of the pound and mil scheme, as a proof of the facility with
which the new system would be brought into operation : it is that of the orange-boy sellin
D -
:26 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J.J. Bennett, Esq.; his 9Fºgºs at “two a penny.” The cry, it is admitted, would be still the same ; but the idea
ºne-ses-sº
attached to the penny would be a different one, and would signify four mils. Now let us see
the effect of the change upon the boy's earnings. We will suppose that he starts in the morning
with 100 oranges, and that he sells them all before night. For these 100 oranges he has paid
3s. under the present system, or their exact equivalent of 150 mils under the new. But under
the present system his oranges at “two a penny” produce him 4s.2d.; under the new he will find
that he has 200 mils, equivalent only to 4s. The profit on his day's labour is thus reduced from
1s. 2d. to 1s., and “he knows the reason why ſ” One seventh of his scanty earnings have been
struck off for the sake of introducing a system which it is supposed will enable those whose
dealings are in thousands and tens of thousands to dispense with the services of one or two
clerks, Will he, smarting under the sense of injustice and of robbery committed upon himself,
be thereby strengthened to resist the temptation, should it fall in his way, of robbing others in
return? The wealthy may depend upon it that in their dealings with the poor example teaches
more than precept ; and that a bad example will never lack imitators, with whom “it shall go
hard but they will better the instruction.” .
I will not dwell upon the difficulties connected with postage, stamps, customs duties, and other
taxes, tolls, soldiers' wages, and all the great variety of contracts between man and man into
which pence and their subdivisions, inconvertible into mils, enter as an essential element. So
much has been already said upon this branch of the subject, and it has been rendered so evident
that great injustice would result from the change, that those who recommend it must be regarded
as sinning with their eyes open. r . - .
64 and 65. The Question of the supposed advantage to education by “the substitution of simple
for compound arithmetic, which it is expected will arise from the introduction of Decimal Coinage,”
is too large to be treated in the off-hand manner in which the Decimalists have hitherto spoken
of it. It demands a thorough and complete examination in all its bearings, the result of which
would not, I am convinced, tell in favour of the exclusively Decimal System. Supposing the
coinage to be decimalized to-morrow, the difficulties of compound arithmetic would not thereby be
obviated or even materially lessened, while weights and measures remain undecimalized ; and it is
certain that in many cases, as shown by the example given in Question 28, the labour of calculation
would be increased. But even with decimal weights and measures, as well as decimal accounts of
money, there would still remain a multitude of questions into which the subdivisions of time
(years, months, weeks, days, hours, minutes, &c.) enter as essential parts, which could only be
worked by compound arithmetic, or by some circuitous substitute. The abolition of compound
arithmetic is therefore an untenable assumption, which certainly would not result from the mere
“introduction of Decimal Coinage,” and which never can be fully carried out. But even were it
possible to effect it, would the advantages to education be so great or so unmixed as the theorists
maintain 2 The object of education is the acquisition of useful knowledge ; and at least three-
fourths of all education is devoted, and justly devoted, to the cultivation of the memory, and the
sharpening of the faculties of the mind. It might shorten the process of education, but certainly
would not improve it, to limit it to the mere practical necessities of the moment. In this point of
view, to cut short the multiplication-table at 10, and to make the processes of addition,
subtraction, multiplication, and division as nearly as possible mechanical operations, might
perhaps save some time both to master and pupil, but at the expense of cramping the child's
faculties, limiting the amount of his knowledge, and obstructing his progress in life. The boy
who knows no more of figures than this would amount to might possibly become a hack-clerk, and
get through his mechanical work with tolerable correctness, but he would have received no
instruction giving him the smallest insight into those multiplied relations of numbers which are
and must ever continue to be of the utmost importance in the business of life. Of the past, in the
history of which figures standing in a great variety of relations to each other would be continually
staring him in the face, he must (as far as those figures are concerned) be content to remain in
total ignorance. Of the monies, the weights, and measures of other non-decimalized countries
he could take no account. Questions would continually arise, let us decimalize as we may, even
in ordinary business transactions, to which he could give no answer. And while he thus felt
himself barred, obstructed, and kept down, he would see others, his contemporaries, better in-
structed and better qualified than himself, taking a higher position, and rising in the world, simply
because their parents and schoolmasters had not suffered themselves to be seduced by a plausible
theory into the fatal error of denying them a knowledge which it is essential they should possess.
The supposition, however, that education would be so limited is simply “a mockery, a delusion,
and a snare.” The saving of time in education is a mere phantasy, which has no real existence
in countries where the coinage has been decimalized, and would be no more realized with
us than with them. In all the American school-books on arithmetic that, I have seen,
without one single exception, (and I have examined at least a dozen of those in common use,
and published within the last fifteen years,) compound arithmetic, always including that of the
English monies of account (or “sterling money”) occupies quite as large a proportional space as
in English books of the same character. The only difference between the two is that in the
American there is an additional heading with distinct rules for “Federal money,” which is not
treated of under the title of simple, but under that of compound arithmetic, and many of the
questions in which are decidedly compound. In like manner, in French school-books, the rules of
simple addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, are followed by directions, of a more or
less complex character, for the performance of the same calculations when (as in money, weights,
and measures) decimals entel' into their composition ; and these rules are succeeded by others
having relation to “Nombres Complexes,” in which the old French system of livres, sols, and
deniers (exactly corresponding in its modes of subdivision with the English pounds, shillings, and
pence) takes a conspicuous share. There are also superadded rules and tables for converting the
old monies, weights, and measures into the new, and vice versá. From all of which it appears
that both in the United States of America and in France, education, far from being simplified, has
been complicated, by the introduction of the Decimal System ; and who that seriously considers
the entire subject can doubt that the introduction of new modes of division for all ordinary things
must necessarily have the same result among ourselves? . e
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 27
. I pass over a great many other points connected with the educational part of the question; but
there is one which is much too important to be omitted,—I allude to the processes of mental
arithmetic; which many acquire by habit and practice alone, and which others derive from rules
given by those who have deeply studied the properties of numbers. With a very large portion,
unhappily too large a portion, of the community, this is the only arithmetic possible; and yet
there are few mên, women, or even children of ten years old, of ordinary capacity, who cannot
(although entirely uneducated, in the school sense of the term) calculate in our existing coinage
all the little money questions which occur to them in daily practice. The power of mental
calculation necessary, for this purpose has been gradually acquired, like their knowledge of most
things around them, by experience; and it seems to me that nothing short of necessity should
induce us to deprive them of the fruits of this experience, and to compel them, as it were, to
begin the world again with a system of ideas to which they are strangers. The same thing may
be said with reference to the peculiar mental calculations connected with almost every branch of
trade, the facilities for which depend entirely on the varied relations which figures bear to each
other in money, weights, and measures, and which would be abolished under a Decimal System.
Within the last 20 or 30 years especially, the art of mental calculation has been brought to great
perfection with reference to almost all the purposes of life; its great advantages are mani-
fest ; it forms an important part of the education of all who are engaged in trade; and yet it is
proposed, by way of improvement, to render all the commonly practised methods of this art
useless or impracticable. -
... In conclusion, I beg to apologize for the unexpected length to which my answers to some of the
questions have run. I feel, however, that far from exhausting the practical objections to the
adoption of the decimal theory, I have only lightly touched on some of the most obvious, and as
it appears to me insurmountable, difficulties of the proposed change in our monetary system.
British Museum, July 22, 1857. JoHN JOSEPH BENNETT, F.R.S.
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
H. W. CHISHOLM, Esq.
Answer to Questions 1–11. A main defect in our present coinage is that it is not constructed
upon any regular system. Noo definite principle regulates the differences between the several
coins representing the units of which our coinage consists:– - w
The farthing = } of a penny, 4s of a shilling, and gºt of a pound.
The penny = P, of a shilling, and go of a pound.
- - The shilling = 3% of a pound.
It is true that this defect is rather theoretical than practical, and may not cause any incon-
venience in paying and receiving ready money, and that the practical inconvenience of the present
system may be restricted to its effect in account keeping and calculations. But admitting that
the primary object of coinage is the adjusting retail payments, and that in this respect there is no
just cause of complaint against the present system, it by no means follows that its disadvantage
in other respects, as complicating accounts and calculations, may not justify the substitution of a
simpler system, by which these disadvantages may be remedied, and which may at the same time
be made quite as applicable to retail payments for all practical purposes. In this case, the axiom
“quieta non movere” does not apply. The subject has to be considered in all its details, and
almost every transaction of paying and receiving money involves calculations, or keeping accounts,
or both. Giving change continually makes a calculation necessary. -
It is too much to assert that the question of merit or demerit of any system of coinage is to
be determined alone by its applicability to small payments. That may be a fair test for deciding
what particular coins shall be issued as multiples of the units; as, for example, the silver 3d. and
4d. coins. But in considering the whole system of the coinage it is impossible to leave out its
working in account keeping and calculations. The great defect of the present system is its
complexity, and the more complex the transaction in which the present coinage is mixed up,
the more strongly this defect developes itself. The paying and receiving money, by itself, is
the simplest operation of all, and in this the defect is not apparent; while in more complicated
calculations, such as actuaries are continually engaged in, this defect in the present system is so
great that it necessitates the substitution of the Decimal System.
The numerical system adopted throughout the civilized world is a Decimal System practically
carried out. The numerical is the primary element in a system of coinage, and the Decimal System
is therefore necessarily involved in any system of coinage. The construction of a purely Decimal
System of coinage is consequently much to be recommended, as it is evident that a system
founded on a single necessary and definite principle, acting uniformly, must be more simple and
easy to be comprehended. These qualities would appear to be generally the most favourable
to distinctness of conception, to facility of recollection, and to readiness and ease in mental
calculation. - . . .
The alleged defectiveness of the Decimal principle, the imperfect divisibility of its integers,
applies chiefly to this principle as adopted in our numerical system ; and who is so bold as to pro-
pose altering that numerical system from a decimal to a duodecimal system 2 to change the matural
number of 10 digits to 12? -
For a simple divisional process the binary is the most natural, the most general, and the most
easy. But the present system of coinage cannot be said to be a binary system; nor is the
binary principle much more involved in the present system than in a Decimal System. The
duodecimal scale has so far an advantage over the decimal, that 12 is twice divisible by 2,
without leaving a remainder, whilst 10 is divisible but once. There is but little practical advantage
in 12 being clearly divisible by 3. Division into thirds is very little used, and hardly ever in retail
operations. Who asks for a third of a pound of meat, of tea, of sugar, &c. P. A yard is divided
into halves, quarters, &c., rarely into feet.
12–14. The examples given afford no fair criterion of the relative convenience of the different
systems. In retail transactions why should an amount be stated in mils, when it is never now
J. J. Bennett, Esq.
H. W. Chisholm,
Esq.
D 2
2s DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION : *
H. W. Chisholm,
Esq.
stated in farthings? Shillings and sixpences will remain in circulation if a Decimal Coinage is
established, and for all vivä voce transactions seven-and-sixpence will not require to be called
375 mils, more than the same amount is now called 360 farthings. The most convenient form of
expression will always be that in common use. - *
No practical difficulty is found in the mental addition of sums expressed decimally in France,
where a waiter in a café restaurant tells you in a moment “l'addition” that is to be paid for
breakfast or dinner. Small sums also will be halved as easily as now, when two friends have to
divide 1s.6d. for a cab, and have not the necessary change in their pockets.
An examination of our present coinage shows at once that it is not constructed upon the
divisional principle so much as it is upon the principle of multiples. Thus,
Copper : Farthing, an unit; or as #d, may be conceded as divisional.
- Halfpenny is divisional. º -
Penny, an unit.
Silver: Threepence is clearly a multiple.
- Fourpence ditto. /
Sixpence ditto.
Shilling, an unit.
Florin is clearly a multiple. - -
Half-crown is practically a multiple, though nominally divisional.
Crown is clearly a multiple.
Gold: Half-sovereign is practically a multiple, passing for ten shillings, though nominally
divisional.
- Sovereign an unit.
Is not this a practical proof that our coinage is not constructed by a divisional but rather
by a multiplicational process, by which process also all our tables of money, weights, &c., are
constructed.
The ten digits are the elements of arithmetic, and our arithmetic is therefore decimal arithmetic.
Every process of numeration, multiplication, or division must necessarily be more or less a process
of decimal arithmetic, which is and must be adapted to it.
15. The primary object of a Decimal System is to get rid of the difficulty and complexity
occasioned by fractions with various denominators; and it is obvious that examples in which these
fractions are introduced, do not fairly illustrate the general working of the proposed system of
Decimal Coinage. Nor are these examples of practical importance. It will be seen that under the
present system, the £ is not clearly divisible into 4, #, ºr, Tºr, Tºr, Tºr, T's, and I's parts, and what
practical inconvenience arises in ordinary transactions 2 This inconvenience is experienced only
in more elaborate calculations, and in these decimals are now almost universally employed.
But even supposing that the advantages of the different systems could be tested by the number of
figures required, the examples given, if fairly stated, would tell much in favour of the Decimal
System. Thus,
s. d. Pence. Mils. Farthings. f
1 gé = 20 O = 240 = 1,000 = 960 = 1
# * = IO 0 = 12O = 500 = 480 = * 5
} + = 5 () = 6O = 250 = 240 = * 25
# # = 4 O = 48 = 200 = 192 = * 2
# * = 2 6 = 30 = 125 = 12O = * 125
To £ = 2 O = 24 = 100 = 96 = • I
sº 4 = 1 O = 12 = O50 = 48 = *05
2 4 6 534, 2,225 2,136 2° 225 T
19 figures 19 figures 25 figures 23 figures 15 figures
16. All the arguments urged in favour of a Decimal Coinage are applicable to a Decimal System
of weights and measures, so far as it can be carried out ; for it cannot be applied to all measures.
The number of days in a week cannot possibly be decimalized, nor can the number of weeks in a
month, or months in a year; in fact, all the measures of time are safe from its operation. The
only question among the advocates of a Decimal System appears to be how this system can be
most advantageously introduced, in order that it may be generally applied. A very little consi-
deration will show that the attempt to introduce too great a change at once would lead to certain
failure, and that the application of the Decimal System to coinage in the first instance would be
most favourable to its success, and to the general adoption of the system.
The regulation and issue of the coins in circulation are in the hands of the Government, who have
thus the power of enforcing throughout the kingdom the adoption of a Decimal Coinage, should
such be established by law. It is probable that it is only by this being first effected, that it will be
possible practically to establish a Decimal System of weights and measures. A far less
important change, the uniformity of the present system of weights and measures throughout
the country, though established by law, has failed in being established in practice, being
contrary to the general disposition of the people. How then is it to be hoped that a Decimal
System of weights and measures would be generally adopted, or could be enforced, even if
established by law, unless the public mind were prepared and predisposed to receive it? And
by what means is this effect so likely to be produced as by first establishing a Decimal System
of coinage 2 This is in itself a simple process, a practical application of the Decimal System
to money, the article of all others the most frequently in use, and by all classes of the community.
The principal difficulty of its introduction consists in the change from the present system, and this
having once passed, the minds of the public must necessarily become familiarized with the
operations of the Decimal System, and cannot fail to perceive and to appreciate its advantages,
if they be such as its advocates allege. These considerations appear conclusive as to the expedi-
ency of establishing a Decimal Coinage in the first instance.
30. In countries where the Decimal Coinage has been adopted has a single instance occurred of the
practice of making up articles in tens instead of dozens? Gloves, in France, for instance. But
should this be the consequence of the introduction df the Decimal System, what inconvenience
would result 2. As a general rule the most convenient practice will be adopted and will regulate
itself.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 29
34. The superiority of the Decimal System is here admitted in a very large number of cases; but,
although the most common subdivision of articles purchased in retail transactions is binary, this is
far from being universally the case in material subdivisions of length, capacity, and weight. The
Apothecaries' drachm is divided into three scruples, and the scruple into twenty grains. In
the old Troy weight the ounce is divided into twenty pennyweights, and has been recently deci-
malized. The ton is divided into twenty hundredweights. The inch upon the mathematical
scale is divided into tenths.
The example given of the ordinary subdivision of the yard into halves, quarters, &c., suggests
further matter for consideration. The tabular subdivisions of a yard are not binary; it is sub-
divided into three feet, and the foot into twelve inches. The result is that these tabular sub-
divisions are not used when binary subdivisions are required, these last being applied directly to
the yard as an unit. This fact tends to show that as a matter of convenience the question of these
subdivisions may be safely left to the public to adjust for themselves.
H. W. Chisholm,
Esq.
sºmºmºmºmºsºmº
But leaving out of consideration the admitted superiority of the Decimal System in so large a
number of cases, does it at all follow, from the natural and convenient practice of binary sub-
division of articles purchased in small retail transactions, that the £ sterling should be similarly
treated P What identity or relation is there between the yard of ribbon, or the pound of tea, and
the 38 sterling? or between the yard of ribbon, as an unit to be subdivided, and the price of the
yard of ribbon, which is no unit at all? The yard of ribbon is as likely to be sold for 10d. as for
1s., and the pound of tea for 4s. 9d, as for 5s. In the cheap ticketed shops it is a common practice
to insert a small #d. after the large 6d. a yard. Does the grocer find it necessary to ticket “our
mixture of coffee” at 1s. 4d. a pound instead of 1s. 6d. or 1s. 9d. to accommodate subdividing
purchasers ? In these cases all the apprehended difficulty of subdivision of money now exists
uncomplained of.”
If, however, the binary subdivision of our coinage for the purposes of small retail transactions,
should still be considered of the first importance, and as necessary to be provided for, may it not be
possible to make an arrangement for this object, whilst for all other purposes the Decimal System
may be generally established?
Assuming that the £ sterling must necessarily be the unit of the Decimal Coinage, it must be
allowed to be a great disadvantage that it is an integer of so high a value, that the cent or 100th
part must continually be further subdivided for all small fractional payments, whilst the mil, or 1,000th
part, is of much smaller value than is required for these purposes. Again, the practice of stating
sums in mils will in all cases largely increase the amount, and will tend to add to the number of figures,
and to the difficulty and labour of accounts and calculations. It is true that the inconvenience of
these results will be much lessened by practically making five mils the lowest fraction, as the penny
is at the present time. But five mils are equal to half a cent, and may not one step farther be
taken, and ten mils or one cent be made practically the smallest money of account, subdividing it,
when actually required for small transactions, into half-cents, nearly equivalent to the present
penny, and quarter-cents, to the halfpenny ? For all purposes of calculation the cent may
be decimally extended, but what advantages are proposed to be gained by the use of mils in actual
coinage 2 And will not every purpose be answered by continuing the penny and halfpenny, and
even the farthing, for small payments in the manner suggested 2
This suggestion appears to be in accordance with the practice of all countries where the Decimal
System is completely carried out, the ultimate subdivision of the coins being binary (47); it
would appear also to combine some of the alleged advantages of the penny unit (excepting alone
the change in its value) with those of the É unit, and to meet all the difficulties of calling in the
present copper coinage.
There would thus be two moneys of account only, pounds and cents . As to the silver coinage,_
The crown would remain - - = 25 cents.
The florin 35 = 10 ,
The shilling 95 = 5 ,
The sixpence, changed into, and = 2;
as ºf 55
The half-crown, now worse than useless in co-circulation with the florin, the fourpenny, and three-
penny pieces, might be called in, and one and two cent pieces issued. -
43. In illustration of the last suggestion, an additional column shows the mode of writing down
the several amounts given as examples of this question.
2é s. d. Pence. Mils. aft
1 O O F. 240 == 1,000 – 1.
O 6 8 F 8O F 333° 333 = “33
O 5 O F 60 F 250 - 25
O 3 4 – 40 F 166 666 = * 16
O 2 6 = 3O F. 125 - • 12%
O 1 3 == 15 +. 62 - 5 = *063
I 18 9 465 1,937 - 499 I 23#
sºmeº tº-º-º-º-º-º-º:
54. Is the mil unavoidable 2
62. The question as to the difficulties arising from a change in the value of the lower coins is
answered by referring to the effect of similar changes in countries where the Decimal System has
been established, and particularly to the assimilation of the Irish with the English currency in 1817.
Exchequer, May, 1857. H. W. CHISHOLM.
* Since these remarks were written, they have been tested by observation of the ticketed shops in Oxford Street.
The first shop noticed was a linendraper's, the window being filled with dresses, ticketed at various prices from 3s. 3d.
to 16s. 9d, the dress. No other or divisible article was ticketed. The second shop was a haberdasher’s, the window
filled with ribbons, ticketed at the following prices per yard: 63d., 73d., 8:#d., 93d., ložd., 11:#d., 1s. 24d, and
1s. 3%d.,-and at no other or more easily divisible price. The third shop was another linendraper's, with a number of
similarly ticketed dresses, together with a few rolls of muslin, ticketed at two prices only, 9%d, and 103d, a yard, “any
length cut.” It was impossible not to be struck with the fact that very few articles indeed exhibited in the shop
windows throughout the street were at all divisible for the purposes of sale.
D 3
30 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION : " : *
s
Professor
De Morgan.
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
PROFESSOR: DE MORGAN.
BEFoRE replying to the questions in order, I make some remarks on their general character.
In the first place, I desire it may be distinctly understood that I do not consider either the
questions or the arguments implied as emanating from the noble proposer, but only as passing through
him. This understanding, convenient as a form, may be suspected from the questions themselves to
be founded on fact. The excessive repetition which occurs is, I should think, to be attributed to
the questions being collected from different sources. I think it very unlikely that question 28 came
from the same head as most of those preceding. The bulk of my answers was written before I
had seen the evidence now accessible in the Preliminary Report. The noble Lord's paper of
questions coincides in argument with the witnesses whose evidence is detailed in that report. I
therefore respectfully tender the following answers to Her Majesty's Commissioners as evidence
in chief, and I trust that I shall be permitted to submit myself to cross-examination on all the points
thus raised. I hope I need hardly deprecate the idea of my unequivocal attack upon the soundness
of the views which the questions advocate being meant to imply some sort or degree of disrespect
to the noble proposer. Of him I take the liberty of saying that he has materially served the cause.
The nation will never consent to any change in the coinage until it is assured that its hard grasp
of old usage has been well and earnestly represented in the previous deliberations. This has now
been done. I can hardly imagine any position of defence for our existing state which has not been
taken in the questions: the definite manner in which those questions are put, and the clear view
they give of the grounds on which they stand, will convince those who cling to our actual coinage
that all the strength of their case has been displayed. I may add that this same clearness and
definiteness has saved much trouble in drawing up the answers.
Next, I consider the questions themselves to be, not questions, but Socratic arguments, to which
the answers are to be replies. But though the arguments are implied, the answers must be
expressed; so that the replies must oftentimes be at some length.
Thirdly, I desire it may be observed that the questions themselves are repeated variations of
very few arguments. Such repetition of attack renders necessary, to some extent, a corresponding
repetition of reply. I could condense all these questions into ten or twelve; but this would open
liability to charge of evasion. I shall therefore follow the lead of the questions until the reader's
sense of fatigue joins his reason in thanking me for some abbreviation of answer. I need not insist
on the value of these repetitions as showing the small compass within which the arguments in
favour of our existing state really lie.
Fourthly, The animus of the questions is the desire to preserve the existing system unaltered,
playing off the proposed penny scheme merely as an antagonist to the pound and mil scheme ; the
apparent intention being that the two opponent schemes should destroy one another, and leave the
existing state of things in peace. I shall pay but little attention to the penny scheme. I have not
the least fear of this plan. I do not for a moment imagine it possible that this country will take to
reckoning in pence, while all the results of reckoning are to be converted, for payment, into pounds,
shillings, and pence, by what books of arithmetic call reduction, or else by tables. I do not think
very detailed argument necessary against a scheme which, when a man goes to draw his balance
from a banker, supposing that balance to be 275,933 pence, will set the banker's clerk at the
following work before he knows what notes or coins to pay with, he having previously had the
reverse work with every sum paid in.
12)275,933
20)2299,4 - 5
*1149 - 14 - 5
I believe that if this plan had offered any advantages it would have been adopted long ago ; for so
long as a person makes his demands and his tenders in pounds, shillings, and pence, he may keep
his books as he pleases, no law withstanding, but only usage. For these reasons I shall be some-
what brief on the penny scheme, which I am satisfied will not be recommended by any Commission,
adopted by any House of Commons, or tolerated by any numerable fraction of the people at large.
The penny, system halts between two suppositions. Sometimes it is not to affect the coinage;
sometimes it is to result in a tenpenny coinage, the tenpenny pieces, with higher silver and corre-
sponding gold, being gradually introduced. The questions treat the tempenny system as one of
merchants’ calculation only, supposing all our coinage to remain as it is. I have therefore made my
answers correspond to the questions. Had any allusion been made to the gradual introduction of
silver francs or tenpences, to be mixed in confusion with the shillings for ten or twenty years, I
should have had something to say on that part of the subject. But it must be particularly remem-
bered that the questions suppose a reckoning by pence with our present coinage, to which point
therefore the answers are directed. *
Fifthly, I shall set down in order a few of the points on which I hold the questions to imply
statements or opinions essentially unsound.
1. The disposition to undervalue existing difficulties of calculation as applied to small sums,
shown in the constant effort to suppose that the calculations of the poor are small adjust-
ments, and that the word calculation is to be reserved for larger operations. So that when
the querist mentions his opponent's assertion of the great facilities which decimals afford
in calculation, he allows himself to imply that calculation means only large accounts.
2. The tendency to pit the present system, well learnt, against the decimal system, not yet
learnt at all in detail. The learner of the decimal system is compared with the proficient in
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 31
the ordinary system; and the time when the common system shall be forgotten, and all
education founded on decimals, is never taken into prospect. In these questions the
supposition is that the transition period lasts for ever.
3. The more easy cases of our present system are paired for comparison with the more difficult
cases of the decimal system. * • ,
4. The existing system is tried mainly on the supposition that even prices are the rule of the
market; that a shilling a pound is the universal basis of calculation. Nothing like close
questioning is attempted as to broken prices, except in one question, in which the
arithmetician of the common system is suffered to divide by 24 in his head, while the
poor decimalist cannot multiply by 2 without writing down once and once, and adding.
5. The existing system is spoken of under all the circumstances which aid comprehension.
The decimal system is treated as only numeration from the lowest coin, without any
attention to the resting-places which are afforded by the higher coins.
6. It is asserted and implied, again and again, that the effecting of payments in retail is the
purpose, the only purpose, of coins. w
7. It is assumed that the decimalist is never to be allowed to use common fractions.
8. It is assumed that the subdivision of the lowest coin into halves, &c. in countries where the
coinage is decimal, is an argument against decimal coinage, to the entire neglect of the
fact that countries which have a decimal coinage highly value it, though, as they show,
they are not insensible to the use of common fractions in suitable and convenient places.
But it must be conceded, on the other hand, that the questions are wholly free from some
absurdities very common among opponents of the pound and mil scheme. They do not bring
forward the usual dirge upon the fraction of a farthing which the possessor of some copper pieces
must lose, for once, on the day when the change takes place : the only question asked on this
point (No. 62.) is a sensible one, fully deserving of consideration and answer. They dº not
enable us to amuse ourselves with the supposition that we mean applewomen to transact lºsiness
by help of ‘0041666666666666 ad infinitum.
These questions are the first attempt I have seen to bring the advocates of t e pound and mil
system to a close and hand to hand controversy with the existing system. In such a trial of strength
the weak points of both systems may appear, but the weak point of the assailant's system is sure to
be discoverable from his mode of attack. I think it will be obvious what is the weak point of the
present argument in favour of the existing system, to all who look on the manner in which
comparison with decimals on broken quantities at broken prices is avoided, in spite of the importance
attached to this case in question 28. In the answer to question 64; I have made an offer to which
I respectfully invite the attention of the noble proposer and of the querists who speak through him.
I will make that offer a source of strength to the pound and mil system if it be declined, of more
strength if it be met by unfair instances, of most strength of all if it be met by fair instances.
The case which happens shall, in its degree, reinforce the conclusions I have drawn from the
questions themselves, that is, from their excessive adherence to a shilling a pound, and their silence
on shillings and pence per pound, or pence and farthings per pound. *
Sixthly. The answers here given do not contain a full exposition of the advantages of decimals:
they only answer the objections proposed. A great deal more might be said on the superiority of
what may be called natural arithmetic over a system which must be placed in opposition as
wnnatural. There is not skill enough in it to allow of the application of the term artificial.
QUESTIONS sº
Drawn up with the view of bringing under distinct Notice and Examination some of the Advantages
of our present System of Coinage, and some of the principal Objections and Difficulties which
have been suggested with respect to the proposed introduction of the Decimal Principle.
They are to be understood as intended to promote a thorough and effectual investigation of
the validity or invalidity of the arguinents submitted by the opponents of the proposed
change ; and they are not to be taken as intimating any conclusive opinion on the points
referred to.
“The best opportunity is thus (by written memoranda, afforded for a mature consideration of statements made
“ and of arguments adduced in support of (or in opposition to) measures proposed for consideration, and the most
“ effectual precaution taken against misconstruction and hasty inconsiderate decision.”—Peel Memoirs, vol. II. p. 99.
I.
QUESTIon.
1. Do you think any change in our present system of coins desirable 2
AINTSW. E. R.
I think that the small change in the small change requisite to make our coinage decimal is more
than desirable, as means of progress both in business and in education. The change consists in
lowering the copper money four per cent., by which the half shilling becomes sixpence and one
farthing, and the pound 1000 farthings. Decimal division follows of course, with great facilitation
from the power of comparing the old and new system given by the smallness of the change.
QUESTION.
2. On what grounds does your objection to our present system of coins rest 2
ANTSWIEE, *
On the ground of its rendering calculations necessary which are quite different from those of
common decimal arithmetic, and much more difficult; so that, as is well known, we are at a
disadvantage from which all countries which have a decimal system are free.
QUESTION.
3. Do you consider them as defective or inconvenient for any of the purposes of retail
transactions, i.e. for paying or receiving 2 Or is your objection restricted to the
inconvenience of our present coinage for the purposes of account keeping and
calculation ?
Professor
De Morgan.
I) 4
32 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
Professor
De Morgan.
Jº NTSV EEa g
I deny that “paying and receiving” include all the “purposes of retail transactions.” There
is rarely payment or receipt without calculation, written or mental. I consider our coinage
defective and inconvenient for all the details of business which precede the actual handing over of
the computed sum. r
^,
QUESTron.
4. What do you consider to be the primary purpose of coins 2 Do you consider them as
fractional subdivisions of the integer created for the purpose of adjusting retail payments?
or do you consider their primary character to be that of instruments, the purpose of
which is to facilitate accounts and calculation ? -
ANTSV ER,
The primary purpose of coins of value is to substitute a Government guarantee for constant
assaying and weighing. The primary distinction of tokens arises out of the abolition of two standards
of value. But, substituting “more important ’’ for “primary,” both the purposes mentioned are so
very important, that I cannot see which is the more important. Which is the more important
constituent of water, oxygen or hydrogen P Water is not water if either be wanting. And in like
manner coin is not coin for the business of life, unless it both adjust payments and facilitate
calculation.
QUESTron.
5. If one of those purposes must to some extent be sacrificed or made subordinate to the
other, which do you think is entitled to the priority in our estimation ?
ANTSW. E. R.
It depends entirely upon the extent of the sacrifice. Sacrifice a small amount of either con-
venience for a large accession to the other. Throw a sprat to catch a whale. Above all, face a
moderate and temporary inconvenience as to either, to gain a decided and permanent accession to
the other. But I do not believe that the proposed change demands any sacrifice of either.
QUESTrorſ.
6. Is not the coinage chiefly concerned in the process of buying and selling by retail P and
must not the question of the merit or demerit of any system of coinage be decided
by its fitness or unfitness for adjusting with readiness and simplicity the multiplied
variety of small payments 2 Are you aware of any complaint against our present system
of coins in this respect 2
Is not the use of coinage, that is, the fitness of the coins to perform their proper purpose
of facilitating the division and distribution of commodities in the retail markets, and
adjusting the small payments which arise, the consideration of primary importance,
rather than the improvement of a system of account keeping, by which the convenience
of the affluent and educated classes, of those who keep large and extensive accounts,
may be principally promoted 2 t
ANTSV.E.R., W
Here are four questions. I first point out and deny two assumptions which they contain.
The first is that retail business is all payment and adjustment of payment. Now there is more
calculation in retail business than in large transactions. Wholesale, a hundred pounds changes
hands by a few strokes of the pen; retail, it goes in driblets over pages of figures. The words
adjustment of payment either include calculation, or they do not. If they do not, a great omission
is made as to retail business. If they do, then in the use of the word adjustment lurks the
implication that small calculations arise in small sums, and large calculations in large ones. To
expose this take the following questions : Calculate 4% per cent, on 126,000l. 2 Adjust 4% per cent.
of Ol. 13s. 8%d. Both to be done within a farthing. I suspect that adjustment of small payments is
confounded with small adjustment of payments.
The second assumption is that calculation is for the educated and affluent, adjustment for the
poor. A bad system of coinage is a far greater tax on the poor than on the rich : upon the education
of the poor it is a tax of tremendous magnitude. The calculations of the poor are far more difficult
than those of the rich, and also more numerous.
To the questions I now reply:—
First, Coinage and its computation are chiefly concerned, as to number of transactions, in retail
matters; and in retail matters the advantage of decimals will be as much felt as in wholesale ones,
and perhaps more. •s
Secondly, In the present case merit or demerit need not be decided even upon a balance of
classes of transactions : it is affirmed that all kinds of transactions, great and small, will gain in an
enormous majority, nearly all—of actual cases. It is quite true that this question, like most others,
ought to be tried by its convenience and advantages with respect to the poorer classes. If this
principle had been put into active operation but half as often as it has been made a breakwater
against agitation for improvement, the education of the people would have been such as to make
the introduction of decimal coinage, weights, and measures, a matter of perfect facility.
Thirdly, Giving to calculation or adjustment—I do not care about names—its proper importance,
there is serious reason to prefer a decimal system to our present system. Our complaint against
the present system,--if complaint be the proper word, is that there exists another, attainable with
very slight alteration, and possessed of much superior capabilities. It is very common to call the
proposal of better a complaint against good enough if no better may be ; and thence to infer that
better must not be acceded to until good enough &c. has been proved bad. This is all fallacy; we
know that Britain is what it is under the present system, just as London is what it is under the
present state of the Thames. Improve the coinage and cleanse the river, nevertheless. º
Fourthly, The facilities of decimals belong to the market as well as to the counting-house, to the
small coins as well as to the large, to the poor as well as to the rich, to the family account-book as
well as to the ledger.
w
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 33
II.
QUESTION'.
7. Do you recommend the introduction of the decimal principle into our coinage 2
ANTSWIER,
I recommend the completion of the decimal system in our coinage, which, though far enough
removed to deprive us of the advantage, is near enough to make the change very easy. In the
bullion trade, in various dividend calculations of the bank, in some custom house measurements, in
engineering calculation, &c., decimals are used ; necessity has forced their introduction.
QUESTION.
8. Is it not impossible under the decimal system to break the integer into as many clear
fractional parts as we now obtain under our present system of coins 2–Do you not con-
sider that this is an objection to the decimal system P
ANTSV. E. R.
The number 10 has not so many divisors as 12. This is, for certain cases, a disadvantage of the
decimal system; that is to say, the decimal system would be more convenient still, if 10 had more
divisors. But it is now much more convenient than the duodecimal system. Before I allow that
the want of divisors is an objection to the decimal system, I must know what is meant by the word,
Sometimes it means a disadvantage only ; sometimes a disadvantage conclusive against adoption. In
the second sense, the want of divisors is not an objection ; in the first sense the disadvantage is
greatly exaggerated.
The extra divisors of 12 are of little use in broken prices, such as 2s. 9d, a pound, 7d. a pound,
More than 90 per cent. of the questions which go near the point are proposed on the idea that
prices are usually even shillings.
QUESTIon.
9. In an old but very remarkable treatise on coin and coinage (Vaughan, 1675) this passage
OCCU TS –
“Of all the numbers, twelve is the most proper for money, being the most clear from fractions
“ and confusion of account, which ought not to be neglected, by reason that of all other
“ numbers it is most divisible, being divisible into units, as all numbers are ; into two
“ parts, as no odd number is ; into three parts, as no even number is but six, and the
“ numbers that consist of sixes ; into fourths, into which six is not divisible ; and into
“ sixths.”
In the memoir dictated by Napoleon at St. Helena, on the new French system, is this
passage:— -
“ On avait préféré le diviseur 12 au diviseur 10, parceque 10 n'a que deux facteurs 2 et 5, et
“ que 12 en a quatre, Savoir, 2, 3, 4, et 6. Il est vrai que la numération décimale, géné-
“ralisée et exclusivement adaptée au mètre comme unité, donne des facilités aux astro-
“ nomes et aux calculateurs; mais ces avantages sont loin de compenser l'inconvénient de
“ rendre la pensée plus difficile. Le premier caractère de toute méthode doit étre d'aider
“la conception et l’imagination, faciliter la mémoire, et donner plus de puissance à la
“ pensée.”
What validity is these in these considerations as objections to the introduction of a decimal
system of coinage P. Or, in what does the fallacy of them consist?
AlºſsWIER.
When an old writer is stript of his conceits, translated into correctness, and under those changes
presented as a sage of antiquity, the only way to meet his authority is to restore his true form, and
to allow his whole character to be judged. Whether the divisors of 12 gain anything by
Mr. Vaughan's advocacy may be ascertained by reading the whole passage, of which a part is
quoted in the question. The punctuation may be excused, since the work was printed after the
author's death by his crochetty brother, Henry Vaughan, the Silurist. He is speaking of the proportion
of gold to silver in value, which he would have 12 to 1, because 12 has many divisors. (pp. 73, 74.).
“But the most, and the most Judicious Propositions that I have seen, both at home and in other
parts, do agree upon twelve for one, as the most equal Proportion; and it agrees with the Proportion
of Spain; upon which in this Subject, we ought principally to have our eye fixed: and for my
part, I do the rather incline to this Proportion, because 12 of all the numbers is most proper for
Money, being the most clear from Fractions and Confusion of an Accompt, (which ought not to
be neglected) by reason That of all other numbers is most divisible, being divisible into unites, as all
numbers are into two parts, as no odd number is ; three parts, as no even numbers is, but 6 and
the numbers that consist of sixes into fourths ; as 6 is not divisible : And to the 6ths this Proportion
seems like to square with the Conceipt of the Alchymists, who call Gold Sol, and Silver Luna,
whose Motions do come near upon the point of 12 for 1..................”
Vaughan was a clever attorney, who had read more out of law than he was able to digest.
Sir William Petty will be allowed to have a much better judgment by all who have read in both. In
his Quantulum-cunque, reprinted in 1856 by the Political Economy Club, it has been pointed out to
me that he speaks as follows:– º
“The use of Farthings is but to make up Payments in silver,” [N.B.-Copper farthings and silver
pence were then in circulation,] “ and to adjust accompts, to which end of adjusting accompts let
* me add that if your old defective farthings were cryed down to five a penny you might keep all
“ accompts in a way of Decimal arithmetic which hath been long desired for the ease and certainty
“ of accompts.”
Decimals, as I shall immediately notice, were not well understood in Petty's time. His system
would give 1,200 farthings to the pound. But his main point evidently was, that the multiplier 5,
by its relation to 10, is an easier multiplier than 4. And even to command as much relation to pure
decimalism as is seen in 60 farthings a shilling, 20 shillings a pound, the author of the Political
Arithmetic was willing to lower the farthing 20 per cent.
E
Professor
De Morgan.
34 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
. De Morgan.
Mr. Vaughan lived at a time when decimal fractions were not familiar to the mass of
arithmeticians. It would be easy to show that, up to 1700 at least, the mastery over decimal
fractions which is common in our day was almost confined to high mathematicians. Mr. Vaughan's
statement merely amounts to this, that 12 is better than 10, because it has more divisors. The
answer is that 10 is better than 12, because it is the radix of our common system of counting.
Mr. Vaughan's objections would be exceedingly valuable if a new system of numeration were to be
under contemplation.
Napoleon at St. Helena is no authority. He had never been a shopkeeper or a money calculator,
and if he had been, his position at St. Helena was not favourable to sense or candour. He was grum-
bling at all creation; nobody knew his own business, not even the general who commanded against
him at Waterloo. He is very unfortunate in his expressions. He adopts the erroneous supposition
that the decimal system is only useful to scientific calculators, and styles them astronomes et
calculateurs. Now the astronomer is the only scientific calculator to whom, as such, decimalisation
is impracticable. He is in such continual connexion with the records of his science that he cannot
afford to decimalise angular measure. He is a merchant who wants all his ledgers for 2,000 years
past. The French tried it and failed ; it is the only part of the metrical system which is not in
use at this day, except indeed the tenth day of rest, which being only an attack on religion dis-
appeared with the return of Christianity. Scientific calculators in general use decimals, and they
want the world at large to have the advantage which they feel every day of their lives.
QUESTron.
10. Must not there be an inferiority as regards fractional divisibility in any decimal system
of coins, as compared with a coinage founded on a combination of the binary with the
duodecimal scale P
ANTSVIER,
No. The balance of advantage is in favour of decimals by a great deal. Our present coinage,
luckily for us, is not wholly founded on a combination of the binary and duodecimal (the word
should here be ternary) systems. Its best point is the entrance of the decimal factor into the
first division of the pound. The great convenience of the reckoning of prices by shillings is one
consequence. The attempt to reckon by pence is found convenient also : but a man stops before
the second shilling; the duodecimal conversion is inconvenient. We hear much of seventeen
and eighteen pence, but nothing of 28 pence or 33 pence. But we hear of prices in shillings up
to and past one hundred shillings. If the pound had been 12 shillings this would not have
happened. The decimal system will allow this convenience to be much extended.
GUESTron.
11. Is not there great force and truth in the remark of Napoleon, that a decimal system of
dividing the integer and of expressing the fractional parts must be less favourable to
distinctness of conception, to facility of recollection, and to readiness and ease in mental
calculation, than a binary or than our present system
ANTSV ETR,
To me neither force nor truth. Napoleon tacitly assumes that all the readiness acquired under
the present system is given by it. When a person has practised our present system, and has not
practised a decimal system, he has more distinctness, more recollection, and more mental power
in the system which he has practised, than in the other. But let two pupils, equally ignorant of
both, be educated in the two systems, and teachers know that the pupil who is educated in the
decimal system will acquire distinctness, memory, and mental power faster than the other. And
for a good reason. The decimal learner has his foundation already laid, the arithmetic of ordi-
nary number. The other has to learn his pence table, and to acquire on twelves a poor portion—
he never gets more—of the facility which the other starts with on tens. None except teachers,
and writers who observe closely, know what miserable work the world at large make of the pence
table ; so miserable, that they would soon—I mean in a few days—be more of decimalists than
they are now of duodecimalists, without any schooling except daily business.
QUESTron.
12. Ex. gr. : Which is the more easy for conception, for recollection, or for addition
mentally Ž
S. d. Mils. Pence.
7 6 ~ 375 ~ 90
2 6 ~ 125 - 30
I 3 2- 62 == 15
O 9 == 37 ~ 9
12 O 599 144
*mma *-i- º -º
Again ; we at once know that the half of 7s.6d. is 3s. 9d., but what is the half of 375 mils?
The half of 2s. 6d. is 1s. 3d, but what is the half of 2s. 6d. estimated decimally, i.e.
125 mils, &c. &c. P
Take another case. Any number of yards—7, 8, or 9 yards at 1s., 1s. 6d., or 2s. 6d. per
yard, or the same number of yards at 50 mils, 75 mils, and 125 mils per yard :
Which calculation will be made with the greater readiness and accuracy, mentally and in the
open market 2
Take half-a-crown—double it—treble it—halve it—divide it by 3—and add all these
products together. Is not this easily done by any common person in his head, without pen
and ink or pencil, and in the midst of confusion ?
But try the same process upon the same sum in decimal notation, namely, as 125 mils,
Will the calculation be equally simple and easy %
Now try it in pence, namely as 30 pence. Is it not obvious that the calculation again
becomes perfectly simple and easy %
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 35
Again : Price's Patent, Candles are advertised in 12lb. boxes at 11 shillings each.
Every one knows that this gives 11d. per lb. for the candles. But what will be the
calculation taken decimally 12lb. boxes at 5' 50 mils each, how much per lb. ?
Again : - -
s. d. Pence. Mils.
1 yard or lb. = 2 6 = 30 = 124, for more easy calculation
than 125 mils.
# do. = 1 3 = 15 = 62
# do. = 0 10 = 10 = impossible.
# do. = 0 7%= 7% = 31
# do. = 0 5 = 5 = impossible.
§ do. = 0 3% = 3} = impossible.
To do. = 0 3 = 3 = impossible.
nº do. = 0 2%– 2} = impossible.
Tº do. = 0 2 = 2 = impossible.
# do. = 0 1%– 1% = impossible.
3% do. = 0 1 = 1 = impossible.
Now, consider the comparative convenience in making the necessary payments.
2s. 6d. is paid with one coin. How many coins will be required to pay 124 mils?
1s. 3d. is paid with two coins. How many coins will be required to pay 62 mils?
Is it not by cases of this kind that the relative convenience of different systems of coinage
must be tested P
AMTSWER.
In the additions proposed there are two distinct points of unfairness.
First, the easy case of one system should have been joined with an easy case of the other.
Shillings and threepences rank, as to facility, with florins and cents. It is no answer to say, that
the second addition is a translation of the first : the easy cases of one system do not translate into
the easy cases of the other. I should think it very unfair to propose the following as a recommen-
dation of the pound and mil system :—Which is more easy for conception, for recollection, or for
addition mentally—
fl. ct. 8. d.
7 S 15 7}
3 l 6 24
1 9 3 9;
() 3 0 7}
.# 1 3 1 4, 1 6 2;
The second point of unfairness is the presentation of the existing system under all its facilities
for conception, while the decimal system is treated as nothing but numerical aggregation of its
lowest coin. The decimalist divides 78 cents into 7 florins, 8 cents; the follower of the existing
system wants process and calculation to bring back 7s. 9d. into 93 pence. The proposer, in adding
7s.6d. and 2s. 6d. lumps the shillings, and catches the fact that the pence give an odd shilling ;
but he omits to notice that we do the same with 7fl. 3ct. and 2fl. 7ct. He wants to bind us
to 73 and 27, without partition. Again, he will not allow the new shilling to be 5 cents, it must
be 50 mils. He asks, can you do 9 yards at 50 mils a yard, as easily as I do 9 yards at one
shilling a yard 2 We answer, Not quite. We might ask, Can you do 9 yards at 2:#d. a yard as
easily as we do 9 yards at one cent. a yard P. He ought to answer, Not by a good deal. Our
retort is unfair, but it is quite as fair as the attack.
In the same manner he proposes dozens, and forgets that a decimal coinage must introduce the
habit of packing by tens, unless experience should show that dozens do perfectly well with
decimals, in which case the argument drawn from dozens is annihilated. -
And further, he chooses nothing but even prices. He finds out that 2s. 6d. will divide in many
ways, in which 124 and 125 will not. But all who frequent the shops and the markets know that,
in all matters connected with the daily supplies of the poor, even prices are the exception, and
broken prices the rule. The Commission will surely take evidence on this point. They will call
the small shopkeepers, and will find out how bread, meat, vegetables, beer, tea, sugar, coffee, milk,
pepper, candles, &c. &c. are sold. Or they will read the evidence given to the Committee of
the House of Commons, which would satisfy most people on this point. And in one way or the
other they will find that even prices belong to things which are seldom broken, but that in all
things which are much subdivided the chaffering and cheapening of the market keeps prices con-
tinually broken. -
Try 2s. 8d. a pound, or 7%d a pound, or even 7d. a pound ; find all the fractions laid down in the
question, and the superiority of common division applied to 112 mils or 29 mils will be apparent;
especially in finding the nil or farthing above the inexpressible price.
Again, as to number of coins, selected instances tell either way. It will probably take 3 coins
to pay one eighth of a pound, or 125 mils, now paid in one coin. But it will take only one coin to
pay 2%d., or its nearest equivalent, now paid in three coins.
As to such even prices as do exist, the present system has a tendency to force them by its
difficulties of calculation. This is injurious to all parties. Any system under which the farthing
is brought into greater prominence will benefit the poorer classes by its tendency to keep
natural prices, and prevent settlement at the even fourpences. A great deal might be said on this
one point.
QUESTIorſ.
13. The defectiveness of any system founded on the decimal principle consists in the imperfect
divisibility of its integers.
Is not the construction of coinage necessarily a divisional process 2 Is it not the
metrical subdivision of the integer for fractional payments in connection with retail
transactions P
Professor
De Morgan.
*in
E 2
36 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
De Morgan.
“While decimal arithmetic for the purposes of computation shoots spontaneously
“ from the nature of man and things, it is not equally adapted to the numeration,
“the multiplication, or the division of material substances.”—J. QUINCY ADAMs,
Secretary of State Reports to Senate of United States, 1821, p. 8.
ANTSV. E. R.
One great defect of all systems which are not decimal consists in the difficulty of division of
mixed integers, which is by far the most common case.
Coinage is not necessarily a divisional process ; it is as often multiplicational. The common
ready reckoner is, and always has been, a book of multiplication. Coinage is intended to facilitate
calculation as well as payment, both in large and small transactions.
Mr. Quincy Adams is oracular, but not clear. If decimal arithmetic shoot spontaneously from
the nature of things, how is it not adapted to material substances 2 The truth is that decimal
numeration arises rather from the nature of fingers than of things in general. And it is an advantage
of decimal coinage that it brings in the fingers again, which nobody can use to any purpose upon
shillings and pence. But instead of commenting further upon what I am not sure I understand—
the nature of things being the Mrs. Harris of argumentative discussion—I will take this occasion
to introduce some remarks suggested by the first paragraph of the question.
The power of dividing is an important element in the capabilities of a system of coinage. There
are two things to consider-its difficulty, and what the proposer calls its possibility, that is, possi-
bility of result without fractions over. In all systems these impossibilities are and must be excessively
frequent, especially in the smallest transactions. But in difficulty, upon the fair average of broken
and even sums, the existing system must be much harder than the decimal system.
The practised computer has some helps from what is called practice, and from an inverted rule,
which is never set down in books of arithmetic, for a reason we shall see. For example, at 13s. 9d.
a pound, how much an ounce and a half? Sixpence is 8s., and 3d. is 4s., and 1s. 9d. is 21d., of
which la. is 16d., say 10d, and Hººd, or 10}d., and 1% ounce is 15%d. How comes it that this
method of dividing by rising to the mark through obvious steps, this inversion of multiplication by
practice, is not in the books of arithmetic P Because the writers are well aware that no one will
acquire it except by frequent practice on instances of one kind, aided by memory of essential steps
gained by daily repetition, fortified by the confidence which arises from previous knowledge of
something near the answer. The grocer's man is quick and sure at turning a lump of shillings and
pence per pound into per ounce; the waiter at the Greenwich tavern is equally quick and sure
at dividing the bill by the number of guests. Let the two change places, and both lose courage and
with it power. The grocer's man knows something about the price from the very look of the
goods; the waiter has as near a guess from what he has seen of the table during dinner. Both
have some idea what to take. We now see why such rules are called practice.
Now, first, though the decimal system yields a somewhat larger crop of impossible divisions upon
the even prices, it is at no disadvantage, but the contrary, upon the fair average of all prices.
Next, the facility of its full work often makes the full work bear comparison as to facility with
the short mental process of the existing system, when there is one, which happens oftener in
selected cases than in actual business.
Thirdly, all the short rules of the existing system have their counterparts in the decimal system.
For instance, division by inversion of practice. Thirteen proverb-scouting guests have dined, and
the bill is 16l. 7fl. 9e. Waiter (sotto voce); ‘ll, is 18l., and 2ſ. is 21. 6ft., and 1s. is 13s., and 54c.,
which is 4c. and 2 over. (Aloud.) Gentlemen, ll. 3ſ., a piece is 11 cents more than the bill,
and what you please more for the waiter.” The waiter will do this faster than the Commissioners
or myself could follow him. Some waiters will remember that 13 times 13 is 169, which settles it
immediately ; these easy cases come in proportionally as often as the easy cases of the common
system.
It is much to be wished that the questions had gone into broken prices.
QUESTIon.
14. In the following table compare the three systems, the present, the mil, and the penny
system. With which does the superiority rest as regards,-
1. Number of figures used ?
2. Conciseness of expression in words or in writing P
3. Facility for mental conception of the sum stated P
4. Tendency to promote accuracy in copying or calling over ?
5. Facility for calculations, especially those which must be made in the head 2
6. Interchangeability at equivalent value with the coins now in use 2
42 s. d. Mils. Pence.
1 O, O - 1,000 - 240
() 17 8 F. 883 - 212
O 15 6 F 775 -: 186
O 9 9 == 487 == 117
O 6 3 - 312 F 75
O 5 7 F 279 - 67
O 4, 10 == 241 == 58
() 3 8 F. 183 – 44.
0 2 4 - 112 - 28
0 1 5 F 70 - 17
4, 7 O 4,342 1,044
27 figures. 34 figures. 28 figures.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 37
If we now proceed to subject these total sums to division, which system will be found the
most convenient P
4l. 7s., divided by 3, 4, 6, and 12, gives the respective sums, ll. 9s., ll, 1s. 9d., 14s. 6d.,
7s. 8d.
Pence 1,044, divided by 3, 4, 6, and 12, gives the respective sums of 348 pence,
261 pence, 174 pence, 87 pence.
But 4,342 mils is not divisible without a remainder by any of these divisors.
AINTSW. E. R.
The Socratic method of arguing has the advantage of necessarily conducting attack in a
refreshing tone of sarcasm, which very much relieves a dry subject, and which has the further
merit of bringing out both strength and weakness. Had it but been allowable to demand that
the numbers of figures required by the systems should be tested by one example selected by one
side, the strength of the conclusion would have been reinforced by the irony of the question,
“With which does the superiority rest as regards,-1. Number of figures used?' But looking
at the utterly inadmissible nature of the claim to decide such a superiority by one instance chosen
by one side, the irony is retorted by answering, ‘So far as appears, undoubtedly with the common
system, because even 28 is greater than 27, much more 34.’
Instead of replying upon one instance, in which pence are set against mils, I shall make a full
comparison of the number of figures in different cases.
And to other suppositions I add this, that in banking accounts no cheques will be paid below
cents. I fully believe that if the pound and mil system were established to morrow, the bankers
would insist upon this rule, not so much for saving a column, as for getting rid of all dealing with
copper. But as those with whom I am arguing will not admit this, I shall only show the result.
And I shall consider the penny system both with reference to farthings, and also with reference
to tenths of a penny; since the advocates of that system have not made up their minds which
they would prefer. I shall make two averages in each case ; one from sums under one pound,
one from sums under 100 pounds. The following are the results:—
Numbers of figures in 100 sums of money. Pound and mil system carried to cents., compared
with other systems carried to pence.
Sums under ll. Sums under 100l.
Pound and mil system to cents º º º - 190 389
Common system to pence - tºº º º - 267 457
Penny system to pence - {- º º - 254, 454.
Pound and mil system, to mails, compared with the other systems to farthings, and also with the penny
system to tenths of a penny.
Sums under ll. Sums under 100l.
Pound and mil system to mils - - • – 289 489 -
Common system to farthings - tº º - - - 400 590
Penny system to farthings - e- --> º - 404 604,
Penny system to tenths of a penny tº º- º – 354 554,
Now, not taking the first line of all, in deference to the opinion that the banker will still deal
in copper, it appears that at present 100 sums of money under 100l. require 457 figures ; in the
pound and mil system, 489. That is, one additional figure to three sums of money. And this
supposes that the banker always writes something in his column of mils : 0 or 5. Against this, I
put the following alleviations, to use a wrong term, for their total amount more than destroys the
inconvenience by a great deal.
First, both systems are practically in five columns; for the second column of shillings is a
working column, with its facility greatly overbalanced by its insecurity. It is not ruled ; so that
if the 1 in 18 shillings be a little out of place, it may chance to be omitted in running down.
And 1 shilling may easily be advanced to the dignity of a half sovereign in running the eye
rapidly down the shillings to catch the tens. All this mixture and its insecurities are abolished.
I am not sure I have not overrated the facility of this column. Adding units is easy work;
but when those units are tens, with cumbrous units to be carried with them, there is more difficulty.
Thus, when the units column of shillings gives 58, the clerk has to go on with 68, 78, 88, 98, 108.
118, &c. This is by no means so easy or so sure as 5, 6, 7, 8, &c.
Secondly, the column of mils, supposing it retained, will be filled either with noughts or fives.
If fives only be entered, the other places being blank, it is equivalent to striking off a figure for
every two sums, which actually brings the average number of figures of the bankers' pound and
mil arrangements below the number required at present. If I were left to myself on this matter,
I should leave the column blank when 0 would otherwise fill it, and write v, an easy mark, much
easier than 5, in all other cases. In adding this column I should collect the v V v v, &c.
by twos.
I3ut the whole question as to number of figures is strangely distorted in importance. Every
calculator knows that when the routine flows easily and continuously, the figures tumble off so
rapidly that he is astonished when he comes to count them. Anything which makes the pen
heave-to, disturbs the line of action of the mind, and introduces the fear of error, is of far more
consequence than half-a-dozen of figures gained by calculation. The saving of the use of the
pence table, and the destruction of the dangerous second column of shillings, is worth more than
the mere writing of two figures in each sum. But it must be clearly understood that this argument
does not apply to figures which are to be taken up by the mind, and then either written down or
used in checking. Here a perceptible addition to the number of figures would be a disadvantage.
One figure in three sums of money would not be felt. And there would be an advantage in taking
up and in calling over, on the side of the decimal system, which I will now explain.
In reading off, whether for use or check, the sums must be read by coins. Thus 331. 17s. 4d.
requires the distinct reading of 33, 17, 4, by which figures it is generally called over. Now when
three lots are read, it is a very serious disadvantage that the middle and separating lot is of a
fluctuating number of figures, sometimes one, sometimes two. Any one who has ever called over
feels sensible of relief when a lot of sums occurs in which the shillings are only units, or under 10.
And the listener is placed at a disadvantage by the constant occurrence of a moment of unsettled
Professor
De Morgan.
E 3
38 * DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
De Morgan.
meaning. In the teens, our language reads the ten after the units. In calling over the above sum,
the listener hears thirty-three, seven, and it may or may not happen that the syllable teen is to follow.
And such mistake as 7 for 17, and 17 for 7, is more likely to occur in calling than any other.
Now in the pound and mil system the florin figure, always single, would form a most convenient
break between the fluctuating pounds and the mils. Thus 33l. 8ſ. 45m. would be called over as
thirty-three, eight, forty-five. This single figure of florins would be a rest for the mind and a security
to the ear. Any one who will try this point may easily satisfy himself of the truth of these
remarks.
The six questions at the beginning are now answered as follows:—
1. Fair averages being taken, the augmentation of figures in the pound and mil system is not
perceptible, being at the rate of one figure to three sums of money, and this only when
noughts are written in the column of mils. And if, as I believe, banking transactions should
stop at cents, the pound and mil system will have an advantage of not far from one figure to
each sum of money. *.
2. As to conciseness of expression, no one can predict what form of abbreviation the great master
of the norma loquendi will adopt. And there is nothing which excites so much laughter as
the prediction of a popular abbreviation. But in words at length, the pound and mil system
competes well with the existing system. When farthings are in question, this is so obvious
as not to need an instance. When pence only are employed there is nothing to choose.
Thus eighteen shillings and sevenpence has eight syllables, nine florins and twenty-nine mils
has eight syllables also, Instances might be given which make the turn of a syllable either
way.
3. As to mental conception of the sum stated, I refer first to the answer to question 12 on the
proposer's tendency to put the existing system into coins, and to express the pound and mil
system entirely in mils. When equally familiar, the pound and mil system has the advantage
of having only one figure in each sub-division. Thus 9 florins, 9 cents, 9 mils, is more
convenient for mental conception than 19 shillings, l l pence, 3 farthings.
4. As to accuracy, &c. in calling over, see the previous part of this answer.
5. As to facility of calculation, look at the very addition proposed. No answer is needed to
any one who denies the very great saving of labour which the decimal system affords in all
written calculation. As to mental calculation, it will grow as the decimal elements become
familiar. It is much to be wished that the questions would come to close-quarters on head-
work in broken sums of money. I cannot do it, because the questions must be proposed by
the advocates of the existing system. All the presumptions at starting are in favour of the
simple system, which reckons by the common reckoning of numbers. If those who wish to
keep out common counting, and to retain the plan which substitutes 12 for 10, affirm that
either written calculation or headwork is easier in their system than in the other, it is for
them to bring it to trial. Instances chosen by their opponents are liable to be charged with
partiality of selection.
6. As to interchangeability of equivalent value with the coins now in use. The sovereign, the
half-sovereign, (the crown, the half-crown, if they remain,) the shilling, the half-shilling,
undergo no change of value. All the other coins are lowered four per cent. What matters
it that four mils will not exchange with an old penny, when the old penny has ceased to
exist. The coin which did exchange with four farthings is lowered at the same rate as those
farthings, and will exchange with the four lowered farthings, or mils, if they be so called.
The last part of the question is again on division; and I repeat again that the facility of the
decimal system, as to both even and broken money, far more than compensates the accurate
divisibility of the present system in certain cases of even money.
QUESTron.
15. s. d. Pence. Mils.
1 4 = 20 O = 240 = 1,000
# 4 = 10 0 = 120 = 500
# 42 = 6 8 = 80 = -
# 42 = 5 0 = 60 = 250
# 4 = 4 0 = 48 = 200
# £ = 3 4 = 40 = *-
+ £ = — = - ~. -
# 4 = 2 6 = 30 = 125
§ 4. - - - - - -
Th; 3 = 2 0 = 24 = 100
-*, * = - - - - *-
Ir -
* 4 = 1 8 = 20 = —
iſ's 4. - - E - ~. *
# 4. -: - - - - *
* † = # = -
Tº º – * -* tº-
T's 4. - - = tº- == *-
Tºy sé = - - — - *-
gº fº = 1 0 = 12 = t-
By this table it appears that going down as far as the shilling the £ is divisible under our
present system, and under the penny system, into eleven distinct aliquot parts; whilst
under the mil system, it is divisible only into six aliquot parts.
But observe further the subdivisibility of the quotients obtained under the present and
the penny system, compared with those obtained under the mil system.
The £ represented by 2s. 6d. or 30 pence, or 120 farthings, is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 24, 30, 40, 60, giving respectively 1s. 8d., 10d., 7%d., 6d., 5d. &c.;
whilst the same sum, represented by 125, mils is divisible only by 5 and 25, giving as the
result 25 mils and 5 mils.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 39.
Again: the fºr £, represented by 2s. or 24 pence, or 96 farthings, is divisible by
2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, and 48, giving respectively 1s., 8d., 6d, 4d, 3d, 2d., 1}., 1d.,
#d., and #d.; whilst the same sum, represented by 100 mils, is not divisible into a third
or an eighth part, or any of their subdivisions. -
The same may be said again of the shilling, which, represented by 12 pence or 48
farthings, may be divided by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, giving respectively the sums 6d.,
4d., 3d, 2d., 1%d., 1d., #d., ºd, ; whilst the same shilling, represented by 50 mils, is
divisible only by 2, 5, and 25, giving the sum 25 mils, 5 mils, and 2 mils. .."
Now let us compare the three systems with reference to the number of figures requisite for
stating the fractions of a £ which are obtainable under each of the three systems:–
s. d. Pence. Mils.
1 4 = 20 0 = 240 = 1,000
# £ = 10 0 = 120 = 500
+ £ = 5 0 = 60 = 250
} {! = 4 0 = 48 = 200
# 48 = 2 6 = 30 = 125
To gé = 2 0 = 24 = 100
3%, 48 = 1 0 = 12 = 50
2 4 6 544 2,225
19 figures. 19 figures. 25 figures.
ANSWER.
Again the questions harp on the divisibility of even sums. Oh for a little broken money !
Why this careful abstinence from all mention of subdivision of shillings, pence, and farthings in one
lot ? Now I take the question of the divisors of £1 in both systems.
How comes it that the great instrument of interest, the ever-recurring per-centage divisor, 100,
is omitted ? How comes it that no reference is made to the frequent sales by hundreds, two
hundred and fifties, thousands 2 I decline to stop at 20, and proceed to enumerate what I believe
to be the useful divisors of money. They are 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 25, 28, 48, 50,
56, 100, 112, 120, 200, 250, 500, 1000. Of these the pound, in farthings, is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 24, 48, 120, in all thirteen. And the pound in mils is divisible by 2, 4, 5, 8,
10, 20, 25, 50, 100, 200, 250, 500, 1000, in all thirteen.
Now the pound in farthings—difficulty of calculation apart, which is putting out of sight a very
important matter—has a more useful lot of divisors than the pound in mils, so long as packets are
made in dozens. But when the packets come to be made by tens, as they certainly will be, the
pound in mils will have a more useful lot of divisors with relation to ten than the pound in
farthings has with relation to twelve. In this way :—
Those who reckon by dozens call a dozen dozen the gross, and a dozen gross the great gross.
Now the pound divides by 12, but not by 12 times 12. But when 10 takes the place of the dozen,
100 and 1000 will take the place of the gross and of the great gross. Now look at the following
questions :— - º
At 1s. 2; d. a piece, how much the dozen, the At 61 mils a piece, how much for 10,
gross, and the great gross P 100, 1000?
14s. 9d, the dozen 6 fl. 1 ct, for 10
12 6l. J f. for 100
61/. for 1000
177s. the gross
I 2
(all by inspection).
2124s. the great gross,
or £106 4s.
At 112l. 17s. 6d. the great gross, how At 112l. 8 fl. 75 m. the 1000, how much
much the gross, dozen, and single for 100, 10, and 1 P
article 2
112!. 17s. 6d. - 111. 2ſ. 8ct. 7m. ; for 100
2O 11. If?. 2Ct. 8m. # for 10
7
1f. Ict. 2m. § a piece
12)2257%d, the gross
12)1883d. the dozen
153d. the article - * (all by inspection).
and #d.
I have put down the accurate fractions in both cases, leaving every one to his own mode of
statement or rejection. From the constant reference to the dozen, and mention of our existing
system as duodecimal, one would suppose that it really offered the same facilities with reference
to twelve which the decimal system offers with reference to ten. The preceding examples show
that it does not.
*Not that we complain of it on this account. For 20 is more of the decimal than of the
duodecimal character; and so much the better.
III.
QUESTION.
16. Is the introduction of the decimal principle into our coinage desirable without reference
to what may be the system of weights and measures in this country P
ARTS"Jºyº R.
I entertain a great respect for this question, which I considered with much care and much
repetition three-and-twenty years ago, when I first began to think about decimal coinage. It is by
Professor
De Morgan.
E 4
40 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
De Morgan.
*g
far the most difficult thing on winch a beginner in the subject has to make up his mind; and no
person has thought properly on the subject until he has turned it over and over again.
If decimal coinage must be looked on as sure to bring about decimal weights and measures, the
question is merely this:—Will the intermediate period, during which coins are decimal and weights
and measures are not, be a period of so much inconvenience that it would be better to decimalise
all at once. * t
But I shall propose another question, my answer to which will of course exempt me from all
answer to the preceding. Would it be worth while to decimalise coins, if it were certain that
weights and measures never would be decimalised at all 3 It is my decided and long fixed opinion
that it would be very well worth while. an
If our weights and measures all ran in harness with our coinage, if four small ones made the
next greater, if 12 of the next greater made the next greater still, and if 20 of the next greater
still made the greatest of all, I am not prepared to say what I should come to upon the question
whether the coinage alone should be decimalised. To the first strong impression in the negative I
should oppose my recollection of the early time when I felt rather strong on the propriety or
decimalising coins, weights, and measures all at once. I see a good deal to be said in favour
of decimalising coinage alone, even in the case supposed. But no such case exists. Our weights
and measures neither accord with the coinage nor with one another. Troy weight, now useful
only to bullionists, comes the nearest to the coinage, which in fact springs out of it. And even
here there is a curious inversion, which I do not remember to have seen explained.
Troy weight. Money.
Twelve ounces one pound. TwenTY shillings one pound.
Tw ENTY pennyweights one ounce. Twelve pence one shilling.
But in all the other cases money has nothing in common with weights and measures, except an
infusion of the binary principle, very differently introduced in the two. The consequence is that
even money and even measures do not match with any striking facility, and broken money and
broken measures have no relations worth noting. Hence, taking into account the immense superiority
of the decimal coinage as an engine of calculation, and the fact that many calculations are made on
money for one which is made on pure weight or measure, I hold that the advantage of decimal
coinage is well worth obtaining, without any reference to weights and measures.
I would decimalise coinage first, because it is desirable to begin with one thing at a time, and to
choose the easiest way of beginning. The coinage system can be decimalised without any
withdrawal of actual coins or introduction of new ones, except what could be done at leisure ; for
higher convenience, not of primary necessity.
I would decimalise coinage first, because it is desirable to teach decimals by something which all
come in the way of learning from. Money comes often to all, weighing and measuring does not
come often to a great many. When the decimal system has been practised upon coins, it will come
easily as to weights and measures.
I would decimalise coinage first, because the coinage is close to decimal coinage already. One
more farthing in the half-shilling, and it is done; there will be 100 farthings to the florin, 10 florins
to the pound.
I would decimalise coinage first, because it could be done speedily. Before weights and measures
can be decimalised there must come a discussion about details, compared to which the discussion
about the coinage will be trifling indeed. As yet, those who would decimalise weights and measures
are not agreed about their units.
I would decimalise coinage first, because the greatest part of the advantage which will result to
education can be gained from it at once; for the books of arithmetic copy actual life in this point,
namely, that the far greater part of the calculations are made upon money.
I would decimalise coinage first, because this great practical improvement is within our reach,
and because we, the English, have always found it suit our complaint best to get what good we can
as soon as we can, and not to refuse anything because we cannot immediately get all. The person
who will not pick the low branches until the ladder comes to help him to reach the higher
º too, deserves to wait for fruit until it drops from the moon, and is quite in the way to get
his deserts.
QUESTron.
17. Commodities are divided for the retail purposes of the market by means of our weights
and measures, and the practical purpose of coins is to effect the payment for those retail
purchases. Can the adjustment of our system of coinage be properly disconnected from
the adjustment of our system of weights and measures 2
AINTSV-7'Eº.
Mere payment is not the purpose of coins : it is one purpose, calculation is another. See the
answer to question 16 for the rest.
QUESTron.
18. At present our system of weights and measures, and our system of coins, may be
considered as binary. Can it prove consistent with public convenience to abandon the
binary, and to adopt the decimal system in our coinage, unless we have decided on the
same course in our system of weights and measures
ARTSV EE.
Our weights and measures cannot with truth be considered as binary, because they are not
binary. The only binary system in our medley is the system of measures of liquids and dry goods
up to the quarter. Neither is our coinage binary. We cannot abandon what we have not got.
Our medley consists of different kinds of mixtures of the binary, ternary, quinary, septenary, and
composite, so heterogeneously put together that broken measures and broken moneys are as
much separated, nearly, as if all the systems were entirely different.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 41
QUESTron.
19. If the retail transactions of the community originate in a system of weights and measures,
by which the hundredweight is divided into 4 quarters, the quarter into 28 pounds, and
the pound into 16 ounces; and in which, again, the lineal measure, the yard, is divided
into 3 feet, and the foot into 12 inches; will a coinage, founded on the decimal
principle of division, afford a greater facility for the adjustment of such retail transactions
than the coinage which now exists 2
ANTSW.E.R.,
At even prices there is little loss, at broken prices there is great gain. I could have wished that
the proposer had dealt in instances of broken transactions; but all his attempts at close quarters are
on even money. If a hundredweight cost 911, 1 1s. 7#d.? how much does a pound cost? also the
same at 911. 5fl. 8ct. 2m.? The direct ways of doing this are as follows, in the two systems. I omit
fractions in the common system, because the work is usually exceedingly tangled ; I insert them
in the decimal method, because they are mere play. If any one likes to put on the fractions
in the common system, he is welcome to do so : the work is easy enough in the instance chosen.
4) 91 11 7; 4) 91° 582
4) 22 17 11 4) 22:8955
(a) **= * ** === (b)
7) 5 14 5; 7) 5’723875
0 16 4+ ‘S 17696
8ſ. 1 ct. 7m. ºr of a mil.
In the existing system 17 process figures are written, the answer being wrong by the 112th of a
farthing. In the decimal process 19 process figures are written, the answer being wrong by about
the 2500th part of a mil; and the matter would have been more against the existing system, but
for the accidental divisibility of 5l. 14s. 5; d. by 7. In the very last question it was stated that the
existing systems might be considered as binary : surely 7 is not a binary factor. This factor 7
is an awkward thing to deal with in adapting it to our quarto-duodecimo-vicesimal coinage. We
have to turn 5l. 14s. into 114 shillings, and divide it by 7 in the head; unless, indeed, we demand
subsidiary paper calculations in the common system. It is, however, the fact, that with all but
expert hands the common system does demand little bye-calculations, of which its advocates take
no notice whatever. I have loaded the decimal work with fractions of mils, merely to show how
much allowance against itself that system can afford. It would really be done thus, except for
the precautions taken against a reader who may “lie at the catch,” as John Bunyan phrases it.
4) 91° 582
*=sº Ans. 8ſ. Ict. 8m.
4) 22°896 Too much by about
(c) . *=ºmsºmº 4% of a mil.
7) 5’724
‘818
Twelve process figures instead of 17, no byework, not a moment's strain upon a head which
contains the common multiplication table, work incomparably more easy, and risk of error very
much lessened. But I confess that I have not given the easiest way of finding the price of
11b. at 911, 11s. 7#d, per cwt. In producing that easiest way, I give the unkindest cut of all at
the quarto-duodecimo-vicesimal hodge-podge. The shortest and best way of proceeding is to
render 911. 11s. 7#d, into florins, cents, and mils (the rule may be learnt once for all in five minutes),
giving 91-582, to work as above, and to render 818 back into 16s, 4d. A little more consideration
show that 16s. 4d. is nearer. I affirm, and I only wait for instances produced by antagonists
to prove it, because instances chosen by myself might be suspected, that the shortest way of
dealing with the common system is to learn the head-rule for conversion into decimals, to transfer
the data into decimals, to work in decimals, and to transfer the decimal answer back into the
common system by the head-rule. But this is for those who use decimals: the world at large must
learn abstract decimals from concrete coins, not the way to mend their coins from decimals.
I put down all the actual processes which go through the mind in the cases (a.) and (c.), which
represent the mode of dealing with the nearest farthing of the common system, and the nearest
mil of the decimal system.
(a.) (c.)
In 9, 2; in 11, 2; # of 11, 15s. ; in 11, 2 ; In 9, 2; in 11, 2; in 35, 8; in 38, 9; in 22, 6.
15 and 2, 17 ; 3s., 36 and 8, 44, 11. In 22, 5; In 22, 5; in 28, 7; in 9, 2; in 16, 4. In 57, 8 ;
# of 11., 10s. ; in 17,4; 10 and 4, 14; 12 and 11, in 12, 1; in 54, 8.
23, 5 ; and #d. 5l., 100 and 14, 114; in 11, 1;
in 44, 6; 2; 24 and 5, 29; 4 ; 4 and 3, 7; }d.
What I have entered as shadowing out the consequences of the 4, 12, 20 of the common system
is decidedly less than it ought to be. And the difference of trouble and of risk of error cannot
be represented by type, any more than the complex variety of routine.
QUESTION.
20. Take the case of an article now selling at a shilling per pound or per yard, and retailed
in halves, quarters, ounces, or inches, these fractional quantities are easily and readily
paid for in our present coins. But if our coinage be subjected to the decimal principle
of division, will not that facility be lost?
F
Professor
De Morgan.
42 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
Professor
De Morgan.
ANSWER.
A shilling a pound again Try 3s. 4d. pound, 174d. a pound, or 11}d, a pound, and compare
he power of payment with that of the decimal system. Are meat, bread, tea, sugar, candles, &c.
always at even money the pound Ž Does not the evidence taken by the Committee of 1853 show
that the fraction of a farthing, and the tradesman's rule of taking the whole farthing, is the cause
of considerable keenness of calculation among the poor?
QUESTION.
21. Under our present system,-
Mils. Pence.
1lb. = one shilling 50 12
#lb. = sixpence 25 6
}lb. = threepence 12.5 3
§lb. or 2 ounces = three halfpence 6:25 1;
Tºlb. or 1 ounce = three farthings 3-125 #
In cases of this kind will the ordinary transactions of the market be carried on under a
decimal system with simplicity or convenience comparable to that which is obtained
by the present system ż
ANTSV EIR.
A shilling a pound again Answer as before. I take this opportunity, in reference to the example
given, to make a remark on the methods which would be followed under a decimal system.
Nothing is more common among opponents of decimals than the assertion or implication that
the decimalist is never to use a common fraction. Now it ought to be known that the decimalist,
perfectly alive to the existence of common fractions and to the mode of using them, intends to
use them whenever they will be more convenient. He uses ºr of a mil instead of #, or ; of a mil
instead of ſº, as he judges best. He is sworn at Highgate never to use decimal fractions when
common fractions are more convenient, unless he likes decimal fractions better, which, in the case
supposed, he is wise enough not to do. In written calculation he will rarely use common fractions,
because decimal fractions are easier. In mental calculation, so long as our present weights and
measures remain, and longer too if he should see reason, he will use binary or other fractions
for the purpose of head calculations, in aid of decimals. At a shilling a pound, or 50 mils a
pound, he will see that an ounce is 3 mils and # of a mil; and with these he will calculate ounces,
and will know that the odd mil comes in at half a pound. And if any opponents should urge
that he is abandoning the decimal principle, he will reply that the decimal principle, like all other
principles, is to be held by only as long as it is convenient. The common run of people,
accustomed to know when the turn of the farthing takes place in their present system, will find
the odd eighth of a mil easy enough. But it will matter little; for the even shilling is not a
common price in things of common consumption.
QUESTron.
22. Would a change from our present to a decimal system of notation and of coins secure any
advantages in brevity of expression, in facility of stating accounts, in simplicity of form,
in speed or accuracy of calculation, or in facility of payments?
A NFSV ER.
This question has been answered before in its various details. But objections may be answered
in various ways. I shall, in this present answer, give one or two extreme cases, not meaning to imply
that everything is like the extremes, but only that, in the long run of cases, the decimal system
insures a large per-centage of the benefit of the extreme cases. In this particular the extreme cases
of the decimal system have the better of the extreme cases of the common system. The much
vaunted exactness and facility of answer which occurs at an exact shilling a pound vanishes altogether,
and leaves no vestige behind, at by far the greater number of broken prices. The even money
cases of the common system are no more extreme cases than sound pavement is an extreme case
of muddy clay; they are isolated and eaceptional cases. But the extreme cases of the decimal
system which I bring forward are genuine extreme cases, the ridges of a gradual rise.
Brevity of eaſpression. Which is most simple as to expression, 999m, or 19s. 11%d., 146m. or
2s. 11}d,
Facility of stating accounts. The power of instantaneous reduction from mixed coins to mils, or
vice versd, gives many facilities of statement.
Simplicity of form. Simplicity of form is the basis of the proposed alteration. Thus, uniformity
is simplicity in matters of calculation, and uniformity is seen in 10 mils one cent, 10 cents one
florin, 10 florins one pound ; and is not seen in 4 farthings one penny, 12 pence one shilling, 20
shillings one pound. And there is simplicity of form in the choice of 10, the radix of our
numeration. -
Speed of calculation. Suppose we ask how much per cent. is 13s. 23d. in the pound, no uncom-
mon kind of question. In the common ways it might be done as follows; but many writers on
arithmetic are shy of practice in such cases, and work out the full rule of three. While writing
these answers I was at a business meeting, in which a collector's poundage was stated at 3:#d. One
of my colleagues, a clear-headed man at common arithmetic, asked how much per cent. is that 2
By help of 14 mils, I answered, as soon as the words were out of his mouth, one pound eight shil-
lings nearly. With an instant's hesitation I could have answered, ll. 9s. 2d.
13s. is 13 × 5 or 65 0 0 per cent. Or thus:–4)300
2d. is of 5 or 16 8 , 75
#d. is # Or 4 2 , 12)275
#d. is # Or 2 1 , 22–11
20)1322
66l. 2s. 11d. per cent, . 66–2–11
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 43
The following is the process for those who are trained in the common way —
1l. 13s. 23d . 1007.
960 — 960)63500(66l. 2s. 11d.
158 576
4. *mºs
=- 2- *. 590
635 576
14,
20
280
192
88
12
1056
96
96
96
O
The nearest question in decimal money is as follows:—How much per cent. is 6ft. 6ct, 1}ſm, in
the pound 2 Answer, by inspection, 66l. If, 5ct, per cent.
Is nothing gained in speed here P Again, it is proposed to find the pounds, shillings, and pence
in 146923 farthings. .
- 4)146923
12)36730–3
20)3060–10
1531. Os. 10#d.
How many pounds, florins, cents, and mils are there in 146923 mils 2 Answer, by inspection,
146l. 9ſ. 2Ct. 3m.
The reduction of either of the two, poundage or per-centage, into the other by inspection, the
utter abolition of the work of reduction of mixed coins, are surely gains in speed. They are extreme
cases, but they are extremes which are gradually approached. I now try the following:—If
17l. 12s. 11%d, yield 24!. 2s. 0%d., how much will 156l. 13s. 7#d. yield 2–This belongs to a numerous
class of questions in the common system, the class out of which pence and farthings are often struck
in order to save work.
17l. 12s. 11;d. 24l. 2s. O}d. 1561. 13s. 7#d.
20 20 2O
352 482 3| 33
12 12 12
4235 5784 37603
4. 4. 4.
16943 . 23138 1504,13
23138
1203304
4,51239
1504,13
451239
300826
4)
16943)3480255994 (205409
33886 12)51352–1
91655 20)4279–4
84715
2131, 19s. 4}d, and ##### of a farthing
69409
67772
163794
1524.87
11307
The accident of two cyphers in the quotient (against which it was 8 to I) saves four lines of
work in the division. I propose the corresponding question in decimal money. If 1.7l. 6ft. 4ct. 8m.
give 24!. Ift. Oct. 2m., what will 1561.6ſ. 8ct. 1m. give 2–I have given a mil additional to the last
sum to avoid a simplification, and I have not taken advantage of the first two sums being both
Professor
De Morgan.
F 2
44 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
De Morgan.
divisible by 2. I have used the contracted division at the end, it being a certainty of the decimal
system that contracted multiplication and division will be taught and used.
17 648 24 102 156*68]
24 102
313 362
15668 I
626724,
313362
17648)3776,325462(218.9808
35296 2.131.9fl. 8ct. ººm.
di
24,672
17648
7024.5
52944
173014
158832
} 4,182
\ | 4,118
64.
53
tº-
11
In the first example the number of figures which mean processes is 139; in the second it is 94.
But those who are properly trained in common arithmetic will have only 66 figures, by doing the
multiplications and subtractions of the division in one. This method is common on the continent,
and those who use it affirm that it is easier and safer. I fully believe them, after many years'
experience of it in use and in teaching. It is one of the greatest mischiefs in education of the
quarto-duodecimo-vicesimal hodge-podge, that it draws the attention of the learners off from
common arithmetic at the very time when they might begin to learn many simplifications.
Accuracy of calculation. Diminution of processes is increase of accuracy, because the more
to do, the more chance of a slip. Simplification of processes is increase of accuracy. Easier
management of the small fractions at the end is increase of accuracy. Every burden taken off the
memory is increase of accuracy. Uniformity of system is increase of accuracy, because details
have more practice. Additional power of verification is increase of accuracy. All who use
logarithms (and they will be all who can be called expert calculators in 10 years after the establish-
ment of decimals), will have means of verification at hand, which they will use until they learn that
the original process may often be discarded in favour of the verifying process. The sliding rule will
come in as a means of verifying the leading figures at sight. A business calculator, an actuary or
accountant, with responsibility on his mind, would give one more protection to his client's interest
and his own character by a sliding rule six or eight inches long, which would warn him of any
error as large as one in a thousand in a multiplication or division, by merely a slide and a look.
QUESTIon.
23. In the report of the discussion, at the Institution of Civil Engineers, of Mr. Yates’
Paper on the French system of Measures, Weights, and Coins, the following passage
occurs (p. 60):—
“ The pound sterling, consisting of 960 farthings, admits of 19 divisions* without a
“ remainder ; but if divided into 1,000 parts, it only admits of 8 divisions. Existing
“ weights and measures are chiefly reckoned by 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 36, &c., which
“ admit of divisions by existing monies; but if a monetary decimal system be
adopted, without also adapting it to weights and measures, it must be evident that
the number of fractions will be greatly multiplied. Decimal coins will not accord
with the fractions of a pound of 16 ounces, nor with those of a yard of 36 inches.
Purchases of #, +, +, +, &c. of any integer could not be paid for decimally without
incurring a loss by fractions not represented by coins. Now those are precisely
the quantities in which the working classes principally make their purchases;
consequently they would be the chief sufferers by the introduction of a decimal
coinage, unless there is a simultaneous adoption of decimal weights and measures.
This anomaly was severely felt in the United States, and to obviate the inconve-
“ nience, Spanish pieces of 64 and 12% cents, although illegal coins, were of necessity
“ employed.”
Must the truth and force of this statement be admitted, or, if not, what answer can be given
to it?
Ç
K
%
&
&
&
Ç
AINTSW/IER,
Already answered. The quotation assumes a close accordance between the system of coins and
the system of measures. No such accordance exists. What are the United States going to do with
their binary coins 2 If what I have heard be true, they must not be quoted any longer on this
subject. [Since the above was written, I have seen the details of the act of congress, calling in
these binary subdivisions of the dollar, and I have also seen a report of the sub-committee of
the chamber of commerce of New York, on dccimal weights and measures, which speaks of “the
readiness with which the requirements of the recent enactment of congress, with respect to the
* Qy. 960 admits of 27 divisions, no. 19 ; 1,000 of 15 divisions, not 8. [True, when I is not reckoned as a
divisor, which it need not be.—A. De M.]
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 45
Spanish coin, were complied with.” This report adds, “The necessity of abolishing its use had
been long felt by the people."]
QUESTron. -
24. In the retail transactions of the shop or market, is not division into halves, quarters,
thirds, eighths, twelfths, &c. more convenient, and more in unison with the natural habits
of mankind, than the division into tenths f -
“ The decimal numbers, applied to the French weights and measures, form one of its
“ highest theoretic excellences. It has, however, been proved by the most decisive
experience in France, that they are not adequate to the wants of man in society,
and, for all the purposes of retail trade, they have been formally abandoned. The
convenience of decimal arithmetic is in its nature merely a convenience of calcula-
tion ; it belongs essentially to the keeping of accounts, but is merely an incident
to the transactions of trade. It is applied, therefore, with unquestionable advantage,
to monies of account, as we have done; yet, even in our application of it to the
coins, we have not only found it inadequate, but in some respects inconvenient.
The divisions of the Spanish dollar, as a coin, are not only into tenths, but into
halves, quarters, fifths, eights, sixteenths, and twentieths. We have the halves,
quarters, and twentieths, and might have the fifths, but the eighth makes a fraction
of the cent, and the sixteenth even a fraction of a mil. These eighths and six-
“ teenths form a very considerable proportion of our metallic currency; and although
“ the eighth, dividing the cent only into halves, adapts itself without inconvenience
“ to the system, the fraction of the sixteenth is not so tractable; and in its circulation,
as small change, it passes for six cents, though its value is six and a quarter, and
there is a loss by its circulatiou of four per cent. between the buyer and the seller.
“ For all the transactions of retail trade, the eighth and sixteenth of a dollar are
“ among the most useful and convenient of our coins ; and, although we have never
coined them ourselves, we should have felt the want of them, if they had not been
“ supplied to us from the coinage of Spain.”—QUINCY ADAMs's Report to Senate of
United States, 1821, p. 81.
- Jºãº SV% º,
Mr. Quincy Adams wrote about France in 1821. In 1839 or 1840 the decimal system was fully
established. The French committed the error of attempting to alter all at once, and in the middle
of a revolution. In England the coinage will be altered first, and in quiet times, we may hope.
Did the United States ever coin any binary coins 2 Was their use of the foreign coins anything
but a mere want of coin P
QUESTION.
25. The late Lord Ashburton, in a debate in the House of Commons on this subject, remarked,
“ That the capacity of division by halves and quarters which attends our shillings is
“ extremely convenient for the common purposes of life, which upon the whole is the
“ best criterion of any system.” Is this correct or otherwise ?
How is the shilling expressed as 50 mils to be divided into quarters, or the sixpence
expressed as 25 mils to be divided into halves?
AINTSWAWIETR.
What does the sentence mean P. What is which 2 Taking it to mean that convenience, and not
binary division, is the criterion, I perfectly agree. Accordingly, I consider all the conveniences;
and I find the conveniences of a decimal system preponderate greatly over those of our system.
Lord Ashburton's argument looks like the following. Convenience is the criterion; binary division
is convenient ; therefore binary division is to be preferred. I reply as follows. The balance of
convenience is the criterion ; binary division, all points duly weighed, is not so convenient by a
great deal as decimal division. Therefore decimal division is to be preferred.
Lord Ashburton’s argument may be paralleled as follows. A table with chairs is more con-
venient than a table without chairs ; therefore it is to be preferred. But what if an important
cacteris paribus have been forgotten ? What if the chairless table have dinner laid out on it, and
the table with chairs be cheerless F A stand-up dinner is better than a sit-down fast, as may easily
be ascertained by trial.
All debate, even in the highest quarters, reeks with the fallacy of urging disadvantages, instead
of their balance. The questions before me are a laboured attempt to magnify certain alleged
advantages of the common system, with the eyes steadily turned away from the over-weighing
advantages of the decimal system.
QUESTION.
26. It is stated by Sir John Herschel, in his evidence before the Committee of the House of
Commons, (qu. 594,) that in his opinion “it is a great misfortune that decimal coins will
“ never fit the fractions of a yard and of pounds and of measures.” Must we concur in
that opinion, and if so, must we concur in the further view of Sir John Herschel that,
“ a decimal system of weights and measures, as well as of coins, ought to form a
“ part of the same integral system f°
27. In the evidence given before the House of Commons’ Committee, Sir John Herschel gives
his opinion, that the decimalization of weights and measures and of coins should go hand
in hand (qu. 598); but if that be impracticable, he inclines to the opinion that
decimalization of weights and measures should be a step towards that of coinage
(qu. 600).
Professor De Morgan would adopt a decimal coinage first, leaving the other (decimal
weights and measures) for a future period (qu 765). •
Mr. Airy thinks that the adoption of a decimal system of weights and measures
desirable to some extent, and probably concurrent with the binary system (qu. 481).
What is the correct view on those points 2 Is the adoption of a decimal system of weights
and measures essential to the efficiency and usefulness of a decimal coinage Ought it
to precede, to accompany, or to follow, as a necessary consequence, the introduction of
decimal coinage 2
Professor
De Morgan.
F 3
46 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
De Morgan.
AINTSV. S. R.
I know that Sir John Herschel and Mr. Airy both strongly advocate the proposed change in the
coinage. I am as strongly as any one in favour of decimal weights and measures; but I affirm that
nothing suits so well with a varied system of weights and measures as a decimal coinage. Con-
sequently, I hold that a decimal system would suit our existing medley better than our existing
system. . -
Two systems do not fit, unless their subdivisions are similar. Suppose we had,—
- - - 4 grains one drachm, 4 farthings one penny,
12 drachms one ounce, 12 pence one shilling,
- 20 ounces one pound, 20 shillings one pound.
Then a sovereign a pound is a shilling an ounce, a penny a drachm, a farthing a grain. But even
then the want of decimal division is a great inconvenience. Thus at 1ſ. 3s. 4d. a pound, how much
do 14 oz. 7 dr. 3gr. cost P. We here encounter a considerable fraction of our old difficulties. The
truth is that next after complete decimal unity, the best thing is decimal coinage with purely binary
weights and measures: a person new to the argument, must for some time halt between the two.
The coinage is that on which far the greater quantity of the work takes place. But the maximum
of facility is gained in a completely decimal system. The reasons why coinage should be decimalised
first have been given already. -
The Commissioners of Weights and Measures, whose opinion Mr. Airy, one of them, gives,
changed their opinion on the subject by the time they made their second report. Speaking in 1854
of what they had said in 1841, they remark, “We wish to state our opinion that, in reference to
“ decimal scale generally, the public mind is very greatly changed; and that the introduction of a
“ decimal system will now be very easy in respect to many points which a few years ago would
“ have offered great difficulties.” Sir John Herschel and Mr. Airy were parties to both reports.
The question to which I am now answering is only speculation. The advocates of the decimal
coinage affirm that decimal coinage alone would be a very great benefit; and, though they are
persuaded that decimal weights and measures will follow, they feel that the coinage question must
be tried apart, and on its own separate merits. Not that they think it ought to be so, but because
they are satisfied it will be so.
QUESTron.
28. Is it not the fact that, next to addition, the most important operation performed on
numbers representing broken sums of money is the finding the price of a broken quantity
of material when the price of a given unit of the material is a given broken sum ?
Is not this operation in theory the multiplication of a broken quantity of material by a
broken sum of money P. Is it not usually performed, and with great facility, by the rule
denominated “Practice?”
Is it not the fact that one of the great advantages of a completely decimal system of money,
weights, and measures, would be that such operations would be performed by simple
multiplication ?
Is it not the fact that this result would not be attained unless weights and measures were
decimalised as well as money 2
If money alone were decimalised, would not such operations be still performed by “practice,”
and would the operations be much or at all simplified ?
Take, for example, the following case, given by Sir Charles Pasley in his evidence before the
Committee of the House of Commons, as showing the advantage of the decimal system.
215 tons 17 cwt. 3 qrs. 9 lbs. at £9 11s. 64d. a ton 2
Under the present system we should say—
215 tons, 17 cwt., 3 qrs., 9 lbs.,
4. s. d.
at £1 perton = 215 17 10 —- ºg
at £8 , – 1,727 2 8 — sis
at 10s. = } - 107 18 11 — ºf
ls. = Tº -: 10 15 10 ºr
:- 6d. = } – 5 7 11 ºr
#d. = ºr - () 6
at £9 11s. 64d. = £2,067 7 84
If weights and measures as well as coins were decimalised, the question might be :—
Required the price of 483,597 lbs. at £4'275 per 1,000 lbs. ? which would be a question
of simple multiplication.
But if only coins were decimalised, then in the pound and mil system we should have 215
tons, 17 cwt. 3 q's. 9 lbs. at #9: 576 per ton, which we should probably work in the
following manner:—
100 tons == 957 - 600
100 , - 957 - 600
10 2, - 95 - 760
5 * = # - 47 - 880
10 cwt. = To = 4 - 788
5 , = # = 2 - 394,
I 33 = To – • 478-8
1 , = l == • 478 - 8
2 qrs. = # == • 239 - 4
1 * = # = • 119 - 7
7 lbs. = # == • 029 •925
1 , = } - • OO4 - 275
1 * = 4. - • 004 - 275
215 tons 17 cwt. 3 qrs. 9 lbs. = €2067-877
Is much or anything gained in this case unless weights and measures as well as coins are
decimalised -
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 47.
ANTSV. E. R.
It is the fact that meat to addition, the most important operation performed on numbers representing
BRoKEN sums of money is the finding the price of a BROKEN quantity of material when the price of a
given unit of the material is a given BROKEN sum. And on this fact, as an anvil, I have been pounding
the preceding questions. This fact is a fact of written calculation, and a higher fact of mental
calculation ; for as to things done in the head, we may leave out the words “neart to addition.”
Now to the question. Would practice be simplified by decimal coinage applied to our common
weights and measures 2 Yes, even if the proposer of the questions were allowed to dictate the mode
of working; but more if there be a little more power of routine in ordinary arithmetic than he has
supposed to be exerted. I shall first ask a few questions upon the practice question which he has
worked in the common system, which I affirm to contain concealed operations, for which no figures
are put down, of a character such as the ordinary arithmetician does not make without figures put
down. And this is not the particular act of the proposer of the questions ; such concealment is
common cven in books of arithmetic. In the common system a little paper bye-play is not
infrequently supposed, a thing which is never needed in purely decimal calculation.
In the first line I see that at 11. per ton 215 tons 17 cwt. is 215l. 17s., but how am I to know
that 3 qrs. 9 lbs. gives 10d. less isd. The work is not much, but it is out of routine. This step
would count as two lines of the work in the decimal example below to any but a very practised
computer. The common run do not do such things without writing down. Again, in the line
“%d. is ºr’ does the proposer mean that 24 is one of his head divisors 3 Has he not made a
tour de force to save a line 5l. 7s. is 107s., having 24 four times and eleven over; eleven times
12 and 11 is 143, having six times 24 pretty nearly. Is 24 to be treated as a divisor in this
way, by head-work alone º Then this is a strong argument in favour of decimal reckoning, whether
as to facility or freedom from risk of error. Again, the imperfect fractional work by which the
final halfpenny is determined, what does it tell ? The answer has nearer to #d. than to #d. Which
was meant, the nearest farthing, or the nearest below 2 Is the existing system always to be troubled
with this extra fractional work Then we have a still stronger argument for the decimal system,
which treats fractions with the ease and after the manner of integers.
I shall now put down the decimal work ; and as the preceding misses very nearly three-quarters
of a farthing, I shall beat it by going to the nearest tenth of a mil. The power supposed to
belong to the worker in the ordinary system contrasts strangely with the assumed feebleness of
his opponent. The first can divide by 24 in one line; the second cannot grapple with the multi-
plication by 2, except by two lines and an addition.
9° 5760
200 1915 2000
1() 95° 7600
5 47 ° 8800
10 cwt. 4, '7880
5 * 2° 3940
2# , 1 * 1970
# , * 1197
7lbs. * 0.299
1 2, * 0043
1 > * 0043
2O67° 3772
20671. 3ſ. 7c. 7m. and , of a mil.
The number of process figures in the common way is 55, in spite of all its contractions of work.
In the decimal process it is only 59 when we count fifteen ciphers which are needless, that is,
44 genuine process figures. As to the ease of the two processes, if any one of any amount
of dexterity cannot find out for himself the vast difference between the two, it is needless to argue
with him.
QUESTION'.
29. Will not the introduction of a decimal system of coins and accounts necessarily tend to
render the present system of weights and measures very inconvenient, and thus to force
the country into the application of the decimal principle to weights and measures for
the sake of necessary correspondence with the coinage 2
“The concurrent use of non-decimal division of commodities with a decimal coinage
“tends, in reckoning prices, to a result expressed in a binary fraction of a cent. In
such cases, if payment be made, three-fourths of a cent is liquidated with a cent ;
a half-cent is sometimes paid the same way, sometimes not noticed. The quarter
“cent is not liquidated. In accounts the three-quarters, halves, and fourths of a
“cent are generally entered, and added in on footing the columns, the total being
carried to the cents, a fraction above half a cent being counted as a cent. It is
believed that no sensible loss to either party arises in the long run from this
“practice. Even in a complete decimal system of weights, measures, and coins it
“would be impossible to liquidate accurately all reckonings, unless the least coin
“were smaller than the public would endure.”—Answer to No. 36 of Circular
Queries, by J. Ross SNowDEN, Director of the Mint of the United States.
ANTSV.E.R.,
The quotation is not much to the point and may be neglected. As to the question, I believe the
country will be forced into decimal weights and measures by a deep conviction of their advantage,
so soon as it shall have experienced the benefits of a decimal coinage. And what then P was not
the world forced into the sub-marine telegraph by experience of the advantages of the land
telegraph 2 and what harm has come of it? Good things which force other good things are good
good things.
It is possible that the demand for decimal measures may not be so rapid nor so urgent as I
anticipate. Decimal coinage will be so great a relief, that people may be more sensible of what
they have gained than of what they may still gain. It is not with all things as with money, of
which the desire of gain often grows with the gain. In matters of comfort a great accession may
produce a disposition to retire upon a competency. But I hope better things.
C &
66
& 6
6
6
IProfessor
De Morgan.
48. DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
Professor
De Morgan.
QUESTron.
30. A great practical authority, Mr. Slater, has stated that one consequence of the introduc-
tion of decimal coinage will be, that articles will be made up in parcels of ten each
instead of dozens as at present. Will not this be less convenient for subdivision than
the present practice of making up articles in dozens 2
AINTSVER,
Mr. Slater is quite right, and consequently several of the preceding questions need no other
answer than is contained in his assertion. Speaking of mere package, what harm will result from
10 not subdividing as much as 12. Customers will be just as apt to buy tens as tradesmen to pack
them. In fact, Mr. Slater founds his opinion on his perception of both buyers and sellers finding
their account in packing by tens. And when a tradesman unpacks a parcel of ten to sell six to his
customer, if six be asked for, he will not feel hurt because his customer did not ask for five. Nay,
if the customer should want a dozen, the tradesman will cheerfully unpack a second parcel. Nobody
has so keen a feeling that every little helps as the man who stands behind a counter all day: nobody
has so clear a notion that gaining a farthing is better than standing idle.
QUESTron.
31. Does not the anticipation of the change in this respect afford a practical illustration of the
tendency of a decimal coinage to force the country into the adoption of decimal
weights and measures 2
ANTSW. E. R.
It does, and so much the better. The force is force of conviction, and is not the force of class
upon class, but the force of man's experience upon himself. It is the force upon which the French
merchants relied for propulsion, when to Colbert's question what he could do for commerce they
answered, Let it alone.
QUESTION.
32. Is not this an inversion of the natural and proper course ? Ought not the country to
decide in the first instance what system is most properly applicable to weights and
measures, and then proceed to adjust coinage and accounts to that system, coins and
accounts being the means for adjusting and registering the retail payments which arise
out of transactions which have had their origin in weights and measures 2
AINTSV Elº.
No, it is the natural and proper course ; at least it is the proper course, whether natural or not.
Man's nature is very apt to induce him to suppose himself an omniscient judge of the future: here
nature and propriety are at war. The proper course, the course which experience tells us has
produced the best results, the course to which this country is given beyond all others, and by
which it has thriven beyond all others, is to make changes slowly, to make the smallest changes
first, to correct the omniscience of man's nature by watching the effect of changes, and to take
what can be safely got as fast as it can be safely got.
QUESTION.
33. The Select Committee of Parliament of 1821 recommended that the subdivision of
weights and measures employed in this country be retained, as being far better adapted
to common practical purposes than the decimal scale. If this recommendation be
founded on sound reason, is it not equally applicable to the case of coinage as it it is to
} . weights and measures 2 Is it not fully as true of coins as it is of weights and measures,
that the present subdivision of them is well adapted to all common practical purposes f
See Evidence of J. E. Gray, Esq. (qu. 378.)
Dr. Peacock, speaking of the introduction of the French metrical system, says,
Frcycl. Metrop. Art. Arithmetic, p. 448 —“The decimal subdivision of these measures
“ possessed many advantages on the score of uniformity, and was calculated to simplify
“ in a very extraordinary degree the arithmetic of concrete quantities. It was attended,
‘ however, by the sacrifice of all the practical advantages which attend subdivisions by
“ a scale admitting of more than one bisection, which was the case with those previously
“ in use, and it may well be doubted whether the loss in this respect was not more
“ than a compensation for every other gain.” Must we admit the weight of this autho-
rity and the conclusion to which it leads
&
A.TNT SWIER,
The parliamentary history of the country is well studded—thank God— with neglect of the
recommendations of select committees. How strong the select committees used to be on the corn
laws | The if is highly important. But even if—though I deny it—the opinion as to weights and
measures be sound, there are ample reasons for decimalising the coinage.
I pay great deference to Dr. Peacock's authority, because he is one of the few to whom the
history of mercantile arithmetic in all time is a familiar subject. But I pay more deference to
Dr. Peacock of 1857 than to Dr. Peacock of 1826, (though he was then one of my teachers,) and
Dr. Peacock himself does the same. He is a warm advocate of the pound and mil system, and is
a member of the Council of the Decimal Association. The men of science generally, who had a
leaning towards binary measures in conjunction with decimal coinage, are gradually becoming more
in favour of complete decimalisation. -
Dr. Peacock was one of the commissioners who in 1854 reported that many of the difficulties of
decimalizing weights and measures had disappeared.
IV.
QUESTION.
34. Is it not the fact that in all matters of abstract number and multiplication of mate-
rial things there appears to be a general instinctive tendency to adopt the decimal
system, whilst in dealing with material subdivision, whether in length, capacity, or
weight, there is an equally strong tendency to adopt the binary system,-the decimal
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 49
system in arithmetical calculation, the binary system in weights and measutes, and the
retail transactions of the market arising out of them 2 Are not all the integers of our
weights and measures multiplied decimally, but divided by the binary scale 2 Do we
not speak of ten yards, a hundred yards, a thousand yards 2 But when we 'come to
subdivide the yard, do we not think and speak of half a yard, quarter of a yard, &c.,
and similarly in all other cases 2
“The earliest and most venerable of historical records extant, in perfect coincidence
“ with speculative theory, prove that decimal arithmetic, as founded in nature, is
“ peculiarly applicable to the standard units of weights and measures, but not to
“ their subdivisions or fractional parts, nor to the objects of their admeasurement or
‘ weights.”—QUINCY ADAMS's Report to Senate of United States, 1821, p. 16.
35. Is it not then natural and convenient that our integer of money, the £ sterling, should be
similarly treated 2 That whilst we speak of ten pounds, one hundred pounds, one thou-
sand pounds, we should subdivide the £ sterling into half a pound, or 10s. ; a quarter
of a £ or 5s. ? And, again that we should subdivide a shilling into half a shilling or 6d.;
a quarter of a shilling or 3d., and so on ?—thus applying decimal arithmetic to the
standard unit of our coinage, the gē sterling, but not to its subdivisions or fractional
parts.
6
AINTSV. E.R.,
We have nothing to do with the natural man and his instinctive tendencies. It is perfectly
clear from history that the instinctive tendency of man is to take of his neighbour's goods without
equivalent as much as he wants ; and this I take to be the earliest measure on record. The best
thing that can be said for the creature's original practices, is that sometimes he did not burn the
rest, after he had supplied himself by his own mode of measuring. Laws are constantly fighting
against instinctive tendencies, if that be the proper name. •.
The instinctive tendency of infants is to crawl. If a generation of infants could grow up with-
out the care of adults, it is much to be feared that the bulk of mankind would crawl for generation
after generation. And when some bold men at last proposed that infants should be taught to
walk, select committees would laugh at the idea on their hands and knees, and long papers of
questions would magnify and diversify the dangers of tumbling, and would appeal to our instincts.
Habits are no argument in questions of improvement. Let a system be ever so bad, people will
acquire some mitigating habits : but such habits must not be urged against improvement.
The convenience of the binary division is the same sort of convenience as that of reckoning
by pebbles, or by the chequer board and abacus. Advancing intelligence has driven out the pebbles
from which calculation takes its name, and the bungling board from which the exchequer takes its
name ; and it will also drive out binary division. Mankind are far enough advanced to make a
good shift without it, and the good shift would soon become perfect dexterity. But let them not
take this on authority : introduce decimal coinage, and they will know it soon enough as to
II].62a SUl I'62S.
The motion that man instinctively goes upwards by ten and downwards by two is unsupported
by fact. The unit of commencement is the unit best adapted to our grasp. Thus, in measuring
land the poie of convenient length for two men to carry and lay along was used, and forty poles
make a furlong. Measures and weights go up and down from a convenient unit, with combina-
tions of various kinds both ways.
There is very little instinctive arithmetic. None but those who have studied the history of
number can be aware of the excessive slowness of the ruder periods at comprehension of
numbers. Again, natural instincts in science were never towards simplicity: simplicity is an
advanced product of art.
QUESTrorſ.
36. In the Report of the Legislative Assembly of Canada on Decimal Currency (p. 14) is
the following statement :—
“ The decimal currency admits of but one aliquot division—into halves; but the New
“ York shilling, an eighth of a dollar, can be divided into sixths, quarters, thirds,
“ halves, &c., and although Congress has never coined any shillings, the American
‘ people during sixty years have clung to their well-worn shillings and sixpences,
“ perceiving them to be a great public convenience. Your Committee are of
“ opinion that coins representing the eighth and sixteenth of a dollar are indis-
“ pensable in small transactions in Canada, and that the smooth British sixpences
“ will continue to pass extensively as the eighth of a dollar unless a better coinage
“ is provided.”
In a communication from the Rev. Joshua Leavitt of New York (p. 48 of the same Report),
this further remark occurs:–
“I have no doubt of the superiority of the decimal system for the purposes of accounts, and
“ am astonished that other countries have so long delayed its adoption. Our experience
“ of the benefit of our federal currency in this respect is all one way. The saving of
time and labour is prodigious, and the advantage in point of correctness and of the
facility of detecting errors unquestionable. But for the purposes of small circulation,
in marketing, huckstering, and the like, I am persuaded that a duodecimal currency
like that of England, or like that which formerly prevailed in the city of New York,
is far preferable. These small transactions of daily life outnumber the transactions of
commerce almost infinitely. And it seems impossible to make a decimal currency as
convenient in these as the old currency. One reason is, that the decimal currency
admits of only one aliquot division, that is, into halves. The shilling can be divided
into halves, quarters, thirds, sixths, and twelfths; and if it were needed, a coin of the
value of two thirds of a shilling would be found manageable. In all these countless
small transactions which I have referred to, and in which every man is employed many
times every day, this capability of subdivision is of great convenience. We are con-
‘ stantly buying a half of a thing, or a quarter, the eighth, the one-third, and so on. If
the price is a dollar, we can make the change for one-half, for one-quarter, and if one,
G
&
&
* &
&
&
6{Ç6&&&&Ǻ
%6{ét66&&4&
{
6
Professor
De Morgan.
.*.*, as rºw ** … • ***A*-** a s > *
!-- ~~~~ ;--
Professor
De Morgan.
***
“ two, or more pence, with our decimal currency, but we cannot pay the exact price of
“ one-third, one-sixth, one-eighth, one-twelfth, or any other of the fractional parts. If
“ the price is half a dollar, we can only pay for one-half, one-fifth, and one-tenth. If
“ the price is a quarter of a dollar, we can pay for no aliquot division whatever. This
“ is a constant inconvenience, and can be got along with in no other way than by
“ disregarding small differences.” -
If a decimal coinage be introduced into this country, is there any reason to suppose that
the inconveniences here stated as the result of practical experience in the United States
will not equally occur in this country P
Will it be possible to obtain the eighth or the sixteenth of a florin, or the quarter of a shilling,
or the half of a sixpence, under the proposed decimal system?
If the small differences, necessarily arising from this imperfect divisibility of the decimal
coins, must be disregarded, upon whom will the unavoidable loss fall?
With the tradesman will it not be an accumulating loss, consuming his profits; and will it
not be impossible therefore for him to bear it?
Must it not therefore necessarily fall upon the small purchaser P
The principle of the objection is, that the decimal system substitutes the divisors 2 and 5
for the divisors 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, which are the natural divisors for material things, and
are also the divisors of our present money, giving us the third, fourth, and half parts of
every thing.
That the effect of this will be, in the sale of broken parcels of commodities, a small money
remainder involving loss to shopkeeper or customer.
This, we see, is a source of constant inconvenience in the United States.
Let us take the descending steps from 8s. -
8s., or 400 mils, or 4 florins, is not divisible by 32, the divisor of # oz.
4s., or 200 mils, or 2 florins, is not divisible by 16, the divisor of 1 oz.
2s., or 100 mils, or 1 florin, is not divisible by 8, the divisor of 2 oz.
1s., or 50 mils, or ; florin, is not divisible by 4, the divisor of 3 lb.
6d., or 25 mils, is not divisible by 2, the divisor of 4 lb.
In each of these cases, in the purchase of a broken quantity of material, oz., 1 oz., 3 lb.,
# lb., will there not necessarily arise a broken sun of money, which cannot be paid in any
coin; a small “difference which must be disregarded,” to the loss of buyer or seller 2
Mark how under a denimal coinage the difficulty occurs in an earlier stage, and in a more
serious form, than under the present coinage, precisely as we descend to the lower amounts,
to those which are the usual prevalent prices with the middle and lower classes.
If it be assumed that, instead of these prices, “competition will determine prices in decimals
“conveniently divisible by 2, 4, 8, or 16,” and therefore in prices not corresponding to
the decimal money of account ; if instead of one shilling, or 50 mils, the price of the
unit of the material is taken at 48 mils, is not this in itself an admission that in intro-
ducing decimal money we shall have introduced a money not conveniently adapted to
the purposes of the market 2 -
And in so doing shall we not have incurred a new set of objections, namely, the incon-
venience of being obliged to use several coins with which to pay the 48 mils, instead of
one coin with which 50 mils may be paid P
37. Again: Mr. Leavitt bears testimony to the admirable qualities of the decimal currency
for accounts, but asserts that for small circulation and payments in marketing, huckstering,
and the like, a duodecimal coinage is also wanted and preferable to the other. These
small transactions of daily life far out-number the dealings of commerce. And this
statement is sanctioned by the concurrence of the Committee of the Legislative
Assembly of Canada.
Does not this statement distinctly point to the necessity of abandoning a duodecimal
system of coinage, but of introducing, if possible, in connection with our present
system of coins, some means by which money transactions may be recorded in a decimal
system of notation, thus retaining the present system of coins undisturbed, but com-
bining with it a decimal system of reckoning or account keeping 2
“Perhaps it may be found by more protracted and multiplied experience that the same
“material instruments shall be divisible decimally for calculations and accounts; but in any
“other manner suited to convenience in the shops and markets; that their appropriate
“legal denominations shall be used for computations, and the trivial (or customary) names
“for actual weight and mensuration.”—QUINCY ADAMs's Report, p. 90.
AINTSW ER.
These questions ring the changes on matters already discussed. I refer again to broken prices and
broken quantities. The fraction of a farthing is constantly occurring in the purchases of the
poorer classes, who, as was proved before the Committee of the House of Commons, become
“keen calculators” in determining how these fractions affect them. The poor have already been
trained upon a hard system of small capability. It is proposed to give them one in which
less trouble will produce skill capable of further direction.
If it should become customary to price ounces in mils, instead of pounds averdupois in shillings or
florins, this will only prove that there is a great convenience in dealing with a low unit multiplied,
instead of a high unit subdivided, and allowing the higher units of coin to come in merely as the
ten, hundred, &c., of the lowest unit. These higher units make themselves in language and in
thought, instead of requiring to be made by an act of calculation. Broken prices work more
easily in a decimal subdivision ; and if people find that they work more easily still in a decimal
aggregation, we can only say why not ? Ought subdivisions which work more easily with broken
sums than the present ones to be refused, for fear it should be found out that by reversing the
process, and working upwards from the lowest unit, the matter would be made more easy still?
The convenience of paying or receiving a coin more or less seems to me greatly overrated.
And the question entirely forgets that people give change. If 48 mils a pound become common,
then, in the few cases, comparatively speaking, in which the exact pound would have been a shilling,
a shilling would be paid in, and two mils given back,
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 51.
- - QUESTIon.
38. Are not the following the primary requirements of a good system of coinage P viz.:-
1st. That the integer should be divisible into the greatest number of clean fractional parts
to correspond with the endless variety of retail transactions which they are to be the
means of adjusting:
2nd. That these fractional parts should be expressible in the shortest and most simple form
of words, and with the smallest number of figures: - º
3rd. That the coins should be such, both in denomination and relative value, as may pass
with the greatest facility in valuing or summing them up when presented in great
numbers : .
4th. That they should be such as may afford the greatest facility for mental conception,
for recollection, and for the ordinary processes of arithmetic which the people are daily
called upon to perform mentally in the tumult of the market or shop, and without the
opportunity of recording them in writing :
5th. That they should harmonize with the natural tendency of mankind to subdivide
commodities for retail purposes by continual halving.
ANTSV 153 R.
1. For adjustment substitute calculation, or, at least, introduce the idea. If division without
remainder be clean, then I suppose division with remainder over is dirty. These words being
agreed on, those computations which are clean at 1s. a pound, become very dirty at 7#d. a pound.
We want much easier ways of dealing with the lowest coins: the decimal system supplies this
Want.
2. The common people have little to do with the technicalities of fractional expression; and if
they had, the forms of decimal fractions are more easy, and more easily convertible than those of
common fractions.
3. This is indeed a primary requirement, and one great point of the decimal system is the facility
of valuing and summing up when the coins go by tens in agreement with the system of numeration.
4. The decimal system distances the common system completely on broken prices, and broken
prices are the rule of the market.
5. The facilities of the decimal system outweigh the advantage of binary division of coins.
These questions are mere repetitions, and I refer on them to all the answers preceding.
QUESTroRT.
£9. Is not the following a just description of the present system 2
In the ultimate subdivision, where the binary division is alone useful, we have two binary
steps, viz., two farthings = 1 halfpenny, two halfpence = 1 penny. In rising to the next
unit, the shilling, we have again the factor 2 introduced twice, giving four 2s, besides the
number which, next to 2, is most frequently required as a divisor, viz., 3. In rising to the
next unit, the .4.1, we have again the factor 2 introduced twice, giving six 2s. besides the
prime number which, next to 2 and 3 and their products, is most frequently required as a
divisor, viz., 5.
Thus giving the following table of the factors of the number of each of our present units
contained in the superior units.
Farthing. 2 x 2 || 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × 3 || 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × 3 × 2 × 2 × 5
Penny. 2 × 2 × 3 2 × 2 × 3 × 2 × 2 × 5
Shilling.’ 2 x 2 × 5
Pound.
Does not this system fulfil to a greater degree than any other possible system some
of the above requirements P Can this system be justly considered as accidental or
unscientific P
There must have been some valid reason for the adoption and long retention of our present
peculiar system of coins instead of the obvious plan of making the progression of coins
correspond to the progression of figures according to our Arabic notation.
What is that reason 2 Is it to be found in the above explanation, and in the varied and
infinite divisibility of the integer obtained through this system P
- A: N'SW. E. R.
A true account is given of the factors which the common system contains. But it does not fulfil
the requirements of a system of coinage so well as the decimal system ; and that by a very great'
deal. To this point the whole of the questions go, and the whole of the answers. It is neither
accidental, nor wholly unscientific for its day. But our affair is with its comparative, not its absolute
merit. - f
The dozen was derived from the Romans, who divided all wholes into twelve parts. Of all the
nations of antiquity they were the most unskilful in calculation, and they had a decimal numeration
so defaced in its mode of expression, that they were driven to the abacus for very ordinary calcula-
tions. The Roman dozen is seen in the division of the pound troy, which is 12 ounces. How the
20 was introduced at the next step, or how the 12 and 20 changed places in the pound of coined
money, I have never seen explained. The 20, fortunately for us, was an abandonment of the Roman
dozen. To be consistent, the advocates of the present system should try still further to duodeci-
malise the pound, by making it 12 shillings. But I believe no one has carried his love of
duodecimalism so far. -
As to valid reason for long retention, when in England was any reason except usage required
for retention ? The progression of coin could not have been fitted to Arabic notation, because our
Professor
De Morgan.

G 2 -
52 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
De Morgan.
coinage was settled long before the introduction of Arabic numerals and reckoning. The awkward
Roman mode of expression, with its mixture of Quinquagesimalism and eapression by subtraction,
half hid the decimal principle. It is not so very long since accounts were kept in Roman numerals
at the Exchequer. The spiteful tallies which burnt down the Houses of Pariiament because they
were turned out of office had Roman numerals on them to the very last. In old books of
arithmetic, the numerals 1, 2, 3, 4, &c., are often explained by i, ii, iii, iv, &c., which were supposed
known to the young arithmetician at starting. In an old work on book-keeping now before me
(Mellis, 1588) all the statements of money are in Roman numerals, which are made Arabic in
the working columns. And this was common enough.
QUESTron.
40. Does it not necessarily follow that a system of coinage based upon a binary or
duodecimal scale must answer these requirements more completely than a decimal
coinage, seeing that 12 is divisible by more factors than 10, and that the quotients of
such division are again more divisible under the present than under a decimal system 7
And does not our present coinage afford peculiar facilities for continued division into
clean fractional parts 2
ANTSW. E. R.
Yes: I mean it does not necessarily follow. The greatest requirement of all, easy valuing and
measuring, is infinitely better obtained in the decimal system. And the clean fractional parts
of the shilling—again I answer, because again I am asked—are useless in broken prices.
QUESTron.
41. If in place of our present division of the 4 sterling, a decimal division be substituted,
shall we not in many cases lose the power of obtaining an exact result 2
What is the 3rd, the 6th, the 12th, or the 16th part of a £ sterling under decimal division
of the coinage 2
Under our present system it is exactly 6s. 8d., 3s. 4d., 1s. 8d., 1s. 3d.
Again, what is the 3rd, 6th, 12th, and 16th part of a shilling in decimal coinage 2
Under our present system it is exactly 4d., 2d., 1d., 3 farthings.
A. NTSV Eºs
This question has been answered again and again; that is, the objection implied in it against
decimal coinage.
V.
QUESTION.
42. If it be admitted that for all ordinary retail transactions, for the purposes generally of
paying and receiving, our present coinage is satisfactory, whilst the inconvenience is
found to arise when we come to processes of account-keeping and calculation, does it
not follow that our present coins ought if possible to be retained without any
change, that some decimal system of recording the various sums should be introduced,
and that we should decimalize our accounts, retaining our present coinage in all respects
unchanged ?—See No. 37.
Alº Sºlº,
It is not admitted that our present coinage is satisfactory for paying and receiving, because a
very important element of this process is the way of arriving at the knowledge of what to pay or
receive. The inconvenience is universal : it is not confined to the higher and more elaborate
paper-ruling, item-describing, and figure-writing process which is called accounts. The
inconvenience is comparatively greater in what the questions call adjustments than in the grander
processes which they call calculations. The easier the thing ought to be, and might be, the harder,
comparatively, does the common system make it.
If we decimalise accounts, retaining all our coins unchanged, we should make our system worse
than it is already, if people would use the new system ; but they would not.
QUESTron.
43. How far will this be accomplished by writing down all money values in the number of
pence of which they consist, ea. gr. :-
£ s. d. Pence. Mils.
1 0 O - 240 - 1,000
O 6 8 == 8O – 333°333
O 5 O F. 60 - 250
0 3 4. = 40 - 166"666
O 2 6 ~ 30 - 125 -
O 1 3 ~ 15 - 62° 5
1 18 9 465 1,937° 499
See the following answer to No. 37 of the Circular Queries by J. Ross Snowden, Esq. :-
“4. The scope of this inquiry may admit of the suggestion, that if the decimalisation of
“ the British coinage were effected by adopting, in place of the pound sterling, a new
“ unit of the value of one hundred of the present divisions of the pound (say 100
farthings, halfpence, or pence) all prices and coins under the present system would
be exactly measured in the new unit and its parts, which would also be almost exactly
“ commensurable with the dollar of the United States. A unit of 100 halfpence, for
“ example, which might be called a dollar, would be equal to 81-013 of the United
States, an approximation to our unit so close, that the moneys of the two countries,
“ under such a system, might be deemed substantially identical.” * * *
& 4
& 4
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. e 53
ANTSV El Re
This is a new question. Let us see how a system of recording in pence would act in a banking
house, our existing coinage being the means of receipt and payment. There would be a constant
bringing in and paying out of mixed pounds, shillings, and pence. In the hurry of the first entry
it is impossible that the clerks should convert into pence as they go on. The first entries then
must be £ s. d. Now surely the original entries must be checked, and the day's work must be
balanced on the first entries. Consequently, addition in the common way must be done. What
then is the boon conferred upon the banking world 2 Permission to multiply by 12 and 20 before
each ledger entry, for the satisfaction of playing at decimal addition of pence in the ledger. This
will be, on the whole, more trouble and risk of error than the common method. The public will
lose the advantage of decimals in business and in education. The banker will have more trouble,
that is, more expense, for his clerks have their hands full as it is ; so that more trouble means more
people to take trouble. And all this refers to the merchant as much as to the banker.
I believe the following to be a true account of the principle, though an exaggerated account of
the detail, of keeping books in pence, while receipts and payments are in pounds, shillings, and
pence. Blocks of stone are to be carted. Break them up into pebbles, because it is easier to
shovel in pebbles than to crane in blocks. Never mind the double process of breaking up and
shovelling amounting to much more trouble than lifting in. Convey the pebbles to their
destination, and when they are wanted to build with join them into blocks again.
Thus with 543l. 11s. 9d. paid in and drawn out by cheque. We have as follows:—
The way into the ledger. The way out of the ledger.
543—11—9 12)130461
20 **-m-gº,
tº-mºme 20)10871–9
10871 ºmmsºmºsºmºmºmºse
12 543—11—9
130461
This is done to save the trouble of adding in the ordinary way. Now, though ordinary addition is
a troublesome thing, with its twelve and twenty work at the bottom of each column, as compared with
decimal addition, it does not mend the matter at all to introduce twelve and twenty work into every
item all down the column. The plan seems to me to imitate the folly of the child who takes the
medicine by sips, because the taste is nasty, instead of getting over it by one good gulp at once,
with one taste for all.
There is no fear of any movement in favour of this system. No one ventured to back it in
the debate which produced the Royal Commission.
QUESTION.
44. Does not every decimal system of accounts necessarily consist in taking the lowest
money unit, and stating in Arabic notation the cumulative amount of that coin con-
tained in any given sum.
45. In the £ and mil scheme do we not take the farthing (changed in its value and called a
mil) as the basis of the system, and then proceed to state all values in the number of these
new farthings contained in that value fº
In the penny scheme do we not take, in a similar manner, the penny as the basis, but without
any change in its value 2
In addition to this advantage, will not the statement of values by the number of pence
contained in them, rather than by the number of farthings or mils, necessarily involve
greater conciseness and simplicity of expression, there being only one fourth the number
of pence as compared with the number of farthings in any value 2
Is it not an advantage in any decimal system that it does not necessarily involve the intro-
duction of a farthing column into all accounts, seeing that all sums under a penny are
now voluntarily omitted from a sense of convenience in a very large proportion of
accounts f
In those cases in which it is found desirable to introduce fractions of a penny, is there not
reason to believe that it will be found more convenient to express those fractions
binarily than in a decimal form, seeing that such has been the result of practical
experience in the United States ?
The Director of the Mint states (qu. 31), “The change has been effectual as to the use of
“dollars and cents, but not of the mil, the fraction of a cent being expressed binarily.”
AINTSW. E. R.
To question 44, No. To both together as follows: The words necessarily consist-are meant to
imply that the question gives us the whole. It does not give us the whole. Legs are essential to
a table ; but a table does not consist of legs.
Undoubtedly, so far as the routine of written calculation is concerned, a decimal system of
accounts is created so soon as a unit coin is chosen, and it is agreed to reckon 1, 2, 3,...... 10, 11,
... ... 100, 101, ...... of those coins. The fallacy of the question consists in leaving out of accounts
every notion except that of numeration.
Besides numeration, there is distinctness of conception, there is facility of recollection, there is
mental calculation. All these things are recognised by the defenders of the existing system,
because the existing system does, in its way, provide for them. Accordingly, the question which I
am now answering is very satirical upon the penny scheme. It says in effect, “We are now come
to a plan which requires us to strip accounts of all the adjuncts of conception, recollection, mental
computation, &c., and to reduce them to pure numeration.” And thus reading question 44, to
which I at first answered, No, I now answer: Yes, if you mean the penny scheme; for the words
“consist in " are very just and fully descriptive.
*-
* Keeping accounts in farthings reduced 4 per cent, in value, as stated by Dr. Gray (385)
Professor
De Morgan.
G 3
54 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
De Morgan.
sºmsºmº-
When Dr. Gray described the pound and mil system as reckoning by farthings reduced four
per cent., he reduced that scheme to the baldness of his own. Both the existing system and the
pound and mil system are superior to the penny system in the following points:–
1. They both aid facility of conception by having coin for every money of account. The 4,
the 48, the 960, of the lowest coin ; the 10, the 100, the 1000, of the lowest coin, are names and
tangible things. The penny system deals in 10, 100, &c., of its lowest coins without names or things.
At some distant period, according to its proposers, we are to have tenpenny coins, introduced
gradually, to work confusion among the shillings.
2. They both aid recollection in the same way, and therefore mental calculation, which is common
calculation with common memory substituted for paper memory.
3. They both contain the pound and shilling as a matter of distinct conception.
QUESTron.
46. If the penny be taken as the lowest unit of a decimal system of accounts, and if all
sums be written down in the number of pence of which they consist, will not this afford
a decimal system of accounts which may be used in conjunction with and without
involving any disturbance of our existing system of coinage, or changing the character
of the 4 sterling as the great unit of account, as the basis of our system of exchange
with all the world, and as the great integer by which all our principal calculations and
estimates of property and of obligations are made 2
ANTSWER.
The penny system will not disturb our system of coinage; but, if not prevented by our system
of coinage from coming into existence, which I am confident will be the case, our system of
coinage will wofully disturb the penny system.
- QUESTron. -
47. The fractions of a penny would be written as fractions #, 3, #. Is this a disadvantage 2 Is
it not the case, that practically in all countries, even in those in which the decimal
system is most completely carried out, the ultimate subdivision of coins is binary 2 Is
not this shown by the fact that in France, Portugal, &c., the 5-centime piece and the
5-rei piece are the lowest coins in general use or generally expressed in accounts 2 In
the United States is not a # cent universally expressed instead of 5 mils? What is the
inconvenience of writing such values as fractions 2 Are they not as easily added in this
as in a decimal form, and are they not more easily multiplied ?
- AINTSV EIR.
The mere halving of the lowest coin is no disadvantage. It can be done in a decimal
system, and it will be done when convenient; nothing proposed in the question is either impossible
to decimalists, or repudiated by them. But it is an abiding delusion of the opponent of decimals
that he will suppose the decimalist to be under contract never to use a common fraction.
The language of some advocates of decimals is calculated to foster this delusion : their phrases
would almost make one think that decimals are upheld as ethically right rather than as technically
convenient. This is always the case in discussion ; matters of practice become matters of doctrine
on both sides. So on one side we sometimes find a morbid exclusion of the common fraction, and
on the other side we hear the taunt, You are departing from the decimal principle. For myself,
I care not one mil for the decimal principle, and the manner in which I look on the subject of
common fractions as related to decimal convenience—for which I do care—is as follows:—
I exclude common fractions, binary or not, from the coins which are to be the units of the main
working system, because by admitting them decimal arithmetic would be crippled in its details, and
its distinctive utility would be destroyed. Decimal arithmetic deals with fractions as with integers,
and thence derives its peculiar advantage. Thus 11%, l and 72 hundredths, is truly 172 for all
working purposes. For purposes of appreciation and perception it is marked 1 '72 or otherwise in
order that 172 of one sort may not be confounded with 172 of another. Hence the great practical
advantage of decimal working : fractions undistinguishable in operation from integers. When once
this great field of facility is fairly reduced into possession, which it never will be if common
fractions are intruded of necessity into fundamental operations, it is then open to the calculator to
learn the manner in which common fractions are to be made useful in all the cases in which they
can be made useful. And assuredly, a decimal system, well and truly learnt, would be a basis on
which common fractions would find uses from which they are now excluded. The decimally
educated arithmetician would acquire that power of perception over his units, and that freedom
from the mysterious notion of the unit, which he never can acquire, at least which he very seldom
does acquire, in a system the units of which are railed off from one another by complex
multiplications and divisions. I would ask the advocates of the present system why we hardly
ever, if ever, see such quotations as £4}, +12#, 2}s., &c. By the true answer hangs a tale which
does not tell well for the existing system. In the question which I am now answering we have the
advocate for a certain decimal system pleading for binary division of his lowest banker's coin. I tell
him in reply that if he will only keep binary division in its place, and not spoil arithmetic by it, he
shall have a system in which not merely the lowest unit, but every unit, shall be the frequent object
of binary division, and non-binary division also, to an extent undreamed of by the operator on
quarto-duodecimo-vicesimal difficulty of transformation. One great advantage of decimals is that
common fractions are instruments of greater power. Try 72-193rds of 63l. 1 1s. 9d. and of
63l. 5ft. 8ct. 7m.
The person who mixes common fractions with decimals, as fundamental ingredients, may be
likened to a tradesman who has sticks of something sold by weight tied up in dozens, and who tries
to sell part of a parcel by cutting off the lower ends of all the sticks. Common sense would tell
him to untie the packet which had been tied up, and to take out as many whole sticks as he might
want. This should be his principle. But if a case should arise in which it is more convenient to
chop off one end of all the sticks, nothing hinders. And still less does anything hinder him from
breaking a single stick ‘o make up weight. Let decimals keep their place, and let common
fractions keep their plo, e : the load will then be lightened to the utmost. As the old philosophers
used to say, Nothing gravitates in proprio loco. w
ANSWERS TO LORD overSTONE's QUESTIONS 55
QUESTron.
48. This system would not include fractions of the penny otherwise than as fractions. Is it
desirable to incur the inconveniences of the # and mil scheme, the abolition of our
present copper coinage, the abandonment especially of the penny, &c., for the purpose of
comprehending in a decimal system of notation and account-keeping the fractions of a
penny, which under the present system are so seldom required, which, when required can
be so easily expressed as fractions, and which are in so many cases voluntarily omitted
for the sake of convenience 2 &
AINTSW. E. R.
If this question be asked as between the pound and mil system and the common system, it is a
general question, already answered in detail. . If it refer exclusively to the penny system, it is only
necessary to note that the decimal system is not intended only for what the questioner calls
accounts. The penny system excludes the world at large from decimals: even supposing that
bankers, &c., would adopt it—a strong supposition—the common people must and will reckon in the
coins they use.
QUESTION.
49. If the decimal system is to be tried for the sake of simplicity and convenience in account-
keeping and calculation, is it not the most prudent and safe course to make the trial of it,
in the first instance at least, as a system of account only, without disturbing the
coinage 2
How far would this be accomplished by simply authorizing the expression of all sums of
money in the number of pence of which they consist 2
ANTSV%. E.R.,
The decimal system is not to be taken on trial : it is a demonstrated improvement or it is
nothing. Who, in England, would propose to alter a coinage or a Parliament on trial 2 What
decimalist ever recommended the system in no higher character than as looking so promising that
it deserved a trial 2 If any persons were to propose to aggregate themselves to the decimal
association on condition that that body should only move for a trial, they would, though I am not
sure about the wording, receive the advice which King David gave to his servants, namely, to
tarry at Jericho until their beards were grown.
Further, this question again supposes that the decimal system is proposed only for its advantages
in “account-keeping and calculation,” by which the proposer always means large transactions as
opposed to smaller ones, which he calls adjustments. But it is, in fact, proposed and supported also
for its advantages in education, and for the convenience which it introduces into the little calcu-
lations of the poor. For example, I, who now answer these questions, and who did what I could to
call public attention to the subject long before the agitation commenced, would never have troubled
myself about it if its advantages had been confined to merchants and bankers; I should have left
those classes to take care of themselves. But as a teacher, I saw the quantity of time which the
common system takes, and I saw also the very imperfect results which it produces. As a teacher,
I found that it was shorter and easier, with tolerably educated pupils, to turn into decimals, to work
in them, and to translate the answer back into common denominations, than to use the ordinary
processes; and I took up the subject for the benefit of those who have little time for education.
The penny system introduces no decimal system into the world at large, which must always
calculate in the coins it uses. I believe the commercial world will do the same.
VI.
QUESTION.
50. If the decimal system of coinage recommended by the Committee of the House of
Commons (£ and mil scheme) be adopted, will it not necessarily involve the introduction
of more than two monies of account P
Will not this necessarily give rise to difficulty, trouble, and confusion ?
51. Is there any country with a decimal coinage in which more than two monies of account
are now in practical use *
AINTSWIER,
The question 51 as originally proposed had not the words “with a decimal coinage' in it, and
the answer was as follows.
By money of account in these questions must be meant monies below the highest unit of account.
The answer to question 51 is—Yes Great Britain, not to mention Portugal and Brazil, with the
MIL REA of 1000 REAs. Therefore we have three lower monies of account, shillings, pence, and
farthings. In addition-trouble, shillings count as two, for the second column of shillings is a column,
and though easy, is a very unsafe column. The banker rejects farthings, but the tradesman, the tax-
gatherer, the savings' banks, &c., do no such thing. When the pound and mil system is established
the bank will reject mils. Talk as he may now, the banker* is a sensible man at figures, and he
knows that 2%d.——less four per cent. to be quite accurate—is nothing in cheque drawing. And he
will be very glad to be rid of all dealing in copper. So that the banker who has now three lower
moneys of account, counting the half sovereign column, will have only two. As to the words inserted,
“with a decimal coinage,” see the answer to question 57.
QUESTION.
52. Is it not important, with a view to the simplicity and facility in calculation which are
supposed to constitute the great recommendation of a decimal system of coinage,
that there be not more than one hundred steps between the highest and lowest monies of
account P
* Everybody who observes must note the great difference between the way in which one and the same thing is
spoken of when it is an argument against change, and after the change is accomplished. Accordingly, all persons
who wish to be true prophets treat the terrors of an innovation by a process inverse to discount. Their present
value is about five times their value when due.
Frofessor
De Morgan.
C. 4
56 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
De Morgan.
AINSW. E. Rs
At present there are 960 steps, to the banker 240; but, practically, the steps of the common
people are only the steps up to two or three shillings, in farthings. In the new system, the banker
will make his pound 100 cents, with, at furthest, an additional column of half-cents, and the people,
who will reckon in florins, will have the 100 mils. So that each class will have 100 steps from its
lowest coin to its highest. I state this merely as a fact, not admitting the validity of the argument
implied in the question.
QUESTron.
53. Is not this the case in all the principal decimal coinages now in use, ea. gr., franc and
centime in France, dollar and cent in the United States, &c. 2
By an Act of Congress passed in the year 1792, it was ordained that “the money of
“account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units, dimes, or
“tenths, cents or hundredths, and mils or thousandths.”
Notwithstanding this long-existing state of the law, we are now told, upon the authority
of the Director of the Mint, that in that country they “ have but two denominations
“of money of account,-the dollar and cent.” And further, we are told “ that
“below the cent they do not usually reckon in mils or decimals, but in binary
“fractions of a cent,” that is, in vulgar fractions.
What inferences are to be drawn from these facts 2
Do they indicate that, be the law what it may, in decimal coinage more than two
monies of account, and more than one hundred steps between the highest and the
lowest unit, are found to be practically inconvenient, and, in truth, unworkable.
And further, that the broken parts of a low unit, such as the cent in the United States
and the penny in this country, are more conveniently represented by vulgar fractions
than by decimal notation.
Upon what other supposition can this established departure in practice from the
millesimal division of the dollar distinctly laid down by the law be accounted for 2
The annexed statement deserves attention; it appeared in “The Times,” April 4:-
“New Orleans, March 19.
“Cotton.—Sales to day, 3,500 bales, at an advance of #c., the market closing
“firm. New Orleans, middling, 134c. to 134c.
“Sugar has advanced ;c., and sells for 10}c., to 10}c.
“ Breadstuffs quiet. Pork firm. Lard advanced #c.; kegs, 143c.
} “Freights.—Cotton to Liverpool, 0#d, and to Havre, {c.”
The broken parts of the cent are all stated in vulgar fractions, in opposition to the
law already quoted.
These fractions, , #, #, 3, 4, can none of them be stated accurately in tenths of a cent.
In the case of a rise of cent in cotton, this, stated decimally, must be given as a rise
of 1 mill or 2 mills. There is, however, a small difference ; the first is too little,
the second is too much. What must be the effect of this unavoidable difference,
small per lb., when multiplied into the number of lbs. contained in 3,500 bales of
cotton 2 What is the lesson to be derived from these considerations Ž
AINTSW. E. R.
The French and Americans cannot have more than 100 steps: their highest coins are too small.
They both feel the want of larger coins. The extremes of wealth and poverty are well contained
in the breadth of our coinage. Pounds, florins, cents, for the bankers; florins, cents, mils for the
poor. It would be well if revenue were reckoned in some higher denomination.
Decimal nations use binary fractions of their lowest coins. Be it so ; we can do the same if we
find it most convenient. A man who has worked his way above bread and cheese diet is not
forbidden to take cheese after his meat if he please. By adopting decimal reckoning we lose no
power of ordinary fractions; but we gain the power of decimal fractions. Ask the French or
Americans to give up decimal coinage; tell them they show they ought to do it, because they
halve and quarter their lowest coins ; and see what they will answer.
We see that no abstract arithmetic prescribed by laws will be introduced unless it be supported
by coins of legal tender. This is a lesson for the penny scheme.
The binary fractions occur, not in accounts, but in statements of price, &c., from which items
of account are made up. It is natural that modes of stating prices should long remain unal-
tered. They are matters of conception, and of connexion between the past and present. It may be
that cotton would long rise and fall by eighths of the penny-of four mils. And if so, for this
reason : Because the cotton speculator has a mine of associations connected with the effect of an
alteration of ; d. All his inferences upon the difference between probable and improbable, rashness
and prudence, ruin and prosperity, depend upon experience of what has happened in a market
fluctuating by eighths. And pure decimal reckoning consorts admirably with binary-fraction prices
taken from the lower coins. These prices are never added up; totals calculated from them are
added. I am told that the two largest cotton brokers in the world, Mr. Holt and Mr. Wrigley, are
for a decimal coinage.
The question seems to me to propose the following argument. The French and Americans have
decimal coinage and accounts, in which they find, so they say, a great advantage. But they use
binary division when they go below account. Therefore let us continue binary and termary division
in our accounts. The argument is more logical when turned the other way; let us decimalise our
accounts that we may obtain the advantage, and imitate their example as to the lowest coin, if we
find it convenient. It seems to me that the argument, as stated, is just as good as the following
would bave been in the mouth of an Irish cotter of a century ago. . The nations which do not
allow the pigs to run about their coftages all declare that their dwellings are more comfortable
than ours. But they all build out-houses for their pigs. Therefore let our pigs still run about
our cabins.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 57
QUESTIorr.
54. If with us the £ sterling be retained as the principal money of account, does not a
subdivision into one thousand parts become unavoidable, with the addition of intermediate
monies of account between the AE and the mil 2
55. Will not this constitute an important difference between the decimal coinage of this
country and the decimal coinages now in use in other countries, much to the
disadvantage of our decimal system as regards simplicity and convenience of calculation,
and especially of mental as distinguished from written calculation, which the middle and
lower orders are constantly called upon to perform in their daily transactions 2
JºAINTSV Brºe
Of course our pound will be divided into 1000 parts, as now into 960. But, as before
explained, this is an advantage. We have pound, florin, and cent for the banker's book, and florin,
cent, and mil for the poor man's score. And even if the bankers choose to retain a five-mil
column, there is much gain for them still, and infinitely more for the community at large. But
the banker will not go below cents, and will bid adieu to copper account. .
QUESTIon.
56. Under our present system is not the high value of our integer, the £ sterling, a source
of great convenience and advantage, especially as compared with the lower value of the
franc in France and the dollar in America,
First, as facilitating the conception in the mind of large values, and expression of
them in fewer figures and with fewer words:
Second, as admitting of a greater multiplicity of clean fractional divisions ?
ANTSW. E.R.,
Yes, and for the first reason. There is no use in inventing high units merely to fractionise
them ; multiples of lower units are better.
QUESTION.
57. By the adoption of the decimal system will not this advantage be converted into a great
inconvenience 2
Will not our high integer, by necessitating the intervention of one thousand steps
between the top and the bottom of the scale, instead of one hundred steps, as in other
countries, become the source of confusion and inconvenience, and render the adoption
of the decimal scale in its most advantageous form impossible with us 2
A NTSV%lº R.
No. Decimal reckoning enables every one to put his unit in the convenient place. This
difficulty about units is an importation from the old system, in which the separate units are under
the lock and key of 12 and 20. It is then made difficult to pass from one unit to another; but in
decimals this is done by inspection. The common system among us has four units subordinate to
the pound; for the shillings column is of two units. Even the banker has three subordinate units.
Every column which has its separate addition is a unit column. What confusion or inconvenience
could possibly arise in the first of the following additions, more than in the second P
£ fl. ct. m. £ s. d. 7.
2 7 3 4. 2 14 8 H
1 9 2 8 1 18 6 #
15 1 2 5 15 2 6
19 7 8 7 19 15 9
I confess myself quite unable to understand a great part of what has been written about the unit.
There seems to be a notion that some mysterious thing called the unit exists in all calculation. This
is true when we reduce calculation to pure counting, and use pebbles. But the great principle of
abbreviation in arithmetic is the introduction of successive units, each consisting of a specified
number of the preceding unit. We laugh at the school-men, as we call them, in our day; but we
fail of none of their confusions, though we do not always attain their excellencies. I have a strong
suspicion that if some writer on the unit would clearly explain himself, an old dispute about the
true correlative meaning of genus and species would raise its head again.
QUESTIor.
58. And further, will there not necessarily be a less number of clean fractional parts under a
system which resolves the £ sterling into one thousand mils, than under the present
system, by which it is resolved into 960 farthings, inasmuch as 1000 admits only of
fifteen divisions without a remainder, whilst 960 admits of twenty-seven divisions without
a remainder; and the results thus produced are again susceptible of division under the
present system, but will not be so under the decimal system ; ea. gr., the eighth part of
960 is 120, which is again divisible by 2, 4, &c. without remainder; but the eighth part
of 1000 is 125, which is not susceptible of further division by 2, 4, &c. without
remainder 2
AINTSWIER,
What! more clean fractional parts * See the bulk of the first half of the answers.
QUESTION.
59. In commercial, trading, and banking accounts all sums less than a penny are now omitted
from considerations of convenience and saving of time in account-keeping. But under
a decimal system, which divides the £ integer into mils, the fourth or mil column must
in all cases be retained, as the omission of it would involve the omission of all sums up to
23d. The effect of this will be an increase of 10 per cent. in the number of figures
used in all such accounts. Will not this increase in the number of figures used in such
accounts interfere with the brevity and simplicity of expression, and the saving of time
in account-keeping, which are anticipated from the decimal system 2
Professor
De Morgan.
EI
58 . . . . DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:.
Professor
De Morgan.
ANTSVER,
Leaving out all I have said about the banker rejecting mils, let us suppose that he retains the
five mils when it occurs. Accordingly he will have an additional column, blank as often as not,
filled with 5 as often as not. Hence, for sums under £100, while the existing system costs 457
figures for 100 items, the pound and mil system will require only 439 figures. Let him fill up
with 0 when the 5 is wanting, and he has 489 figures. Both the saving and the expenditure are
equally beneath notice when the importance of other considerations is duly estimated.
QUESTron.
60. The decimal scheme now under our consideration will retain the shilling and sixpence as
fractional coins, but will it not destroy the peculiar advantage which now attends them,
namely, their convenient divisibility ? A shilling resolved into 50 mils is divisible only
by 2, 5, 10, and 25; but the same shilling, resolved by our present system into 48
farthings, is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 24.
61. Is it not a serious objection to the proposed scheme, that it will deprive the lower classes
of their divisors 2, 3, 4, 8, and 16, as applicable to the coins most familiar to them, thus
interfering with the facility with which they now obtain the third and fourth parts of
every thing which they require, and to the use of which they are well accustomed;
whilst, on the other hand, it will give them the divisor 5, which is wholly useless as a
divisor of the commodities which they purchase, or of the money which they use ?
“A glance of the eye is sufficient to divide material substances into successive halves,
“ fourths, eighths, and sixteenths. A slight attention will give thirds, sixths, and
“ twelfths. But divisions of fifth and tenth parts are among the most difficult that
“ can be performed without the aid of calculation. Among all its conveniences the
“ decimal division has the great disadvantage of being itself divisible only by the
numbers two and five. The duodecimal division, divisible by two, three, four, and
six, would offer so many advantages over it, that while the French theory was in
contemplation, the question was discussed, whether the reformation of weights and
measures should not be extended to the system of arithmetic itself, and whether
the number twelve should not be substituted for ten as the term of the periodical
return to the unit.”—QUINCY ADAMS's Report, p. 71.
&
&
6
6
&
%
{
&
G
6
- ANTSVºjº.
All this has been fully discussed in answer to the same objections stated in other words.
QUESTIon.
62. The proposed scheme involves an absolute change in the value of all the lower coins.
The penny and all multiples of the penny other than six and twelve will not be
interchangeable at equivalent values with the new decimal coins ; and again, the two
lowest monies of account in the decimal system, cents and mils, will be uninterchangeable
at equivalent value with any of the present copper coins, although these latter form
parts in odd pence of a large proportion of existing contracts, especially annongst the
lower classes, and constitute an immense proportion of the existing coinage.
• From this cause it is anticipated by some persons that confusion and difficulty in their
accounts, some unavoidable loss and injustice, and a vague but dangerous impression of
more extensive injustice will arise amongst the mass of the people.
Whereas a decimal scheme founded upon the penny or the halfpenny would involve no real
change in the value of any of our coins, but would only involve some additional trouble
to the richer classes by giving a new numerical form to their high integer, the £ sterling,
but not involving any absolute change in its value. - . -
Do you think these apprehensions well founded, and what is your opinion of the extent
and importance of this difficulty 2
AºNTSV EIR,
We now come to a new sort of difficulty. I suppose * the question admits that the new
farthings, namely, the old farthings altered in value, will interchange well enough with the new
pence, that is, with the old pence ratably altered in value. It is necessary to have a clear
understanding upon this point, because in quarters where no such confusion would be looked for,
arguments have been held which rest upon the difficulty of expressing an old penny in new mils,
and upon the assumption that reckoning in old pence will continue after the copper piece called the
penny has changed its value. In fact, we have had seriously propounded the harbour-master's
difficulty, who, when the pier was to be raised three feet because the decks of the packets were
to be raised three feet, was in great distress of mind to know how people were to mount from the
old pier to the new packets. The question reminds us, without falling into any mistake about it,
that we shall, for one day, encounter the harbour-master's difficulty. The new packet must, for
once, lie to at the old pier.
A.B. goes to bed on the last night of farthings, with six copper pence in his pocket, the equiva-
lent of a half-shilling bit, which he has exchanged for them during the day. He rises on the first
morning of mils an impoverished man. A Government flea has bit his pocket in the night, and
has eaten four parts in the hundred of the value of his copper. His six copper bits will no longer
change for the half-shilling bit: they want a new farthing, 3% of the old farthing, to be what they
were before. This never happens again : in all time to come, warned by bitter experience,
he will not let his half shilling go until he sees the odd farthing which is to come in. This
tone is no exaggeration. This spoliation, this robbery of four per cent. of a man's odd
copper, done once in his life, that he and his children may be benefited for ever, has been spoken
* The wording may seem to refer to old pence which are to keep their old value, while new decimal coins come in
against which they cannot be exchanged. But I suppose this is not meant. The old penny becomes one of the new
decimal coins, as four mils. -
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 59.
of as if it were a thing to rouse a patriot and kill a philanthropist. The prime minister addressing
a deputation on the very point, represented the poor man as saying to himself with the six coppers.
in his open hand, and a gloom on his countenance, “now I shall have to go and work before I can
make this into a silver sixpence." It would be hard to prove, and it certainly would want proof,
that any labouring man ever calculated the time of a farthing's worth of work. At ten shillings a
week, and over ten working hours a day—the decimal system which is the real horror of a poor
man—a farthing's worth of work is half a quarter of an hour. One manual labourer with another, it
is about half this time, that is, three minutes and three-quarters. Now, if the Balaclava mess cost
only one extra million, which is saying very little indeed, and if five million of adults have to work
out that million at 40 shillings a week, which is saying too much, each individual must work six
hours; that is, supposing such a wretched piece of work as that at Balaclava to occur only once—
which requires a large dose of the charity that hopeth all things—the mess cost 48 times as much
work as the establishment of the decimal system will cost, and with no set-off to count.
The set-off is as follows. In by far the greater number of instances the poor man will get as
much for his mil as he did before for his farthing ; that is, for a loss upon one sixpence, if he should
happen to have coppers to that amount, he gains nearly as much on every silver sixpence which
he gets for weeks and months after. -
Now to the question, will this abolition excite a feeling of dissatisfaction, and a dangerous
impression of extensive injustice among the mass of the people 2–No ; and for these reasons. First,
the mere appearance of 25 farthings instead of 24 in change for a half-shilling will look like an
augmentation; secondly, the cheapening of goods which competition will immediately cause, will
make the new mil nearly as good as the old farthing, and will justify the appearance ; thirdly, the
question about the price of goods, and about which will be lowered and which will not, will have an
interest which will utterly swallow up all power of considering the fate of the coppers which happen
to be in the pocket at the moment of the change, or the fraction of a mil lost or gained in an out-
standing debt.
Wages are received in silver, and the silver has more copper in it. This is the fact which will be
most easily apprehended.
The question tells us that the penny system will leave the poor as they are, and give some
additional trouble to the rich. This is a true description. Why then take the penny system into
consideration ? The existing system is clearly better, for it will leave both poor and rich as they
are. We do not want decimals, except for convenience. The pound and mil system will save
trouble both to rich and poor. -
Of course any change whatever must be widely made known and clearly explained. I have no
doubt that the clergy of all denominations, the postmasters, the excise officers, and the turnpike
keepers, will very willingly aid the comprehension of their neighbours; and all these classes should
be furnished with official explanations. The numerous railroad stations, with their intelligent
officials, put the country in a very different position from that which it had in 1816, as to the
promulgation and explanation of any new matter. When I was a boy, the people used to get
round the guard of the mail coach on its stopping, to set their watches by his time. Now, every
place where the coach stops has a good clock of its own, visible all day. As the power of asking
the guard a question once a day is to the power of looking at the station clock at any hour of day
or night, so is the old means of disseminating information to that which now exists. On reading
this answer again, I see that one of the points of question is, whether a dangerous impression of
injustice would arise. In plain words, would people so much dislike the loss of a farthing or its
fraction, once for all, that they would be likely to resist it by force P Believing that no impression
of injustice would result, I believe of course that no dangerous impression would result. But to
the question, supposing such an impression were to arise, would it be a dangerous one P. So
striking an Act of Parliament could not pass the Houses without attracting universal attention.
Supposing the Act to pass, it would be clear that the general feeling of the members of the House
of Commons would be that no danger need be apprehended from ignorant alarm as to the meaning
of the change. If a respectable minority of the House were to apprehend danger, and show
their grounds of apprehension, such a measure would not pass. Consequently, there is little need
to mix up this question with the question of the relative advantages of the two coinages. The
matter must come before parties who are much better judges of the state of popular feeling than
the arithmeticians who answer these questions. I may even be permitted to submit to the
Commissioners whether their function extends to offering an opinion upon the point. -
Next, it may fairly be questioned whether the people at large have earned the continual reference
which is made to the possibility of their resisting unpopular measures by force. There is but
one contingency which really deserves attention. Supposing the act passed, and a day named,
which could not be a very close one, for its taking effect, circumstances might occur which would
render the Government unpopular at the time when the day was approaching, on grounds wholly
unconnected with the coinage. In such a case it is very possible that the coinage might be
misrepresented in such a manner as to cover it with the current unpopularity of the ministry.
Suppose the act to take effect, not on a given day, but on a day to be named by the Queen in
council, and this contingency is sufficiently guarded against.
QUESTIon.
63. Will not the advantage of the change be experienced, if at all, by the commercial and
higher classes,—those who keep extensive accounts, and enter into large calculations,—
and not by the lower classes, who usually employ the smaller coins, and are familiar
principally with the penny and its multiples and subdivisions f
AINTSWIER,
The advantage of decimal coinage will be more felt by the poor than by the rich. The effec.
upon education will be very decided. No one has denied my assertion that 95 hours will be as
good as 100 hours now are. Many think I have underrated the benefit; I know I have done so,
and I did it on purpose. And many of the 95 hours will be turned into easy hours instead of diffi-
cult ones, or better still, into hours of healthy difficulty followed by feeling of success, instead of
hours of mere drag followed by discouragement. By the time the pound and mil system is fairly
established, the son of a day labourer will have a much better chance of rising to a clerk's or
Professor
De Morgan.
H 2
60 - DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Professor
De Morgan.
accountant's place than he now has. By a rough calculation, I am fully satisfied that the pound
and mil system will be a much greater boon to the labouring classes than the opening of the public
services (India included) is to the middle classes. I mean in the way of putting a rise in life
within the reach of the more intelligent of their sons.
QUESTron.
64. In connexion with the foregoing considerations, it has been suggested that a vast majority
of the smaller money transactions in a community are not transactions of written account
at all; that they arise out of retail purchases made in the market or the shop, the
calculations connected with which are necessarily performed in the head, and are not
reduced to writing. That for these purposes, namely, adaptation to the existing division
of our weights and measures, for distinctness of mental conception and facility of
calculation in the head, our existing coinage is better adapted than a decimal coinage;
whilst the supposed superiority of a decimal coinage for purposes of written accounts and
calculations is not applicable to such transactions, and would not prove beneficial
to the great mass of the people with whom such transactions are of constant daily
OCCUlrren Ce.
How far do these considerations constitute a just ground of objection to the introduction of
a decimal coinage 2 or what reply can be made to them 2
A NTSW3. R.
All the transactions of the poor will be facilitated by decimal coinage. But the questions do not
come to close-quarters on headwork at the broken prices which actually occur. Let any number
of questions, such as concern the poor, be collected by the Commission, and solved by those who
would retain the existing system, in their own way. Let them concern the great articles of daily
consumption, bread, cheese, meat, vegetables, beer, tea, sugar, coffee, pepper, tobacco, &c., &c.
Let them be taken from actual prices; let it be stated for each whether it is to be done by pen
work or by head work, and let the work of the common system be handed to me. I will undertake
to add the way of working in the decimal system, and I will make it apparent that the medley of
our weights and measures adapts itself to a decimal coinage better than to the existing coinage.
A hundred or two of questions, in answer to my challenge, will be much more to the purpose than
general arguments about clean fractions, which can only be supported upon even prices. The
questions proposed are worthless as a trial of the actual wants of calculation of the poorer
classes.
QUESTION.
65. Looking to the considerations alluded to in the preceding questions, the superior facility of
division possessed by 12, the further very convenient and almost unlimited facility of
division arising from our peculiar mode of reckoning the gº integer into shillings, pence,
and farthings; the harmony which exists between our fractional coins and our weights
and measures, the double advantages in facility of calculation to be obtained from decimal
coins unaccompanied by decimal weights and measures, and the brevity and convenience
of expression, oral and written, which attaches to our present coins;–duly weighing, on
the other hand, the advantage of assimilating the progression of coins to that of figures, the
simplicity and facility in keeping accounts and making calculations, the saving of time
in education and of labour by the substitution of simple for the proverbial inconvenience of
compound arithmetic, which it is expected will arise from the introduction of decimal
coinage;—
Is it on the whole prudent to make the experiment 2 Is the result sufficiently certain P Will
the increase of convenience be sufficiently great and fairly diffused over all the classes
upon which the inconvenience of the change must fall P Or must we come to the con-
clusion that the advantage of the change is neither so important nor so well ascertained
as to justify the disturbance of our existing system, and of the habits and computations
founded upon it 2
AINTSW. E. R.
Looking at both sides of the question ; allowing to the existing system its sole superiority, that
it is the existing system ; looking at the full and long discussion which the question has received;
at the foreign countries which have adopted decimals and found them all they were said to be; at
the reports of the scientific Commissions, which have shown themselves truly English in their
cautious mode of treating existing things; at the evidence taken before the Committee of the
House of Commons; at the arguments held in the House itself, and at their result; at the feeling
of society in general, and of the mercantile world in particular, which is favourable where the question
has been examined, and quiescent where it has not; and at the actual facilities produced and
demonstrated:—
It may be confidently affirmed that this is no experiment, but a well-considered and well-tested
improvement, which it would be foolish in the highest degree to reject ; that its temporary inconve-
niences are far less than the usual inconveniences of great changes; and that the inconveniences
bear so slightly on every class, that it is difficult to say which class has least; that the disturbance
of our existing system is wonderfully slight, so that instead of saying new habits are to be formed,
it would be more correct to say that old habits are to be kneaded into better ones. In a change
which leaves the sovereign, the florin, the shilling, the half-shilling as they are, and only calls the
half-shilling sixpence-farthing, the old system will be a crutch to the new system for the few
weeks or days during which a crutch is wanted.
University College, London, A, DE MORG AN.
April 25, 1857.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE's QUESTIONS 61
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
J. A. FRANKLIN, Esq.
Answer to Question 1. I think a change desirable in the lower gradations of our token coinage,
below the half-shilling piece.
2. Because of the want of coins at that stage which might be optionally treated, either as
units, or as parts of higher values, without more complex modes of reckoning, computing,
and accounting, than by the natural notation of the ten fingers, the universal language of the
Arabic numerals.
3. In so far as the farthing is ºn instead of rººm of our legal standard of value (the £
sterling), not only that coin (the farthing) but all its multiples below ºn of the unit standard of
value are necessarily complicated fractions of it, and therefore less convenient for all purposes than
would be coins which, being continuously decimal, or binary and decimal, might be dealt with at
pleasure either as fractions of the £1 integer, or as integers themselves, self-expressed in any
denomination of value by the same digits, without needing to be reduced or converted.
4. The primary conception of coin is a value-metre ; it is secondarily employed, in its capacity
of a value-token, as an instrument whereby to effect an interchange of equivalents of various kinds.
Value or price is primarily computed by so many unit coins, and not by so much of a large value.
We more frequently count coins than take “change” for them. The notion that the “primary
purpose of coins” is to serve “as fractional subdivisions of the integer,” seems disproved by the
disappearance of a great variety of coins minted from time to time as fractions of the gold
integer, i. e., the “double royal or sovereign,” of Henry 7th, the “pound sovereign” of Henry
8th, the “unit” or “xx” shilling piece of James 1st.
These fractions could scarcely have dropped out of the currency if a multiplicity of such
divisors had been found either necessary or convenient. One of my earlier papers “On the
Expediency of at once Decimalizing English Monies and Weights,” read before the Society of Arts,
was illustrated by an historical diagram of these “fractional subdivisions.” The lowest of them
was ºr of a penny, and its relations to the penny piece and to the £ sterling were precisely
those of the grain to the pennyweight and to the lb. troy. All practical men know that this
“correspondence” or “harmony” became eventually of no use so ever. As to the weight, we
now employ the ounce alone, decimalizing both its parts and its multiples. Whenever we are at
liberty to do the like with our monetary system then and then only will there be harmony
between weights and prices, because gradations will not be simply analogous, but identical and
uniform.
5. To carry out the decimalization of our coinage through the stage which remains to be
decimalized would not involve any “sacrifice,” inasmuch as petty traffic would thereby be
facilitated as well as commerce on the large scale.
6. “Small payments” are only the final processes in small traffic. In such markets the buyer
is not altogether unconscious of loss when commodities are parcelled out into quantities not uni-
formly commensurable by the instruments where with he buys ; but it is notorious that he is no
match for the more practised computer, who fixes prices so as to mulct him beyond what he is aware
of for the extra trouble of subdivision, for additional drafts of scale, and the like.
The less “affluent and educated” is the buyer, the more useful to him are instruments of
reckoning analogous to his ten fingers.
7. The Decimal principle already exists in our coinage. I recommend that it be carried out.
8. Wide Answer, No. 15.
9. Duodecimal coinage might be desirable if the arithmetical notation of the world were
duodecimal—not otherwise.
10. The number 24 is not necessarily the best for coinage, because it happens to have more
divisors than any other number of approximate magnitude. The Prussian thaler is now divided
into 30 groschen instead of 24, as it used to be. Wide also answer to No. 30.
11. The quotation from Napoleon begs the question at issue. Moreover, the question is not
merely of “dividing the integer,” nor does decimalization prevent binary subdivision to a conve-
nient extent.
12. A binary system of subdivision would have certain advantages, yet nobody proposes a pure
binary system of money or account.
With reference to the arithmetical examples given in this and following questions I crave
permission to observe, that inasmuch as every monetary system has its peculiarities which, being
peculiarities, cannot be superadded to those of an altered system, so problems framed in the
special interest of the system of £ s. d. and gr. cannot be so simply solved by decimal, i.e., common
arithmetic. It were easy, were it warrantable, to turn the tables in cases like that stated in these
questions, and show, for instance, that boxes of commodities containing 101bs., 100lbs., and so on,
costing 4 cents. per lb., 4 florins per 10 lbs. and £4 per 100 lbs. would be less conveniently com-
puted at 9 6 pence per lb., 8 shillings per 10 lbs. and £4 per 100 lbs.
Hence (in reply to the concluding query) it is not “by cases of this kind (those selected) that
the relative convenience of different systems of coinage must be tested.”
13. The construction of coinage is not “necessarily a divisional process,” nor is it “the
metrical subdivision of the integer for fractional payments in connexion with retail transactions.”
If in the system of £ s. d. the £ is spoken of as “the integer,” then to decimalize the £ down-
wards is to afford a choice of no less than four integers, any one of which may be employed as the
unit, according to the magnitude of the idea of initial value which the object valued suggests to
the mind -
J. A. Franklin,
Esq. -
H 3
62 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J. A. Franklin,
Esq.
It is an inconsiderable minority of the public, such as bankers, capitalists, and the like,
who regard tangible monetary tokens as mere change for, or fractions of, higher values, employed,
not in realizing their income, but in paying small broken parts of a large expenditure. On
the other hand, to the many, coin is the symbol of their earnings, increments to be conceived
additively. An illustration of this, is the desire of workpeople to receive their wages in the
shape, i.e., the denomination of coin, in which they are to be spent or distributed.
I concur with the authority quoted, that “decimal arithmetic for the purposes of computation
shoots spontaneously from the nature of man and things.” That it is “equally adapted to the
numeration and multiplication of material substances,” seems proved by a current estimation
of some commodities by scores, by tallies, by hundreds, by thousands, &c. Prices are even now
quoted decimally, instead of in the equivalent money of account or payment, because a much
clearer conception of proportionate difference in price is afforded thereby. “95s. to 96s.” is a
quotation significant of a relative increase of 1 in 96, whereas, “...f4 15s. to £4 16s.,” besides
being less concise for utterance and record, is significant of an increase of ºr in 45%––a rather
complex idea. In like manner commodities are quoted at “37 to 38 pence,” instead of “3s. 1d.
to 3s. 2d.” In the metal market such quotations as “zinc at 147s.” are common, and in the
congeries of markets, known as “Mincing Lane” it is an ordinary practice to quote prices and
even make out invoices by the use of decimal expressions, notwithstanding that they must be
reduced to £ s. d. in order to be carried out and posted. l
As to division, there is a natural disposition to divide binarily ; but it is controlled without our
being conscious of it, by the converse habit of aggregation which is, quite as naturally, decimal.
The factor 3 which is in the duodecimal system, being eliminated, both decimal and binary
division are practicable alternatively or even concurrently. In decimal computation, the figure 5
is no less familiar as # of a higher integer than as five times a lower one. .
The form in which a Frenchman represents 5 at the end of a sum is as significant to him as #,
and he makes it without lifting his pen, which must be done twice in writing #. The practised
arithmetician instead of multiplying by 5 divides by 2, instead of multiplying by 25 divides by 4,
instead of multiplying by 125 divides by 8.
14. Compare the same three systems in the following table, framed, this time, in the interest of
the decimalized pound, merely substituting for ſº of a shilling, the To of a shilling—the smallest
increment likely to be represented in formal accounts under the proposed system :-
£ and mil. & 6 s. d. Tenpences.
l - t I 24
99 5 - r 19 10# 23 8 '8
99 19 9; - 23 7' 6
98 5 19 8; 23 6 ° 4
98 19 7} 23 5" 2
97 5 * 19 6 23 4
97 19 4; 23 2°8
9 5 1 10; 2 2°8
9 - - 1 9; 2 1 '6
8 5 1 83. 2 4
8 I 7} 1 9°2
397 24 5 - 7 4 10; 173 8' 8
26 figures. . . . . . . 33 for whole numbers, 31 for pence,
20 for fractions. 10 for tenths.
53 figures. 41 figures.
15. It is obviously possible to break the integer £1, by means of its constituents 960 farthings,
into no less than 27 aliquot parts ; whereas the £1 of 1,000 mils is divisible only into 15 parts.
960 Farthings. • . -

r —) 1,000 Mils.
S. d. d. *-
# 10 . * zºo. 6 : # 5
# 6 8 ºr | 5': # 2 || 5
# 5 #5 4 } 2
# 4 ... . . . * 3# # 1 || 2 || 5
# | 2 || 6 # 2% 3% 5
Tº I 8 rºw }} TO 2 5
T5 l, 4 -Tăg |- I: º, 2
*s 1 3 3+0. 1 r&b. l
- 3. w 1. 10 ało # ris :
1. 8 > ##" • , * sº 4
sº l TJ GO 4. sº
3 º' 7% - ºw ;
\ Y- -——— <--V--—)
48 figures. ... • t 19 figures.
The question at issue is, whether the sacrifice of such divisions as are not common to both systems
is worth making, in order to reconcile our monetary system with common arithmetic, to acquire, in
placee of one integer, no less than four significant of each other at a glance, and to secure other
advantages elsewhere recited. . - * - - º
If it would be worth while to notice further the economy of mere cyphering, then we find the
advantage obviously in favour of the Decimal System, e.g. :-
# : +} :: 80 : 57 : ; 100 : 714 per cent.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS 63
Figures are of course economized in proportion as amounts can be represented by single
numerals instead of two or more. Now under the £ and mil system there are no less than seven
values which may be expressed, represented, and recorded by single numbers, five of them being
coins already current and familiar. Wide the following group. Those marked with an asterisk
do not yet exist; but there needs be no delay of the desired change for the want of those
two coins so long as we have the # shilling of 25 mils, and the old copper representing 1, 2, and
4 mils respectively. -
£ | f | c. m.
1 | .
5
l
5
1%
5%
I
On the other hand there exist only three single numeral coins—1, 2, and 4 farthings, towards a
Decimal System founded upon the unreduced farthing ; and but a solitary one, the penny token
itself, towards the proposed tenpenny system. º
I venture to express a belief that the seven coins above enumerated might eventually suffice for
all purposes, and correspond with the extension of the system in our bank note currency of £5,
£10, £50, £100, £500, and £1,000.
When coins are not readily distinguishable in respect of dimension, colour, weight, &c., mistakes
are unavoidable. If in payments there needed be no more than four like pieces, then both oral
and mental counting, usual sources of error, might either be dispensed with or any how checked
by a glance. The larger the variety of coins the greater the risk of mistakes in sorting, selecting,
and computing them. w
The token of £ºr is rapidly superseding that of £4, and their concurrent circulation, because of
their resemblance, is generally complained of. The quarter-franc has been withdrawn in favour of
the 20-centime piece, and so with the coins in other countries.
16. Decimal Coinage is desirable whether weights and measures be decimalized or not. Witness
the experience of the United States and other nations.
17. Commodities are not necessarily divided for retail purposes, they are also collected or
selected. In such cases the charge is made for the aggregate value, at per given quantity or
number multiplied, and not for a fractional part of some larger quantity or number.
The practicability and convenience of adjusting a coinage apart from weights and measures,
are exemplified by countries which have decimalized their coinage in advance of weights and
measures; and the practicability and convenience of the converse are even now exemplified
in Germany, where weights are being decimalized in advance of the coinage.
18. Our weights are binary to a very small extent, and our measures scarcely so at all. Vide
Answer to No. 13 (last paragraph).
19. Those who retail by the lb. do not buy by the quarter (of 28lbs.), but by the cwt. itself,
sometimes regarded as 100lbs. plus 12 per cent. thrown in for drafts and contingencies. Those
who retail by the yard (for which in like manner they get 37 inches) take no account of the foot at
all, but subdivide into halves, quarters, and eighths, notwithstanding that the eighth of a yard is
not expressible by a whole number of inches.
No reduction in wholesale prices, except it be so large as £3 14s. 8d. per ton, £1 17s. 8d. per
cwt., or 4 pence per lb., affords any advantage to the small buyer at per ounce, so long as neither
coins nor weights are graduated decimally.
20. An inch at 1s. per yard (one of the instances adduced in this question) cannot now be
paid for in coin, except at a loss of 25 per cent. to the seller, or else of 50 per cent. to the buyer
The value is one-third of a penny. A farthing, the nearest coin, is one-fourth less ; and two
farthings are half as much again. At a shilling per yard, the fractions usually dealt in are
three, viz., #, #, and #. At 50 mils 5 cents, or # florin per yard, the fractions might con-
veniently be nine,—viz., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 tenths; of these, 2, 4, 6, and 8 tenths will be
familiarly known as 1, 2, 3, and 4 fifths, just as “$" following the pence column is conceived and
added as # ; and ºr will be equally significant of # a yard. The prices of these nine fractions
will be expressed in the same denomination of coin as the price per yard,—e.g., 5, 10, 15, 20, 25,
30, 35, 40, and 45 mils respectively. -
21. Decimal money while it suggests and facilitates the subdivisions just enumerated, needs by
no means prevent binary subdivisions. The German journals are now publishing a recent conven-
tion for decimal weights, on the basis of 500 grammes or # kilogram, French, accompanied by
explanations, showing that halves, quarters, and eighths, may at any stage be represented
decimally. -
22. When money is decimalized in advance of weights, then retail prices, which are usually so
stated as to ingratiate the buyer, will be quoted at per ounce : say 4 mils, with a bait of 40z.
for 1% cent or 15 mils, a well understood grace of 1 in 16; just as 13 are given to the baker's dozen,
25 publications for 24, and the like. *
23. The ton of 2,240lbs., (25 x 7) × 10, has 28 divisors; the £ of 960 farthings (25 x 3)
x 10 has 28 divisors; the £ of 240 pence (23 × 3) × 10 has 20 divisors. A unit constituted of
1,000 parts has 16 divisors.” - -
# 1,000 500 250 125
} 200 100 50 25
(#)? 40 20 10 5.
(#)* 8 4 2 1
J. A. Franklin,
Esq.
H 4
64 - DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J. A. Franklin,
Esq.
In 2,240, the binary system of subdivision may be carried through six stages; in 112 through
four stages; and in 1,000 through three stages only ; yet, in the United States and in our colonies,
a practice prevails of reckoning the ton as 2,000lbs., and the cwt., as its name implies, as 100lbs.
The Spanish eighths and sixteenths of a dollar have been demonetized and withdrawn.
24. If even all these assumptions, dated 1821, were something more than speculative, there
would remain the expressive fact in 1857, that the United States adhere to a Decimal Coinage.
25. A process become convenient from usage, may be surpassed in convenience by other
facilities. A rate which it is convenient should be divided, is sure to be so fixed as to become
divisible.
26. This opinion of Sir John Herschel, who is an eminent advocate of the Decimal System in
coins, weights, and measures, seems tantamount to an expression of his regret that we are not
likely all at once to secure all the advantages which are in prospect.
27. Acquaintance is generally made with coins before there is occasion to employ weights and
measures ; and common arithmetic is mastered long before the complexities of compound arith-
metic. The reconciliation of our monetary system with natural arithmetic could, if it were
necessary, be accomplished at one stroke, without issuing new coins, or demonetizing existing
ones; whereas the decimalization of our weights and measures would require time and care.
Although it is easy to foster prejudices against any change, simply because it is change, yet if our
money were decimalized the lesson would reach all classes, and the desire for further progress
would become general.
28. Decimalization affords an opportunity to treat as whole quantities what can otherwise be
treated only as broken parts or sections ; but the process by no means precludes the notion of
sectional or aliquot parts, computable by the convenient rule called practice. -
The expedient whereby in the question given (215 tons 17 cwt., 3 qrs. 9]bs. at 91. 11s. 64d.
per ton) the value at 11. per ton is represented as 215l. 17s. 10d.-gs becomes a still more ready
expedient when that sum is represented as £215'8916, its obvious equivalent—
2.É &
1 215.8916 at £9 11s. 64d.
8 1727. 1328
10s. = + 107.9458
is = i. i07945
6d.=} 5-3972
#= ºr 2249
£2067-8868–62067 7s. 8d.
This process dispenses with much time, mental effort, and risk of error, incidental to compound
arithmetic. By pure decimals a like question would be propounded in this form—483. 597 lbs. at
£4'275 per 1,000lbs., and thus simply worked :-
lbs.
483 ° 597 at £4° 275
4 1934 °388
"25=} 120°899}
25=}r 12-0893%
*ºmºmºmºmºmº — The fractions are too minute to be
4° 275 £2067-3774, taken account of.
29. The quotation from the Director of the United States Mint shows how readily a theoretical
difficulty is surmounted in practice. The opportunity of employing money decimally will recom-
mend application of the same simple method to our weights and measures.
30. The authority here quoted admits the patent fact, that parcels and prices of commodities are
always accommodated to each other reciprocally. And just as in France “parcels are made up”
to suit decimal in preference to duodecimal computation, so in England as in other countries can
3 as a divisor be dispensed with. Even in Southern Germany, where the florin (244 to the mark
of pure silver) is divided into 60 kreutzers, the dominant coin of change is the 6 kreutzer piece,
or tenth of a florin, and accounts are sometimes kept in florins decimalized. This tenth of a florin
is the increment of cab fares, and of middle-class traffic generally. The owner of this coin is not
so much a competitor for commodities, as the seller of commodities is for the coin; so that quantities
and qualities are in the nature of prices which fluctuate, not the coin which they may be said to
purchase : just as eggs are sold by the shilling, and in the north of England flour is retailed at
so many lbs. per shilling.
The expression a “cheap penn'orth * embodies the same fact; and when change for a shilling
becomes 12 pence halfpenny, the 4 per cent difference will be considerably less in proportion than
the usual halfpenny rise or fall on the 41b. loaf.
31. The tendency to decimalize weights and measures will steadily increase, and it merits to
be encouraged.
32. Correspondence cannot be said to exist between the relations of weights or measures and
* The Decimal System comprehends also the binary and the quinary systems —
I 2 4 8 sº sº tº dº dº 2n
I 5 25 125 - - - - - - 5”
T J () 100 1 000 dº &s - - 10”
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS 65
those of a monetary system, unless upon some uniform system of multiples and submultiples; be
it decimal, quinary, binary, or otherwise (the first comprehends the other two):—
Decimal 10° 10° 10 1 ºr (I'm)” (I'm)”, &c.
Quinary 5° 5° 5 1 + (4)" (#)", &c.
Binary 2* 2° 2 1 }, (3)" (#)”, &c.
Compare the heterogeneous gradations now existing, of I
Weight (20 × 28 × 4), (28 × 4), 28, 1, ºr, (†), (†)” x 37.
1 \2 2
Measure (4 X ãº) 5}, 1, Ex EJ 2 (#) x #
Value 10°, 10, 10, 1, 3%, so X T's, sº X ºf x 4.
It is impossible with gradations such as these, so to arrange quantities and prices upon a
sliding rule as to work out results simply expressed ; that is to say, the figures on the scale
representing length or quantity will not be opposite to the like figures expressing price. It used
to be supposed that correspondence existed between Troy weights and the money coined by them;
240 pence to the £ sterling, 240 dwt.s. to the lb. Troy ; but the ounce Troy is now decimalized
to the great satisfaction of all occupied with bullion.
As anciently in bullion, so it is still in petty traffic, value is the primary idea, and the quantity,
weight, or dimension of the commodity is a secondary one. Witness such received standards
as the “shilling's-worth,” “sixpenn'orth,” “a penn'orth,” “a ha'porth,” &c.
33. Pide Answer 21.
34. Granting the instinctive tendency to pursue the Decimal System here described, and the
coincidence of theory and historical fact in its favour here quoted, it has been shown that to
decimalize is not to take away the option of binary subdivision. Even as , of , of , a yard, i. e.
# or “half-quarter,” is a familiar measure, although not a whole number of inches, so may of
100, of 10, or of unity be employed, whether that quantity be or not representable as an integer in
all its relations.
35. It would be still more natural and convenient that the £ sterling should not be, as it now
is, the smallest price available as an integer in decimal relation with its multiples.
36. The citations prove that Canada did not overlook or under-estimate the peculiar facilities
of binary and duodecimal subdivision, when it preferred and adopted the Decimal System.
The questions here repeated have been already answered elsewhere.
The relation of £fºr per lb. to broken quantities of the lb. is treated elsewhere.
37. The quotation here given exemplifies how readily decimal money might be accommodated
to non-decimal weights and measures. “Protracted and multiplied experience” in America has
removed early theoretical misgivings.
38. The ripe experience of many nations which have abandoned duodecimal coins proves that
all the peculiar facilities afforded by such coins are well sacrificed for the far superior facilities
peculiar to decimal coins.
39. The special aptitude of the number 960 has been acknowledged. It is not the most
desirable factors of 960 which have to be rendered up in exchange for still greater desiderata.
40. It is even more easy to conceive and recollect 2, 4, or 8 times a certain integer than #, #,
or 4 of a larger integer, especially if the product needs not be converted, reduced, or changed for
other numbers, except at the option of the computer.
A pure “binary coinage " would require in addition to pieces now current, coins of 5s. (almost
eliminated from circulation), of 1s. 3d., of 7%d., &c. A duodecimal coinage requires pieces of 1s. 8d.,
13d., &c. Ireland has had coins based decimally on the penny, e.g., 5d., 10d., 20a, &c.; the
20d, was in duodecimal ratio to the #". Despite the correspondence of that coin with the
assumed duodecimal necessities of retail commerce, it has been dispensed with.
41. Discussed in preceding replies.
42. What is found satisfactory in our present coinage is the compromise to which long routine
reconciles us. If the copper coinage were lowered 4 per cent., transactions would be recorded
with still less occasion for compromise, and routine would in due course establish more
correspondence and harmony between prices, accounts, and payments.
43. As I have endeavoured to show elsewhere, we are taught by the experience of all times and
all markets, that whatever the monetary system, prices, lots, and parcels become adjusted thereto.
Results diametrically opposite to the illustration here given would be exhibited by citing the
actual transactions of a French market, and exposing in similar tables the sacrifices of economy
and simplicity which would inevitably be consequent upon a return to the old French monetary
system of £ s. d. (livres, sols, and deniers), the precise counterpart of our # s. d., which has
there been happily superseded. France is not the only nation which has abandoned a monetary
system strikingly analogous to our # s. d. and qr.
It is a great mistake to suppose that where coinage is decimal buyers and sellers can only
conceive quantities and values duodecimally.
With all due deference to the Director of the United States Mint, his natural predilection for
the dollar unit has led him to suggest a material alteration of the monetary standard of value.
By the legal prescriptions of the British and the United States Mints respectively,
#1 : £ ºr :: 2,169,909 : 2,200,000;
so that to substitute 24 dollars for £5 would be to mulct the creditor to the extent of nearly
1% per cent.
We have yet to learn from experience whether gold coins so small as the dollar and the 5-franc
piece will maintain their standard weight in circulation better than the old quarter guinea which
proved unsuitable.
The notion of revolutionizing a coinage in order to render it international is attractive
but delusive. The Australian sovereign of one province, although of full weight and quality,
does not circulate in the other provinces, much less here in England, and notwithstanding the
connexion which exists between the imperial and the colonial mints. What chance, then, of
foreign coins, if even mathematically equivalent, being accepted indiscriminately 2
J. A. Franklin,
Esq.
66 . DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J. A. Franklin,
Esq.
Mere approximation between the moneys of two nations is rather a difficulty than an advantagé
in regulating exchanges. The larger the disproportion between two monetary units, the more
easy it is to adjust the exchange between them.
44. In a Decimal System any one of several moneys of account can be treated as a unit, and
Arabic notation expresses the cumulative number of such units in any given sum.
45. What is here called “keeping accounts in farthings reduced 4 per cent.” may be also termed
keeping account in the legal monetary integer, produced decimally to the smallest coin required,
and comprehending every pre-existing coin needful to be retained.
46. The notion of reconstructing the coinage on the basis of a penny, a comparatively modern
token, seems altogether untenable. It would confessedly “extinguish” the pound sterling as well
as the shilling.
47. There is no objection to writing a fraction at any stage, provided the so doing be optional
and not unavoidable.
It is true that however small a coin be provided, the chaffering of the market will “split the
difference.” There could be no objection to representing 5 mils by “{* of the next high grade,
as in the United States, so saving a column of accounts. In Holland the half-cent is recorded
thus, 22" (22 cents).
48. The conveniences of the decimalized pound will be found far to outweigh imaginary incon-
VCInlen CCS.
49. Half measures would in this case be found less expedient than comprehensive ones. Any
plan whereby £1, 4 ºr, and fºr must be represented by 240, 24, and 12, is objectionable.
50 and 51. Whereas £ s. d., omitting farthings, are inevitably three moneys of account, the
decimalized £ can, if preferred, be treated as £ and mils only (e. g., Portuguese milreis and reis,
or Norwegian species, dollars and skillings, 120 to the dollar), or as £ and cents, recording the
half-cent or not at pleasure.
So long as a line sufficiently distinctive separates the £ from inferior denominations, it will be
immaterial how many columns follow that line. In some countries faint lines separate every
decimal gradation both right and left of the principal demarcation,--a plan which prevents errors
of position, and facilitates addition by convenient breaks.
52. We have at present three compartments for accounts. Even when we do not record fractions
of a penny, provision is made for four places of figures after the £ integer,-viz. two for shillings,
which may be 10 to 19, and two for pence, which may be 10 or 11. Anciently £2 2s. 2d. was
written £202 02, and even then the 4th figure after the £ was no lower in grade than g+m, whereas
by the third figure after the decimalized £, we can attain as low as rººm. It is difficult to
comprehend the objection to more than two figures after the £ integer. At present that stage is ºr,
on the Decimal System it will be # of gºr. *
53. The inference to be drawn from the facts recorded in this question are, that whatever be
the forms prescribed theoretically, decimal accounts have an elasticity which admits accom-
modation to all circumstances.
Francs and dollars are occasionally divided into thousandths, and so represented not merely
in accounts, but in negotiable instruments. Illustrations of this might be multiplied.
The American quotation of sugar at 10% per lb. is obviously identical with & 10 12% per cwt.
of 100 lbs. or 28, 101 25 per 1,000 lbs. On the £ s. d. system, 51%d. per lb. would be entered at
£2 2s. 24d. per 100 lbs. or £21 1s. 10%d. per 1,000 lbs. That these rates are equivalent is not
obvious, for the digits are not identical as on the Decimal System. Hence the Decimal System
affords every facility to binary subdivision, while, on the contrary, the ºf s. d. system affords no
facility for expression or subdivision decimally.
54. The retention of the pound sterling as the principal money of account, if seriously threat-
ened, would claim a more circumstantial justification.
Its subdivisibility into 1,000 parts is an advantage to be desired, not an inconvenience to be
avoided. Where the 5 mil piece or ; cent. is the smallest amount recorded, the broken parts of
the £ will be 200 only. -
55. It will in nowise affect “the middle and lower orders,” whether there be or not a resem-
blance between Decimal Coinage here and in foreign countries. Very few of these classes have
any concern in foreign accounts.
It is probable that those who now keep accounts in shillings and pence, will hereafter keep
them in florins and hundredths.
56. It is undoubtedly true, as here stated, that the high value of the # 1 integer is a source of
great convenience and advantage, facilitating a conception in the mind of large values, and the
expression of them in fewer figures and fewer words than is elsewhere possible.
57. By a further decimalization of the £1 integer those conveniences and advantages will
be confirmed and extended.
The best form of expressing the rate of exchange between the two countries is in so
many small units for a large one. Our #' being conveniently the largest unit is generally
employed in exchange computations, e.g., 25 fr. 27% per £. Where the units approximate each
other in value, that circumstance, far from being a convenience, is a snare to the ill-informed.
The tendency to adopt a large value with which to compare dissimilar ones of smaller magni-
tude may be thus illustrated :—
At Frankfort, which may be considered one of the great clearing-houses for international finance,
the exchanges are quoted at so many florins for 60 Prussian thalers, for 50 Bremen thalers, for 100
Hamburgh marcs banco, for 250 Milanese lira, and for 200 French francs. Even with London
the exchange is quoted at per £ 10, so as to avoid taking account of non-decimal kreutzers.
It is far more easy to conceive the ratio of a franc to £ (to-day quoted 25.27% short), than of
the franc to 10 pence, which is ***** to 1, or 1:05296 to 1. Moreover for any decimal part of £
the same figures express the precise equivalent.
Notwithstanding the fragmentary character of our present monetary system, a considerable
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 67
number of arithmetical operations, which would otherwise require a reduction of £ s. d. and gr.,
into the lowest denomination at starting, and the converse process at the end, are now habitually
performed by expressing sums less than £ in decimals of £ (readily done at sight), thus sparing
much time, labour, and risk of error. Besides the printed tables of decimal money used by
various professions, others, for instance dealers in the public funds, construct elaborate tables in
manuscript, decimal throughout.
Even bullion computations, whether by Bank rate or Mint rate, may be more readily and
accurately worked decimally than otherwise. I take advantage of the fact that 4 x £3 17s. 9d.,
or £3.88% = 4:15:55, and I divide by 4 the weight, now always expressed decimally (notwith-
standing the correspondence in divisibility between troy weight and the coin minted by it,) and
work the same by practice.
OZ.
4)7846'496 (3) Bank rate.
10 19616 - 24
5. 98O8 12
• 5 980 '812
05 98 O812
4:15:55 fºo,503'2532 = #30,503 5s. 0#d.
Add for O25 49 0406 t
£15.575 €30552'2938 = 4:30,552 5s. 10}d. Mint rate.
To find how much foreign money is equivalent to £ s. d, up to any amount, the shillings and
pence are decimalized as a matter of course.
For £4,567 17s. 6d. how much French money at 25fr. 27# 2 I work the question thus:
There is a conventional “par of exchange,” 25 fr. to the £, and the smallest gradation of
fluctuation is 2% centimes per £. Now at this fictitious “par” +4 = 100 fr., and 4 × 2% cen-
times = 10 centimes per 100 fr. or 1 per mille (1000).
4 × 25 fr. 27} = 101 1. Consequently,
4) £4567 875
100 = 114196.87%
l = 1141.96%
O 1 => 114, 19+}
101 * 1 = fr. 115453° 04
The converse operation is as easy, and gives the result £4567'875 = #24567 17s.6d.
Fluctuations of 1 per mille are exceedingly convenient, and when our # is millesimized, both
our domestic and our foreign commerce and finance will be simplified and facilitated.
The most sensitive of all markets, bullion, is regulated at per mille, others at per cent, not-
withstanding the non-centesimal character of our money.
58. Wide preceding answers. “Clean fractional parts * are not the be-all and end-all of a
monetary system.
59. Wide the accompanying paper from the “Banker's Magazine” of 12th May, 1855, on
“Decimal Coinage as a banker's question.”
It is probable that many will voluntarily omit from their cheques fractions less than rºw of £
or 4 of a shilling. But even though the shilling be as frequently broken into tenths as it used
to be into twelfths (not at all likely), the saving of figures in recording sums less than £1 will
nevertheless be between 5 and 6 per cent.
DECIMAL MONEY AND ACCOUNTS, AS A BANKER'S QUESTION.
By J. A. FRANKLIN, Esq., Public Accountant and Auditor.
THERE prevails a tendency to complicate what is after all a very simple proposition—to
decimalize or adapt to the operations of common arithmetic our monetary system, based upon its
firmly established unit—the £ sterling.
The subject might be usefully treated in several chapters, e.g. the schoolboys’ question, the
hucksters’ question, the workmen's question, the fiscal question, the foreign-exchange question,
&c. &c. The following observations are in response to an invitation to give a brief exposition
of the bankers’ question.
I. It is proposed that the smallest money paid or received by bankers—heretofore one penny,
= fºn, shall, by concert, be fixed at £gºo = 1% shilling = 5 mils, mites, new farthings, or
however named.
II. Copper coin (pence and halfpence) might then be dispensed with ; inasmuch as a half-
shilling (25 mils) exchanged against two 10-mil pieces (20 mils) leaves a difference of five mils.
III. Cashiers would save time, labour, and risk of error, in respect of sums or parts of sums
less than £1 ; inasmuch as the variety of such sums possible would be only 199, instead of 239
as heretofore.
.J. A. Franklin,
Egq.
I 2
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J* A. Fr anklin,
Esq.
IV. Bankers’ coins of change could, eventually, be reduced to five varieties,” ranged thus in
the till —
Tenths Hundredths Thousandths
FLORINs CENTS MILs.
100 mil coins. 10 mil coins.
(# Sovereigns.) (Shillings) (; Cents)
* ſº * e
pes of O florins. pes of O cents. | pcs. of O mils.
(1-10th Shilling.)




pcs. of [florin. pcs. of | Cent.
V. Clerks, accountants, &c., would have their labours diminished and facilitated ; inasmuch as
608 figures are required to express, by gradations of one penny, the possible variety of sums (239)
between £ and £; whereas 478 figures suffice for the 199 decimal gradations of 5 mils.
VI. Interest calculations would be materially simplified ; e.g., the single group of figures (275)
in a table, suffices to represent the several sums #:0°27,5 (5s. 6d.), £2.75 (£2 15s.), £27°50
(£27 10s.), £275, £2,750, &c. &c. Where the interest is actually calculated, and only tested
or checked by the table, the operation is obviously still more facilitated.
THE FOREGOING PROPOSITIONS ILLUSTRATED.
I. The difference in value between £3+6 and £gº is only £rºw-tº shilling=} penny.
The difference between a farthing and a mil is tºp of a penny exactly.
II. Suppose a term fixed for the obligatory circulation of the 4-penny and 3-penny pieces at
their original value (£ºn and £º respectively), except in payment of revenue they could after-
wards pass current for only £rºm, a “cent,” “ten,” “piece of ten " (mils).
The new piece of that denomination might, by the present standard, weigh 17 ºr grains gross,
and contain 16 ºr grains of fine silver. The apprehension that it would be inconveniently small
is disposed of by the practical experience of the United States, which, for similar reasons having,
in 1851, made the 3-cent piece weigh 12; grains gross (assay # fine), reduced in 1853 its gross
weight to 11:52 grains (assay tº fine); thus increasing its intrinsic value while diminishing its size.
III. There are various methods of arranging the decimalized money columns; e.g., #1472,5
(£14 14s. 6d.) may be represented at pleasure |#14 || 725 ||, |#14 | 72 || 5 ||, |#14 | 72% |just as
# centimes are quoted in French exchanges, or ||+|14 || 72"|, with such a mark as the Dutch use
in recording a half-cent ; and there are other alternative methods.
IV. Nothing needs to be prejudged ; but if expedient, the “five” (; cent, ſº shilling, £gºn,)
could be struck in a new metal, obviously unlike silver or copper, and about the size of a thick
farthing.
V. The following tables illustrate the economy of figures under the decimal system :—
GRADATIONS OF ONE PENNY,
240 in #1.
£ S. d. || 36 S. d. £ S. d.
16
l 4 16
2 4 l 16 I
3 4 2 16 2
4 4 3 16 3
5 4 4 16 4
6 4 5 16 5
7 4 6 16 6
8 4 7 16 7
9 4 8 16 8
10 | 4 9 16 9
11 || 4 || 10 16 || 10
4 11 16 II
*— ~~ J '' ( ~~ J \- ~~ J
13 figures 25 figures 37 figures
Of these specimens 1 col.......... 13 figures ............ 13
9 : ......... 25 × ............ 225
10 : ......... 37 , º 370
20 608
— =
* These coins equally suit those who fancy to keep accounts by making a unit of the 3 sovereign, the florin, or the shilling.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 69
GRADATIONs of 5 MILs, J. A. Franklin,
200 in 391. Esq.
& 100ths | 1,000ths £ 100ths 1,000ths gº
tº C G tº tº tº 5 40 tº gº e
l dº º e 40 5
tº º l 5 41 tº dº º
© º º 2 & e e 41 5
2 5 tº º ſº 42 tº tº º
tº @ 3 Q & © tº º º 42 5
3 5 e Q e 43 tº º º
© tº C 4 tº e e 43 5
4 5 e tº º 44 Q & ©
5. 44 5
5 5 45 ge
gº tº º 6 tº e º 45 5
6 5 º 46
7 © C & 46 5
7 5 47
tº gº º 8 tº º e 47 gº
tº º º 8 5 48
9 & © tº e 48 *
9 5 49
\ —' 49 || 5
-N-
28 figures \ ~~ —'
- 50 figures
Of these specimens 1 col................ 28 figures.


9 , 50 figures... 450 ,
10 478
The saving of clerical labour, 130 in 608, would be enormously greater if parts of a penny,
960 per £, each requiring 3 marks of the pen (e. g. #), were compared with the single figure
which serves to denote £rpºro.
VI. Wide Laurie's Interest Tables (18th edition).-Taking £275, the lowest amount among
the examples in § VI., the interest for which can be gleaned by addition only. We find the
interest for 121 days at 4 per cent. is £2 13s. 0}d. + 19s. 10%d. = #3 12s. 11d. ; whereas
decimal tables might give the interest £3 64,6-figures available for any of the sums expressible
by 275.
Even though the interest were culled in two items; e.g., 2’652 + '994 = #3' 64,6,
would be a notable saving in figures.
60. Wide preceding answers.
61. Wide preceding answers.
62. To declare £45, the half-shilling, equal to 64 old pence, could occasion the loss of the
farthing to him who might neglect to exchange his “sixpen'orth of ha'pence” for new coinage.
Few of the working classes keep any store of copper coin ; their wages are principally paid in
silver coin, and some are rather likely to mistake the alteration as a gain of a value in their
shilling. The small coinage has been reduced in other countries even beyond 4 per cent. without
difficulty or discontent.
63. The advantages of the change to the lower classes will be manifold. It is the shilling
which is their familiar measure of value ; copper money, which they call “ha'pence,” is but change
for their shilling.
64. By decimalizing we get rid of complexities more easily mastered in writtel, accounts thax.
oy mental reckoning.
65. Even though all the merits claimed for the system of £ s. d. and qr, were conceded, and
if some of the inconveniences apprehended were not supposititious, it would in my opinion be
nevertheless prudent, just, and expedient to carry out the decimalization of our coins and accounts
through the single stage which now breaks the harmony.
These questions do not touch upon the immense advantages of the change from an educational
point of view.
Precious hours are now wasted in schools, from which the children of the masses are all too
soon withdrawn, upon irksome lessons and distasteful exercises; hours thereby lost for that
ethical and intellectual training, the deficiency of which is visited upon society at large.
It may be pleaded for Decimal Coinage, that it will essentially serve the classes who “live
from hand to mouth,” by supplying the instruments whereby their expenditure in detail may be
measured out with a degree of intelligence and economy not otherwise available.
It will accomplish no less for the warehouse, the shop, the counting-house, and the bank,
sparing time and labour for more productive employment, and diminishing risks of error in com-
putation to an enormous extent.
International commerce will in like manner be facilitated when nation can speak to nation
concerning the objects of peaceful interchange in the only common language yet extant—common
arithmetic.
J. A. FRANKLIN.
Warnford Court, 6 June, 1857.
I 3
70 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
S. A. Goddard,
Esq.
(Communicated by Lord Overstone.)
S. A. GoDDARD, Esq.
Answer to Question 1. I think the florins should be called in, being of no use, and inconvenient;
often mistaken for half-crowns, and no handier than two single shillings. I have never met with
anyone who thought them any convenience. I think gold five-shilling pieces in flat rings would be
useful. I do not think any other change of the coins or any other new coin necessary.
If a decimal system of accounts be adopted, I would issue Victorias, or 100 pence pieces, and
double and quadruple Victorias, as the money of account; or I would use crowns as the money
of account, continuing the sovereign as a coin of four crowns.
2. I do not object to the present system of coins. I object to the florin for the reason above
stated.
3. I do not object to them at all. I consider them more convenient than decimal coins for
retail transactions and for most trade transactions; but I think a decimal system of accounts the
most convenient, and that it may be introduced without any change of coins,—certainly with no
material change.
4. For market transactions and the daily purposes of life. Not to facilitate accounts. 1,000
half pecks of potatoes are sold for coin and paid for in coin to every transaction in cotton. The
time of the person buying the potatoes is of as much consequence to him as that of the person
buying the cotton to him; besides, he is not so quick at reckoning, and cannot overcome a difficulty,
and moreover the cotton is not paid for in coin after all. The value of 1,000lbs of cotton is, how-
ever, easier reckoned at 10 cents than at 5d.
5. Unquestionably the million must be considered in preference to the thousand. But, if not,
there is this practical difficulty,+the million will not be sacrificed—no law will effect it. Two
things will prevent it, either of which would be effectual; viz., their will, and the impossibility of
their falling into the system, even if willing.
6. a. Certainly it must. I have fully stated this in writings on the subject. This consideration is
indispensable.
Never heard any complaints except of florins, and that fourpenny and threepenny pieces cannot
be readily distinguished. However the smooth edge of the one and the milled edge of the other
mainly prevent the inconvenience.
b. Most unquestionably. This I have distinctly stated in writings on the subject. But I think
both may be accomplished with ease if it be thought desirable to introduce a Decimal System into
aCCOuntS. º
7. No. But I suggest that the Decimal System may be applied to our money and used in
a CCOU IntS.
8. The decimal parts are infinite, but the even fractional parts that can be found under a decimal
system are less in number than can be found under the present system. As fractions of duodecimals
are better adapted to the present system of weights and measures, and to dozens and grosses, than
decimal parts, so that system must be more convenient than a decimal system. Indeed, I think
it is more convenient than the Decimal System would be even under a change of weights and
In eaSUlrCS.
9. a. Experience shows this to be true. The universality of the use of 12, and of its divisions
into halves, quarters, &c., goes far to prove its superior fitness.
b. I doubt whether any time is really lost at schools through the duodecimal system. I think
the minds of boys require a more severe training than the decimal system alone would give, and
that the duodecimal system exercises the mind more, requires the use of the “imagination” and
“memory,” and consequently assists both. Were everything counted and weighed by tens it
would not even then be so easy to use Tºr, #, ºr, ºr, &c., as 3, #, #, &c.
c. I had made this same remark in writing on tue subject, in reply to what teachers have said in
favour of decimal teaching, without knowing that the opinion had been advanced by anyone.
d. I do not see any fallacy in these considerations.
10 I think this cannot be doubted. It unquestionably is so.
11. Not less favourable to readiness and ease to begin with, but the other plan trains the mind
more, and soon gives the mind greater power, and also trains it to distinctness and exactness.
This I had written in opposition to the motion of teachers that time might be profitably saved by
adopting decimal calculations universally.
12. a. I consider the mil system so thoroughly objectionable as not to demand attention. Were
society to start anew the third column would be as easy as the first, but as persons are used to the
first, that would come easiest to them. Nothing short of sweeping away all present coins and
weights and measures, and the adoption of the decimal system generally, would induce the com-
munity to fall into new modes of reckoning in daily transactions. The old form must otherwise
be tolerated, for it will be practised.
b. I have shown in my writings that the mil system never would nor could be practised in the
daily retail transactions.
c. Yes; but especially to those used to it.
d. No. This I have shown in writings, and no practice would make it easy.
e. Yes.
f. Were decimal money adopted while weights and measures and dozens and grosses remain,
calculations would be continued as at present. Sums would be worked in shillings and pence, and
then turned into the money of account. This is the practice in America after 60 years of trial, with
the simplest possible decimal money, and without any shillings or pennies.
There is a coin, a Spanish eighth, called, in New York state, a shilling; but this is accidental, and
had little or no influence in continuing the custom of reckoning in shillings and pennies.
10 boxes at 5'50 &55:00 would be easily reckoned. -
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 7]
10 boxes at 22s. 411., about as easily reckoned.
But 5% boxes at 5:50 not quite so easily as 5% at 22s. -
g. The mil system, for the ordinary transactions of life, is an impossibility; and were it not,
society would not adopt it.
13. a. Were everything dealt with decimally, decimal fractions would not be as convenient as
vulgar fractions. -
That is the object, and the division of money should correspond with the division of things that
money is to pay for, if possible.
b. It is unnecessary to say there could hardly be a better opinion. But it appears to me that
decimals are better adapted to “numeration and multiplication.” I think decimal computation
not so well adapted to the “breaking up" of things, but I think it better for accounts.
14. a. The first column is simplest, the second impracticable ; the third would be inconvenient
unless the unit of account should be expressed by 100.
The third column would be as easy as the first were the money of account dollars and pence, for
then the statings would be 32:40, 32:12, &c., whereas with pounds as the money of account, we
have to find the number of pence in 17s. 8d., and then put down 212. 1,044 would be readily paid
with present coins if we had a hundred-penny piece called a “Victoria :” it would read 10:44–
10 Victorias 44 pence (or 3 shilling pieces, 6d, and 2d.) This would be the best decimal money
that could be adopted for accounts (viz., 8s. 4d. Victorias and pennies) but for the fact that Victorias
would not be an aliquot part of a sovereign, and therefore 10:44 could not be readily turned
into pounds, nor 4!. 7s. into Victorias, and sovereigns would have to be called in ; whereas, were
the crown adopted as the unit of account, it could be readily turned, 4l. 7s. x 4 = 17:40, or
10:44 + 6 = & 17:40; i. e., divide by 60 less 0, done mentally.
b. The shilling and pence system is most convenient.
c. The addition of 40 mils to the pound destroys exactness, and prevents divisibility ; in fact,
the 1,000 mil pound and the 940 mil pound represent respectively the decimal and duodecimal
systems.
15. These propositions appear to be self-evident, and to require neither affirmation nor denial.
There would be a “world of trouble" in altering present price books into mils, and when done
they would be utterly perplexing, and to most persons unintelligible. The books of some manu-
facturers have 50,000 prices in them. It would be nearly an impractiacble task to change them
to mils, and when done their use would increase the trouble tenfold.
- s. d. * S. d.
Reckon 5 doz. 2 6 O 12 6 O?” 5 125 625
6 , , 3 0 () 18 O 6 150 900
8 :, 3 6 I 8 O 8 175 1,400
1() , 4 0 2 O O 10 200 2,000
12 , 4, 6 2 14, O 12 225 2,700
12 6 7,625
*-7
This example by no means exhibits the difference in the labour between the two systems. The
mil plan here merely involves the use of about one half more figures, while the main trouble
would consist in finding the prices in mils to begin with ; and in resolving them again in the mind
into shillings and pence, to see if they were about right, which necessity it would require years of
practice to obviate.
16. Not into the coinage ; but I think it may be introduced into accounts, and the present
money be adapted thereto.
17. No ; especially as connected with the custom of buying and selling by dozens and grosses,
but still accounts may be kept in decimals conveniently.
18. I think accounts may be kept decinally, and the coins used either decimally or binarily, as
may best suit the convenience of parties. The use of the two modes appears to give a double
facility instead of occasioning confusion. I do not think a change in weights and measures neces-
sary to a trial of the compound system.
19. Not so great, certainly. Coin used decimally would be most inconvenient under the present
system of weights and measures, dozens and grosses.
20. a. Unquestionably. Decimal reckoning would not even then be made in buying and selling
except with some particular articles. Shillings and pence are used, for the most part, in the
American States in reckoning, although there are no shillings nor pence ; but before payments
are made the sum is turned into dollars and cents. They say “6 at 3s. 9d. is 22s. 6d., and that
is 33°75, New England (or 82: 81; New York). They never say in shops “6 at 62% cents; but
the practice prevails to some extent of selling agricultural produce in dollars and cents.
b. Beef is sold at 10 cents, potatoes 50 cents, flour 86, &c.; and reckoning in these instances is
very convenient, and payment in decimal money easy, for the value of the cent is not so small as
to occasion a multiplicity of figures; but even in this case 9 bushels at 75 cents would not be
reckoned 9 × 75 = 36.75, but 75 cents would be called 4s. 6d., then 9 × 4s. 6d. = 40s. 6d. =
36-75, done mentally and more readily than 9 × 75. This mode of using two denominations of
money to obtain the result is curious, but it continues after 60 years' practice, and this in itself
goes to prove that the contraction of sums into shillings is more convenient than to reckon them
in cents.
21. Not with present practice, but under a Victoria and penny system would be done very
readily will present money. The mode, however, would not be practised.
22. That the Decimal System is best adapted to accounts, I think, can hardly be questioned ;
less trouble, correctness more readily ensured, and greater facility in reckoning interest. I think
it may be adºpted without altering the coins, still allowing the old system to prevail in marketing,
shopping, and in manufactories, &c., &c., in buying and selling.
S. A. Goddard,
Esq.
I 4
72 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
S, A Goddard,
Esq.
º, jº. º.º.e, see-sº-sº
23. a. It is a mere waste of time to talk of dividing the unit money of account into 1,000 parts.
Whatever else is done, it must be divided into 100 only, with 100 steps, and there must be but
two columns of account, and there should be but two rows of figures in the right hand column.
The mil system would disgust the whole community in less than twelve months.
b. The inconvenience and not the loss is to be considered. The working classes would gain as
much as they would lose.
c. This is not correct in any one respect. The Spanish money was not adopted for the purpose
of the 3 and 4 cents ; on the contrary, those fractions are always lost on the small sums. The
Spanish money was in the country and had been used, and this use was simply continued. The
United States Government adopted the Spanish money as their money and legal tender until
time would permit them to coin for themselves. They found dollars, halves, quarters, eighths,
and sixteenths, and used them ; but instead of the eighths and sixteenths saving fractions, they
cause the loss of fractions. Two eighths or four sixteenths will pass for 25 cents, or a quarter of
a do lar, but one eighth will only pass for 12, and a sixteenth for 6. Should a boy buy a
cake for # cent, an eighth, 12%-cents would not be taken and 12 cents given in change, but 12,
and 6} will be taken for 19 cents.
No purchase is made for less than a cent. There may be two cakes for a cent, then a boy
would pay a 12}-cent piece, and receive back 11 cents. He would avoid this payment if he
could, and keep two eighths to pass for a quarter or 25 cents, but this shows that fractions are
lost and not saved by this division of coins.
d. Not illegal coins; Spanish dollars were a legal tender, and also all parts of Spanish dollars
—See Q. 24, 5th line from bottom.
e. The answer to the question is, that decimal money could not be applied to the present system
of weights, measures, and modes of computation with any degree of convenience. Could it be,
the loss of fractions would be immaterial ; as much would be gained at one time as lost at another,
and people would invent and practise modes that would overcome, mainly, the difficulty.
24. I do not see that “nature” has much to do with it. Quantities and lengths are halved,
quartered, &c. because these portions can be compared with their fellow portions.
a. I imagine this to be the true system of action ; viz., the Decimal System for accounts—the coin
and reckoning as at present ; but final amounts, when put on paper, to be stated decimally.
b. Not the most useful and convenient, because they represent # cents and } cents, which
fractions, as before said, are always sunk except when two or more are paid together; but because
of their universal use, there not being enough dimes and half dimes for use. I believe the Spanish
money has been declared, say in 1856, no longer a legal tender. 10-cent and 5-cent pieces are
quite as handy and useful as 12# and 6+ ; and more so, as they do not lose the fractions.
25. Question means,—Is the convenience of the common purposes of life the best criterion ?
Unquestionably, these transactions are as 1,000 to 1 of others; but where the right of suffrage is
denied, it can hardly be held that one man is as good as another, and his convenience as much to
be studied. Education and the working man's good are now fashionable topics; 50 years ago
they were ultra-radical.
26. Where does the misfortune lie 2 with decimals or with the system of weights and measures?
The question is, whether the benefit to be derived by introducing decimal weights, &c. would more than
counterbalance the “misfortune P’ My opinion is, that decimals for accounts, making 100 the
exponent of the unit of value, with the present system of coins to be used decimally, only when
people find it most convenient to so use them, is the proper mode to adopt.
27. a. Society could be re-constituted with less trouble than this would be accomplished.
If a pure Decimal Coinage be essential, then it is essential to decimalize weights and measures;
and could all be done at the same moment, that would be best, were the change not too great for
the people to act upon. I think it would occasion universal confusion.
b. If adopted at all, it should be first, as the risk of a sudden entire change would be too great.
c. If a change be made, the Decimal System should be introduced into accounts first, and the
present coins used decimally so far as persons might choose to use them, and no further. A trial
of this plan would involve no expense, nor any inconvenience; and if it did not answer, a change.
back to the old system might be made with but little trouble. Tons might be called 2,000lbs., and
cwts. 100lbs. (afterwards); but pounds must always be divided into halves, quarters, eighths,
sixteenths, &c.; they could not advantageously be divided decimally. I am therefore of Mr. Airy's
opinion, so far as I understand it; but I would introduce the Decimal System to money
transactions only partially.
28. a. Question not very clear ; but, so far as understood, yes.
b. Yes.
c. That is represented to be the great advantage, but I believe if everything were decimalized
that calculations would still to some considerable extent be made by the rule of “practice.”
Therefore I think a combination would be useful of decimal accounts and the present system of
weights and measures and coins. I believe that the universal application of the duodecimal system
to money, weights, and measures better, on the whole, everything considered, than the universal
application of the Decimal System to money, weights, and measures would be.
d. This calculation is made in 39 figures, discarding fractions. Under the decimal plan it would
take 47, as follows:—
483597
4275
24, 17985
338.5179
96.7194
" 1934388
-msmºsºme mºmºmºmº mammºmº
2067377175 47 figures.
-*--sºmmemº-
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 73
e. This calculation embraces 74 figures. It may be done in 48 figures, as follows:–
95.76
215
4,788O
9576
1915.2
2O67377 48 figures.
f. Nothing gained in any case. r
29. a. The introduction or application of the Decimal System to accounts will not render a change
of weights and measures necessary. Nor will the application of the present coins to decimal
computations, leaving them to be used as shillings and pennies when found to be most convenient
so to do. Were it possible to hit upon a decimal plan, pure and simple, that the people would
adopt universally, then it would doubtless lead them to demand the decimalization of weights and
measures; but I do not consider that possible.
b. Unless in very small transactions, half-cents are not put down in money columns at all.
30. When would this be dome generally 2 Never, until shillings and pennies should be
abolished, and all weights and measures decimalized, and even then it is altogether doubtful whether
it would equal the present system for convenience. My impression is that it would not. Moreover
it would be a most laborious matter for a nation to effect such a change. It would take two
generations, and be productive of great discontent and dissatisfaction.
31. Decimal money pure and simple would no doubt tend to induce the adoption of decimal
weights and measures, but not if it be applied to accounts only.
32. It should be determined in the first instance how far the Decimal System is to be carried,
and then whatever step is taken should be adapted to the ultimate system. Undoubtedly a system
should not be adopted that is not applicable to a convenient system of weights and measures.
Whether one should be adopted not applicable to the most convenient system of weights and
measures, depends upon the amount of the advantage in other respects, by such adoption.
33. I do not see how this conclusion can be avoided.
The “conclusion” is, that it may well be doubted. I think it cannot be doubted that the loss
was more than the gain.
34. a. I think this tendency very much the result of education and practice, but no doubt the
natural tendency is to halve quantities and amounts. Half may be ascertained by its equality to
its fellow half, and by that means the lowest subdivision may be obtained. e
b. Without knowing these facts, and without having seen this opinion, I had formed the same
opinion.
35. a. Yes; but it does not follow that the integer should be pounds.
I think it convenient that the coins should remain as they are, except that the unit should be a
Victoria, or 8s. 4d., and 100 its exponent. I would write V. 25.50.
Turn 25:50 into # = 10l. 12s. 6d., done mentally, by deducting one sixth ſrom 24, leaves 20 ;
half that is 10, and 150 pence is 12s. 6d.
Turn 10l. 12s. 6d. into Victorias; add 4 to 10 = 12; double that is 24, and 12s. 6d. is 150 pence
or 25-50. There would be some little trouble in turning from one to the other; and as 8s. 4d.
is not an aliquot part of a sovereign, the sovereign could hardly be coatinued in use. These
are the objections to the adoption of the Victoria and penny system for accounts, leaving all
ordinary transactions to be conducted in shillings and pence.
8 doz. - 8s. 4d. would be 8 doz. º 100 º 800
6 yds. - 4s. 2d. 53 6 yds. t- 5() -> 300
24 gross - 16s. 8d. , 24 gross - 200 - 4,800
5,900
b. I very much prefer, however, crowns and hundredths, because the crown is an aliquot portion
of the pound, and consequently the present sovereign and bank bills could be readily counted
and estimated in crowns and vice versä.
36. a. There is a great deal of nonsense in this paragraph. Whoever thought of dividing the
eighth of a dollar into sixths, quarters, and thirds—no one, ever. It should have read thus:–
“The Spaniards found it convenient to issue halves, quarters, eighths, and sixteenths of dollars;
and this money being plentiful in the States, and there being none other, Congress made it a legal
tender. Moreover, as the Americans had always been used to reckoning by shillings and pennies,
a custom borrowed from Great Britain, they continued the practice, and as it so happened the
Spanish eighths corresponded to the New York shillings of eight to the dollar, that was found to
be a further convenience.”
b. It will be noticed that Mr. Leavitt speaks of pence (inadvertently), although there is no such
COII].
The fact that the Americans, after sixty years' practice with decimal money and accounts, con-
tinue to reckon in shillings and pence, although they have no coins by those names, shows at least
the force of habit, and how impossible it would be to get a people, having shilling and penny coins,
K
S. A. Goddard,
Esq.
74. DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION: . . . . .
S. A. Goddard,
Esq.
to give up reckoning with them. It also shows that it is essentially convenient—habit out of the
question.
c. Answered by foregoing,
d. What system—the mil system 2 No. Under any Decimal System 2 No.
To issue coins of those denominations would be a departure from the Decimal System ; and to
reckon by halves, quarters, &c. would be equally so.
e. No class of persons will lose more than it will gain.
f. No ; it will be of no loss of any importance to any one, but it would be a subject of annoy-
ance and dissatisfaction, because people are annoyed at what appears to be a loss, and the loss is
not compensated in their minds by similar gains. Probably no person in all America loses a
dollar a year by losses of # and + cents on eighths and sixteenths of dollars; as much is gained at
one time as lost at another.
g. The inconvenience is simply that of the annoyance from the want of exactness. Disregarding
small differences is fallen into with complacency, and is therefore no material inconvenience.
h. The community will not apply the decimal principle (exclusively) to buying and selling
They will use it when it suits them best, but will use the present mode when that suits them best
There will be no use in trying to force them ; they never will adopt it.
The people will not reckon by 48 mills. .
37. a. Mr. Leavitt had great experience, and his statement appears to be quite in unison with
the facts. -
b. I have not seen Mr. Leavitt's Report, nor that to the Canadian Legislature, but I had come
to the conclusion that this would be the proper method, viz., to introduce in connexion with pre-
sent coins, some means by which money transactions may be recorded in a Decimal System of
notation.
I think the present system of money far preferable to an exclusively Decimal System.
38. a. My reply to the three first question is, yes.
I do not think the easiest plan always gives eventually the greatest facility. The mind
gets careless over an easy matter, where it will overcome and master a difficulty, and then be
perfect in it.
I think this arises more from practice than natural tendency. People halve because half can be
arrived at by comparing it with its fellow half. -
39. a. I think the adoption of twelve scientific. That of twenty accidental and unscientific.
b. In the adaptation of twelve to divisibility; and this divisibility being concurrent with that of
weights and measures.
40. This necessarily follows so far as twelve is concerned, but not in respect to twenty, that I
can see; but perhaps the twenty does not militate with the convenience of the system.
4]. a. A decimal division for accounts, and the present mode of computation for trafficking, would
be the best plan.
b. Take crowns for the money of account: Å would be 1s. 8d., #= 10d., ºr = 5d., 1* =33d.
Calculations would be made in shillings and pennies, and turned into decimal money when written
thus,—
S. d. £ s. d.
12 × 4, 6 = 2 14 O
6 X 9 O = 2 14 O
3 * 18 O = 2 14 O
8 20 × 4 & 32°40, changed mentally.
42. If any change be made, it should be this (with the aid of a new value to the unit of the
money of account), viz., retain the present coins, and the present modes of computing them, intro-
ducing a mode of computing them decimally, when such computation should be more convenient,
which mode should also be applicable to accounts.
43. a. The money of account must be represented by 100. We cannot estimate the value of
465 pence without turning the sum into poiánds. 465 could not be paid with our present coin.
without much trouble in ascertaining what coins would come to that. It should read 4°65 or
4 Victorias 65 pence.
Unless the integer of the money of account can be represented by a coin, the exponent of which
shall be 100, I would sooner leave it as it is. To write down pence, and deal in either pence or
pounds would be, I conceive, a very clumsy, patchwork, unscientific mode. I think it would
be ridiculed by France and America. *
b. The pound should be a multiple of the 100, if the sovereign is to be retained as coin, and
the present bank note is to be retained ; 100 halfpence, called a dollar, will never do. It would
have many practical inconveniences. The pound would be no multiple of it; all sums reckoned
in pence would have to be doubled; it could not be turred into pounds readily, nor pounds
1ntO 1ſt.
The fact of 100 half-pence being equivalent to the American dollar has charms for some persons,
but there is nothing in it. The value of the American coin has been altered several times, and
may be again, and it is of the smallest possible consequence whether our money of account be of
the same value as the American or not. Besides, the value of the dollar is not +9% of the crown,
but +}{}; in fact, the value of the silver dollar is 4s. 7d., not 4s. 2d., in silver. There is, however,
about the same value of gold, say quantity of gold, in 4s. 14 d. English gold, that there is in the
American gold dollar ; i.e. silver against silver the value is about 4s. 7d., gold against gold 4s. 14d.
44. I know of none other than taking the lowest in use. The lowest unit in the States is a mil,
but it is discarded ; a cent is taken, and all sums read in cents, viz., & 199.99 or 19999 cents.
45. a. I do not think that adding 40 to the number of farthings in the pound of the smallest
practical importance to anyone. All values would be stated in farthings, but there would be only
10d. loss or gain in 10,000l., it being compensated in the increased value of the shilling.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 75.
b. No doubt; but the penny cannot form a decimal part of a pound with 100 as the exponent
of the pound, nor would the sum of 100 pence be an aliquot part of a pound.
c. There should be but two columns in accounts, but two denominations, as dollars and cents or
pounds and pence. The American system has four, viz., dollars, dimes, cents, and mils, but two only
are used. -
d. Yes; the contrary plan would never be practised. - -.
e. The dime, also, has been dropped, or rather never taken up ; sums are not expressed
39 9d. 96.9m. but 89.99, or say & 10' 00. Mils, however, are not known by name even.
There are coins named dimes and half-dimes, but they are usually called 10 cents and
5 cent pieces. -
46. I consider this would be imperfect and inconvenient. The integer must be expressed by
100 of the lowest money unit. This I regard as indispensable. *
The mind could not estimate values expressed in pence, at least without much practice, nor turn.
a large number of pence into pounds without some trouble.
I do not think it important to retain the pound as the integer, if a better can be found. The
crown would be far preferable in respect to its value ; it would conduce to economy, and would
save largely in the Government expenditure, because notions of value are based very much upon
the great unit of account. A crown will be valued under a crown system much higher than it is
under the pound system. -
Crowns or Victorias, or Victoria pounds, may be adopted. The crown must be accompanied by
hundredths, not by pence. -
The crown is a better English term than pound. It is more sonorous and aristocratic. “Pound”
is very plebeian, in fact vulgar. All calculations or amounts now stated in pounds could be reckoned
mentally in crowns, and vice versä.
47. Quite unimportant. No disadvantage ; better than decimals, but halfpennies would seldom
be written in the money column.
Vulgar fractions are not so easily added as decimals. But for the most part these fractions are
rejected in accounts as unimportant. They should never be introduced in books of account.
48. The mil system is preposterous for a working system ; it may look well on paper. The
Committee of the House of Commons came to a correct decision, viz., that the pound, if the money
of account, under a decimal system must represent 1,000. I think the Committee turned its
consideration to the question of how the pound could be divided, and not to what would be the
best system of decimal money. -
49. Certainly this is what I have recommended.
This will not answer unless we are to deal in pennies as the substantive denomination. It
would be a peddling system. It would lower the money system in the eyes of the world, but it
would tend to economy. We could not estimate and pay in pounds; we must estimate and pay
in pennies—the money of account.
50. I think but two monies of account would be used and spoken of, viz., pounds and mils.
a. Not in respect to there being too many columns of account. There would be but two, but
hardly anything would increase the confusion that would be necessarily occasioned.
51. Are not pounds, shillings, and pence three monies of account? or is the dollar one and the
pound one, as here meant P
52. Unquestionably. I think this must be taken as the basis of any decimal system; 100 steps,
and 100 only.
53. a. Dollars and cents only are used in the United States. -
Dimes or tenths would occasion trouble without any benefit, and no one cares for mils. Probably
not one person in ten knows what a mil means; it is seldom heard of.
b. That practically two columns only are necessary, and that the lower fractions are not worthy
of consideration.
c. They indicate that more than two columns are practically useless, even if not inconvenient.
d. This may be said, but the fact is they know about as little of half cents as of mils, except in
dealing in valuable articles, as cotton, &c., but in ordinary transactions the half cent is hardly
known. Two for a cent, not half a cent each.
e. Its utter uselessness.
f. Here is an instance where the fraction of a cent is used. It is used in this manner, and not
in shop and market transactions.
Were the penny to be used decimally cotton would still be sold at 8%d., 8}d., 8%d., and not 8:1,
8' 3, 8: 5, &c. I suppose this aptness to divide into halves, quarters, eighths, &c., arises from the
fact that these may be ascertained in length, distances, &c., by comparison. One can double a
string, or halve a quantity, but how can we arrive at one tenth or one fifth of the length of a
string or one tenth or one fifth of a quantity? Barbarians would evidently adopt the system of
halving because they could compare halves. .
g. Cotton may as well rise tº as #, and the total value would be as correctly arrived at. The
reason is that people are more used to halves, &c. than tenths, and probably because the measure
of half, quarter, &c., in lengths, &c., can be exactly determined at once, but not the measure of
one tenth or one fifth without extraneous aid.
54. I think in this case the pound must be divided into 1,000 parts, but that pounds and mils
only would be written. And as I think the mil system impracticable, the pound cannot be
retained as the unit of account under a Decimal System. -
55. The integer must represent 100; immense trouble and confusion would be occasioned by
its representing 1,000. The lower classes would not compute in mils, nor in florins and mils;
and if they could, it would take much longer and be more liable to inaccuracy than shillings and
pence. 4.
56. a. More convenient than francs, but no convenience nor advantage over dollars and cents.
On the contrary, a great disadvantage, occasioning extravagance and universally greater expen-
diture. I think francs too low, - * * *-
S. A. Goddard,
Esq. . . . .
K 2
76 . DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
S. A. Goddard,
Esq.
b. Crowns carry the value to the mind clearly. The value of 1,000 crowns is as clear as that of
250 pounds.
c. This is an advantage so far as it refers to coins, but none whatever in respect to accounts.
57. The adoption of crowns and hundredths, or Victorias and pence, would occasion no
inconvenience in this respect. :
a. The high value of the pound, necessitating the use of 1,000 steps, the most advantageous
exponent, renders the application of the Decimal System to the pound impracticable even in
its most advantageous form. But it does not follow that the Decimal plan may not be applied
to some other unit of account.
58. No doubt.
59. I think but two columns would be used, viz., #9 999 mils. This increases the figures in the
mil column one half, and consequently interferes with brevity. This column should have but two
rows of figures.
60. It would be more inconvenient to deal with a 50 mil shilling than with a 12d. shilling.
a. It would be so serious an inconvenience they never would reckon in the Decimal money
unless all other money should be called in, and then even they would try to reckon by halves and
quarters.
b. This is in accordance with my previous remarks at No. 53. At the time of writing those
remarks I had not seen this, but I do not think it is owing to the power of a “glance of the eye,”
but to the fact that 3, 4, , ºr can be ascertained by comparing one portion with another.
Double a string and we get half, double it again and we get quarters, and so with quantities; but
there is no means of ascertaining # or 1% of measure or of length by a ready comparison of one
portion with another.
62. a. On the crown plan no coins nor bank notes need be changed, and no values would be
changed *
b. As the people never would reckon in mils they would not suffer much pecuniarily from the
attempt to introduce the Mil System. -
c. The penny or halfpenny scheme will neither answer. The pound would be no multiple of the
integer, and the value of the sovereign would not be obvious at a glance. The 100 penny Victoria
would be a good plan were all sovereigns called in and all notes changed to Victoria notes ; the 100
halfpenny plan will not do in any way.
63. A mode of keeping accounts decimally would benefit nearly all classes, but mainly bankers,
merchants, manufacturers, &c.
64. a. It would be unjust to attempt to impose upon the masses an inconvenient system simply to
benefit the few. If their ultimate convenience could be shown then it would be justifiable. But
by no reasoning that I can apply would decimal money to be used decimally conduce to their
convenience, nor to the convenience of anyone, without a decimalization of weights, measures,
&c., and even then its utility is rather more than doubtful. -
b. They form an insuperable objection to the attempt to decimalize the money computations, but
not to the application of the Decimal System to accounts, nor to the present coins being computed
decimally when convenience should recommend it.
65. I do not think there is any loss of time by compound arithmetic; it is good and valuable
exercise for the mind; and I think the time as usefully spent as in any other mode of calculations
for exercising the mind.
I do not think it would be advisable to introduce Decimal Coinage any further than to declare
that all accounts shall be kept in Victorias and pennies, or in crowns and hundredths. The latter
may be done in a day, and changed back to pounds in a day if it should not work well.
£5 note would be 20 crowns crown 100 5 at 5; 0 fºl 5 0
Sovereign , 4 » lmalf 50 10 at 4/0 fº 0 0
Half ditto , 2 ” florin 40 12 at 4/6 tº 14 4
shilling 20
sixpence 10 tºº-ºº-ººººººººººººººº.
threepence 5 f5 19 () x 4=23.80.
THE v.ARIous SCHEMES RECONSIDERED,
I. The Pound Mil (1,000) scheme.
This has the advantage—
1st. Of preserving the old term, pound.
2d. Of the capability of its being divided decimally with the present coins, with the assistance
of some new coins.
It has the following disadvantages:—
1st. It changes the value of the penny in sums under the silver coin by adding 40 farthings
to 960.
2d. It takes 1,000 instead of 100 as the exponent of the integer—a radical defect.
3d. If carried out in its integrity it will require four columns of money of account, while it is
desirable, nearly imperative, that there should be but two. Should two be adopted
the second would require three rows of figures, which would be inconvenient.
The above objections apply to it as a money of account.
As a money of payment it has amongst others the following disadvantages, viz.:-
Difficulty of computation, and of estimation, and of payment. Ordinary persons could not
compute the amount of articles in mils, nor would educated persons so readily as in shillings and
*; 6 dozen at 3s. 9d, is 11, 2s. 6d. or 125, that would be the practice, not 6 at 1874, nor 6 at
187°5.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 77
It would be difficult to estimate mentally the value of the total when arrived at ; for instance, S. A. Goddard,
what is the value of 1874, or of 1875. It would take uneducated persons a long time to become
familiar with it; and then how is 1874 to be paid P All these things are much more difficult to
arrive at than in shillings and pence, even in whole numbers, and much more so when applied to
halves and quarters.
A “bill of parcels,” made out in mils, would be quite an elaborate matter, and would take a
tolerable scholar in the first instance to accomplish. Then as to applying mils and florins, or mils
alone, to lists of prices and to price books, the task would be terrific ; and, when accomplished,
perplexing, troublesome, and useless to any good end. It is hazarding nothing to say the people
would never adopt the mil system, except for columns of account.
The most that the law can do, I imagine, is to say, that no sum shall be recoverable in a court
of law, unless sued for in pounds, florins, and mils. The system might then be applied to final
columns of account, all reckonings being made in shillings and pence. It would not for that
purpose be a very bad money of account.
It would be worked something as follows:—
Esq.
S. d. gé s. d.
4 doz. at 2 2 -: O 8 8
13 2, 3 4. - 2 3 4
25 , 4, 6 - 5 12 6 39 figures.
37 ,, 5 8 = 1 O 9 8
18 14 2 = 18,709 done mentally, but many sums would
not be turned so readily mentally.
The main objections to it for the money of account are these :—There must be three rows of
figures in the last column, and 1,000 must be the exponent of the integer instead of 100, therefore
it would be an imperfect system. Amounts would not be computed as follows :-
4 doz. at 108, - 4.32
13 2, 1663 = 1,660
498
4}.
4}.
25 , 225 = 4,500
1,125
37 , 283, = 8,490
1,981
12.
18,708; 55 figures, rejecting all the fractions, which
would not necessarily attach to the system,
because sales would be made in even
numbers.
How many £ s. and d. = 18 14, 2, done mentally in this instance 2
The result is, that the only good to be derived from the Pound and Mil System would be to
apply it simply to accounts. The objections to that, that it would require three rows of figures in
the mil column, and that 1,000 would be the exponent instead of the proper number, 100.
II. The half-penny or dollar and cent plan would work as follows, viz. –
s. d. 3 s. d. s
4 doz. 2 2 () 8 8
13 2, 3 4. 2 3 4.
25 2, 4, 6 5 12 6
37 , 5 8 10 9 8
18 14, 2
20
374,
12
— 4,490 = $89'80 – 49 figures.
How many pounds -- 4,490 by 12 = 374; 2 + 24 = 18 14 2, 62 figures, reckoning
those only marked under.
Few things would be reckoned in dollars and cents in the every-day transactions. Cotton, and
land, and houses, and grain might be, but, generally speaking, reckonings would be made in shillings
and pence.
The objections to this system as a money of account are: it is no multiple of the present
silver coins of account. A new coin would have to be struck, or there would be none to represent
this money of account. The pound would not be a multiple of the dollar, and therefore its value
could not be easily estimated in it, nor vice versä. Sums due in shillings and pence could not be
readily paid in dollars; and there are 49 figures in the above calculation, 10 more than in the
pound and mil plan. .
4 doz. 26 = 104
13 , 40 = 520
25 , 54 = 1250
IOO
37 , 68 = 2220
296
— 44'90 = 389'80, 43 figures.
K 3
78, DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION: . . . . . "
S. A. Goddard,
Esq.
Here with these figures there are six figures less; but this decimal mode would seldom be resorted
to, and in transactions generally, the figures would not conduce to brevity so well as these
happen to do. r - -
The American dollar is not +$3th of the English crown, but about +4%ths of it, or about 4s. 7d.,
say 4s. 6d., not 4s. 2d.
But there is the same value in about 4s. 1+d. of English gold coin as in an American gold
dollar. Therefore 100 represents neither the value of the American gold dollar, nor of the
silver dollar; nor if either did exactly, would there be any benefit worth speaking of in such
agreement. . •
III.-The Penny System.
This system would be practised in shillings and pence, and not in pence decimally, for the reason
that shillings and pence are better understood;—and much readier calculated, even if no better
understood. $ ... * - -
Articles like cotton might be sold in pennies, and reckoned decimally; but for the most part
reckonings would be in shillings and pence, thus :— -
4 dozen 2s. 2d. = géO 8 8 -
13 2, 3s. 4d. = 2 3 4
25 , , 4s. 6d. = 5, 12 6
37 , 5s. 8d. . . 10 9 8
18 14, 2
2O
374,
12
§ 4,490 45 figures.
How many pounds: 4,490 + 12 = 3,742 +20 := #18 (4s.2d. 59 figures.
Decimally — 4 dozen 26 = 104
13 , 40 = 524
25 , 54 = 1,250
100
37 ,, 68 = 2,290
296
— 44,90 39 figures.
How many pounds: divide by 12 and 20, 3,742 = f°18 14s.2d. 48 figures.
The objections to it as a money of account are,
No coin to represent the hundreds, but to find its value must be turned into pounds, shillings,
and pence, or statings must be in pence. . The English nation is not prepared to speak of pence.
Books might be kept in pennies, certainly ; but to do so, and turn the amount into pounds,
when to be dealt with, would be an imperfect and objectionable mode.
1 think the Pound and Mil System quite as good for accounts as this ; perhaps there is not
much difference. -
IV. The 10d. plan, making 10 penny pieces the money of account.
I think this plan impracticable, so long as weights and measures, and dozens and grosses, are not
decimalized, and even then in ordinary transactions it would not be so convenient as the present
system of shillings and pennies, because sums would not break up so well, nor divisions of money
assimilate to divisions of articles so well.
V. The Victoria or 100 penny plan. • .
I think this a better plan than the penny plan, inasmuch as there would be a coin of account to
represent 100, and amounts in books would always be stated in the coin in which they would be
due ; viz. –W. 44 ° 90:—
£ s. d.
4 doz. 2s. 2d. = 0 8 8
13 , 3s. 4d. = 2 3 4.
25 , 4s. 6d. = 5 12 6
37 , 5s. 8d. = 10 9 8 - -
—— 18 14, 2
20
--- 374
44' 90 49 figures.
How many pounds: 3,742 = 18 14 2 divided by 12 and 20. 58 figures.
Decimally:— -
. . . 4 doz. 26 F. 104.
13 2, 40 = 520
25 , 54 = 1250
100
296 -
W. 44.90 39 figures.
How many pounds: 3,742 = 18, 14 2 48 figures.
The serious objection to this is, that sovereigns are not a multiple of it, and could not well
be used along with Victorias, because it would be too troublesome to estimate the number of
sovereigns requisite to pay an amount stated in Victorias,
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 79
The same with bank notes. This objection applies to the 4s.2d. dollar, the 8s. 4d. Victoria, to
the ten penny plan, and to the penny plan. Another serious objection is this, viz., that neither
the Victoria, nor the 4s. 2d. dollar, would be multiples of the present silver coins.
VI. The Crown and Hundredth Plan. (Example No. 1.)
4 dozen 2s. 2d. = #0 8 8
13 , 3s. 4d. = 2 3 4.
25 , 4s. 6d. = 5 12 4.
37 , 5s. 8d. = 10 9 8
* > - .# 18 14, 2
How many crowns 2 & 74-80 — 38 figures 2
Reckoned mentally by multiplying by 4 = 72; add in 2 crowns in 14s. is 74, then 4s. 2d.
at 20 cents to the shilling is 84 = 74-84. This could be reckoned with the greatest facility
in books and accounts. It would not be required in ordinary transactions not on paper; those
would be reckoned and paid in shillings and pence.
In 74-84 how many pounds—18!. 14s. 2d.--43 figures. Found thus: divide by 4 is 18–2 over
is 10s.-84 cents 4s. 2d., or 18l. 14s. 2d. Done instantaneously on paper; not required elsewhere.
Decimally 4 dozen 24 = 104
13 2, 44 = 524
25 , 54 = 1,250
100
37 , 68 = 2,220
296
4,490 pence. 43 figures
How many crowns 2 & 74-84: Done mentally by dividing by 60 less 0; say 6 in 44.7; 6 in 29,
5 over; add 0 to 5 is 50 or 4s. 2d.--at 20 cents to the shilling ; 74-84 done instantaneously.
8725 pence how many crowns P=145.42; with a little practice done at a glance; but transactions
would seldom be reckoned in pence, probably never but in shillings and pence, as example No. 1.
5 shillings, crown F. 100
2s. 6d., half crown = 50
2s., florin = 40
1s., shilling = 2O
6d., sixpence F. 10
3d., threepence = 5
T}o, hundredth or cent= l
Pound - 4 crowns.
Half pound = 2 crowns.
.#5 note F. 20 crowns.
This plan has but one single disadvantage, viz., that the value of the hundredth is not the same as
that of the penny. But this seeming disadvantage may turn out to be an advantage. I think
it will.
It is settled conclusively in my mind, I have not the shadow of a lingering doubt on the subject,
1st, that decimal currency is not wanted for daily transactions; 2d, that with our present
shillings and pennies, dozens, grosses, &c., and duodecimal system, no decimal money would ever,
even in generations, be adopted by the people; 3d, that it would not be so convenient by far as the
present system, even were all weights, measures, modes of computing by tens, &c. adopted ; and
therefore all that is wanted is a decimal money for accounts.
It being then determined that the decimal currency for accounts only is wanted, the question
arises, what characteristics should this possess. I venture to say that it should have the following:—
1st. 100 should be the exponent of the unit of value, and there should be 100 steps from the
highest to the lowest denomination, and only two denominations, viz., units and hundreds.
2d. There should be but two columns of money, that is, but two denominations as aforesaid, and
the minor denomination column should have but two rows of figures.
3d. The pound sterling should be divisible by the unit of account, i. e., it should be a multiple of
it, so that the eye at a glance would turn pounds into the money, or the money into pounds,
say by halving or quartering it, or by some other simple mode of division or multiplication,
because for a considerable period in estimating values people would turn the money into
pounds, in the same way that learners of a language turn the new words into their own
language in order to understand their meaning. “Bon jour” is not understood; the mind
turns it into “good day,” and then comprehends it. And also because the sovereign could
not be conveniently used as a coin, unless it were a multiple of the money of account.
4th. It is important that sums arrived at in the shilling and penny calculations should be resolved
into the decimal denomination by some simple divisor, so that the working may be mental :
and also that the new denomination should also be turned into the old by similar easy
II] (28.I].S. - *
5th. The decimal plan should be adopted, if possible, without any change of coins, at least
worth noticing. The coins should be capable of being applied either to decimal or
duodecimal calculations; and it is especially important that the sovereign, if not the unit
of account, should be a multiple of the unit of account, and also that bank notes should be
so also.
6th. The name of the unit of account should be a monosyllable, sonorous, pleasant to the ear,
exciting agreeable sensations and recollections, as “truths,” and not “lies,” “crowns”
and not “fetters,” &c.; and it should be, if possible, an English name, and not the name of
the money of account of any other nation. - -
All these characteristics the crown plan has. None of the other plans have them to anything
like the extent. The only defect it may be considered to have is, the non-uniformity of the cent or
hundredth to the penny, and this by practice will probably be found an advantage.
S. A. Goddard,
Esq.
K. 4
80 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
S. A. Goddard,
Esq.
Dr. J. E. Gray.
The “crown” is in all respects a better name than “pound,” and its value is sufficiently great
to prevent an inconvenient quantity of figures, while its smaller value, as compared with the pound,
will conduce to economy both in public and private expenses, and better enable the nation to
come in competition with other nations,—a very important matter now that competition is
increasing.
One great and decided advantage it has is this, that the system may be introduced at a moment's
notice, without expense, and be abandoned as quickly, and at as little expense, should it not
answer. It would simply be necessary to enact that no debts should be recoverable in a court of
law, but in crowns and hundredths.
Gold crowns should be coined probably in flat rings.
After all, this question arises : —
Are the benefits to be derived by keeping accounts decimally sufficiently obvious to warrant
the trial P
I think they are, provided the change does not involve much expense or trouble; and provided
that, should it not answer, the present system could be reverted to, also with little expense and
trouble.
These conditions appear to apply to the crown and hundredth plan completely.
To the pound and mil two column plan to a considerable extent.
To the penny plan to a rather less extent.
To the Victoria plan, the tenpenny plan, and the halfpenny plan still less.
I have had 20 years of experience in America and 40 years in England.
Edgbaston, Warwickshire, SAMUEL ASPINWALL GODDARD.
May 20, 1857. •
Communicated by J.ord Overstone.)
DR. J. E. GRAY.
TO THE RIGHT HON. LORD OVERSTONE.
MY LORD, British Museum, 7th August 1857.
I HAVE not thought it necessary to send replies to the questions which you have been so kind
as to transmit to me, inasmuch as I have given my opinions in regard to most of them in my
evidence before the Commission, which is already printed. But I venture to offer some additional
observations on a part of the question which appears to me not to have been yet sufficiently
brought before the notice of the Commissioners, and which has, nevertheless, an important
bearing on the question of a change in the coinage.
In the first place then it has been repeatedly stated by the advocates of change that a Decimal
Coinage has been tried and found convenient in . France, in the United States, and in other
countries. In making this assertion it appears to me that these gentlemen confound two very
distinct things, a Decimal System of Accounts and a Decimal System of Currency. Now, even
were we to admit that the Decimal System has been found to answer very well as regards bills
and bookkeeping, I think the evidence is incontrovertible that it has been a complete failure in
regard to retail transactions over the counter; neither in France nor in the United States is the
general retail trade carried on in accordance with a Decimal System, or by means of the Decimal
coins of account established by the laws of the two countries, and this is a remarkable circum-
stance, and well worthy of being constantly borne in mind, when we consider that the Decimal
Coinage of both countries has been in circulation for more than sixty years.
In France this is not only the case with reference to the small retail traders who deal in articles
of universal consumption ; but even in some of the Government offices the old methods of compu-
tation are adhered to, and the decimal scale ignored. Thus, if you inquire the postage of a
letter not merely at the common receiving houses, but even at the great central post-office in
Paris, the answer is given in sous, although the postage stamps are marked in centimes, and you
are thus compelled to convert the sous into centimes, or vice versä, in order to determine what are
the right stamps to be affixed to make up the postage required. Other simple but comprehensive
examples of the same fact are at this moment before me. According to the “Spectator” for the
25th of April 1857, “beef is now 21 sous the pound ;” a late revolutionary placard posted in the
streets demanded “pain à trois sous ;” and in the number of “Galignani's Messenger’ for the
31st of July 1857, the following are announced as the “Terms of advertisements, fifteen, twelve,
or ten sous a line, according to the number of insertions; none under fifty sous.” Judging by all
that we know of the manner in which retail trade is conducted in France, it may safely be
affirmed that decimalism or counting by tens has no greater hold on the minds of the people than
it had before the great revolution. This is further proved by the fact that the double sou, which
at the change of system was called a décime, in the hope that the people would be induced to count
by it rather than by the sou, and thus convert their current money of account into a decimal coin,
has never made the smallest way, the word décime being utterly unknown to retail trade, although
many millions of a coin stamped with the name have been in circulation for half a century. So
convinced have the Government at last become of the utter hopelessness of their endeavour to force
this term, and with it the decimal idea, into general use, that the coin is now simply marked as a
piece of “dix centimes.” Thus all domestic calculations continue to be performed in sous on the
vicesimal system, exactly as they were before the change in 1796, and not in décimes, which
simple change would have been all that was necessary in France for the establishment of a
decimal currency, but which successive governments, constitutional and absolute, have been
unable to bring about. So wedded indeed were the people of France,—volatile as they are said to
be, and mutable as they have shown themselves in other respects, so wedded were they to the old
system of currency, that many of the older coins were allowed to continue in circulation until the
year 1834, forty years after the change ; and even in 1856 it was necessary to issue an ordinance
withdrawing them from use. In the meantime, instead of coining pieces of 20, 30, or 40 centimes,
the Government were compelled to issue binary or quaternary divisions of the franc, that is to
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 8]
say, #, #, and # franc pieces, the latter coin being in one instance (an I2) stamped as a “quart.”
Indeed it is curious to observe, how the names of these pieces have oscillated between 4 franc,
} franc, and 50, 25 centimes: by whatever name they were stamped, however, the people have
persisted in calling them 10 and 5 sous pieces.* This continued and almost exclusive use of the
sou in retail trade, and of the five-franc piece in larger commercial transactions, shews that the
IFrench made a great mistake in not regarding the Sou or copper coin in common use as the basis
of their Decimal system, as had been done by the Americans; reckoning 10 sous as their décime,
and regarding the livre or franc as the fifth of a dollar, or whatever name they might have given
to their five-franc piece.
The same observations apply to a considerable extent to Belgium, Sardinia, and Switzerland,
which have all adopted the French monetary system, as may be seen by a reference to the official
and other reports from those countries printed by the Commissioners. To give an idea of the
impediments in the way of change, the impossibility of enforcing it against the habits and feelings
of the people, and the trouble and confusion entailed on trade by the use of two concurrent
systems, I beg leave to quote the following passages from Mr. T. Baring's communication on
Belgium, which are quite consistent with my own experience in that country.
“In the country, large sums are generally mentioned in francs, small sums connected with the
country people's daily dealings in Brabant guilders and stivers; and such is the force of habit
with the Flemish peasants, that at this very day, in the district round Dunkirk, where the Flemish
language still prevails, the farmers, though under French rule since King Lewis the Fourteenth,
still speak of guilders and stivers, meaning by the same francs and sous of five centimes. In
usual life, every man in Belgium is compelled to have constantly at hand his tables of reduction
of the various monies, both past and present.”—p. 272.
“Notwithstanding the legal introduction full sixty years ago of the decimal metrical system of
weights and measures, the old local systems have not ceased to exist, though their existence is
wholly illegal. In Antwerp and other important places the new systems have long been in work,
especially for large transactions ; but with the country people, as well as the lower orders in the
towns, the old weights and measures are still the order of the day, and any other hardly spoken
of. One must not, however, suppose that such weights and measures are tolerated by law ;
quite the reverse ; the mere possession of old weights and measures constitutes in itself a
misdemeanour, for which the law provides, and actually inflicts, fines and punishments. The
people employ decimal weights or measures, and have recourse to numerous ridiculous and
Quaint calculations to transform the results into the old weights and measures, which vary almost
from province to province, and to which they are so attached that it will be very difficult ever to
eradicate the same completely. Small dealers do their best to keep up this state of things, as the
confusion now subsisting prevents ignorant customers from calculating off-hand the prices at
which the goods stand such dealers.
“Habit and routine are wonderful things; it would otherwise hardly be credited that up to
this day, on the Antwerp Exchange, grain still sells in Brabant guilders, though by decimal
weights and measures ; and that the Antwerp sugar refiners sell their sugars by 100 pound old
Antwerp weight, through a laborious reduction from the actual weight taken in kilogrammes from
the scales.”—p. 273.
In Sardinia, where the Decimal System was first introduced by the French in 1793, we are
told by Her Majesty’s Minister at Turin that the old and new systems continued in use
concurrently for some years ; but at present (1856), with the exception of the “Novarese,” and to
a certain extent Liguria, the new system is generally adopted. At Genoa (the commercial
capital) the lower classes and retail dealers continue to use the old denominations; and in some
instances the merchants’ books are kept in double columns for the old and new money. “No
inconvenience,” he adds, “is felt at Genoa from the concurrent use, except by merchants who
are still in some instances obliged to buy and sell in the old money, and subsequently, in their
accounts, reduce it into new money.” A simple inspection of the list of coins in circulation and
of their values in lire and centesimi, is sufficient to prove how difficult must be this operation
which “the lower classes and retail dealers” so wisely eschew. Switzerland, we are told, has
“become part and parcel of France, so far as monetary transactions go ;” and this absorption is
quite natural, considering the relations between the two countries.
In the United States of America there exists the same attachment to the old system of
currency, after the same lengthened period of trial of the decimal coins, as in France.
Omnibus conductors, shopkeepers, and all those connected with the multifarious dealings of retail
trade persist in the use of shillings and sixpences (so called), although there are comparatively
very few coins answering to those denominations in circulation ; and although the Federal
Government has done its utmost, even within the last year, to recall those that still remain, and
to recoin them in dollars and dimes. So universal is the custom of pricing by shillings, that a
friend who has just returned from America informs me, that not only in country towns, but even
in the larger cities such as Boston and New York, he was constantly obliged to request the shop-
keepers to inform him what the price amounted to in cents, as he had to pay the “shillings” in
that coin. In America, too, as in France, the smaller silver coins in common use do not represent
2, 3, or 4 tenths of the dollar unit, but in conformity with the concurrent custom of all mankind, to
whom decimals are an unnatural mode of subdivision, the dollar is divided in a binary manner,
into halves, quarters, and eighths. Thus they have a half dollar, a quarter dollar, an eighth of a
dollar, a half dime, and a three-cent piece ; and the reckoning of all the smaller and more
ordinary retail transactions of trade is anything rather than decimal, either in reality or in its mode
of expression. It is a striking proof of the inapplicability of the demary system to the affairs of
common life that not one of the countries which have adopted a Decimal Coinage and Decimal
weights and measures has adopted along with them the plan of putting up articles ordinarily sold
in packets, such as gloves, stockings, &c., in tens, but all continue as before to put them up in
dozens; nor do I know of any article in common use which is usually sold in tens. This is easily
* It is the same as regards measurement. In some of the more recent French Natural History works the
measurements of animals are given in decimals of the metre, but this is generally accompanied by the equivalent in
lines, and their aliquot parts, thus—0' 0057m. (2}l.), or 0' 0060m. (231.), shewing the concurrent use of both systems,
and the necessity for explaining the new by the old.
L
Dr. J. E. Gray.
82 - * DECIMAL: COINAGE COMMISSION 5 ; ; ;
Dr. J. E. Gray.
understood when we consider that the quarter of a packet of ten, of stockings or gloves, would be
two pairs and an odd one. - - .
It follows that, instead of the habits of the people and the requirements of retail trade being
in unison (as in this country under the existing system) with the system of coinage and accounts,
there is (in those countries in which a Decimal System is enforced) one system for commercial
transactions and accounts, and another for the retail transactions of every-day life. Such a
complication cannot be regarded as a gain on the side of simplicity. At the present moment
throughout the length and breadth of Britain there is one complete, uniform, and well-understood
system both of coinage and accounts ; but iſ a new Decimal System were to be introduced, it
must (to judge from all experience) run concurrently with another system expressed in other
terms, and better adapted to the purposes of retail trade ; in other words, the new Decimal
System and the old mixed system would be perpetually meeting, jostling, and confusing each
other ; and such a retention of the old system for common use, even setting aside the question
of experience and utility, must appear perfectly natural to all who take an unprejudiced
view of the subject. All those who have passed the age of childhood, and are versed in
the use of the existing system, will naturally be loth to give it up, if they can in any
way retain the expression of it. Their children and grandchildren will learn from them
and from the shopkeepers with whom they deal, much more important lessons in relation to
money transactions than they will be taught at school, and the old well-understood every-day
system will keep its ground in spite of laws and ordinances to the contrary; such has been the
case in other countries, and such would be the case in our own. The Decimal System having then
failed entirely, after a lapse of more than half a century, in adapting itself to the retail trade of
the two great nations by whose laws it is enforced, the natural repugnance of the mass of the
people here-to admit of any such change in the English system is easily accounted for and amply
justified. It may safely be stated that the vast majority are opposed to any change, but they look with
apathy on the agitation going on, under the firm conviction that no Government will sanction an
alteration which must involve the whole retail trade of the country in great inconvenience and
confusion, and prove such a fertile source of contention and annoyance, for no other reason than
because it is believed that the change would facilitate the keeping of accounts, and save the
trouble of dividing the column of pence by 12; for, after all, this is the only advantage that its most
energetic supporters hold out to the world. We are told, it is true, that it would enable bankers,
merchants, and certain public departments to conduct their business with fewer clerks, but even
supposing that this would be the result (which I deny), can it be pretended that it affords a
sufficient ground for placing the retail trade of the country in a state of confusion, from which
that of France and America has not recovered after an experience of sixty years, and, as far as
appearances indicate, is not likely ever to recover, although the change attempted in both these
countries is slight indeed compared with that which it is proposed to initiate here 2. But this leads
me to the second part of my subject.
In the second place, then, let it be particularly observed, that the changes attempted in France
and in the United States, but which the retail trader still so firmly and pertinaciously resists, are
not to be compared, in regard to their nature and extent, with the sweeping alterations in the
entire system of the monies of account which the pound-and-mil decimalists propose to introduce
here. In a country like England, where the system of coinage and accounts is fortunately in
complete unison with the habits of the people, articles are sold, not so much with reference to the
various coins in actual circulation, as with reference to those which are more especially the coins
of account; every article is priced at present in pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings, as the case
may be, and consequently an alteration in the names and values of the coins of account must
of itself create confusion in the trade of the community. In France, prior to the change, the
sou, and in America, the halfpenny, were the ruling coins in the price of the articles of most
universal use, and these were proposed to be changed in name only, without any alteration of
their value. The new name proposed to be given to the sou has been uniformly rejected, while
that of the halfpenny or cent has come into general use,” and is adopted as the coin of account.
But in England it is proposed to abolish the penny (which is in like manner our ruling coin in
the prices of articles of universal consumption) both in name and in fact, to remove its repre-
sentative under an altered value (4 mils) from a place in the monies of account, and to
remove it so completely from this position that no multiple by less than twenty-five shall hold
such a place. The shilling, too, which, next to the penny, is the chief ruling coin, is in like
manner to be shut out from the monies of account, and to be designated by a new name ; thus,
instead of pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings, we are to have pounds, florins, cents, and mils,
according to the scheme of the Committee of the House of Commons; or pounds and mils only,
*To give an idea of the comparative simplicity of our present system of expressing the most ordinary transactions of
trade, as compared with the Decimal systems of France, Holland, and the United States, and with the Decimal system
proposed for our adoption, I submit the following table of approximate values in each :

English. TJnited States. Dutch. French. I)ecimal proposed.
S d. C. C. C 77?. 777
% 1 2} 5 0 - 002.” Or 2
l 2 5 10 0 °004 • , 4
2 4 IO 20 0.008 . , 8
3 6 15 30 0 - 012. , 12
4 8 20 40 0 - 016 - , 16
5 10 25 50 0.020" ., 20
6 12 30 60 0.025 - , 25
9 18 45 90 0.037. , 37
| 0 20 50 100 0° 041 ° 2, 41
I 0 24 60 120 0.050. , 50
1 6 36 90 180 0.075. , 75
I 8 40 J 00 200 0.083. , 83
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 83
according to other advocates of the system; or mils only, according to Sir Charles Pasley. All
prices, then, should this system be brought into operation, must be stated on an entirely new
system, the most important denominations of which, (the two intermediate ones, namely,) would be
widely different in value from those of the present. Such a sweeping alteration, I may boldly
assert, would not and could not be adopted in the every-day transactions of retail trade; nearly all
its dealings would be carried on under the old system, but with the additional complication of
reducing its terms as nearly as possible to the new for the purpose of registration in bills and
aCCOuntS. . - *
I am aware that the advocates of the Pound and Mil Scheme state that they would retain in
circulation the penny and the shilling, and all the existing coins except the half-crown and the
four-penny piece; but in making this statement they carefully slur over the fact that the penny
and shilling are no longer to be coins of account, that they are to pass by different names (the one
having besides a different value), and that they must be entered in all accounts in a totally
different manner. They may depend upon it, however, that so long as shillings and pence are per-
mitted to exist, whatever may be the regulation of the law in relation to them, twelve pence
will be reckoned by the great bulk of the people as equivalent to a shilling, and twenty shillings
(and not ten florins) as the natural mode of subdivision of the pound. -
There may be, and there of course will be, with the two systems in concurrent use, continued
quarrels in relation to them, and much confusion and annoyance resulting from them; but these
are penalties of the change which its enthusiastic advocates either refuse to anticipate or profess to
regard as of trifling importance. -
To return to the nature of the change attempted in France. Prior to the Revolution, commo-
dities were sold by the livre and the Sou, its twentieth part ; subsequent to the Revolution,
when (with the view of breaking down all old associations) the names of the most familiar things
were changed, the livre (which had sometimes been called a franc) was ordered to be exclusively
so called ; it was almost imperceptibly altered in value, ºr, and, instead of being divided into
20 Sous, it was divided into 10 double sous,-a coin already in common use, to which it was
attempted to affix the name of décime. The décime was again directed to be divided into 10
centimes; but as the coins below a sou were very seldom called for, it may be said that there
was scarcely any disturbance in or alteration of the coins in ordinary use, the franc, the double
3ou, and the Sou. And yet at the end of sixty years the people have refused to adopt
the slight change which consists only in substituting the double sou for the sou as their
money of account, and persist in retaining the name of the latter, both as a coin and in their
calculation of prices, notwithstanding all the ordinances and fines which have been fulminated
against it.
Contrast the smallness of the change with the wide extent of that attempted to be perpetrated
here, which proposes to abolish at once the use of three out of four monies of account, substituting
for the two intermediate and practically the most important terms others with different names
and of double or more than double their present values, and altering the lowest both in name
and value. The introduction of the florin or two-shilling piece as a coin of account is in itself
a change equal to that of the décime or two-sous piece in France, which, as we have seen, has
entirely failed in that country. But, over and above this, we are to be favoured, as a money of
account, with a cent in value 2% of our present penny, and bearing the most inconvenient relation
possible both to present prices and to the habits of the people on which they are formed. For
the last money of account we are to have a mil, a farthing depreciated 4 per cent. in value. But,
inasmuch as ten of them are required before we reach the next higher term, the mil must of
necessity be the most frequent denomination in all the ordinary transactions of retail trade,
and cannot, for the same reason, be omitted (as the farthing now is) in the higher commercial
a CCOUIntS.
This complete change in the value of the monies of account on which the price of articles is
to be marked must, if carried out, be productive of a corresponding and most puzzling change
in the retail trade of the country. Thus, to take one of the simplest and most ordinary cases:
instead of an article priced at 2s. 6d., it must be marked, according to the system adopted, either
f0° 125, or 1 fl. 2 cents 5 mils, or 1 fl. 25 mils, or 125 mils, and so on on all other prices. But
it may safely be asserted that this would rarely be attempted ; the mass of the people would
regard it in the light of a mystification ; and, so long as the shillings and pence circulated, would
buy and sell in shillings and pence as before, with the addition of a plentiful amount of grumbling
and quarrelling over any discrepancy or supposed discrepancy between the new and the old,
whenever either party thought fit to object to the other's mode of reckoning, or whenever it
became necessary to record the result in the new system of accounts.
We will, however, suppose it possible that the new system should be adopted for the purpose
of retail trade. Det us call to mind that every article of universal consumption, such as bread,
meat, vegetables, sugar, coffee, beer, spirits, calico, flannel, coals, candles, Soap, &c., is sold at
so many pence per retail quantity, and that these articles are sold wholesale at so many shillings
per ton, cwt., stone, gallon, &c., and we cannot but admit that it is scarcely possible to realize to
one's self the vast amount of confusion, amounting almost to revolution, which such a change
would produce in both the wholesale and retail trade of the country. And not in trade
only, but in every relation of life would the change and its attendant confusion be felt, for it would
equally affect the wages of the labourer, the pay of the soldier and the sailor, and the allowances
commonly made to them. In fact, overy transaction of life would be darkened by its shadow ; in a
multitude of cases, lowering with doubt and discontent.
Lastly, I beg leave to observe, that such a change would not only affect the manner in which
prices are marked, and injure the poorer classes in particular by the substitution of coins of
higher value for those in which their ordinary purchases are made, but must also have a direct
effect on the prices themselves, and this for the two following reasons: in the first place, as it
would be impossible, where the present price of an article or portion of an article is less than
sixpence, to convert the price accurately into the new system,--as it must necessarily be always
either a little more or a little less, in order to make it an entire number of mils, the weaker,
that is to say, the poor customer, would inevitably go to the wall. This likewise is proved by
the experience of other countries. Those who are acquainted with the details of trade in the
United States affirm that large profits are realized out of the small differences resulting from the
Dr. J. E. Gray.
L 2 - * *
84 . DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Dr. J. E. Gray.
decimal division of the coin, and the repeated binary division of the articles for which it is
exchanged,—a fact which most emphatically contradicts the assumption of the advocates of a
change, that all evil attending it would be corrected by competition, “The fractions resulting
from reduction (of the money from non-decimal to decimal) are always,” says Her Majesty's
minister at Brussels, “detrimental to the poorer classes.”
In the second place, the prices of a great number of articles are absolutely determined by the
monies of account. Many articles are sold in England for a penny or a shilling as they are sold
in France for a sou, 5 sous, or a franc, and in Holland for a cent or a florin. Now, if the monies
of account be changed, there will naturally follow a change in the price of all these articles, and
with a large increase in the value of the two most important denominations the change would
certainly not be in favour of economy. On this branch of the subject I have formerly observed:—
“It may appear extraordinary, but any person used to travelling in different countries where
coins of account differ in value will very soon perceive that the common prices of a large number
of articles are fixed by the amount of the current coins of account; as with us there are very
many things sold for a shilling, so in France the same kind of articles are usually sold for a
franc, while in Holland they fetch a guilder or florin, which is exactly two francs, and conse-
quently things cost double as much as in France.”
“The Committee paying no attention to this fact have recommended that the silver coin of
account shall be a florin, equal to two shillings, and we have already had some experience of an
inclination to increase the ordinary price of articles, such as one may expect were the proposed
system to become common. Thus more than one advocate of the Decimal System of Coinage
has published his lucubrations in a pamphlet, at “a florin,’ which would formerly have been
issued at a shilling.”
“But the effect of the change of the copper coinage will be still more serious, for there the
increase in the money of account is from a penny to nearly twopence halfpenny; and even
supposing that the article now charged a penny were hereafter to be sold for a half cent, there
would be an increase of twenty per cent. in the price.”
“ In answer to this it has been said, that the half-cent loaf will be larger than the penny one,
and so also will the penny cup of coffee ; but if the penny one was large enough for the purpose
of the purchaser, the increase in the size and quantity will be no gain to his want, while it will
be a loss to his means.”—p. 25.
These remarks were printed three years ago, and the more I consider the subject the more
convinced I feel that the change in the value of the smaller monies of account, if it ever comes
into operation, will entail a grievous loss on the mass, and especially on the poorer classes of
the population, who purchase their ordinary article of consumption in small quantities, and are
thus compelled to divide their daily, weekly, or monthly income into many small sums.
The shilling or half florin being, under the operation of the Decimal System, divisible only into
10 portions (# cents) instead of into 12 pence (or 24 halfpence) as at present, one-sixth part
of their small incomes (in the great majority of instances) would be absolutely frittered away by
the change.
Let me, in conclusion, add a few words as to the actual extent of decimalization as applied to
coins. The three great Decimal Systems are those of France, Russia, and the United States ; as
far as regards the rest of the world, decimalization only exists in states of small account, or in
those which may be regarded as off-shoots from one or other of these systems. We are frequently
told of Decimal Europe, as though England were the only European country which had not
adopted a Decimal System ; whereas, on the contrary, the whole of central Europe constituting
the great German commercial union is not only non-decimal, but has within the last few months
deliberately refused the proposals of decimalists, and resolved upon a reconstruction of its mone-
tary system on a basis better suited to the wants and habits of the people. “The Wiener
Zeitung,” says the “Times” of the 11th of June, contains the text of the Currency Treaty,
Munz Wertag, which on the 24th of January 1857 was concluded between Austria, Prussia, Bavaria,
Saxony, Hanover, Wurtemburg, and twenty-two of the smaller German States. In Northern
Germany 30 dollars, in Austria 45 florins, and in Southern Germany 52% dollars, will be minted
out of 11b. (of 500 French grammes) of fine silver. In order to facilitate commerce two silver
“ Union coins" will be minted, which will be current in all those German States that are parties
to the treaty. The one coin, the dollar, will pass for 1 fl. 30 kr. in Austria, and for 1 fl. 45 kr. in
Southern Germany ; the other, the two-dollar piece, will be equal to 3 florins in Austria, and
to 2 fl. 30 kr. in Southern Germany.
The metal of which the Union coins are to be made will consist of 900 000 parts of silver
and 100'000 parts of copper, so that 27 single and 13% double dollars will weigh one pound.
On one side of the coin is to be the head of the Sovereign of the country, and on the other his
arms, with an inscription stating how much fine silver the coin contains, and its value.
By the 31st of December 1862 all the contracting states must have minted 824, and during
every successive four years & 16, for each 100 persons of its population.
The Austrian zwanziger, a piece of 10 kr., will be entirely withdrawn, and, instead of these, coins
worth a quarter of a florin, 5 groschen, or 15 kr., will come into circulation.
8,750,000 “Union dollars” must be minted and put in circulation in Austria by the 31st of
December 1862. Even the Austrian coins of 6 and 3 kr. will have to be re-minted, as they must
be exactly 's or so part of the new Austrian florin, and consequently ſº, or ºf part of the
Union dollar.
For the convenience of the foreign mercantile world two Union coins in gold will be intro.
duced. The one “the crown" will be the ºr, and the other “half-crown’ will be the rºg
part of a pound (of 500 French grammes) of fine gold.
The metal of which the gold Union coins are to be made will consist of 900-000 parts of fine gold,
and 100'000 parts of copper, so that 45 crowns and 90 half-crowns will weigh a pound. On
one side of the coin will be the head of the Sovereign of the country; on the other, the name of
the coin, in an open garland of oat leaves (corona), and the date.
The contracting states will mint no other gold coins, but Austria will be allowed to keep her
ducats in circulation until the end of the year 1865. (This exception in favour of the ducat
was absolutely necessary, as it is the gold coin which circulates in the East.)
As the gold “Union coins” will vary in value according to the price of gold at Vienna,
. Milan, Berlin, Francfort, Augsburg, &c., they will to all intents and purposes be articles
Of COIſlim €I'Ce,
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 85
All other German and foreign states are at liberty to become parties to the Currency Treaty,
which is to be binding until the end of the year 1878.—“Times,” 11th June 1857 : Austrian
Letter, dated 7th June 1857. - *
Such are the measures resolved upon by a sober and eminently practical people for the
remedy of grievances in the variety, complexity, and confusion of their monies of circulation
and account, which had become intolerable. For us, who have but one monetary system, complete
in itself, sufficiently simple to be thoroughly understood by all, and admirably fitted to all its
purposes, the lesson is plain :—Change could only lead us into those very evils of complexity
and confusion from which others are endeavouring to escape, and into which it would be
madness for us to plunge. I trust no Government will ever be induced to give encouragement
to such a scheme.
I am, My Lord,
Your obedient Servant,
JOHN EDW. GRAY.
(Communicated by ſlord Overstone.)
G. W. HEMMING, M.A.,
Late Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge.
ANY one who was disposed to reply in a carping spirit to the questions which have been circu-
lated might perhaps, without much difficulty, show that many of them have been framed so as to
suggest answers more unfavourable to the decimal project than the facts fairly warrant. A
considerable proportion of the examples introduced appeal quite as much to the habits which
have grown up under the existing system as to the unbiassed judgment, and others seem to have
been ingeniously selected so as to show an apparent advantage in the present coinage, where
none in reality exists. Thus comparisons are suggested between divisions, multiplications, and
additions, starting from 2s. 6d., and the corresponding operations on 125 mils. The results are
certainly favourable to the half-crown notation; but if the decimal notation where once
established its advocates might with equal fairness ask which was the easier sum to deal with,
160 mils (or as it might still more concisely be written 16 cents) or 3s. 23d, and they would obtain
an answer just as decisive in favour of their system. But without entering into such details I
think it is fairer to look upon the entire series of queries, as the case made against the suggested
innovation, resting partly I think on sophistical but mainly upon sound arguments. Some of the
particular inferences suggested admit of explanation, but the case as a whole appears to me unan-
swerable ; and I think it will be more useful to reply rather to the general question implied in the
entire paper than to raise cavils about the pertinence of any particular illustrations. The broad
question I understand to be, whether upon the whole the balance of convenience is on the side of
our present arrangement of the coinage, or of some form of decimal progression; and though
the case of the decimal scheme does not strike me as quite so bad as it would appear from the
examples selected, I am decidedly of opinion that the evils of the projected change would
preponderate over any possible advantage.
The first thing to be borne in mind is, that a change to a Decimal System would not be a
transition from a defective to an ideally perfect system. If that were so the scrious temporary
inconveniences of the middle passage might be more cheerfully endured; but in adopting a decimal
scheme we must be content to put up with permanent as well as transitionary evils in return for
certain advantages which it would no doubt afford. The difficulty is to balance all the possible
evils against the promised benefits, and I think it will be more easy to do this if, putting out of
consideration for the moment all notions of what may be practicable in England in the year
1857, we examine what, abstractedly considered, would be an absolutely perfect system. For this
purpose we cannot look at the coinage alone, but must take account of the relations which exist
between our systems of coinage and mensuration, and our arithmetical notation itself. The
principal requisites of a perfect system appear to be the following:
1. The coins, weights, and measures used for purposes of reckoning should advance from the
lowest unit upwards by powers of the radix of notation. Intermediate multiples of the
radix might also be used as subsidiary coins, &c., but not as coins, &c. of account.
2. The lowest unit of the coinage should be of convenient value.
. Coins, &c. representing the half and the quarter of the lowest unit should be added.
. The successive coins, &c. of account should neither be too numerous nor too widely separated
in value. In other words, if the first condition is satisfied the radix of notation should
neither be too small nor too large.
. The coins, &c. of account, or what would be the same thing, the radix of notation, should
be capable of exact subdivision into the greatest posible number of aliquot parts, and
binary divisions should be especially favoured.
The reasons for these conditions are too obvious to need much explanation.
The first is the strong point of the decimalists, though half the benefit of it would be lost unless
the whole system of mensuration as well as the coinage were brought into conformity with the rule.
The second rule is very essential. If the lowest coin in use for purposes of account is too
small, our calculations are encumbered with needless figures. If it is too large, exactness is lost.
The minimum ought to be the largest sum which can be safely neglected in ordinary accounts,
a maxim which for commercial purposes is very well satisfied by the penyly.
This suggests the importance of the third rule. The sum which a merchant may despise is
important to a poor man ; we ought, therefore, to have the means of graduating our minimum
value. This is readily afforded by the use of the fractions ; and #, while with a strictly decimal
scheme there would be no medium between two minimum standards, one of which would be tem
:
5
Dr. J. E. Gray.
G. W. Hemming,
Esq.
L 3
86 DECIMAE, COINAGE COMMISSION : . . . . . .
\
G. W. Hemming,
Esq.
times sa large as the other. In fact, experience shows that the fringe of binary fractions at the
lowest end of the scale is so convenient, that even the absence of the appropriate coins and
measures will not entirely prevent its use. People will buy half yards and quarter yards,
notwithstanding that three feet make a yard; and in America half cents and quarter cents are
familiarly spoken of in preference to the corresponding value in mils. In this respect our ,
halfpence and farthings satisfy a natural demand. .
The fourth rule is important with reference even to ordinary arithmetic, and still more so with
respect to the coinage. In no country, I believe, are there more than three steps in actual use
in the coinage of account, and in general only two distinct names are employed. We have in
England three denominations, £ s. and d., and the inconvenience of a larger number will be seen
at once by looking at a sum of money written down in pounds, crowns, halfcrowns, shillings,
sixpences, pence, and farthings. Thus £5 19s. 10}d. would be £5. 3. 1. 2.0. 4. 2. This incon-
venience is not felt so much in a Decimal System, because it is always possible to group together
as many successive figures as you please under one head. . Thus, instead of 3 dollars, 7 dimes, and
4 cents, we may speak as they do in America of 3 dollars 74 cents; but this again introduces us
to the opposite evil of too wide a separation of successive coins. The limits in this direction are
easily fixed, but they are different for different people. A man who knew familiarly his addition
and multiplication tables up to 50 + 50 and 50 times 50, and was provided with the necessary
symbols, would work more easily and rapidly with a radix of 50 in his ordinary arithmetic, and a
progression by fifties in his coins and measures, than he would do with any smaller number,
because he would be dealing with a less number of figures in each particular case. The radix
therefore cannot be too large, except with reference to the knowledge and habits of the person
who has to use it. All persons who can reckon at all know their tables up to 12 times 12.
Twelve, therefore, is not too large a number for the purpose. Twenty obviously is so at present,
for it is a comparatively rare accomplishment to know the multiplication table up to 20 times 20.
To take a simple, example, most persons in reckoning the price, of 91bs. at 11.17s. 8d. per lb.
would be five or six times as long in getting from the shillings tº the pounds as in the easier
transition from the pence to the shillings, because they know by roté the value of 9 times 8, while
9 times 17 is a result of calculation and not of memory. To obtain the greatest possible rapidity,
even with our present coinage, the tables up to 20 × 20 ought to be got up ; and if a radix of
notation larger than 12 were in use it would be absolutely necessary to add materially to the
length and complexity of the tables which would have to be drummed into the heads of the
ordinary run of computers. -
The fifth rule is the one of which the questions especially bring out the value, and which had
previously been too little regarded. This is not confined to coins and measures. Even in simple
arithmetic divisibilty of the radix is a very valuable quality. Thus it is much easier to divide
any number, say 3494, by 5 or 25, than by 6 or 23, and the difference is especially felt if the
calculation has to be performed without the assistance of paper. If tablets are used the processes
in the first two cases would be as follows:–
3494 2×(3494)
6 – 10 = 698 - 8
3494 4×(3494) — so.
# = ** = 18976
Although they look longer, the following processes would, perhaps, be easier in mental
arithmetic :- -
3494 '3000 400 90 ... * ... .
*=(* or goo) + (* or so)+(*o. 18) + (; o; 8)
= 698 8 -
3494 3000 400 . 90 ..., , . 4 tº
-ā-- ( 25- or 120) + (...o. 16) + (. or 3 6) + (i. OI’ 16)
The corresponding divisions by 6 and 23 would have to be worked as follows, whether on
paper or in the head. {
3494 3000 480 12 3' 6 36
# = ** + ··· + i + -ā- + -ā- +, &c.
= 582' 66 in inf.
3494 2300 115 23 20° 7 23 069
# = ** + 3 + 35 + -ā- + 35 + -ā; +, &c.
= 151 ‘913......
*
omitting for facility all the decimals after the third place. -
The great distinction between the last two examples and the former ones is, that in the latter
you can only split up the total dividend into divisible quantities by a series of guesses which
involve a number of tentative multiplications. . In dividing by a factor of the radix or of a power
of the radix, the dividend splits itself into divisible numbers without any effort, and when this is
done the separate divisions can be effected by mere multiplication. The facility of dividing by a
factor of the radix, or of some low power of the radix, is of immense value in mental reckoning,
because the tentative mode of division interferes fatally with the retention in the memory §
results previously obtained. This is an observation which will be found to bear very materially
on another part of the subject which I shall presently discuss.
Division being so much more readily performed by numbers commensurate with the radix than
by any others, it is obvious that that radix is, cateris paribus, the best, which has the largest
number of factors which commonly occur as divisors. The more of such divisors there are the
easier will be the common operations of simple arithmetic. It is especially important that the
radix should be readily divisible by the powers of two, because these occur more frequently than
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 87
any other divisors. Two, four, eight, &c. are natural divisors. You can fold a piece of paper,
or cut an orange into halves, quarters, eighths, and so on with ease ; it is more difficult to divide
it into thirds, and still more so into fifths. The same is true of all material divisions; and as
these lie at the root of much of our practical arithmetic, it is easy to understand why the powers
of two occur more frequently as divisors than any other numbers. All these considerations, which
would influence the choice of a radix if we were constructing a new arithmetic, apply with
equal force to determine the numbers by which the progression of coins and measures may be
most conveniently regulated. In the case of coins and measures there is, besides, this further
advantage in the use of a good divisible number, that it enables the most commonly recurring
fractions of each coin, &c. to be represented exactly by one or more inferior coins, &c., and thus
facilitates the process of retail payment or subdivision as well as the act of reckoning.
In the case of coins the special advantage of using readily divisible numbers for each progres-
sion is increased by the tendency of prices to accommodate themselves to the coinage. Such
charges as 1s., 1s. 6d., 2s. 6d., probably occur 100 times where 1s. 1d., 1s. 5d., 2s. 7d. occur
once, and the convenience of the shilling being so easily split up into aliquot portions of pence is
palpably felt in all such cases. The price of coffee ranges from 1s. to 3s., but though 1s. 3d.,
1s. 4d., and 1s. 6d. are common enough, I never saw coffee advertised at 1s. 5d. or Is. 7d. per lb.
The advantage of divisibility is not, however, confined to the cases where prices are adjusted to
the actual coinage ; there is considerable facility in small reckonings due to the divisibility of
the shilling, even where a price may be fixed without reference to the convenience of calculation
or to the actual coinage. Thus, it is easier to divide 13s. 5d. or 17s. 2d. mentally by 2, 3, 4, or
6, than it would be if the same sums were expressed in mils, and for this reason, that the
amount is already split up into two quantities, each of which is separately divisible. . To take the
first example, we know at once that—
# (13s. 5d.) = 4s. -- 4d. + 1d. } = 4s. 5%d.
while 3 (655 mils)= 218 or 218:33 is by no means so quickly arrived at.
I have selected very simple examples, purposely to test the value of the two notations in the
common transactions of common people ; but it cannot be necessary to say much to show the
great convenience of using easily divisible numbers for the progression of coins.
Now there is no number within any reasonable limits at all comparable in divisibility to 12. It
has four divisors, which is more than any other number (except 18) has, until you reach the multiples
of 12 itself. 18 is evidently inferior, because it substitutes a second 3 for the more convenient
factor 2. The only other numbers which can for a moment be put in comparison with 12 are
8 and 16. They have more binary divisors, but independently of their less convenient magnitude
the facility of binary division is not enough to compensate for the loss of so many factors as are
found in 12, and its powers. As for 10 it is a wretchedly defective number. Look at the following
list of divisors:—
Of 12–2, 3, 4, 6 Of 144–2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 16. 18, 24, 36, 48, 72.
8—2, 4. 64–2, 4, 8, 16.
16–2, 4, 8. 256–2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64.
10–2, 5. 100–2, 4, 5, 10, 20, 25, 50.
Now observe the result of applying our five tests of a perfect system.
Rule I. This may be satisfied by any number.
Rule II. The penny fulfils this perfectly.
Rule III. Halfpence and farthings exactly conform to this.
Rule IV. Twelve is, with our present habits, neither too small nor too large.
Rule V. Twelve surpasses every other number in this respect, while ten is one of the worst.
It is obvious, therefore, that if we had carte blanche to create an entirely new system, we
ought to employ 12 as the arithmetical radix and retain our present coinage unaltered up to
shillings. To satisfy the first rule we should require to use instead of the sovereign a 12s. piece,
say a noble, and at the same time to make such changes in our weights and measures as would
make them strictly duodecimal.
The notion of compelling the use of the radix 12 by any arbitrary legislation, and thus sup-
planting the decimal by a duodecimal arithmetic, is no doubt quite visionary, though not, I believe,
more so than the project of decimalizing all our coins, weights, and measures. One difficulty of
a universal decimalization would consist in the violent change which would be required in all
weights and measures in common use, which are almost purely binary or duodecimal. This change
would be strenuously opposed, not only by the force of habit, but because it would deprive the people
of the convenience afforded by the ready divisibility of almost all our measures of quantity, magni-
tude and weight, and would in fact, except in the one point of conformity with our existing system
of numeration, be a decided change for the worse. The difficulty would not be nearly so great in the
transition to a duodecimal system. A second objection to a complete compulsory change, which
applies to decimals and duodecimals alike, would be, that a vast accumulation of results in the shape
of scientific tables, &c., compiled at the cost of enormous labour, would be rendered useless until
translations had been effected into the new notation. Although it is so long since the decimal
scheme was nominally adopted in France, they have not yet, I believe, converted all their scientific
tables, and for all practical purposes angles are still measured by degrees, minutes, and seconds,
for want of tables expressed in the decimal notation of grades. This difficulty would be felt
even more severely in any attempt to force the universal use of duodecimal arithmetic. Not only
the natural and logarithmic tables of sincs, &c. would require translation, but even the logarithms
of numbers would have to be recalculated to a new base and expressed in a new scale of notation.
A third hindrance to a compulsory duodecimal scheme would be the necessity involved ef
acquiring new modes of calculation, but this which at first sight looks the most formidable of all.
would be found comparatively easy to surmount.
But though it is plainly hopeless to attempt to enforce a strictly uniform system, whether
decimal or duodecimal, it is well worth considering whether such changes might not be introduced
as would facilitate the voluntary use of duodecimals by those who should learn to appreciate
their immense value. Granting that the only perfect system is unattainable as an exclusive
method of calculation, we ought not to abandon it altogether in favour of any inferior Scheme until
G. W. Hemming,
Esq. -
L 4
88 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
G. W. Hemmil,g,
Esq.
***
we have inquired how far it would be practicable to put it within the reach of any one who chose
to adopt it, without interfering with the use of the existing modes of calculation by other persons.
This will not be found nearly so arduous an undertaking as may be imagined. The idea of
founding a new arithmetic certainly appears at first sight sufficiently startling, but bearing in mind
that it is suggested only as a voluntary system the difficulties, though not inconsiderable, will, I
think, on examination of the details, be found far less formidable than those which would have to be
overcome in introducing the pound and mil notation. To decimalize the coinage on this basis, even
without approaching the wilder project of introducing decimals into every branch of mensuration,
would require a very harsh interference with the daily habits of the whole population. You cannot
change the value of the smaller coins without breaking up habits, interfering with contracts, dis-
turbing all fixed tolls and rates, and doing a vast amount of injustice. To take a case of which many
instances might be specificd, a railway may make an income of some 250,000l. out of tolls limited
by statute to such sums as #d., #d., §d., 1d., 2d., and so on per ton. If the pound and mil system
were introduced the income would be depreciated 4 per cent, or 10,000l. ; in other words, the
balance which provides the dividend would be entirely swept away. Such instances might easily
be multiplied. Toll bridges, turnpike trusts, &c. will occur to every one, and there are, besides,
many other payments which are fixed at 1d. by custom almost as rigidly as if they were regulated
by law. If the penny were depreciated it would be found impossible to raise the price to any
other existing coin, and the loss of the whole or a large proportion of the profits would ensue.
I have referred to these points to show the sort of inconveniences which the innovators are
prepared to face. Compared with them the difficulty of introducing duodecimals as a concurrent
system with our existing arithmetic would be quite insignificant. The only alteration required in the
coinage would be the addition of a 12s. piece with a new name, which might be a noble. The
pound might still be retained until people grew tired of using it, as they would do very soon,
when they found how much more casily they could work with the new coin. The transition
indeed might be greatly fostered by issuing first bank notes of 5 and 10 nobles, which would be
equivalent to 3 and 6 sovereigns, and as the pound fell out of use replacing them by the more
appropriate 6 and 12 noble notes. In carrying out this scheme not a single contract would be
affected, and the present facility of making retail payments would still be retained, together with
our smaller coins. Even to harmonise the entire system of weights and measures, which is prac-
tically an impossibility on any decimal principle, would be perfectly feasible. Add a measure
of 4 yards or 2 fathoms, and the linear table is duodecimalized at once. Thus 12 inches = 1 ft.,
12 foot = 1 stade, or whatever the new term might be, would be all we should require. The
fathom and yard would still be useful as supplying the fractional fringe at the lowest end of the
scale in dealing with large quantities, in which it would not be desirable to descend to feet and
inches. It would not be very necessary to extend the notation up to a mile, because miles and
yards are seldom if ever combined, except indeed, in the authorized tables of cab fares ; but if this
pedantic accuracy were desired, what would be easier than to change the length of a mile from
1760 to 1728 (123) yards?
Then, again, in weights we should only have to use the troy standard for all purposes, and
introduce one new weight equal to the Pyth of an ounce. The quarter of this would bring us to
10 grains, so that there would be no violent collision either with the maximum or minimum of the
present scale. The troy scale might also be extended upwards by a weight of 144lbs. instead
of the cwt. (829,440 grs. instead of 784,000 grs.), and another of twelve times that amount. It
might be convenient to retain the old ton for some purposes, on account of its having been used
in fixing tolls and in other legislative enactments.
In dry measures of bulk the gallon might be the lowest unit, and the quart and pint would be
represented by the fractions + and #. In proceeding upwards we should want a new measure of
6 pecks (12 gallons) in place of the bushel. When the immense variety of higher measures now
in use in different places is considered, it is obvious that the employment of a six-peck
measure, with another of 72 pecks instead of the quarter (32 pecks), would not even at first
add much to the complexity already existing, while its superior convenience would sooner or
later put to the rout all the quarters, sacks, loads, lasts, bolts, and the three or four different
barrels and other measures which, now perplex every one who desires to compare the prices of
different localities.
In liquid measure the quart would perhaps be the best minimum unit, and we should only have
to add one new measure of 3 gallons (12 quarts), the next step in the scale being the 36-gallon cask,
which is now commonly used. Pints and gills would be represented by the binary fractions of the
quart unit.
Finally, in time we have already 12 hours each for the conventional day and night, and the
construction of our clock faces seems to ask for a specific name for five minutes or one-twelfth
of an hour. This would duodecimalise time for all ordinary purposes. For astronomical calcula-
tions it might be impossible to make a change without deranging the records of past observations.
For such purposes the old division into minutes and seconds might still have to be retained in
preference to any other.
Add to this that the habit of packing things by the dozen and gross would fall in with duo-
decimal calculation, and it will be seen that without any change which would be felt as an
inconvenience for more than a very short time, our whole metrical system might, for all practical
purposes, be made strictly duodecimal. To obtain such uniformity would be quite out of the
question if decimals were taken as the basis, and the change of the coinage alone into the pound
and mil shape, while it would fail to secure the advantages of perfect conformity to the radix
would be felt as a far heavier grievance than the complete modification of weights, measures,
coins and all, on a duodecimal footing.
When the slight changes I have mentioned were introduced the schoolmaster would do the rest,
and would do it very easily. Consider how little any one would have to learn who desired to
avail himself of the great advantages of duodecimal computation. In the first place he must
have two new symbols for ten and eleven. A 6 reversed thus 3 would do very well for ten,
being suggested by its resemblance to the letter d, and its analogy to the figures now in use. A
reversed 9 (e) which is suggested by the letter e, would serve equally well for eleven. It would
not take long to become familiar with these symbols.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 89
The next step would be to frame a method of counting. This, indeed, is not necessary for paper G. W. Hemming,
calculations, but it is always a great assistance to the mind to have a name for the symbols used. Esq.
Thus persons who work with duodecimals in calculating areas and cubes, in feet, and inches, - - -
find it convenient to call the successive numbers pence and shillings, in order to make the readier
use of their knowledge of the pence table. If the system were more generally employed a less
clumsy nomenclature would be desirable. Thus we might count up to a dozen by the present
names. From 13 to 24 we could say a dozen and one, a dozen and two, and so on, but a more
compendious method is suggested by the way in which sums of shillings and pence are sometimes
spoken of Fifteen pence is often shortly called one and three, half-a-crown two and six, and so on.
This mode of speaking would serve admirably for duodecimal numeration. Thus the numbers from
twenty-five to thirty-six would be termed two and one, two and two, two and three, &c., which would
be quite as good as the twenty-two, twenty-three, &c. of our present arithmetic. It may be thought
that by this phraseology some confusion would arise, as for example, between the term “three-
and-six" meaning three dozen and six, and the same term when used to signify “three + six.”
But the following example of an addition sum in shillings and pence shows that the apprehension
is groundless :— - - . - -
s ==
*i
:
3
6
This might be read, three and sia are nine, and nine are eighteen, six and carry one and one
are two and one are three,_three and sia, where the ambiguity occurs without producing
any real confusion. The multiples of twelve ought also to have short names ; for such terms as
two dozen, three dozen, &c. would not equal in neatness our twenties and thirties. Perhaps they
might be abbreviated into twosen, threesen, &c., or twoen, threen, &c., which are brief though
not quite harmonious. However, the point to be observed is that no new name (except such
abbreviations as these) would be required in reckoning up to the third place or “gross,” which
would take up the same position as the hundred of decimal arithmetic. By adopting the term
“gross” we should have all that is necessary up to 12%. A name for a gross of gross,
say a lac, would carry us up to 12°, or more than 400,000,000, and we might then go on as
far as we pleased with bacs, tracs, &c., which would not be more barbarous than billions,
trillions, and quadrillions. But for all practical purposes the one additional name for which lac
or any other term might be used would be the only new term required to make duodecimals run
glibly off the tongue up to amounts far larger than are wanted even for such formidable accounts
as the national balance sheet. So far, therefore, we have encountered no difficulty. The next
and last condition to enable us to use the radix 12 is that the addition and multiplication tables
must be known in the scale of twelve up to twelve times twelve. In point of fact, everyone
knows them already, and it would only be necessary to combine in the mind the common multi-
plication table with the common pence table, and to write down the shillings and pence, without
any dots between them. Thus, take multiplications by 10.
. d. S. d.
10 × 1 = 10 10 = 0 1()
10 × 2 = 20 20 = 1 8
&c. &c. -
10 × 11 = 110 1IO = 9
10 × 12 = 120 120 = 10 O
The practice of a few days would enable any schoolboy to write and think these tables off at
once into the scale of twelve. Thus,
Read thus—
3 × 1 = 2 Ten times one equals ten.
2 × 2 = 18. Ten times two equals one and eight.
&c. &c. &c.
2 × 2 = 92 Ten times eleven equals nine and two.
3 × 10 = 20 Ten times twelve equals ten dozen (tensen).
I have picked out an example which contains the greatest possible number of novelties, and it
looks startling to the eye at first, but a very little reflection will, I think, convince any one that
the effort of acquiring the necessary habits would be extremely small ; as it would only have to
be made by volunteers it would be no serious obstacle at all, and when the process had become
familiar it would be much easier to work even simple arithmetic in the scale of twelve than of
ten, on account of the greater divisibility of the radix. The easy changes in, or rather additions
to, the coins, measures, &c., which I have already suggested would also completely do away with
compound arithmetic, which is the great object of the decimalists, though they can only partially
attain it, on account of the implacable hostility between the number ten and the natural method
of dividing material quantities.
It being thus easy to acquire the art of working readily in the perfect scale of 12, it remains
only to consider the drawbacks inseparable from the concurrent use of two scales of notation. In
the first place it may be supposed that some confusion would be apt to occur between the two, and
that numbers written down in one scale would be occasionally read by mistake as if they belonged
to the other. I think, however, this danger would be very small. Where calculations extended to
any length the new symbols for ten and eleven would be sure to occur whenever the scale of 12
was used, and prevent the possibility of error. Besides, so far as regards the use of duodecimals
merely as a private mode of calculation, and not as means of communication, there would
be little fear of a man mistaking the arithmetical language employed in his own books. Even
when made the medium of communication the risk of blunders of this kind would be very small.
Some idea of its extent may be formed from the experience of foreign merchants, who are com-
pelled to make use of various different coinages in their accounts. Did any one ever hear of
frequent errors arising from mistaking francs for shillings, or dollars for pounds In France at
M
9() DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
G. W. Hemming,
- Esq.
***
this day a double language does exist in many particulars. Thus the decimal and the sexagesimal
divisions of the circle are both in use, and sous are still familiarly spoken of at the same time
that the amounts are written down in the decimal notation. The apprehension of confusion from
the employment of two forms of arithmetic may therefore, I think, be laid aside as groundless.
There is only one other possible objection to the use of duodecimals, viz., that a man who kept
his accounts in this form would be unable to communicate the results to an adherent of the old-
fashioned decimal mode without going through the labour of reducing them from one notation to
the other. This would be so far an inconvenience. Let us consider its amount in order to see
whether it outweighs the other advantages of the system. Take the most unfavourable case, that
of a man using duodecimals in his own books while all the rest of the world adhered to decimals.
Whenever he wished to communicate arithmetically with any other person he would have to go
through the process of reduction. Would this involve more labour than he could save in his own
calculations 2 I think not. If he had any long reckonings to go through there can be no
doubt that the economy of labour throughout the process would much more than compensate for
the trouble of reduction. There would perhaps be a certain class of reckonings of a simple kind
and involving large amounts in which the balance might be the other way, but on the average of
accounts I think there would be found a very decided gain from the use of duodecimals. To
find the area of a rectangle whose sides are given in feet and inches is a very simple problem,
involving only a single multiplication, yet even in this where the number of feet is not very
large, many persons think it worth while to reduce the quantities to duodecimals, perform
the multiplication, and then reduce the result back to the scale of 10. In more intricate
problems involving feet and inches this process is unquestionably the easiest, and the greater the
complexity of the problem the more would be saved by the use of duodecimals. The fact is that
the reduction from one scale to the other is a very short and easy process. Thus, to pass from
the scale of 10 to that of 12, if the number is not greater than 144 requires no calculation, but
merely the application of the common pence table Thus, 112 (decimal) = 94 (duodecimal), may
be written down at once, and would cost absolutely no effort when the pence table had been got up
in the shape of a duodecimal table, without being encumbered with the idea of shillings and
pence. If the number to be reduced were not greater than 128 or 1728, one division by 12 would
be the whole difficulty. Up to 124 (more than 20,000) two divisions only would be needed, while
four divisions would effect the transformation for all numbers up to 12°, or nearly three millions.
The converse operation, to pass from duodecimals to decimals, would require in the same way one
division by 10 for numbers up to 1440, two divisions up to 14,400, and four divisions up to
1,440,000. Even these processes might be greatly shortened by tables giving the value of 1,000,
2,000, and so on in the scale of 12, and corresponding tables for 128, 2 × 128, &c., which would,
without much difficulty, be acquired by rote.
There would, therefore, I think, be a decided gain even to a person who was a solitary
duodecimalist in a decimal community, supposing, of course, that the coins, weights, and measures
were accommodated to him ; but when the convenience of the method was once recognised, whole
classes might be expected to go over to the new practice, and the occasions, when the trouble of
translating results would have to be gone through, would be limited to those when a duodecimalist
had to interchange ideas with a pure decimalist. If any effort were made to convince the
mercantile world of the benefit to be derived from the process, and to train up accountants
familiar with it, it would not, perhaps, be very long before a duodecimal phraseology might
become the current language of merchants, and all or almost all the inconvenience of a double
system would thus be obviated. Poor people, shopkeepers, and others out of the regular com-
mercial pale, would be longer in acquiring the new habit ; but even if decimals continued to be
the retail language, this would interfere very little with the use of the more convenient method
in mercantile accounts. A merchant might write twelve dozen 100 in his counting house, and
144 in ordering candles at his tallow-chandler's without much risk of confusion. The two
languages would soon settle down to their own territories, and clash no more than Welsh and
English do in the general affairs of the country. We have many instances of the same kind of
thing even in the actual arithmetic of the markets. A dozen in some trades means 12, and in
others 14; a hundred of walnuts is 120, and different localities attach different values to the same
weights and measures. Tons of 2,640lbs. and 2,688lbs. may be found in use in the same district in
addition to the standard ton of 2,240lbs. A barrel means 14, 16, or 20 stone, according to the nature
of the grain sold, and multitudes of similar anomalies exist without producing the confusion which
might a priori be expected to ensue. It would be the same with duodecimalarithmetic if it obtained
a partial or class circulation ; but there is no reason why it should not in course of time become
almost universal, decimals being retained in those departments of science and business which
are dependent on tables recorded in that shape. Translation into decimals might also be necessary
in communicating with foreigners, and would be attended with inconveniences of the same order,
and no more, as are involved in the translation in similar cases of English into French, and the
like. But if the schools were set to work judiciously, a few years would produce a rising genera-
tion of all grades in Society quite competent to work with duodecimals. A little influence exercised
by school inspectors would go a great way, and a due regard to proficiency in the subject in the
examinations for pupil teachers and Queen's scholars would do still more. In a short time, if
only a few merchants could see their own interest in the matter, a duodecimal clerk would be
worth much more in the market than a gentleman whose arithmetic was confined to the scale
of 10. The demand would create the supply. Commercial schoolmasters would make a great
point of the subject, and the whole country would, after the first few lagging steps, be trained
with great rapidity to the new and easy learning.
One other consideration seems to me of great importance. I have already put the case of a
solitary duodecimalist working in the midst of a world conformed to the scale of 10. Suppose
even a worse result, viz., that after the coinage &c. had been accommodated to the project, old
habits proved too powerful, and no one could be brought to use the radix 12,-suppose, in short,
the scheme were tried, and in its grand object completely failed, even then there would be a
residuum of good, because, irrespective of their adaptability to a better arithmetic, the new coins,
measures, &c. would be intrinsically better than the old. If you hold by the radix ten, it would
yet be easier to work with 12s, to the noble than with 20s. to the pound, and so with other measures
*
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 91
of quantity, &c. An experiment in which success would be an immense gain, and failure itsel
an improvement of some kind, may be very safely tried. *
These considerations seem to show that the practicability of encouraging duodecimal arithmetic
is at least deserving of careful consideration, and that the difficulties are in fact less than any
decimal scheme, especially the pound and mil plan, would have to encounter. If the project
should be thought too bold an innovation, it is clear that any other must be only a compromise
between the requisites which I have mentioned as essential to a perfect scheme. But even sup-
posing that a duodecimal system is not to be thought of, would it be wise to sacrifice the use of
the duodenary division of the shilling for the very inferior progression by tens, in order to secure
the advantage of conformity between our coinage and our arithmetical notation ? The fault it
must be remembered is all on the side of the latter, and is entirely due to the unlucky circum-
stance that men have ten fingers and not twelve. If the Philistine giant who had six fingers on
each hand and six toes on each foot had been the inventor of a system of numeration, he would
assuredly have proceeded by steps of 12 instead of 10, and we should have escaped the difficulties
which now beset the question ; but the habit of using decimals having become universal and
perhaps ineradicable, is it worth while to accommodate our coinage to it? There are, I think,
ample reasons to show, that if we cannot establish the best system of all, we are better as we
are than we should be with the decimalized coinage.
If we cannot mend our arithmetic we are not obliged to spoil our coinage. That such would
be the consequence of introducing a decimal notation follows I think from the considerations I am
about to refer to. Coins are used in three ways: 1st, as a means of making payments ; 2d, as
instruments of mental calculation ; 3dly, for the purpose of paper computations. It is not
necessary to answer minutely the questions intended to show that purchases of fractional parts of
a pound or a yard would involve more trouble and admit of less exactness in payment if the
shilling or florin were divided into tenths instead of twelfths. This is the necessary result of
employing a number whose factors are only 2 and 5 in place of one, divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6,
and I think it would be useless to dwell upon the point more fully than I have already done.
So far as retail transactions are concerned, it will probably be admitted on all hands that a
Decimal Coinage would be a change for the worse. It is equally true, though less obvious,
that in mental calculation we should gain little or nothing by the change, even if we did not
actually lose facility by it. All methods of calculation consist of splitting up the problem to be
solved into a number of simpler computations, and then combining the results. A scale of notation
is serviceable in two ways. First, it enables us to reduce any process to a number of additions,
multiplications, &c., either by digits less than the radix, or by the radix or some power of it.
The former are set down from memory, the latter by mere inspection. The other aid which it
affords is by enabling us without any effort so to record our partial results under their heads of
tens, hundreds, and the like, that they may range themselves in the positions best adapted for
grouping them into a complete total ; whereas in compound arithmetic, where the advantage of
the regular scale is to some extent lost, we can only split an aggregate number of pence into
shillings, and shillings into pounds, by an actual process of division by 12 or 20. Of these two
advantages derived from a scale of notation the latter is entirely, and the former to some extent,
sacrificed in mental reckoning. The great difficulty when no tablets are used is in the
recording process, and not in the minor calculations. When the intermediate steps of an arith-
metical problem are set down on paper, it matters not how many are accumulated before they
are combined into a single total; but the mind cannot work one subsidiary calculation, and at the
same time retain any considerable number of partial results already arrived at. The mental com-
puter must group his subsidiary calculations together step by step as he goes on, and in recording
them in his memory he thinks of hundreds, thousands, and so on as names much in the same
way as he thinks of pounds and shillings, without being either helped or hindered in this part
of the process by the fact that these values may be indicated by the position assigned to the
digit. I believe that Mr. Bidder, the famous calculator, learned to reckon before he knew how to use
a scale of notation at all, and thus escaped the common mistake of attempting to perform arith-
metical operations in the mind in the same way in which they are most readily performed on
paper. The cardinal rule is to begin at what the paper calculator would call the wrong end, i.e.,
with the highest denominations instead of the lowest unit, and the process is almost equally
easy whether the problem is one of simple or compound arithmetic.
Examine the process with reference to the primary rules of arithmetic. In adding a long list
of figures on paper compound addition is a little more troublesome than simple, because you have
every now and then to divide some large aggregate of pence or shillings by 12 or 20 instead of by
10, as in the other case, but the difference disappears in mental reckoning. Instead of taking all
the pence or all the units first, the addition of the first amount to the second is completed before
the third is approached, and the occasion for divisions by 12 or 20 never occurs at all, or at
least only with numbers less than 24 or 40 respectively. Now to take 12 out of 15 or 18 is as
easy as to take 10 out of the same number, or in other words, compound is by the mental
process as easy as simple addition.
In multiplication by large numbers some benefit is derived even in mental arithmetic from
having a scale of notation, but the comparison we have to institute does not much concern
large numbers. It is only in the two or three last decimal places that any difference would be
made by decimalizing coins. The multiplication of the pounds goes on decimally as it is, and
the test of the two methods will, therefore, be to compare operations on amounts in which the
pounds are limited to a single digit. Nor ought we in an experimental example to employ very
large multipliers, because it is only in comparatively simple cases that the mental process is
attempted. Now let any one perform the following operations:
gé s. d. g
14 × 2 2 3 and 14 × 223
9 x 3 18 6 and 9 × 3186
215 × 2 7 9 and 215 × 279
and I think he will find that although the figures are the same, the former class may be calculated
mentally just as rapidly as the latter.
f G. W. Hemming,
Esq.
M 2
92 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION: . . . .
G.W. Hemming, . The one process would be- .
Esq.
seves------- ~~~~~ * **wº-
The other would be, , , , .
£ s. d. - 28’’’ . . . . . : ' ' . . . . . . . . . . - - - tº 1 k . . . . . . . .
14 × 2 2 3 = 28 + 14 (2s. 3d.) 14 x (223) = 2800 + 14 (28) . . . . . . .
“. . . . . . is 29 + 8s. -- 14 (3d) |º = 2800 + 280 + 14 (3)
29 + 8s.-- (3s. 6d.)|' 3080 + 42 °
- 29l. 11s. 6d. ' ' ' . . . 3122. . .
At any rate, even in such multiplications, without the help of paper, there is no appreciable
advantage derived from the use of a scale of notation. An irregular progression (if the steps
are easy in themselves, as by 12 and 20) is about as easy to deal with as one by powers of 10.
In division the advantage conferred by a scale of notation is even less, and where the radix
is not a very easily divisible number there is more than a counterbalancing inconvenience.
The ordinary divisions which a man has to do in his head are in fact easier in compound than in
simple arithmetic, not because the regularity of the progression by 10 is not some benefit in
itself, but because 12 and 20 are more divisible than 10. "I have already in discussing the
last of my five fundamental rules referred to the circumstance that the tentative process, which
is so troublesome in division, may be got rid of whenever the divisor is a factor of 10, and then
the shortest mode of proceeding mentally is to divide first the highest denominations by them-
:
selves, then the next, and so on, each division resolving itself into mere multiplication. Precisely
the same thing may be done with pounds and shillings, and as the divisors of 12 and 20 occur
more frequently than those of 10, mental division is, in the majority of cases, easier in compound
than in simple arithmetic. - - - • * : . . . ;
Upon the whole, it may at least fairly be said that nothing would be gained in mental computation
by decimalizing the coinage. The one solitary advantage would therefore be, that it would facili-
tate computations on paper. There is no doubt that with the aid of tablets the addition, multiplication,
&c. of numbers expressed in any continuous scale of notation is a more expeditious process than
when they are stated in pounds, shillings, and pence, but it should not be forgotten that, without any
interference with the coinage, the use of decimals is quite possible in commercial accounts. The
only obstacle is the labour of reducing every sum to decimals of a pound, or to pence, or to some
other single denomination, before setting it down in the day book or ledger. The saving of this
amount of trouble is all that the advocates of decimal coinage propose to effect by a change which
would be useless for the purposes of mental calculation, and injurious so far as the convenience of
retail transactions is concerned. It is worth while, therefore, to consider what would be the
extent of the trouble of using decimals in accounts while the present coinage was retained for
other purposes. This would, after the habit was once acquired, be much less than is commonly
supposed. Take any sums, say 125l. 18s. 7d., or 257l. 19s. 3d. If these were reduced to decimals
of a pound by the orthodox practice according to Cocker, the pence would have to be divided by
twelve, added to the shillings, then divided by twenty, and added to the pounds. This, of course,
would be an intolerably long proceeding to go through before entering an item in a book of
accounts. But a much simpler process would be adopted. In the first place, the pounds, and
the even shillings or florins, can be converted into decimals by inspection, without anything that
can be called calculation at all. Thus, –
£ s. d. .# -
125 18 7 = 125°9 + 7d.
257 19 3 = 257 ° 9 + 1s, 3d. -
The conversion of the 7d. and the 1s. 3d., if done by calculation, would take a little time ; but
it would be no great addition to the educational labours of a clerk to get up by rote the value, in
decimals of a pound (or mils) of all sums from 1d. up to 2s. What difficulty would there be in
learning off the following short table 2 -
d 772. s. d. d. 772.
1 = 4 l I == 13 - 54
2 – 8 I 2 = 14 = 58
3 F. 12 1 3 = 15 F 62
- 4 - 17 1 4 = 16 F. 67
5 F. 21 1, 5 = 17 F. 71
6 F. 25 1 6 = 18 = 75
7 - 29 1 7 F. 19 F. 79
8 +: 33 I 8 = 2O F 83
9 = 37 1 9 = 21 F. 87
10 = 42 1 10 F 22 F. 92
11 F 46 1 11 = 23 – 96
1s. 0d. = 12 – 50 2 O F. 24 - 100
But after having mastered this very simple business, the conversion of £ s. d. into mils, or
* decimals, would be effected by writing at the end of the value of pounds and florins the equivalent
for the remaining portion of the sum to be reduced, as furnished by the above table. Thus in the
examples which we have already taken,_
£ s. d. £
125 18 7 = 125'929
257 19 3 = 257. 962
would be written down as fast as the pen could form the figures; and all the advantages of
decimal computation would be gained without any appreciable sacrifice of time, or any addition
to the labours of accountants, beyond the preliminary task of getting up once for all a short and
easy table. If it were desired to be accurate as far as farthings, it would only be necessary to
add one to the number of mils for each farthing in the sum to be reduced. -
When all the proposed benefits of the decimal coinage can be thus easily secured by the com-
mercial classes without interfering with the coinage at all, it does seem unfair to embarrass retail
dealings with dimes, cents, and mils, merely for the sake of relieving schoolboys and accountants
from the trouble of making themselves familiar with a table, the length of which is but one sixth
of the common multiplication table—which tradition, it is true, has branded as “vexation,” but
which most boys know well enough before they are ten years old. Even the slight trouble of
reducing moneys to their value in mils would, after a time, be saved in the majority of transac-
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONs. 93
tions, because, when once the decimal mode of keeping accounts became general, wholesale prices
would commonly be stated in this form, while the tº s. d. notation might be retained in our shops
and retail markets. . . . . . . . . . . .
As between the existing coinage and the best of the decimal schemes, I am strongly of opinion
that the evil of the change would preponderate over the good; and if any experiment is to be
tried at all it appears to be worth considering whether the duodecimal method, considered as a
voluntary system is so entirely extravagant as at first sight it appears, and whether it might
not be developed without much difficulty and without any risk. At least there seem strong
grounds for saying that the project would not be more formidable, while it would be much more,
complete, than the pound and mil scheme.
It may make the views which I have urged more intelligible if I sum them up in a series of
questions which seem to invite a full investigation.
1. Whether the conditions of a perfect system of numeration account and mensuration are not,
1st, a duodecimal radix of notation; -
2d, a coinage unaltered up to shillings, and having a twelve-shilling coin instead
of the sovereign; * . " -
3d, a duodecimal system of weights and measures, with a fringe of binary fractions
- - - below the Smallest unit. • * * . * - - - - - - -> * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a
2. Whether it is not equally impracticable to extirpate decimal arithmetic in favour of duode-
cimals as a compulsory and universal method, and to decimalize our entire system of
coins, weights, and measures, and whether, even if the latter were done, the result would
not be very inferior to a duodecimal scheme, mainly on account of the small divisibility of
the number 10. - - - - - - - - -
3. Whether the only choice does not lie between these three courses,—
1st, to make such changes as would enable those who chose to do so to make use of a
perfect duodecimal system; -
2d, to decimalise the coinage alone;
3d, to retain the present system unaltered. ge -
4. Whether the modification of our coins, measures, &c., which would render duodecimal
calculation possible as a voluntary system, would not have these facts in its favour,
1st, that the method if adopted would be perfect. - &:
2d, that it would disturb no existing arrangements and contracts :
3d, that it would not affect retail transactions; . -
4th, that (even if it should turn out that no one availed himself of the facility afforded
by a duodecimal radix) it would be productive of some permanent advantages and
no permanent evils. - -
5. Whether the temporary inconveniences of such a transition would not be very slight as
compared with those which would result from the pound and mil scheme. [N.B. The
principal steps would be to coin a twelve-shilling noble, to extend troy weight, and to
establish a four-yard measure, a six-peck measure, a three-gallon measure, and a five-
minute measure, in addition to those at present in use.] -
6. Whether the task of acquiring the art of duodecimal reckoning would not be a very trifling
addition to the present arithmetical labours of school boys. [N.B. Two new symbols for
ten and eleven, and a new name for 124, would be the only necessary innovations.]
7. Whether, even if duodecimals were only adopted for calculation, and never used as a medium
of communication at all, the saving of labour in complicated reckonings, and perhaps in
all except the very simplest, would not much more than compensate the trouble of converting
the results into decimals when it became necessary to communicate them.
8. Whether, if the duodecimal method were adopted pretty generally among certain classes, it
would not also be used for communication among them, so as to save even the trouble of
reduction to decimals, except when communication became necessary between a member
of the duodecimal classes and a member of the decimal classes. .
9. Whether it is not a very possible result that the great advantages of duodecimals would
lead to their general adoption by the commercial classes, while decimal language might
survive in the retail shops until a generation grew up who had been trained at school in
the new arithmetic.
10. Whether this training might not easily be promoted by the agency of Government School
Inspectors, and through the examinations of pupil teachers and for Queen's Scholarships.
11. Whether the use of two concurrent notations for different purposes would be likely to
lead to any greater difficulties than the use of different coinages by foreign merchants
does now. . -
12. Whether the permanent effects of decimalizing the coinage alone would not be the
following, -
1st, to impede retail transactions ;
2d, to increase rather than diminish the difficulties of ordinary mental calculations;
3d, to facilitate paper computations by partially getting rid of compound arithmetic.
13. Whether it is not at least doubtful whether the permanent evils of any decimal system
would not exceed the permanent advantages. -
14. Whether the pound and mil scheme in particular would not be attended by another per-
manent evil, namely, the inconvenient minimum value, and the want of the gradations
supplied by binary fractions of the unit. -
15. Whether in this respect the penny or ten-penny scheme would not be far preferable.
16. Whether the pound and mil scheme, or any scheme which changed the minimum coin,
would not work violent temporary evils, and whether, in this respect also, the penny or
ten-penny is not less objectionable.
17. Whether the penny or ten-penny scheme would not lead to an inconvenient maximum coin
(8s. 4d.), too large for silver and too small for gold. *
18. Whether all the advantages promised by decimalization might not be gained without any
of the corresponding disadvantages, and without any change in the coinage, at the cost of
a very little labour on the part of accountants in acquiring the art of reducing money to
decimals by inspection and memory.
- sº
G. W. Hemming,
Esq.
e)
94 . . DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
G. W. Hemming,
Esq.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
19. Whether (especially for the last reason) it would not be better to leave the coinage unaltered
than to introduce any Decimal System. r
20. Whether, if any decimalization were determined on, the penny or ten-penny scheme would
not, on the whole, be better than the pound and mil scheme. ...'
21. Whether the encouragement of the voluntary use of duodecimals does not promise greater
advantages and involve less risk and inconvenience than any of the modes of decimalization
that have been suggested.
G. W. HEMMING.
Lincoln's Inn, 12 June 1857.
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
Sir J. F. W. HERSCHEL, Bart.
(N.B.-I beg leave to correct a very glaring mis-print in the printed record of my Evidence before the Committee
of the House of Commons of 1853, which has caused mis-apprehension. See question 543, page 50, line 7 from the
bottom, for 270,000,000, read 470,000,000.)—J. F. W. H.
QUESTIONS
Drawn up with the view of bringing under distinct Notice and Examination some of the
Advantages of our present System of Coinage, and some of the principal Objections and Difficul-
ties which have been suggested with respect to the proposed introduction of the Decimal
Principle.
They are to be understood as intended to promote a thorough and effectual investigation of the
validity or invalidity of the arguments submitted by the opponents of the proposed change ; and
they are not to be taken as intimating any conclusive opinion on the points referred to.
“The best opportunity is thus (by written memoranda) afforded for a mature consideration
“of statements made and of arguments adduced in support of (or in opposition to)
“ measures proposed for consideration, and the most effectual precaution taken against
“misconstruction and hasty inconsiderate decision.”—Peel Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 99.
I.
1. Do you think any change in our present Answer. I do.
system of Coins desirable 2
2. On what grounds does your objection to our Answer. On the grounds—(a) That it is incon-
present system of Coins rest ? venient ; (b) circuitous ; (c) needlessly
complex; (d) productive of arithmetical difficulty, and thereby affording openings for error; (e) a
cause of the loss of much valuable time in the practical business of life; (f) a clog on educational
progress, and, as such, a grievance and an injury to the community; (g) obstructive of clear and
synoptic views in all financial and statistical discussions where money prices are concerned.
(a) Inconvenient.—From the necessity of the special statement of £ s. d., and either quarters
or fractional forms of entry for farthings where any single sum is mentioned, as well as from the
awkward and troublesome columns it requires in account keeping. -
(b) Circuitous.-Because it requires a much greater number of figures (besides letters, dots, and
other marks) to be written in account keeping, and in the statement of sums of money generally,
than a better system, such as the decimal, would do.
Demonstration:-Write down every possible amount from 1 farthing up to ll., both included,
on the present system ; thus 4d. §d. #d. 1d. 1+d.—ls. 1s. 0}d—19s. 11;d., fl, (omitting zeros,
where even shillings and even pence occur) on the present system, and you will have written
3,952 figures. Do the same on the decimal system to express every possible sum from 1 mil to £1,
both inclusive (not omitting terminal zeros when even tens or hundreds occur) thus, 17m. 2m.—
9m., 10m.—100m.—999m.—1,000m., and you will have written 2,893 figures. If the letters,
dots, and fractional lines be taken account of, the disproportion is very much greater in favour of
the decimal system. -
Again, if the account be kept, or the sums written, only to the nearest penny in the present
system, and the nearest 5 mils on the decimal, the former will require for all the possible sums
609 figures—the latter 581. This supposes the decimal account to be stated in mils throughout,
retaining the terminal zeros, but if kept in cents, and the intermediate half-cents written with a
decimal 5, thus 0° 5, 1, 1° 5, 2–99–99’ 5, 100, only 483 figures would be required.*
(c) Needlessly complea.—The existing system is vicemary in its first subdivisions, duodenary
in its second, and binary in its third. A division of the pound into 30s., and of the shilling into
30 minims (2 × 3 × 5) would have given 900 subdivisions, have preserved abundance of perfect
aliquots, and have had the advantagé of uniformity; but the present mixed system is neither
consistent in its several members, nor in accordance with that system of numeration by which all
nations express number. The decimal system is uniform, and in such accordance.
* The view taken by Mr. Minasi in his Evidence (Report of 1857, question 737), in which he comes to an opposite
conclusion on this point, making the number of figures on the mil system 692 in the case proposed, is, I submit, not
correct. He actually reduces every sum as stated in pennies to its nearest equivalent in mils, and then sums the figures
in the mil statement, i.e., he accepts an abbreviated form of statement on the one side, and rejects it on the other. Now
to make a fair comparison between the two systems, it is indispensable to consider each as established, and as if the
other had no existence. Suppose the Decimal system established, there can be no doubt that bankers would coun
only to the nearest half-cent. Whether the bankers’ accounts were kept to the nearest penny or to the nearest 5 mils
(or 5 farthings as coins now run), would make absolutely no difference on a long account, or at least one so utterly
inappretiable that it would be absurd to take it into consideration as a reason for rejecting this simplification.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 95
(d) Productive of arithmetical difficulty, &c.—It is needless to enlarge on so plain a position.
The appeal is to every book of arithmetic, where examples are given in “compound addition,
subtraction, multiplication, or division,” in “Reduction,” “Practice,” “Interest.” To find what
fraction one sum is of another, i.e., what is the ratio of two proposed sums of money (when both
contain odd shillings, pence, and farthings) is really a formidable operation, whereas, being a
case of very common occurrence, it ought to be one of the simplest and easiest, as it is in the
decimal system. In adding up long columns of figures the change of unit in carrying from
column to column is an endless source of blunders. -
(e) A cause of the loss of much valuable time in the practical business of life.—On this point
the evidence printed in the Report of the Committee of 1853 must be considered as conclusive.
Wide that of Messrs. Hankey, Question 26, 27, 28 ; Pasley, Question 203; Airy, 277 ; De
Morgan, Question 709, 822, 760; Miller, 1243–1246; Bennoch, 1253, 1254, 1272; Beard, Question
1293, &c. - wº
(f) A clog on educational progress, &c.—It surely cannot be necessary in this stage of the
decimal question to go over this ground again; only I must say that I am surprised that
Professor De Morgan, an advocate of the decimal system, should have hesitated about rating at
the higher per-centage than he has done the amount of the mischief and the extent of the nuisance
which it is proposed to put an end to, in this respect, by its adoption. (See Report, 1853,
Question 709.)
(g) Obstructive of clear views in commercial, financial, and statistical discussions.—A few
questions will illustrate the sort of obstructions complained of—
(2) What per cent. is an income tax of 7d. in the pound
(3) Who sees, when it is first proposed to him to pay 16d. in the pound that this means
one-fifteenth part of his income 2
(y) What is the difference to the revenue whether a duty is 73d, or 9%d. in the pound on
50,000 cwt. 2
(3) On a population of 29 millions what is 1s. 5}d. per head
(e) What per cent is 8s. 7%d. on 1341. 14s. 3}d. ?
(£) What annual rate of interest is 63d. per cent. for 11 days
(m) What is the rate per cent. of interest on an Exchequer Bill at 2; d. per diem 2
Who does not feel that in the innumerable such cases that occur in the sort of subjects above
mentioned, the system of £ s. d. is obstructive, draws off the attention unduly from the subject to
the figures, and exhausts it in needless detail of calculation ? In all such inquiries the use of
logarithms is an immense facility, but to prepare sums for their use a tedious and harassing pre-
liminary reduction to pence and farthings is almost always necessary.
3. (1.) Do you consider them as defective or Answer. They are not, in my opinion, incon-
inconvenient for any of the purposes of venient in small retail transactions. Few systems
retail transactions, i.e., for paying or are so when people are used to them. In Hol-
receiving land, in 1822, I found that to change a guelder
into the smallest number of pieces it was neces-
sary to add 2 stuyvers to it, and get in change four “six-stuyver pieces” (valued at 5% stuyvers
each). I found in circulation pieces of 1% guelders (30 stuyvers), of 28 stuyvers, of 52 stuyvers,
and in changing a Napoleon it was not unusual to get all these coins and a parcel of two-stuyver
pieces and copper doits and pfennings (8 for a penny) besides. Yet retail was practicable; nobody
but myself seemed to complain, and I never heard that the Dutch found any difficulty in buying
or selling over the counter, or at market.
(2.) Or is your objection restricted to the
inconvenience of our present Coinage
for the purposes of Account keeping and
Calculation ?
My objection is not altogether so limited.
I think the 42 s. d. system both of coins and
of reckoning less intelligible, more perplex-
ing, as compared with the decimal. I consider
that there are many persons who would be
able to cast up a shop bill, and know whether they were cheated, if decimally stated, which
would confuse them in #8 s. d. This, it may be said, is “calculation.” It is so, but it is one
which has to be made in every payment; and to a foreigner, accustomed only to a decimal coinage,
the change of scale mixes itself as a source of annoyance and confusion with every payment in
which gold, silver, and copper coins pass mixed together from hand to hand. The calculation is
inseparable from the currency. On the other hand, the transition to a decimal currency on going
abroad is felt as a relief. I met with this passage the other day in the “Englishwoman in America,”
(London, 1856):—“At Hamilton I was exceedingly puzzled with the Canadian currency. The
“ States money is very convenient. I soon understood dollars, cents, and dimes, but in the
“Colonies I never knew what my money was worth.” (i. 197). And again: “So simple is the
“ coinage of the United States that in two days I understood it as well as my own. Five
“ dollars make an English sovereign, and 100 cents are a dollar, and with this very moderate
amount of knowledge one can conduct one's pecuniary affairs all over the Union. The sim-
plicity of the calculation was a great relief to me after the relative values of the English
coinage in the Colonics.” (i. 86.) I merely cite these passages to show how the process of
“ calculation” mixes itself with every act of payment.
G6
< &
66
4. (1.) What do you consider to be the Answer. To do away with barter, by afford-
primary purpose of coins ing a numerable, ponderable, Verifiable, and
graduated scale of relative value, and so to
serve as a basis on which the abstract notion of money value and that of a general medium of
exchange can be raised.
(2.) Do you consider them as fractional sub- (2.) I consider fractional subdivisions of some
divisions of the integer created for the purpose integer or unit of coinage as the only possible
of adjusting retail payments 2 mode of cash payment (other than by weight)
when the amount is not expressed in integers.
Whether wholesale or retail is no matter, odd sums over integers occurring as well in the one
as the other. Provided the unit be sufficiently subdivided to meet minute values, and the
members of a coinage be reasonably varied, and the smaller coins sufficiently abundant, and in fit
proportions, I consider all the essential conditions of retail as well as wholesale payment Satisfied.
I make no distinction.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
M 4
96. DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION : . . . .
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
(3.) Or do you consider their primary cha- (3.) I consider coins (meaning the particular
racter to be that of instruments the purpose of monetary members of which a coinage consists)
which is to facilitate Accounts and Calculation ? as of absolutely no use in facilitating accounts
4. - - and calculations, though they may add to their
difficulty. Nobody who has a bill of 17s. 9d, handed to him thinks of the sum as seven half-
crowns and a threepenny piece ; though if he happen to have those coins in his purse, he will
very likely pay it so. When a price is named to you for an article, you do not judge it cheap or
dear by considering how many threepennies, or sixpennies, or seven-shilling pieces it will cost.
You think only of the money of account, totally disregarding the coins in which it will come to be
paid for. It is the business of the money of account to facilitate accounts and calculation ; that
of the coins, to afford a simple and convenient medium for their material application and
liquidation in all cases which may arise. There is much money of account which has no coin to
represent its unit, as the mark banco. -
No doubt, however, a coinage, the elements of which should be discordant with the money of
account, would be a nuisance. Such would be a Decimal Coinage with our present reckoning
of £ s. d. • ‘ -
5. If one of the purposes must to some extent
be sacrificed or made subordinate to the other,
which do you think is entitled to the priority in
our estimation ?
Answer. The primary use of coins, as ex-
plained in answer to Question 4 (1.), is of
paramount importance, and cannot be made
subordinate to any consideration ; but this being
| secured, Iconsider that with a well-chosen series
of coins, a sufficient range of subdivisions, and a plentiful supply of small coins, there is so little
difference in the convenience of any one in comparison with any other (when once worked into
practice), that it is not worth being put in competition with distinct and eminent advantages of
other kinds, should such be found on either side.
6. (1.) Is not the Coinage chiefly concerned in
the process of buying and selling by retail P
(2.) And must not the question of the merit
or demerit of any system of Coinage be decided
by its fitness or unfitness for adjusting with
readiness and simplicity the multiplied variety
of small payments 2
(3.) Are you aware of any complaint against
our present system of Coins in this respect 2
Answer (1.) No doubt more money passes in
retail than in wholesale transactions.
(2.) No. (See answer to Question 5.) Pro-
vided, of course, the “unfitness” for making
small payments be not one of So gross and
glaring a kind as need not be contemplated in
this discussion. -
(3.) No. Except that there are not farthings
enough in-circulation. I mean not so many as
it is desirable there should be, in order that
retail prices should follow more exactly than they do the variations of wholesale. In Ireland, the
use of the farthing (at least three or four years ago) was unknown, except in the immediate neigh-
bourhood of Dublin, Cork, or Belfast.
(4.) Is not the use of the Coinage, that is, the
fitness of the Coins to perform their proper
purpose of facilitating the division and distri-
bution of commodities in the retail markets,
and adjusting the small payments which arise,
the consideration of primary importance, rather
than the improvement of a system of Account
keeping, by which the convenience of the
affluent and educated classes, of those who keep
large and extensive accounts, may be principally
promoted 2 -
(4.) The “use of the coinage” is, no doubt,
of primary importance in the choice of a
coinage. Any system of coinage must be a bad
one which compromises its use. But if twenty
different systems of coinage be all very good
and useful for a certain purpose, and one of
them pre-eminently so for a certain other
purpose, and that a very important one, in
which all the rest miserably fail, assuredly we
ought to prefer that one. Now that is the real
state of the case as between the Decimal System
and the present one, and all others. The
Decimal has this immense advantage over the other ; and as respects mere convenience in
payment, it is fully on a par with any yet devised, besides possessing some other distinct
advantages, to be mentioned in their proper places. -
Affluent and educated classes versus poor and uneducated ones.—The advocates of the Decimal
System may, I think, justly protest against any enlisting of popular feeling on this score. For
my own part, I believe the change would equally benefit all classes, with one very trifling
exception, and that in favour of the latter. The subdivision of the pound into 1000 parts instead
of 960, and the fact that this minuter subdivision would be kept constantly and systematically in
view, while in the present system the farthings are thrust out of sight by habitual disuse, and
almost out of knowledge, must have a tendency to make the retail market follow more closely the
fluctuations of the wholesale. The retail dealers (I mean no disparagement, and I do not speak of
great towns, where there is plenty of competition to keep them in check) take very good care
to obstruct its doing so as far as they possibly can, and will always do this, adopt what system
we may.
7. Do you recommend the introduction of the
Decimal principle into our Coinage 2
8. (1.) Is it not impossible under the Decimal
system to break the Integer into as many clear
fractional parts as we now obtain under our
present system of Coins 2
(2.) Do you not consider that this is an ob-
jection to the Decimal System 2 -
Answer. I do.
Answer. (1.) Meaning by fractions aliquot
parts, yes; but I consider this as a point of
very trifling importance, when brought into
competition with the great advantages of the
Decimal System in other respects.
(2.) I consider as division by 3 to be in
Some cases comparatively speaking to the dis-
little moment.
advantage of the Decimal System, though of
People speak much of halves and quarters, but little of thirds.
subject of divisibility, I would contrast the two systems in another manner.
But when on the
(a) Tell me
off-hand, can 4l. 8s. 53d. be equally divided among 3, or among 9, or among 11 persons in
coins of the realm ? (b) Take the same figures 4851 in mils The answer requires only
inspection of the figures.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 97
As to breaking the integer into exact aliquot parts, the advantage has been unduly exaggerated.
People, when they talk of 3d, as the price of anything, look on it rather in comparison with 2d. or
2}d, or 3}d. or 4d, than as the 80th of a pound. They look on 6d. oftener as half a shilling,
than as the 40th of a pound ; but its legal name of “half-shilling” has been driven out of use by
“a sixpence,” the idea of fraction succumbing to that of multiple. But in point of fact, people
quite as well understand what 7d. or 8d, means as 6d, or 4d. ; and as to individual pieces, they
look on each of them as on a definite object sui generis, with which they are familiar, and deal
with them as such, withoutmuch caring what fractions they are of the pound. Their primary idea
of a halfcrown is not, that 8 of them go to the sovereign, but that it will change into two shillings
and one sixpence.
9. (1.) In an old but very remarkable treatise
on Coin and Coinage (Vaughan, 1675) this
passage occurs :—
“Of all the numbers, Twelve is the most
“ proper for Money, being the most
Answer. (1.) Vaughan is rather a fanciful
writer, but he is so far right in the abstract, that
12 would be in some respects (not in all) a pre-
ferable number for numerical reckoning to 10.
If we had a duodecimal arithmetic, a Decimal
‘ clear from fractions and confusion of
Account, which ought not to be neg-
lected, by reason that of all other
Coinage would be a nuisance ; but we have a
decimal arithmetic, and we have not a duodecimal
coinage.
“ numbers it is most divisible, being
“ divisible into units as all numbers
“ are ; into two parts as no odd number
“ is ; into three parts as no even num-
“ ber is but six, and the numbers that
“ consist of sixes ; into fourths, into
“ which six is not divisible ; and into
“ sixths.”
(2.) In the Memoir dictated by Napoleon at
St. Helena, on the new French system is this
passage :—
“On avait préféré le diviseur 12 au divi-
“seur 10, parceque 10 n’a que deux
“ facteurs 2 et 5, et que 12 en a quatre,
“ savoir, 2, 3, 4, et 6. Il est vrai que
“la numération décimale, généralisée
“ et exclusivement adaptée au mètre
“ comme unité, donne des facilités aux
“ astronomes et aux calculateurs; mais
“ ces avantages sont loin de compenser
“ l'inconvénient de rendre la pensée
“ plus difficile, Le premier caractère
“ de toute méthode doit étre d’aider la
“ conception et l'imagination, faciliter
“ la mémoire, et donner plus de puis-
“ sance à la pensée.”
(3.) What validity is there in these consi-
derations as objections to the introduction
of a Decimal system of Coinage 2
(4.) Or in what does the fallacy of them
consist Ž *
(2.) Napoleon was a great warrior, and his
opinion on a matter of strategy is authority. He
was a bad statesman, a bad financier, a bad
political economist, and a very bad judge of
commercial matters. In such, then, his opinion
goes for no more than that of any other person
capable of being so characterized.
6
(3.) “What validity, &c.” In my opinion
these considerations have no validity as objections
against introducing a Decimal coinage.
(4.) Fallacy is too strong a word. They have
a scintilla juris about them. If I must call
them fallacious I should say that their fallacy
consists in putting out of sight the fact of their utter inapplicability to the present British
system, which is not duodecimal but mixed. 2ndly, in attributing a much overrated import-
ance to the point of aliquot subdivisibility. As I do not wish to meet opinion by a simple
contrary opinion, I will observe on Napoleon's dictum, 1st, that it admits the advantage the
Decimal system gives to calculators. 2nd, that nothing which renders thought difficult can be
any advantage to them. 3rd, that so far from rendering thought difficult, it simplifies and
renders it easier. The man who, when a number is proposed to him, has to think whether it
admits of being broken up into pairs, or threes, or fours, or sixes, has an element of distraction
in his mind to draw off his attention from the subject-matter, which he who depends on a
straightforward method, and throws over short cuts and cases of ease, is free from. 3dly, the
first requisite of a “method” and that which constitutes it a “method” is, that it be generally
and equally applicable without distinction of cases. I have quite as clear a conception of 11
by considering it 10 and 1, as by regarding it as 3 times 3 and 2, or as two fours and a three.
4thly, in the Decimal system (as compared with the # s. d. system of currency) the advantage
on the side of memory is all in favour of the former. There is no need to get by heart a “pence
table,” nor the long string of “Practice” aliquots, which sadly puzzle many a boy both to conceive
and to recollect—still more to apply.
Answer. No. In the scale of coinage as it has
been proposed to make it, there will be less
aliquot divisibility, and this I have shewn in my
evidence (Report, 1853) Qu. 529, to be rather
an advantage as far as facilitating some payments
. is concerned. As regards the system as one of
account, I reply, In the scale of numbers 1, 2, 3...... 1000 there occur more numbers fractionally
divisible into aliquot parts than in the scale 1, 2, 3...... 960. There is a greater probability of
finding a sum proposed at random in mils to be equally divisible among a determinate number of
persons (proposed also at random) than a sum expressed in ºf s. d., the division being made in
each case in the corresponding currency: for the decimal sum value for value, is ipso facto
divisible into a greater number of sub-units, and the proportion of primes is less in a greater
10. Must there not be an inferiority as
regards fractional divisibility in any Decimal
system of coins, as compared with a coinage
founded on a combination of the Binary with
the Duodecimal scale
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
number than in a less. N
98 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Sir J • F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
11. Is there not great force and truth in Answer. Of all the systems of numeration
the remark of Napoleon, that a Decimal system and subdivision, the purely Binary is intelligible
of dividing the Integer and of expressing the to the lowest grade of intellect. But it is not
fractional parts, must be less favourable to dis- | possible to use it as the system of numeration, by
tinctness of conception, to facility of recollec- reason of the cumbrousness of its expression.
tion, and to readiness and ease in mental When we get above 3 or 4, numbers are consi-
calculation, than a Binary, or than our present dered quite as well per se, or as having a certain
system P * - place and order in a systematic scale as in the
a . . . . - light of multiples and parts—indeed, more so.
5 or 7 is quite as clear a conception as 6 or 8. The number 10101 is far more readily con-
ceived by its decimal numeration than by considering it as consisting of 3367 threes. -
Napoleon's dictum cited above is inapplicable to our present system, which is not Binary nor
duodenary, but a mixed system of both with a vicenary, and is anything but favourable to
clearness of conception on this very account. Perhaps this is the right place (since a great name
has been called in) to say a few words on the superior “clearness of conception,” “facility of
recollection,” and “readiness of mental calculation,” which is claimed for the £ s. d, system of
reckoning over the Decimal. I deny it altogether. For, be it observed, it is a system of
reckoning, i.e. of numeration, as facilitated by combining units into certain groups, and these
again considered as units into certain other groups, and these again into groups of a higher
order, and so on, with its appropriate rules for their addition, subtraction, multiplication, and
division. Now if it be true, as is pretended, that these three very essential qualities are possessed
in the highest possible degree by a system in which units are grouped by pairs, these pairs again
by pairs, these higher pairs by dozens, these dozens by scores, and these scores by tens, hundreds,
and thousands, &c., then it is impossible to deny that it would be a vast improvement to arith-
metic to follow the same principle out wherever number is concerned, since distinctness of
conception and facility of recollection are in themselves most desirable things, and since whatever
gives readiness to mental calculations must tend in many cases to dispense with pen work, and
in all, materially to aid it, all calculation being mental, and whatever system aids the mind
habitually to make the longest steps with equal security being practically the best system. We
ought, therefore, to burn our books of arithmetic, and adopt that system of numeration (the
monetary system) up to 960, retaining the Decimal scale for higher numbers, or rather after the
scores, to recur again to the pairs, pairs, dozens, and scores, in regular order of succession ad
infinitum. Now (putting the question of practicability of such a change quite aside), I do not
think’ anybody will be found to agree to such a conclusion. They will at once fall back on
the “regularity of the Decimal System.” And why Because it is precisely this regularity—
precisely this habit of forming numbers mentally into groups of ten and rejecting all others
which is found, most of all, to secure clearness, facility, and readiness of calculation both mental
and graphical. -
12. (1.) Ear. gr. : Which is the more easy for Answer. It is not easy to exhibit in a few
Conception, for Recollection, or for Addition | words all the onesidedness of this question, or to
mentally 2– answer it in the spirit of fair discussion. I will
S. d. Mils. Pence. remark, however, 1st, that it takes for granted
7 6 – 375 = 90 the present system as the established and habitual
2 6 = 125 = 30 one, and throws all the onus of approximations
1 3 = 62 = lö and uncouthness of expression on the new-comer,
O 9 = 37 = 9 2dly, that it deals only with cases of ease to the
* existing system, and of awkwardness to the
12 O 599 144 Decimal. 3rdly, That nine of the cases exem-
--- plified take no cognizance of the farthing, while
(2.) Again; we at once know that the half they expect the decimal corresponding ones to
of 7s. 6d. is 3s. 9d., but what is the half of take account of mils. The best sort of answer
375 mils to questions proposed on such principles is to
(3.) Tho half of 2s. 6d. is 1s. 3d. ; but what is reverse the position, to assume the Decimal Sys-
the half of 2s. 6d. estimated decimally, i.e. 125 tem to be the established one, and the # s. d.
mils, &c. &c. 2 system a candidate for introduction, and to put
parallel questions, such as,
(1.) Which is the more easy for Conception, for Recollection, or for Addition mentally :—
Mils. S. d. d. qrS.
390 = 7 9} = 93% = 374
170 = 3 4% = 403 = 163
40 = 0 94 = 9} = 38
600 11 11; 143% 575
(2.) Again, we know at once that the half of 466 mils is 233 mils ; but what is the half of
9s. 3}d. 2 e
(3) The half of 124 mils is 62 mils ; but what is the half of 124 mils estimated in £ s. d., viz.
2s. 5; d. and gº ºr 2 -
(4.) Take another case. Any number of (4.) Any number of yards—say 7, 8, or 9, at
yards—7, 8, or 9 yards at 1s., 1s. 6d., or 2s. 6d. 40 mils, 60 mils, 80 mils, or the same number at
per yard, or the same number of yards at 50 9d. 24, 3, 1s. 2d. 1" 3, 1s. 7d. 0 ºr 3 per yard 2
mils, 75 mils, and 125 mils per yard : which calculation will be made with the greatest
Which calculation will be made with the readiness and accuracy mentally and in the open
greater readiness and accuracy, mentally and market 2
in the open market 2
(5.) Take half-a-crown—double it—treble it (5.) Take 60 mils—double it—triple it—halve
—halve it—divide it by 3—and add all these it—divide it by 3 and by 5, and add all the
products together. Is not this easily done products together. Is not this easily done by any
by any common person, in his head, without common person, &c. &c. 2
pen and ink or pencil, and in the midst of con- -
fusion ?
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 99
(6.) But try the same process upon the (6.) But try the same process on the same
same sum in Decimal notation, namely, as sum in # s. d, notation, namely, as 1s. 2d, 1 *ś,
125 mils. Will the calculation be equally | Will the calculation be equally simple and easy %
simple and easy %
(7.) Now try it in pence, namely, as 30 pence. (7.) Now try it in pence; viz., at 14:#d Is it
Is it not obvious that the calculation again be- a bit more easy %
comes perfectly simple and easy % (8.) Again : Price's Patent Candles under a
(8.) Again : Price's Patent Candles are al- || Decimal System fully established, would be ad-
vertised in 12lb. boxes at 11 shillings each. vertised in 10lb. boxes at 46c. each. Every one
Every one knows that this gives 11d. per lb. knows that this would give 46m. per lb. for the
for the candles. But what will be the calcula- candles, but what will the calculation be in #! s. 6
tion taken decimally 2 12lb. boxes at 5' 50 | –10lb. boxes at 9s. 2d, 1 qr. # each 7 How
mils each ; how much per lb. ? much per lb. ?
(9.) Again : (9) Again: -
s. d. Pence. Mils. Mils. s. d.
1 yard or lb. =2 6=30= 124, for more easy | 1 yard or lb. = 420 = 8 4 3** = 402*, for
calculation more easy
than 125 calculation
- mils - than 403}.
# do. = 1 3 = 15 = 62 - # do. = 210 = 4 24 = 2010 r
# do. = 0 10 = 10 = impossible. || || do. = 140 = 2 9; =134
l. do. = 0 7% = 7} = 31 # do. = 105 = impossible.
# do. = 0 5 = 5 = impossible. # do. = 84 = impossible.
# do. = 0 33 = 3% = impossible. # do. = 70 = 1 23 = 674:
Tº do. = 0 3 = 3 = impossible. | } do. = 60 = impossible.
Tº do. = 0 2% = 2; = impossible.
Tº do. = 0 2 = 2 = impossible.
ºr do. = 0 13 = 1% = impossible.
l do. = 0 1 = 1 = impossible.
3 O - wº e &
Now, consider the comparative convenience
in making the necessary payments.
Mils. Mils.
ſo do. = 60 = impossible. gº do. = 12 = impossible. Now consider the
Tº do. = 42 = impossible. 4's do. = 10 = impossible. comparative conve-
Tºr do. = 35 = impossible. tº do. = 7 = impossible. venience in making
Tº do. = 28 = impossible. *I do. = 6 = impossible. the necessary pay-
gº do. = 21 = impossible. ºr do. = 5 = impossible. ments.
gºr do. = 20 = impossible. Tº do. = 4 = impossible.
As do. = 15 = impossible. Ho do. = 3 = impossible.
ºn do. = 14 = impossible. 3+o do. = 2 = impossible.
(10.) 2s. 6d. is paid with one coin. How many (10.) 124 mils would probably be paid in three
coins will be required to pay 124 mils? coins ; but 124 mils is not the equivalent of half
- a crown--the eighth of a pound. Were it thought
right (and on the principle of an approximation to a binary sub-coinage, some might think it so).
A coin of 125 mils might circulate with no greater inconvenience than the half-crown at present,
concurrently with the florin. --
(11.) 1s. 3d. is paid with two coins. How (11.) Three perhaps—or thus ; 30" is paid in
many coins will be required to pay 62 mils? one coin. How many coins will it take to pay
74-d. P
(12.) Is it not by cases of this kind that the º 12.) Assuredly not. Such comparisons can
relative convenience of different systems of never by possibility arise, except in the brief
Coinage must be tested interval of transition from one system to another.
They vanish when either is established. Besides
they are onesided, and therefore pro tanto unfair ; and it is not by questions capable of being so
qualified that the merits of any proposal can be tested.
13. (1.) The defectiveness of any system (1.) This is, in a few words, a faithful sum-
founded on the Decimal Principle consists in the ming up of all that can be urged against the
imperfect divisibility of its integers. Decimal Principle in general. If the divisibility
of the base of a system of numeration into many
factors increased in the least degree the divisibility of numbers in general, it would have much
weight. But 41 is quite as incapable of aliquot division, and 143 quite as incapable of being
resolved otherwise than into 11’s and 13's, whether these numbers be expressed decimally, duode-
cimally, or in any other way. Even taking the much-vaunted system of duodecimal arithmetic,
its real advantages, if adopted, would be : 1st, that numbers would be written somewhat
more concisely. 2ndly, that it would be as easy, by inspection, to tell whether a given number
is divisible by 11 or 13, as in the Decimal System it is to tell whether it is divisible by 9 or 11,
and a trifle more easy to tell whether it is so by 3 or by 9, and that ; #, and # would not require
to be expressed by repeating duodecimal fractions, though 4 would. But on the other hand, it
would not be possible, without actual trial, to say whether it could be divided by 5. Other
advantages I really know none, except that dozens would be spoken of oftener and scores seldomer
than at present. Six would be called half a dozen, but 4 would not be called the third of a
dozen, &c. &c.
(2.) Is not the construction of Coinage ne- (2.) Yes.
cessarily a divisional process P
(3.) Is it not the metrical subdivision of (3.) I do not understand the question. ... See
the integer for fractional payments in connec- answer to Question IV., if “metrical * be
tion with retail transactions P omitted.
(4.) “While decimal arithmetic for the pur- (4.) This is an opinion and an assertion,
“ poses of computation shoots sponta- and may, therefore, be quite logically met by a
“neously from the nature of man and l counter-opinion and a counter-assertion; but let
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
N .2
100 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
smºº ºr’
“ things, it is not equally adapted to the
“ numeration, the multiplication, or the
“ division of material substances.”—
J. QUINCY ADAMs, Secretary of State.
Report to Senate of United States, 1821,
p. 8.
us examine both the one and the other. What
is computation other than numeration, multipli-
cation, and division, &c. P. What is number
itself other than an abstraction drawn almost
entirely from the contemplation of material sub-
stances? How does decimal arithmetic shoot
spontaneously from the nature of man and things
otherwise than that man, having ten material substances convenient for the purpose always before
him, uses them to count with ? Had he 12, a duodecimal arithmetic would equally have arisen.
There is a natural facility for dividing some sort of material substances (not all) equally into 2
parts, but not into 3, 5, 7, 11, &c. No system of computation can facilitate the division of
material groups in general into more simple groups, though one may enable us to say more
readily than another whether any particular group is resolvable into a particular class of sub-groups.
In numbers, in general, there are more groups of 2's than of 3's, more of 3’s than of 4's, of 4's
than of 5's, more of 5’s than of 6's, and so on. Now the decimal system enables us to say at
once whether a number consists of either of these five most common groups. But the duodecimal
does not give us this ready information.
14. In the following table compare the three
systems, the present, the mil, and the penny sys-
tem. With which does the superiority rest as
regards,-
(1) Number of figures used ?
§ Conciseness of expression in words or in
Answer. (1.) Number of figures used. The
example is by no means a fair one. See Ques-
tion 1, Answer (b.), also Question 12– Remark.
If the equivalent mil account had been stated to
the nearest half-cent. thus, 100c. 88°5, &c., it
would have required only 29 figures. The mils
writing 2
(3.) Facility for mental conception of the
sum stated P
(4.) Tendency to promote accuracy in copy-
set down in the example proposed are erroneous
if intended to be the nearest equivalents of the
£ s. d. items, and the errors are such as to pro-
duce an incorrect sum total, obviously not the
& * tº • 2
ing or calling over:
equivalent of 4l. 7s. The correct figures are as
(5.) Facility for calculations, especially those
follows, giving sums obviously the correct ones :-
5 8-9
which must be made in the head P In Mils. In Cents.
(6.) Interchangeability at equivalent value 1,000 100
with the coins now in use 2 883 88 - 5
4 s. d. Mils. Pence. 775 r 77 - 5
1 O O = . 1,000 = 240 488– 48 - 5
17 S - 883 = 212 3.12+ 31 - 5
15 6 F 775 = 186 279 28
9 9 - 487 = 117 242 24,
6 3 F 312 F 75 183 18 - 5
5 7 == 279 - G7 117 I 1 - 5
4 10 - 241 == 58 71 - 7
3 8 - 183 + 44 *s tºmº
2 4 - 112 - 28 4,350 435
1 5 == 70 - 17 tº-º-º: - - - ==
*=º tº-º-º: 34 figures 29 figures.
4 7 O 4,342 1,044 The difference in the number of figures is only
wº-ºº-ºº 1 to the disadvantage of the cents as compared
27 figures. 34 figures. 28 figures. with pence, and 2 as compared with the £ s. d.——
no great matter, considering that the example is a
selected one, with no farthings.
(2) Conciseness of expression in words or writing. There is so little difference that it is
really difficult to say. But had there been, as in fairness there ought to have been, farthings,
the decision would have been in favour of the Decimal System.
(3.) Facility of mental conception.—Decidedly in favour of the cents as compared with the
AE s. d. As regards the pennies it is not the practice to express our money in pennies ; nor could
such a practice ever be introduced as to make the penny a money of account, retaining the pound
sterling and the existing coinage.
(4.)Tendeney, &c.—Decidedly in favour of the mils as compared with £ s. d.
(5.) Facility of calculation, &c.—The same Cents. £ s. d.
ground of protest : cases of ease are compared with 100 F. 1 0 0 —
cases of difficulty. The only refuge of a respon- 78 - 0 15 7}–
dent to such a question is a counter-question, 56 - 0 11 24–
reversing the situation. Of these, which affords 38 == 0 7 7#–
the greater facility for calculation, especially, 24 – O 4 94-i-
&c. &c. * 10 == O 2 O –
(6.) Interchangeability of value with the coins 6 - 0 1 24–
in use. This is again a question which must be 3 - 0 0 74—
replied to in the same way. The figures here set 2 - 0 0 43 +
down suffice to exemplify the complete reversal l - 0 0 24–
of the result with the change in the point of *º-sº-sº
view. 318 3 3 7%—
*
(7.) If we now proceed to subject these (7.) The errors being rectified in the items of
total sums to division, which system will be the proposed question, the total sums (4350m. or
found the most convenient? 435c.) are just as easy of division as that of the
pence (1044), indeed, easier ; for the divisibility
by 5 is obvious on the cents; that by 5 or by 2, or by 10, on the mils; and that by 3 on both.
1,044, indeed, is divisible by 9, which 4,350 is not ; but then 1,044 is not divisible by 5, or thus,
1,044 x 4 = 4,176, has three prime factors, 2, 3, and 29, while 4,350 has four, viz., 2, 3, 5, and
29. This is as regards the penny system,--as to 4!. 7s. ; in that form it is not divisible at all.
Nobody, without reduction, would suspect it to be divisible by 9, though every body would see
that 4,350m. is so by 3 or by 5.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS.
IOI
(8.) 4!. 7s., divided by 3, 4, 6, and 12, gives
the respective sums, ll. 9s., 11, 1s. 9d., 14s. 6d.,
7s. 3d. Pence 1,044, divided by 3, 4, 6, and
12, gives the respective sums of 348 pence, 261
pence, 174 pence, 87 pence.
But 4,342 mils is not divisible without
a remainder by any of these divisors.
(8.) Those who found arguments on the re-
sults of their calculations should be sure of their
figures. But the point is not worth contending
for, were they correct. If they were so, they
would afford an infinitesimal argument in fa-
vour of the system of a penny account (which
is not the question), viz., that of one favourable
case out of the infinite multitude of proposable
cases. See Answer to Question 10, which disposes finally of all such arguments.
15. S. d. Pence. Mils.
IAE = 20 O = 240 = 1,000
##! = 10 O = 120 = 500
# = 6 8 = 80 = —
+8 = 5 0 = 60 = 250
+ £ = 4 0 = 48 = 200
## = 3 4 = 40 = —
##! – 2 6 — 30 = 125
##! == tºº, - — - -
Th Đ = — = — = —
ºf = 1 8 = 20 = —
*: == *mºnº = - - -
T4ſ- - tºng F. 4-mºmº - tºº
Tº = 1 4 = 16 = —
nº - 1 3 - 15 – fºss-sº
# F. *== F - -
#: – *=º F *=sº - *===
Tºy F * F gmº - *sº
** = 1 O = 12 = 50
(1.5 By this table it appears that going
down as far as the shilling the £ is divisible
under our present system, and under the penny
system, into eleven distinct aliquot parts :
whilst under the mil system, it is divisible
only into six aliquot parts.
(2.) But observe further the sub-divisibility
of the quotients obtained under the present
and the penny system, compared with those
obtained under the mil system.
(3.) The # 48 represented by 2s. 6d. or 30 |
Answer. Aliquots of a pound as expressed in
£ s. d., pence, and mils. This is fair argument
(at least as far as P. 5.) It is admitted that the
Decimal System carried to mils has fewer abso-
lute aliquots of the unit of account in it than
the £ s. d. system. Valeat quantum. After all,
it is no disadvantage worth speaking of. The
chief use of these aliquots is to facilitate the
arithmetical rule of “Practice”—a rule of short
cuts and expertnesses, which is cast aside in the
Decimal System as not worth the trouble of ac-
quiring. Anybody who has to pay 3s. 4d., or to
bargain for 1s. 8d. per yard, cares very little
whether the sums are aliquots of a pound or not.
As to the sub-aliquots or aliquots of aliquots——
no doubt for “practice” they are useful. But
observe, that in the mil system, such numbers as
30, 60, 120, 180, 42, 84, 96, 210, 420, &c., which
have many aliquots, present themselves on the
face of sums. Whereas on the 28 s. d. system,
2s. 6d. has to be turned into sixpences or pennies
or farthings to perceive its divisibility, and in
such sums as 8s. 9d., the divisibility by 5, 7, 14,
28, is so concealed that nobody would perceive
it without reduction to units of one denomination.
The £ s. d. system is one which almost studiously
conceals divisibility by 5, 7, 9, 11.
(6.) See the Answer to Question 12 in
general, and as to the omission of farthings
while retaining mils. If (as fairness of state-
ment requires) the decimal account were kept
to the nearest half-cent, the figures on the
decimal side (including the sum total) would be
19, on a par with the others. But the object of
the question being merely to compare the number
of figures requisite for stating the aliquots, the
sums total ought not to be included, and then
the advantage is one figure in favour of the
decimal statement over both. Or, if the £ s. d.
aliquots were written (as fairness requires) so as
to express that there are no odd farthings, thus
20s. 0d. Ogrs., 240d. Oqrs. there would be in each
case (including the sums) 27 figures, to 25 in the
decimal expression, or (omitting the sum) 23
pence, or 120 farthings, is divisible by 2, 3, 4,
5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 24, 30, 40, 60, giving
respectively 1s. 3d, 10d., 7}d, 6d., 5d., &c.;
whilst the same sum represented by 125 mils
is divisible only by 5 and 25, giving as the
result 25 mils and 5 mils.
(4.) Again : the fºr £, represented by 2s. or
24 pence, or 96 farthings, is divisible by 2, 3,
4, 6, 8. 12, 16, 24, 32, and 48, giving respec-
tively 1s. 8d., 6d., 4d., 3d, 2d., 1}d., 1d., #d.,
and #d. ; whilst the same sum, represented by
100 mils, is not divisible into a third or an
eighth part, or any of their subdivisions.
(5.) The same may be said again of the
shilling, which, represented by 12 pence or 48
farthings, may be divided by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12,
16, 24, giving respectively the sums 6d., 4d.,
3d., 2d., 1}d., Id, #d., #d.: whilst the same
shilling, divided into 50 mils, is divisible only
by 2, 5, and 25, giving the sum 25 mils, 5 mils,
and 2 mils.
(6.) Now let us compare the three systems
with reference to the number of figures requi-
site for stating the fractions of a £ which are
obtainable under each of the three systems:—
S. d. Pence. Mils.
1 42 = 20 0 = 240 = 1,000
4 + = 10 0 = 120 = 500
} fº = 5 O = 60 = 250
} f = 4 0 = 48 = 200
% At = 2 O = 24 = 100
3's .# = | O = 12 = 50
2 4 6 544 2,225
19 figures. 19 figures. 25 figures.
figures in the £ s. d, system to 21 in the mil system.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
N 3
102 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION: º
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
16. Is the introduction of the Decimal Prin- Answer. I think so, on the homely principle
ciple into our coinage desirable without refer- that a slice of a loaf is better than no bread. I
ence to what may be the system of weights am persuaded that under all systems of weight
and measures in this country? and measure, not studiously perverse, goods
t - would quite as easily be bought and sold, and
paid for in a decimal or in any other currency when once familiar and established, and there
had been time for the habitual compromise between the niceties of price and the niceties of
currency, which is sure to take place in an established system. To bargain for three ounces
avoirdupois of a commodity at five or at seven units per lb. is as great a difficulty, whether the
units be pence, cents, or groschen. However, it is admitted on all hands that more than half
the advantage of a Decimal System of money would be wanting if not accompanied, or followed
by one of weights and measures. Nevertheless, that a Decimal System can work with perfect
ease and satisfaction in conjunction with the present British system of weights and measures, is
demonstrated by the instance of the United States, whose system of weights and measures is
identical with our own.
17. Commodities are divided for the retail Answer. Wide Answer to the last question,
purposes of the market by means of our and to Question IV. (2). No doubt however,
weights and measures, and the practical pur- that if a Decimal System of currency were
pose of coins is to effect the payment for those adopted, it would be highly desirable to carry
retail purchases. Can the adjustment of our out the same system into weights and measures.
system of coinage be properly disconnected
from the adjustment of our system of weights
and measures?
18. At present our system of weights and Answer. No doubt the Binary element enters
measures, and our system of coins, may be con- largely into our systems, though I should hardly
sidered as Binary. Can it prove consistent consider them as Binary systems. But granting
with public convenience to abandon the Binary, that, adopt what system you will in weights and
and to adopt the Decimal System in our coin- measures, the “half” and “quarter” of the most
age, unless we have decided on the same course | usual unit, as the yard, or the pound, or the.
in our system of weights and measures 2 gallon, will be very frequently asked for, still in
- the scale of currency from 1 to 1000 mils, there
is room for a large variety of binary scales, as 1, 2, 4 mils, &c., 3, 6, 12 mils, &c., 5, 10, 20 mils,
&c. And for those commodities which are most frequently called for in binary aliquots, the
prices will naturally adjust themselves so as to allow of exact payment in the coinage adopted.
19. If the retail transactions of the com- Answer. The price per ounce by 1etail is
munity originate in a system of weights and hardly ever (probably never) one 1792d part of
measures, by which the hundredweight is the price per cwt., or one 448th of that of a
divided into 4 quarters, the quarter into 28 quarter of 281bs. To pass from 28lbs. to llb.
pounds, and the pound into 16 ounces; and in is no easier in the £ s. d. than on the Decimal
which, again, the lineal measure, the yard, is System. Those commodities which are usually
divided into 3 feet, and the foot into 12 inches, sold by the yard are never asked for in feet. No
will a coinage, founded on the Decimal Prin- lady, I suppose, ever went into a shop to buy 13
ciple of division, afford greater facility for the fect of ribbon ; she would ask for 4} yards,
adjustment of such retail transactions than though there would be 6 inches of waste. I do
the coinage which now exists 2 not suppose that the Decimal System would
afford greater facilities than the present for our
system of weights and measures in retail.
20. Take the case of an article now selling Answer. (Report 1853, Decimal Commission,
at a shilling per pound or per yard, and re- | Question 1020). Mr. Lindsay’s Evidence (grocer
tailed in halves, quarters, ounces, or inches, and tea dealer). Is a shilling a very common
these fractional quantities are easily and price for articles? Ans. Not in our business.
readily paid for in our present coins. But if (Preliminary Report on Decimal Coinage 1857,)
our Coinage be subjected to the Decimal Prin- | Question 362. Dr. Gray's Evidence.—Dr. Gray
ciple of division, will not that facility be lost 2 gives “a list of the articles exhibited in a mer-
“ cer's window, High Street, Islington, on May
13, 1856, with the prices in our present coinage, and how they will be marked should the £ and
mil system come into use.” The articles are 50 in number, varying in price from 19s. 6d. to 23d.,
and among them is only one priced at 1s., viz. “lawn per yard,” and only one other priced at
an exact number of shillings. Of this list, the majority consists of indivisible articles, but among
them are 20 divisible, or on sale “per yard,” and of these only two are priced at an exact penny,
while 18 have odd halfpence or farthings. And among all the 50 there is only one (1s.), which
is an aliquot part of a pound. Dr. Gray, in reference to the mil prices annexed, observes,—“I can
well conceive the feelings of the lady customers on seeing the prices so marked,” assuming them
to be impressions of disgust. To one habituated to the Decimal System, however, quite as
intense an impression of a similar nature would arise on sight of the prices in #. s. d. actually
affixed. Such being retail, it is needless refinement to insist on those cases of easy subdivision
and aliquots in the presence of vast and important general considerations. They are utterly
overwhelmed and swept away in the mass of petty give-and-take transactions, which occur in
buying and selling over the counter; and among the number of considerations which weigh in
the mind of a shopkeeper in deciding upon the ultimate farthing or mil which he shall demand,
or of his customer which he shall haggle upon, I do not believe either party ever attributes the
smallest weight to their consideration. In reply to the question, therefore, I can only say that I
do not believe any facility of the sort, worth speaking of, will be lost by adopting the Decimal
Principle. So long as we pay by tale and not by weight, so long will there exist this margin of
uncertainty and haggling.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE's QUESTIONS
103.
21. Under our present system,--
- Mils. Pence.
1 lb. !-- one shilling 50 12
4 lb. = sixpence 25 6
# lb. = threepence 12°5 3
§ lb. or 2 ounces = three halfpence 6'25 l;
# lb. or 1 ounce = three farthings 3' 125 #
In cases of this kind, will the ordinary trans-
actions of the market be carried on under a
Decimal System with simplicity or convenience
comparable to that which is obtained by the
present system 7
22. Would a change from our present to a
Decimal System of Notation and of Coins secure
any advantages in Brevity of Expression, in
Facility of stating Accounts, in Simplicity of
Form, in Speed or Accuracy of Calculation, or
in Facility of Payments 2
23. In the Report of the discussion, at the
Institution of Civil Engineers, of Mr. Yates'
Paper on the French system of Measures,
Weights, and Coins, the following passage
occurs (p. 60):-
“The pound sterling, consisting of 960
“farthings, admits of 19 divisions* with-
“ out a remainder ; but if divided into
“ 1,000 parts, it only admits of 8 divi-
“sions. Existing Weights and Measures
“ are chiefly reckoned by 2, 4, 8, 12, 20,
“ 24, 36, &c., which admit of divisions by
“existing monies ; but if a monetary
“ decimal system be adopted, without also
“ adapting it to weights and measures,
“ it must be evident that the number of
“fractions will be greatly multiplied.
“ Decimal coins will not accord with the
“ fractions of a pound of 16 ounces, nor
“ with those of a yard of 36 inches. Pur-
“ chases of #, #, #, ſº, &c. of any integer
“ could not be paid for decimally without
“ incurring a loss by fractions not repre-
“ sented by Coins. Now those are pre-
“ cisely the quantities in which the
working classes principally make their
“ purchases; consequently they would be
“ the chief sufferers by the introduction
“ of a Decimal Coimage, unless there is
“ a simultaneous adoption of Decimal
“Weights and Measures. This anomaly
“ was severely felt in the United States,
and to obviate the inconvenience Spanish
“ pieces of 6} and 12# cents, although il-
legal coins, were of necessity employed.”
Must the truth and force of this statement
be admitted, or, if not, what answer can be
given to it 2
1857, p. 339.) As regards the 12% and 63 cent
Answer. See answer to the last question
The Decimal System once established, I do not
conceive that there would be any difference of
facility worth mentioning.
Answer. See the answer to Question 2 (b)
and (d), and the Note. As to facility of payments,
only the difference between mils and farthings,-
the mils admitting of a closer approximation to
any non-exact value, as being smaller fractions
of 11.
Answer. See answer to Question 20. Mr.
Yates omits the divisor 7 in his enumeration. It
needs only to consult any priced list to be satis-
fied of the small percentage of cases to which
this argument from aliquot subdivision applies.
As regards the 6% and 12% cent pieces in America,
it should be observed that the American cent
is ºr of a shilling (taking the dollar at 4s.),
or almost exactly # penny. If then the exi-
gencies of American Retail required the use of
the farthing, or its equivalent the half-cent, at a
time when there was no such coin as a half-cent,
there was no remedy but to resort to a foreign
coin. There is no doubt that in New York, and
perhaps in other great cities in the United States,
as in our own, the farthing is wanted. [The fare
of an omnibus in New York is 6% cents, and is
probably usually paid in such a coin as Mr. Yates
mentions, but that a Spanish copper coinage can
pervade the Union as a matter of necessity, is
quite incredible.] In fact, it appears from Mr.
Snowden's Report to the Secretary of the United
States Treasury, (Prelim. Rep. Dec. Comm. 1857,
p. 340,) that there exist now abundance of half-
cents which have been coined by the United States
mint. This circumstance proves that the American
unit of value (the dollar) is just double what the
exigencies of commerce require, and that the
florin, whose centesimal is about the minimum
coin required (or the pound, whose millesimal is
so,) is the better unit. As regards the arguments
for aliquots and for the binary and tertiary system
of subdivision, see also M. Michel Chevalier's
Letter to Lord Monteagle, (Rep. 1857, p. 211,)
which renders further reply superfluous.
As to the practical inconvenience of a Decimal
System in money, and not in weights and mea-
sures, see Mr. Everett's reply to Questions 25 and
26 of the Circular of H. M. Commissioners. (Rep.
pieces (called 6%), see his reply to Question 23
(p. 338). As to any “practical inconvenience” produced by the retention of these coins, see
Mr. Ewart's Letter to Mr. Baily. (Prelim. Rep. 1857, 342.) Be that as it may, it appears they
are about to be called in, and their use suppressed as a nuisance.
24, (1.) In the retail transactions of the Shop
or Market, is not division into halves, quarters,
thirds, eighths, twelfths, &c. more convenient,
and more in unison with the natural habits of
mankind, than the division into tenths 2
(2.) “The decimal numbers, applied to the
“ French weights and measures, form one
of its highest theoretic excellences. It
has, however, been proved by the most
decisive experience in France, that they
are not adequate to the wants of man
in society, and, for all the purposes of
retail trade, they have been formally
(Snowden to Mintern.)
Answer. (1.) Halves and quarters are natu-
ral subdivisions. Nature affords ready means of
halving many things, lengths, weights. But not
so of thirds or fifths. And accordingly nobody
ever goes to buy “a third of a pound,” or even
the “third of a yard,” though there is a measure
to represent it. -
(2.) The reason why these Spanish coins were
retained in use has been explained in answer to
Question 23. It was because the American unit
(4s.) was pitched too high for a centesimal sub-
division, and too low for a millesimal. From the
testimomy of Messrs. Snowden, Everett, and
Eward above referred to, it appears that these
remarks of Mr. Quincy Adams (in 1821) are now
* Qy. 960 admits of 27 divisions, not 19 ; 1,000 of 15 divisions, not 8.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
*
N 4
104
DECIMAL conAGE commission:
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
&
º
abandoned. The convenience of Deci-
“ malarithmetic is in its nature merely a
convenience of calculation ; it belongs
essentially to the keeping of accounts,
but is merely an incident to the trans-
actions of trade. It is applied, there-
fore, with unquestionable advantage, to
monies of account, as we have done ;
yet, even in our application of it to
the Coins, we have not only found it
inadequate, but in some respects incon-
venient. The divisions of the Spanish
dollar, as a Coin, are not only into
tenths, but into halves, quarters, fifths,
eighths, sixteenths, and twentieths. We
have the halves, quarters, and twen-
tieths, and might have the fifths, but
“ the eighth makes a fraction of the cent,
“ and the sixteenth even a fraction of a
mil. These eighths and sixteenths form
“a very considerable proportion of our
metallic currency, and although the
“ eighth, dividing the cent only into
“ halves, adapts itself without incon-
venience to the system, the fraction of
the sixteenth is not so tractable ; and
“ in its circulation, as small change, it
“ passes for six cents, though its value is
six and a quarter, and there is a loss by
its circulation of four per cent, between
“ the buyer and the seller. For all the
transactions of retail trade, the eighth
and sixteenth of a dollar are among the
most useful and convenient of our Coins ;
and, although we have never coined
them ourselves, we should have felt the
want of them, if they had not been Sup-
plied to us from the Coinage of Spain.”
—QUINCY ADAMS's Report to Senate of
United States, 1821, p. 81.
&
6
&
º
&
&
Ç
C
&
&
C
&
&
&
&
G
6
6
&
C
&
&
&
&
6
&
6
&
&
6
&
&
6
6
6
&
25. The late Lord Ashburton, in a debate in
the House of Commons on this subject, re-
marked, “That the capacity of division by
“ halves and quarters which attends our shil-
“ lings is extremely convenient for the common
“ purposes of life, which upon the whole is the
“ best criterion of any system.” Is this correct
or otherwise 2
How is the shilling expressed as 50 mils to
be divided into quarters, or the sixpence ex-
pressed as 25 mils to be divided into halves 2
26. It is stated by Sir John Herschel, in his
Evidence before the Committee of the IIouse of
Commons, (Qu. 594,) that in his opinion “it is
“ a great misfortune that Decimal Coins will
“ never fit the fractions of a yard and of
“ pounds and of measures.” Must we concur
in that opinion; and if so, must we concur in
the further view of Sir John Herschel that, “a
“ Decimal System of Weights and Measures,
“ as well as of Coins, ought to form a part of
“ the same integral system " ?
out of date, half-cents being in circulation. Mr.
Snowden proposes to abolish them for the singular
reason that “they are useless, because no one
will take the trouble to make a cent with two
pieces of money :” and the Government has
acted on the suggestion, (New Coinage Law of
Jan. 15, 1857,) and at the same time called in the
12} and 63 pieces, which is equivalent to de-
claring that the half-cent is no longer required in
American retail, whatever it might be in 1821,
when Mr. Adams wrote the Report cited. See
also answer to Question 53, (1) and (2).
Answer. The only answer this admits of is,
that the capacity of the shilling for division into
5 cents, and each of them again into 10 mils, will
also no doubt be found convenient for the common
purposes of life, if we may quote the experience
of those countries which have a Decimal Coinage.
Answer. I retain both these opinions, but I
must protest against their being drawn into an
argument against the adoption of a Decimal
System of money. 1st, as regards the arith-
metical want of fitting. To take a parallel case.
It is a great misfortune, as regards the theory of
harmony and the practice of music, that the
series of powers of # and of # are non-coincident,
and that in consequence no scale of perfect fifths
will coincide exactly with any scale of perfect
octaves, by reason of which there can be no
perfect harmony. But this does not prevent our
making excellent music, by allowing a little adjustment or “temperament” to bring the notes
together.
27. In the evidence given before the House
of Commons, Sir John Herschel gives his
opinion, that the Decimalization of Weights
and Measures and of Coins should go hand in
hand (Qu. 598); but if that be impracticable,
he inclines to the opinion that Decimalization
of Weights and Measures should be a step
towards that of Coinage. (Qu. 600.)
Professor De Morgan would adopt a Decimal
Coinage first, leaving the other (Decimal
Weights and Measures) for a future period.
(Qu. 769.) -
Mr. Airy thinks that the adoption of a De-
cimal system of Weights and Measures desirable
As regards the other part of the question, see answer to Question 27.
Answer. As it appears that there is a diver-
sity of opinion about the order of adoption among
parties who yet agree that both should be adopted,
I consider the correct view to be contained in the
precept, “Hoc age.” Waive the discussion of
priority, and act in the matter in hand. I do not
consider the adoption of a Decimal System of
Weights and Measures essential to the usefulness
of a Decimal System of money. I think it would
be better if that of Weights and Measures could
be introduced first ; but that it would at all
events be an improvement to have the money deci-
malized, even without the weights and measures.
The more so, that it appears by M. Michel Che-
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS.
105
to some extent, and probably concurrent with
the Binary system. (Qu. 481.)
What is the correct view on those points 2
Is the adoption of a Decimal system of Weights
and Measures essential to the efficiency and
usefulness of a Decimal Coinage 2 Ought it
to precede, to accompany, or to follow, as a
necessary consequence, the introduction of
Decimal Coinage?
28. (1.) Is it not the fact that next to addition,
the most important operation performed on
numbers representing broken sums of money is
the finding the price of a broken quantity of
material when the price of a given unit of the
material is a given broken sum ?
(2.) Is not this operation in theory the multi-
plication of a broken quantity of material by a
broken sum of money? Is it not usually per-
formed, and with great facility, by the rule
denominated “Practice”?
valier's evidence, that the resistance to be ex-
pected to the former is less than to the latter.
Answer. (1.) Admitted.
(2.) Yes, as to the theory. As to the facility
of “Practice,” it is easy, with practice. Some
are more expert at it than others. There is a
certain readiness which makes it easy to those
whose turn of mind it suits. Some have great
difficulty in applying it, and I believe nine persons
out of ten who can add up £ s. d. correctly, would be puzzled by the example here set down. If
it occurred to myself, I should probably decimalize both the weights and measures, and multiply.
(3.) Is it not the fact that one of the great
advantages of a completely Decimal System of
Money, Weights, and Measures would be that
such operations would be performed by simple
Multiplication ? Is it not the fact that this
result would not be attained unless weights
and measures were decimalised as well as
money?
(4.) If money alone were decimalised, would
not such operations be still performed by
“Practice,” and would the operations be much
or at all simplified?
(3.) Such no doubt is one of the great advantages
of the Decimal System of Money, Weights, and
Measures. It would not be completely attained
without a decimalization of the latter. But it
would partially ; for instance, in the sum pro-
posed I should find the decimalization of the
money done to my hand.
(4.) That I very much doubt; and I am not
sure that the operations are simplified, though
they may be made to look shorter on paper by
leaving out a good deal of the work. I appre-
hend that in business such sums as the example
do not very often occur, and that if there be a business in which they do, recourse must, I
suppose, be had to a certain useful book called the “Ready Reckoner,” or to special tables kept
in the counting-house.
Indeed, I think it would be safe to say that if they did occur frequently,
and had to be worked by practice, commercial business could not be carried on
(5.) Take, for example, the following case,
given by Sir Charles Pasley in his Evidence
before the Committee of the House of Com-
mons, as showing the advantage of the Decimal
System.
215 tons, 17 cwt. 3 qrs. 9 lbs. at £9 11s. 64d.
a ton. Under the present system we should
Say—
215 tons, 17 cwt. 3 qrs. 9 lbs.,
2é s. d.
at £1 per ton ~ 215 17 10 – gºs
at £8 , = 1,727 2 8 — ºf
at 10s. = } -: 107 18 11 — ºf
1s. = ºr - 10 15 10 fºr
6d. = # - 5 7 11 ºr
#d. = ºr - o 4 6
+.
at £9 11s. 64d. £2,067 7 84
If weights and measures as well as coins were
decimalized, the question might be :—Required,
the price of 483,597 lbs. at £4.275 per 1,000
lbs., which would be a question of simple
Multiplication.
But if only coins were decimalized, then in
the pound and mil system we should have 215
tons, 17 cwt. 3 qrs. 9 lbs. at £9:576 per ton,
which we should probably work in the follow-
1ng manner:--
100 tons = 957-600
100 , F. 957-600
10 , - 95.760
5 : = } = 47-880
10 cwt. = Tº = 4-788
5 * = # = 2°394
1 .. = } = '498'5
1 > = 1 = '498.5
2 qrs. = } = “249-25
1 > = # = • 124'625
7 lbs. = } = •O31 - 11.5
! .. = } = •004:450
1 : = } = •004:450
215 tons, 17 owt, 3 q's, 9 lbs, = 2067-433
O
(5.) In the working of this sum in £ s. d. by
practice, as here set down, there are 55 figures on
the right of the sign =. In the decimal working
75, but of these 8 are superfluous cyphers, which
might be omitted in writing, and which at all
events involve no thought or calculation. Re-
jecting these the number is 67, being a difference
of 12 figures only. But on the other hand, in
the decimal working, all is plain, straightforward,
“simple" multiplication and division, while in
the other there is a deal of head work that does
not appear on the paper, and some calculation
which ought to appear. It is not obvious to in-
tuition how the fractions—ºs, -ºs, -ºk, Tºy, Tºy,
are obtained; far less, that together they make a
halfpenny.
The work would rum as follows:—
ºf + ºr = — ; + 1
S
- ?s – º – ºn tº +
= };} = } nearly.
— 5 ſ,
tained 2 It arises from the 3 qrs. 9 lbs.
The calculation ought to be set down, but is
not. And how is the 4s. 6d. in the last line got
from the 45 7s. 114%rd. To divide this sum by
24 is a “compound division” sum, which no man
could safely do in his head; the work ought to
be set down. Were all this done, the number of
figures involving calculation would be greatly
increased, to say nothing of the chances of error
in the intermediate head work which is still
necessary. I should almost be disposed to cite
this example as a distinct proof of the superiority
of the decimal mode of proceeding, even under
the disadvantage of a “Practice” working.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart,
106
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
: Is much or anything gained in this case
unless weights and measures as well as coins
are decimalised?
29. (1.) Will not the introduction of a De-
cimal System of Coins and Accounts necessarily
tend to render the present system of Weights
and Measures very inconvenient, and thus to
force the country into the application of the
Decimal principle to Weights and Measures for
the sake of necessary correspondence with the
Coinage 2
force) the country to carry out the system to its
(2) “The concurrent use of non-decimal
“ division of commodities with a Decimal
“Coinage tends, in reckoning prices, to a
“ result expressed in a binary fraction of
“ a cent. In such cases, if payment be
“ made, three fourths of a cent is liqui-
“ dated with a cent ; a half-cent is some-
“ times paid the same way, sometimes not
noticed. The quarter cent is not liqui-
“ dated. In accounts the three quarters,
“ halves, and fourths of a cent are gene-
rally entered, and added in on footing
the columns, the total being carried to
the cents, a fraction above half a cent
“ being counted as a cent. It is believed
that no sensible loss to either party arises
in the long run from this practice. Even
“ in a complete Decimal System of
weights, measures, and coins it would
be impossible to liquidate accurately all
“ reckonings, unless the least coin were
“ smaller than the public would endure.”
—Answer to No. 36 of Circular Queries,
by J. Ross SNOWDEN, Director of the
Mint of the United States.
30. A great practical authority, Mr. Slater,
has stated that one consequence of the intro-
duction of Decimal Coinage will be, that
articles will be made up in parcels of ten
each, instead of dozens as at present. Will
not this be less convenient for subdivision than
the present practice of making up articles in
dozens?
Ç
&
&
&
&
Ç
Ç
6
&
K
&
&
&
&
&
&
Answer. (1.) I think it will not tend (other-
wise than as a change, viz., temporarily), to pro-
duce any inconvenience worth mentioning, by
reason of its inconsistency with the Weights and
Measures; but I do consider that the sense of
that temporary inconvenience, together with the
very obvious consideration of the great advan-
tages of a further change in the same direction
will have a powerful tendency to persuade (not
completion.
(2.) These remarks of Mr. Snowden are per-
fectly just. No system of coinage can run down
to the “accurate liquidation of all reckonings.”
The Decimal System carried down to mils affords
a closer approximation to this mathematical pre-
cision than the farthing system, as rºo is a
Smaller fraction than pào.
Answer. Mr. Slater himself has replied in the
negative. He says expressly that no practical
inconvenience could result from it. But what
says common sense ? If I want a dozen pair of
gloves I go to a shop and buy them. The shop-
man's business, not mine, is to make the dozen
and put them up for me ; and the probability is,
that the shopman, who has to sell to his next
customer a single pair or two, or three, will suffer
no inconvenience from having a broken parcel. He must answer the miscellaneous demands of
his customers by breaking his parcels, equally, whether they are made up in tens or in dozens.
After all, America and France have decimal money. Is it a fact that they make up parcels in
tens or dozens P
If in dozens, Mr. Slater's conclusion that the tens will drive out the dozens, is
falsified ; if in tens, it can only be that it is found more convenient to do so, and if so, why
should it not be equally found so in England? and where, then, is the disadvantage 2 Of course,
whoever adopts a system adopts its peculiar habits and conveniences.
31. Does not the anticipation of the change
in this respect afford a practical illustration of
the tendency of a Decimal Coinage to force the
country into the adoption of Decimal Weights
and Measures 2
32. Is not this an inversion of the natural
and proper course P Ought not the country to
decide in the first instance what system is most
properly applicable to Weights and Measures,
and then proceed to adjust Coinage and Ac-
counts to that system, Coins and Accounts
being the means for adjusting and registering
the Retail payments which arise out of trans-
actions which have had their origin in Weights
and Measures 2
Answer. If a change be really anticipated it
can only be that the country has begun to
perceive that there are good reasons for mak-
ing the change, and they cannot but see that
the same reasons apply with still greater weight
to a further change ; as to force, it remains in the
will of the country either to stop short half way
or to go on, or not to begin.
Answer. The natural and proper course, when
great improvements or systems of improvements
have to be made, is, to begin with that which is
under all the circumstances most readily practic-
able, provided that it be in itself advantageous, and
have no tendency to obstruct further progress by
raising up unforeseen obstacles.
The question submitted to the present Com-
mission for examination is, “How far it may be
“ advisable and practicable to introduce the
“ principle of decimal division into the Coinage
“ of the United Kingdom ?” not whether it would be more advisable or more practicable to
My individual opinion is,
introduce it into the whole system of money, weights, and measures.
that a Decimal Metrical System would have a much more powerful tendency to bring on a
Decimal monetary system as its natural supplement, than the latter the former; but this would
not lead me to reject the latter when brought within reach, in hopes of the former—still in
nubibus.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S. QUESTIONS.
107.
33. The Select Committee of Parliament of
1821 recommended that the subdivision of
Weights and Measures employed in this
country oe retained, as being far better
adapted to common practical purposes than
the Decimal scale. If this recommendation
be founded on sound reason, is it not equally
applicable to the case of Coinage as it is
to Weights and Measures 2 Is it not fully
as true of Coins as it is of Weights and
Measures, that the present subdivision of them
is well adapted to all common practical pur-
poses 2
See Evidence of J. E. Gray, Esq. (Qu. 378.)
Answer. I do not think this recommendation
founded on sound reason, nor that the system of
coins (any more than of weights and measures)
is well adapted to a great many purposes, which
are both common and practical, though in the
mere matter of liquidating accounts they answer
very well.
I have read the evidence of Dr. J. E. De Gray
(Qu. 378), and am not impressed by his arguments,
nor by the opinions of Mr. De Grave on Weights
and Measures; nor by Mr. Bates' remark on the
difficulty of obliging people to conform to a
Decimal System in their purchases by measure.
From Mr. Jessop's statement, that the object of the
change being uniformity, you have to compare the
uniformity you will lose with that you will gain, one who did not know our system would
conclude that there exists a uniformity in our present system which is only true of the uniformity
of its use among all classes (and that not in all things). But it is improvement, not uniformity,
(as such) that is aimed at for its own sake ;—that particular uniformity which carries with it
other advantages. If the Decimal System of money were not superior, and vastly so to our
present system, I agree with Mr. Gurney (cited by Dr. Gray), that we ought not to make the
change; but I look to superiority in other points than mere payment over the counter.—See
Answer to Qu. 2.
(2.) Dr. Peacock, speaking of the introduc-
tion of the French Metrical System, says,
Encycl. Metrop. Art. Arithmetic, p. 448 :—
“The decimal subdivision of these measures
“ possessed many advantages on the score
“ of uniformity, and was calculated to
simplify in a very extraordinary degree
the arithmetic of concrete quantities.
“It was attended, however, by the sacri-
“fice of all the practical advantages
“ which attend subdivisions by a scale
“ admitting of more than one bisection,
“ which was the case with those pre-
“ viously in use, and it may well be
“ doubted whether the loss in this re-
“ spect was not more than a compensa-
tion for every other gain.” Must we
admit the weight of this authority and
the conclusion to which it leads P
34. Is it not the fact that in all matters of
abstract number and multiplication of material
things there appears to be a general instinctive
tendency to adopt the Decimal System, whilst in
dealing with material subdivision, whether in
length, capacity, or weight, there is an equally
strong tendency to adopt the Binary System,
the Decimal System in arithmetical calculation,
the Binary System in weights and measures,
and the retail transactions of the market
arising out of them P
&
&
(2.) I think not. I am sorry to differ with
Dr. Peacock, for whose judgment in most things
I have a high respect, but I consider that the
loss is trifling and the gain great.
Answer. I am quite unable to say whether
there be such an instinctive tendency as is here
propounded for the adoption of the Decimal Sys-
tem in multiplying units. As regards the strong
tendency to Binary subdivision, it would seem
to arise (in so far as it may be supposed to exist),
not from any instinct, but from our experience of
the facility which some material objects afford
for actual bisection. Thus, a given length of
string is bisected by doubling the two ends toge-
ther and straightening out the double string, a
sheet of paper in a similar way, a weight of
easily divisible matter by placing part in one Scale and part in the other, and adjusting the equi-
librium by taking from the heavier and adding to the lighter, &c., while for ternary or quinary
subdivision no such facility exists. Another reason for its prevalence is pointed out in Answer
to Qu. 47 (2), 53 (2).
However, admitting the instinct, it may be observed in reply that the nature of man is partly
instinctive, partly rational, and that the whole history of civilized progress is little else than an
account of the steps made towards the subduing and keeping within proper limits the influence
of the former, and the cherishing and improvement of the latter. If Decimal multiplication and
binary subdivision be instinctive, and if this instinct is to be obeyed as a law of our nature, what-
ever reason may urge against it, we ought to reject decimal fractions altogether, and to employ
the Arabic system of numeration on the left hand of the decimal point, and the Liebnitzian or
binary system on the right hand. We are bound, moreover, in all common sense to do this if it
would really tend to make our computations easier and our conceptions of their meaning more
distinct.
(2.) On this point let us see what the books of
arithmetic tell us. The pound avoirdupois is our
unit of weight; it is multiplied by 2 x 7 (and not
by 10) to give the stone ; by 28, 56, 112, to give
the quarter, half cwt., and cwt. The cwt. is multiplied by 20 to give the ton. Again, the yard,
which is our legal unit of length, is multiplied by 11 to give the rod, by 22 to give the chain, by
220 to give the furlong (2 × 11 × 10), and by 8 times this to give the mile. The gallon, which
is our legal unit of capacity, is doubled to make the peck, octupled to make the bushel. . In all
this it is not easy to trace any dominant instinctive Decimal System of multiplication, but on
the contrary a mass of confusion calling loudly for abolition; and the same may be said of our
whole system of customary and local (though illegal) multiples. Next, as to the alleged universal
(2.) Are not all the integers of our weights |
and measures multiplied decimally, but divided
by the binary scale?
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
ºmºsºmº-mººs ºmgº
O 2
I08
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
º
Binary System of subdivision. The yard is divided into 3 feet, the foot into 12inches, the ounc
into 437; grains, the rood into 40 poles or perches (there being no square measure of 10 poles, by
which the rood could be broken into 4). It is suggested in Question 66 that a harmony subsists
between our fractional coins and our system of weights and measures.
The above particulars
render it difficult to perceive in what that harmony consists.
(3.) Do we not speak of ten yards, a hundred
yards, a thousand yards? But when we come
to subdivide the yard, do we not think and
speak of half a yard, quarter of a yard, &c.,
and similarly in all other cases 2
(4.) “The earliest and most venerable of
‘ historical records extant, in perfect co-
“ incidence with speculative theory, prove
“ that decimal arithmetic, as founded in
nature, is peculiarly applicable to the
standard units of weights and measures,
“ but not to their subdivisions or frac-
“tional parts, nor to the objects of ad-
“ measurement or weights.” — QUINCY
ADAMS's Report to Senate of United States,
1821, p. 16.
&
&
&
&
&
6
&
35. Is it not then natural and convenient
that our integer of money, the £ sterling,
should be similarly treated f That whilst we
speak of ten pounds, one hundred pounds, one
thousand pounds, we should subdivide the £
sterling into half a pound, or 10s. ; a quarter
of a pound, or 5s. 2 And again, that we should
subdivide a shilling into half a shilling, or 6d. ;
a quarter of a shilling, or 3d., and so on 2–
thus applying a Decimal arithmetic to the
standard unit of our coinage, the £ sterling,
but, not to its subdivisions or fractional parts 2
36. In the Report of the Legislative Assem-
bly of Canada on Decimal Currency (p. 14) is
the following statement:—
(1.) “The Decimal Currency admits of but
“ one aliquot division—into halves ; but
“ the New York shilling, an eighth of a
“ dollar, can be divided into sixths, quar-
“ ters, thirds, halves, &c., and although
“ Congress has never coined any shillings,
the American people during sixty years
have clung to their well-worn shillings
and sixpences, perceiving them to be
a great public convenience.”
Ç
6
%
&6
& C
other.
(3.) This is undeniable, but we also speak of
a fathom, a chain, a furlong, and a mile, and we
do often speak also of a foot or an inch. There
is no absolute indefeasible usage or law of our
nature broken through in so doing.
(4.) Had Mr. Adams cited the particular
passages of Scripture to which he appears to
refer, it might be possible to discuss seriatim
their bearings on the question. In relation to
the position of the universally instinctive ten-
dency to Binary subdivision, it may, however, be
remarked that the Hebrew seah was # of the
ephah or bath, the hin # of the ephah, the
omer ºn, the cab s and the cotyla rºw. Again,
in weights, the shekel being the original unit,
we find the bekah (it is true) half a shekel, but
the gerah fºr of the bekah.
Answer. The premises being denied, or shewn
to have no bearing on the subject, or at all
events no conclusive weight as argument, the
conclusion is inadmissible. See also the last
paragraph.
Answer. This clinging to some outstanding
portions of an old system, even when the new is
admittedly superior, is part and parcel of every
considerable change. The reason assigned (if it
be more than an inference on the part of the
reporting committee) is probably referable to the
fact pointed out in the answer to Question 23,
viz., the necessity of some payable value below
the cent, which is the equivalent of our half-
penny. It appears, however, by the new Coin-
age Law of the United States §§ 2 and 4, that
the binary subdivisions of the dollar are called
in, and the coinage of the half-cent discontinued,
measures which seem contradictory to each
There may, however, be half-cents enough in circulation for the present to replace the
other pieces, each of which did the work of a half-cent.
(2.) “Your Committee are of opinion that
“ coins representing the eighth and six-
teenth of a dollar, are indispensable
in small transactions in Canada, and
that the smooth British sixpences will
continue to pass extensively as the
eighth of a dollar unless a better
“ coinage is provided.”
(3.) In a communication from the Rev.
Joshua Leavitt of New York (p. 48 of the
same Report), this further remark occurs:–
“I have no doubt of the superiority of the
“ Decimal System for the purposes of
“ Accounts, and am astonished that other
“ countries have so long delayed its adop-
“tion. Our experience of the benefit of
“our federal currency in this respect is all
one way. The saving of time and
labour is prodigious, and the advantage
in point of correctness and of the faci-
lity of detecting errors unquestionable.
But for the purposes of small circula-
tion, in marketing, huckstering, and the
like, I am persuaded that a Duodecimal
“Currency like that of England, or like
that which formerly prevailed in the
city of New York, is far preferable.
These small transactions of daily life
outnumber the transactions of commerce
&
&
C
Ç
&
<
&
&
&
%
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
Ç
6
%
&
66
&
(2.) An importation of British farthings would
seem to have been the more natural and recom-
mendable provision for the sort of exigency
contemplated.
(3.) Mr. Leavitt seems to contemplate as
practicable a Decimal System of account-keeping
concurrent with an æ s. d. system of money
payment. I do not believe this to be practicable.
Any one now may if he please keep his accounts
decimally, but he will have a table to consult or
a calculation to make at every entry. We must
choose between the two courses, and we must
balance between those vast and “prodigious”
advantages which Mr. Leavitt so justly states, on
the one side, and the very much exaggerated
amount of inconvenience in the huckstering
departments of commerce, which an overwhelm-
ing mass of testimony from countries where a
Decimal Coinage exists, shows to disappear alto-
gether in practice, or at most to be of infinite-
simal importance.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS.
109
“ almost infinitely. And it seems impos-
“ sible to make a Decimal Currency as
“ convenient in these as the old currency.”
(4). “One reason is, that the Decimal Cur-
“rency admits of only one aliquot divi-
“sion, that is, into halves. The shilling.
“can be divided into halves, quarters,
“thirds, sixths, and twelfths; and if it
“were needed, a coin of the value of two
“thirds of a shilling would be found
“manageable. In all these countless
(4.) The convenience in question only exists
when the price of the unit is a readily subdivi-
sible one. These cases in the present system are
not the majority, nor even a large minority.
Under the Decimal System, carried to mils, sub-
divisible prices would probably be more common
than at present.
“ small transactions which I have referred
“to, and in which every man is employed *r
“many times every day, this capability of
“subdivision is of great convenience. We
“are constantly buying a half of a thing,
“ or a quarter, the eighth, the one third,
“ and so on. If the price is a dollar, we
“can make the change for one half, for
“one quarter, and if one, two, or more
“pence, with our Decimal Currency; but
“we cannot pay the exact price of one
“third, one sixth, one eighth, one twelfth,
“ or any other of the fractional parts. If
“ the price is half a dollar, we can only
“pay for one half, one fifth, and one tenth.
“If the price is a quarter of a dollar, we
“can pay for no aliquot division whatever.
“This is a constant inconvenience, and
“can be got along with in no other way
“ than by disregarding small differences.”
5.) The inconvenience complained of in
the United States in so far as it really existed
was no doubt owing to the want at an early
period of a coined equivalent to the farthing or
(5.) If a Decimal Coinage be introduced into
this country, is there any reason to suppose
that the inconveniences here stated as the result
of practical experience in the United States
will not equally occur in this country
- country.
(6.) Will it be possible to obtain the eighth (6.) Assuredly not.
or the sixteenth of a florin, or the quarter of a
shilling, or the half of a sixpence, under the
proposed Decimal System 2
(7.) If the small differences, necessarily (7.) It will not of necessity be disregarded.
arising from this imperfect divisibility of the
Decimal Coins, must be disregarded, upon
whom will the unavoidable loss fall ?
dation, which permit of an indefinitely approxi-
mate adjustment of prices; and the retail dealer
who fixes the price of small fractional amounts
in quantity does, as is abundantly proved in evidence (see Report, 1853; Kirkham, Question
1387, 1395; Lindsey, Question 1015; Strugnell, Question 928, 934, 937), make his final adjust-
ment as to the extreme farthing on a variety of considerations, among which quality enters as
one, the desire of gain by trifling overcharges, as another; the desire of extending his custom by
sacrificing the ultimate outstanding trifle, as another; &c.; some telling one way, some another.
In cases where quality is not available for this final adjustment, and where there must be a loss
to one or other party, the close dealer takes the advantage and the liberal dealer gives it, and
there is no manner of doubt that it tells upon his custom. It is one among the many considera-
tions which gain for one shop the character of a cheap, and for another of a dear one, with those
to whom the odd half-farthing is an appretiable fraction of their daily expenditure. Where there
is competition, these customers are both able and willing to discriminate. Where there is not, the
dealer has the poor customer at his mercy in many ways far more productive of profit, and will
very likely affect to despise this small source of gain, to lay it on in the price of the unit
tenfold.
(8.) With the tradesman will it not be an
accumulating loss consuming his profits; and
will it not be impossible therefore for him to
bear it 2
(8.) Assuredly not ; see answer to (7). He
will not suffer it to consume his profits; he
will price his articles (if he give the ultimate
fraction) so as to make the fair profits of his
trade. If he take it, competition will force him
to do the same, and not to exceed them. Besides, a retail dealer who makes his profit by selling
an immense number of trifling quantities must keep more shopmen, who must be paid. (Kirkham,
Question 1381). It is as much trouble to weigh and put up a quarter of an ounce as a pound.
If every transaction be made to pay itself, there is a constant element in every price (the remune-
ration for the shopman's time and trouble) independent of the variable part proportional to the
quantity sold, and which may not improperly be considered as covered, in the long run, by these
small fractions when taken: when not taken their total amount merges in the general expenditure
of the business. º
(9.) Must it not therefore necessarily fall See the last Answers.
upon the small purchaser 2
(10.) The principle of the objection is, that
(9.) No.
(10.) The principle of the objection is no doubt
the Decimal System substitutes the divisors 2 very clearly stated here, though in somewhat
and for the 5 divisors 2 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, which are copious detail; but it seems only necessary in
mil, so that there is no reason to expect it in this
The qualities of articles differ by shades of gra-
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
O 3
Hi}{} ... . . ; ; , DECIMAEGOINAGE GOMMISSION: ... . . . .
Sir J. JF. W.
. Herschel, Bart.
thing. . . .
the natural divisors for material things, and are reply to reiterate what is said in answer to
also the divisors of our present money, giving | Nos. (5), (7), (8), (9). As regards the United
us the third, fourth, and half parts of every- States, the real inconvenience now felt would
‘. . . . . . . . . . . . . rather appear to be the existence in circulation
That the effect of this will be, in the sale of of those eighths and sixteenths of dollars, the
broken parcels of commodities, a small money | continuance of a usage which has been felt to be
remainder, involving loss to shopkeeper or a nuisance, and which is in process of being got
customer. . . . . . . . . . . rid of. See Answer to Question 36 (1).
This, we see, is a source of constant incon-
venience in the United States. . . . . . .
Let us take the descending steps from
8s.
8s., or 400 mils, or 4 florins, is not divisible
by 32, the divisor of # oz.
4s. or 200 mils, or 2 florins, is not divisible
by 16, the divisor of 1 oz.
2s., or 100 mils, or 1 florin, is not divisible
by 8, the divisor of 2 oz.
1s., or 50 mils, or #-florin, is not divisible by
4, the divisor of 4 lb.
6d., or 25 mils, is not divisible by 2, the
divisor of # lb.
In each of these cases, in the purchase of a
broken quantity of material, # oz., 1 oz., 3 lb.,
# lb., will there not necessarily arise a broken
sum of money, which cannot be paid in any
coin ; a small “difference which must be dis-
regarded,” to the loss of buyer or seller ?
(11.) Mark how under a Decimal Coinage (11.) It is precisely in these lower amounts
the difficulty occurs in an earlier stage, and in that the trouble and inconvenience to the shop-
a more serious form, than under the present keeper bear the largest ratio to the value of the
coinage, precisely as we descend to the lower article, sold, and which therefore justify him in
amounts, to those which are the usual preva- taking, rather than giving, the ultimate unad-
lent prices with the middle and lower classes. justed value, if any, and if his views of the
- nature of his business taken as a whole lead him
to prefer this course. -
(12.) If it be assumed that, instead of these (12.) Under any and every system some prices
prices, “competition will determine prices in will be divisible and some indivisible, and the
Decimals conveniently divisible by 2, 4, 8, or latter will always constitute the majority. If
16,” and therefore in prices not corresponding divisible prices be really felt to be a great object
to the Decimal money of Account ; if instead of public convenience, the mil system affords a
of one shilling, or 50 mils, the price of the more obviously available opportunity for doing
unit of the material is taken at 48 mils, is not it than our present system, and if experience
this in itself an admission that in introducing should show that coins of 30, 60, and 120 mils,
Decimal money we shall have introduced a were really found productive of any material
money not conveniently adapted to the purposes facility, I do not see why they should not be
of the market 2 - . . . • * struck, the great object after all being to obtain
- . . . . - a system of currency which shall be compatible
with a Decimal system of accounts retaining the pound sterling, and not, as our present, in
contradiction with it. I, for one, should be quite content to leave it an open question to be
decided by experience, what particular system of mil multiples should constitute our coinage,
provided our currency were decimalized. But I should give the first trial to the system of 1, 2,
3, 5, 20, 30, 50, 100 mils (with a few 10), reserving the option of enlarging the series by the intro-
duction of those above specified, or any others. That Decimal money, as such, is not found
inconvenient for marketing is matter of experience. It is a fact that cannot be argued down.
(13.) No point turns on the particular number
48. In the money transactions of a nation all
varieties of sums which can be stated in those
units which are ordinarily used will come to be
paid in the long run. The sums for which there
* - - exist single coins will, of course, somehow or
other come to be paid in those single coins more frequently than otherwise, but (except for
gratuities) I do not believe that the consideration of payment in a single coin determines many
prices, certainly not those of articles of general necessity and universal consumption ; and
provided the coins be forthcoming in reasonable proportion (as to number and value) each to the
whole Coinage (see Answer to Question 4), all the conditions of utility are satisfied.
(13.) And in so doing shall we not have in-
curred a new set of objections, namely, the
inconvenience of being obliged to use several
coins with which to pay the 48 mils, instead
of one coin with which 50 mils may be paid 2
37. Again : Mr. Leavitt bears testimony to Answer. I cannot imagine the practicability
the admirable qualities of the Decimal Cur- of such a thing with our present system of coins.
rency for Accounts, but asserts that for small The only objection I find against them is, that
circulation and payments in marketing, huck- the decimalization of accounts is incompatible
stering, and the like, a Duodecimal Coinage with our currency. Otherwise there is no
is also wanted and preferable to the other. quarrel with them as instruments of exchange;
These small transactions of daily life far out- nay, it may be admitted that—if Decimal ac-
number the dealings of commerce. And this counts and Decimal calculation were not an object
statement is sanctioned by the concurrence of worth contending for, or even worth submitting
the Committee of the Legislative Assembly of to some inconvenience for—the £ s. d. system is
Canada. . . . . . - quite as good as any other at present in use.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS.
11:1
Does not this statement distinctly point to
the necessity of not abandoning a Duodecimal
System of Coinage, but of introducing, if
possible, in connection with our present system
of coins, some means by which money trans-
actions may be recorded in a Decimal System
of Notation, thus retaining the present system
of coins undisturbed, but combining, with it
a Decimal System of Reckoning or Account
keeping 2 r
“Perhaps
“ tracted and multiplied experience that
“ the same material instruments shall be
“ divisible decimally for calculations and
“ accounts ; but in any other manner
“ suited to convenience in the shops and
“ markets ; that their appropriate legal
“ denominations shall be used for com-
“ putations, and the trivial (or customary)
“ names for actual weight and mensura-
“tion.”—QUINCY ADAMS's Report, p.
38. (1.) Are not the following the primary.
requirements of a good system of coinage 2
viz.:- +. .
it may bé found by more pro-
Answer (1.) I consider the primary requirements
of a good system of coinage to be—
1st. That it should admit of a system of regis-
tration and of computation (thereon founded) in
correspondence with and requiring no intermediate calculation to reduce itself to the algorithm
by which all civilized nations have at length agreed to represent number in the abstract, so as to
reduce the notion of pecuniary value to a combination of the two independent simple conceptions
of a pecuniary unit and of abstract number. - --- - - --- -
2ndly. That all individual coins should represent integer multiples of this unit, and that the
multiples used should be such as to render as easy as possible consistently with other objects
which may be deemed of superior importance (and they ought to be very important ones), their
addition into one sum. A - *
3rdly. That the pecuniary unit chosen should be adapted to the commercial exigencies of the
age (taking the word in its largest sense), and should express a value so small that its fractions
should, even to very poor persons, be matters of little moment. - - - -
4thly. That such a scale of these values should exist in the general system of coinage as to
throw as little difficulty as experience shall show to be possible into their mutual aliquot subdivi-
sion consistently with facility of addition into one sum. . -
5thly. That the coinage should consist of such numbers of each sort of coin as shall leave the
public under no difficulty in breaking any coin into coins of inferior denominations, and shall
enable them easily and readily to pay any given sum. -
6thly. That, inasmuch as the scale of abstract number is infinite, and the habitual citation of
very large numbers embarrassing ; the scale of coinage should be so constructed as that it shall
consist of stages, each ascending from the last by one and the same rule of amplification, so that
each stage shall afford a magnified unit capable of further amplification upon the same numerical
system on the one hand, and diminution on the other ; and that wherever the usages of society
shall render it necessary, a special name or names shall be imposed on one or more of these new
units.
(2.) 1st. That the integer should be divisible
into the greatest number of clean fractional
parts to correspond with the endless variety of
retail transactions which they are to be the
means of adjusting :
(3.) 2nd. That these fractional parts should
be expressible in the shortest and most simple
form of words, and with the smallest number
of figures:
it the “fallacy of the double maximum.”
(2.) I do not consider this to be a primary
requirement of a good system of coinage. In
fact it seems to involve a contradiction. If the
variety of retail transactions be (as it is) endless,
no system of clean fractional divisibility can cor-
respond to them. See Report of 1853, Questions
929, 1022, 1023.
(3.) Here we have an instance of a form of
expression or a form of requirement which is so
fertile a source of misconception and confusion
in political, social, and financial discussions that
is ought to be pointed out and proscribed. I call
It has to be shown in all such cases that the two
maxima are not inconsistent with one another.
will be found to carry the other along with it.
If this can be shown, then the one attained
If not, what becomes of one or the other ?
In the case before us, they are incompatible, the Decimal system involving fewer figures and
a shorter form of verbal expression, and the £ s. d. System the greater number of aliquot
subdivisions.
(4.) 3rd. That the Coins should be such,
both in denomination and relative value, as
may pass with the greatest facility in valuing
or summing them up when presented in great
numbers: " .
(5.) 4th. That they should be such as may
afford the greatest facility for mental concep-
tion, for recollection, and for the ordinary pro-
cesses of arithmetic which the people are daily
called upon to perform mentally in the tumult
of the market or shop, and without the oppor-
tunity of recording them in writing :
(4.) A triple maximum, and again incompa-
tible; amounts expressed decimally being infinitely
easier to be summed when presented in great
numbers, while the decimal subdivision gives
fewer aliquots.
(5.) A fourth maximum, and one which may,
or may not, be inconsistent with the first, accord-
ing to personal habits of mental conception and
recollection, and the sort of arithmetic to which
persons are used, or to which it is desirable for
the sake of civilized progress that they should
become used.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
-, *- : * ~~~~ * *.*.*.*.*.*.* ... •r ºr
O 4
112 º . . . DECIMAL COINA6E COMMISSION:
chel, Bart.
ſº F. W
(6.) I cannot admit this among a list of primary
requirements. If, consistently with other requisites
of infinitely greater moment, it can be secured in
any considerable degree, of course it ought. It
- v. | is easy, however, to call for the coincidence of a
number of perfections, but very difficult to unite them. All such things are affairs of com-
promise; to attain the greater advantage we must school ourselves to disregard the less.
Answer (1.) Whatever be the demerits of this
statement as an argument against the Decimal
System, it must be allowed in a pre-eminent degree
the merit of ingenuity. It would be perfect as an
argument, and would suffice to convince every
one of the absolute perfection of the #3 s. d.
system of reckoning if only two things were
granted, viz.,- -
1st, that the human "intellect stands in a defi-
nite relation to the scale of its pecuniary
(6.) 5th. That they should harmonize with
the natural tendency of mankind to subdivide
commodities for retail purposes ‘by continual
halving.
39. (1.) Is not the following a just descrip-
tion of the present system 2 -
In the ultimate subdivision, where the
binary division is alone useful, we have
two binary steps, viz., two farthings=1 half-
penny, two halfpence= 1 penny. In rising to
the next unit, the shilling, we have again the
factor 2 introduced twice, giving four 2s.
besides the number which, next to 2, is most
frequently required as a divisor, viz., 3. In
rising to the next unit, the #1, we have
again the factor 2 introduced twice, giving
six 2s. besides the prime number which, next
to 2 and 3 and their products, is most fre-
quently required as a divisor, viz., 5.
Thus giving the following table of the
factors of the number of each of our présent
units contained in the superior units:—
transactions, beginning with the meanest
capacity, capable only of binary arithmetic,
as corresponding to the lowest stage of
purchasing power, and proceeding upwards
by successive enlargements of idea to that
degree of worldly wellbeing which admits
the occasional handling of a gold piece ;
and,
2ndly, that there are no necessities of our
nature which require us to take in a larger
Farthing.
and more general conception of number; and

2 x 2 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × 3 × 2 × 2 × 5 which feel these narrow restrictions as a
2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × 3
-º- series of stumbling blocks interrupting the
2 × 2 × 3 × 2 × 2 × 5 continuity of progress. It is possible to
insist beyond what is fair and reasonable on
the advantages the £ s. d. system confers, or
is supposed to confer, on the very lowest and
least educated classes. The middle classes
(all between the nobility and the day
labourer) also call for consideration. It is
especially desirable (looking to the yearly
increasing political importance of those classes) that they should have no unnecessary obstacles
(see answer to Question 2 (e), (f), (g),) thrown in the way of their educational improvement,
and of their acquiring clear and comprehensive views of general commerce and finance.
(2.) Does not this system fulfil to a greater (2.) No doubt it fulfils some of them very well,
degree than any other possible system some of though as regards aliquots I consider that a
the above requirements 2 Can this system be | division of the #8 into 1440 farthings, as being
justly considered as accidental or unscientific 2 | twice divisible by, 3 (making the penny consist
of 6 farthings) would have possessed advantages
over it. I do not believe it to have been purely accidental, though I question whether in the
successive stages of its introduction which history describes, any such singularly clear and
compact (though I must call them narrow) views can be shewn to have prevailed. Be that as it
may, it may very justly, I think, be described as unscientific, if by the word be meant the
reasonable adaptation of a system to all the ends it ought to aim at accomplishing, giving pre-
cedence to the most important.
(3.) There must have been some valid reason
for the adoption and long retention of our
present peculiar system of Coins, instead of the
obvious plan of making the progression of Coins
correspond to the progression of figures accord-
ing to our Arabic notation.
Penny. 2 X 2 3
Shilling. 2 × 2 × 5
Pound.
(3.) When gross ignorance of arithmetic was
the rule and not the exception, when money
dealings were far fewer than at present, and con-
fined to lower amounts, when the sorts of articles
bought and sold were less various and their gra-
dations of quality infinitely less numerous than at
|present, and when sums of many pounds were
hardly ever spoken of among the lower classes, aliquot subdivision was of more comparative
importance, and decimal calculation seldom resorted to because few persons had anything to do
with dealings of that sort in which the embarrassments of our present system chiefly occur. It
will be remembered that it was so late as the century between 1150 and 1250, that the Arabic
notation was introduced into Britain; and that the Roman written system of numeration was so
cumbersome and unmanageable, that the classification of numbers by pairs, dozens, and scores was
almost the only practical one for facilitating computation.
(4.) What is that reason 2 Is it to be found (4.) See above.
in the above explanation, and in the varied
and infinite divisibility of the Integer obtained
through this system 2
40. Does it not necessarily follow that a
System of Coinage based upon a Binary or
Duodecimal scale must answer these require-
ments more completely than a Decimal Coinage,
seeing that 12 is divisible by more factors than
10, and that the quotients of such division are
again more divisible under the present than
under a Decimal system 2 And does not our
present coinage afford peculiar facilities for
continued division into clear fractional parts 2
Answer. It is not very clear in what respect
this question differs from Question 10, to which
see the answer. As regards the peculiar facility,
&c., see answer to 39 (2.).
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. II.3.
41. If in place of our present division of the
£ sterling, a decimal division be substituted,
shall we not in many cases lose the power of
obtaining an exact result? w
What is the 3rd, the 6th, the 12th, or the
16th part of a £ sterling under decimal division
of the coinage 2 -
Under our present system it is exactly
6s. 8d., 3s. 4d., 1s. 8d., 1s. 3d.
Again, what is the 3rd, 6th, 12th, and 16th
part of a shilling in decimal coinage 2
Under our present system it is exactly 4d.,
2d., 1d., 3 farthings.
42. If it be admitted that for all ordinary
retail transactions, for the purposes generally.
of paying and receiving, our present Coinage
is satisfactory, whilst the inconvenience is found
to arise when we come to processes of Account-
keeping and Calculation, does it not follow that
our present Coins ought if possible to be re-
tained without any change, that some decimal
system of recording the various sums should
be introduced, and that we should decimalize
our Accounts, retaining our present coinage in
all respects unchanged 2–See No. 37. *
43. How far will this be accomplished by
writing down all money values in the number
of pence of which they consist, eac. gr.:—
£ s. d. Pence. Mils.
1 O O = 240 = 1,000
O 6 8 = 80 = 333' 333
O 5 -O = 6O = 250
O 3 4 = 40 = 166' 666
() 2 6 = 30 — 125 e
O 1 3 = 15 = 62° 5
I 8 9 465 1,937° 499
Answer. This question seems to be an itera- Sir J. F. W.
tion of Question 15, to which see the answer. Herschel, Bart.
Answer. If this were practicable without
introducing greater inconvenience it would long
ere this have been adopted. Any one may, if he
please, now record his receipts and payments
decimally.
Answer, 1st. The method proposed ignores
farthings, and is applicable of course only to
accounts which go no lower than a penny. 2nd,
Let us see how a few other entries will look upon
this system, and what sort of accounts we should
have. Ex.:—
3. s. d. d.
3 6 4 - 796
17 2 9 - 4,113
189 7 6 – 45,450
209 16 7 – 50,359
If people counted in pennies, and never used the
shilling or the pound, this is of course a complete decimal system. But according to the terms of
the question, the parlance is in #'s. d. and only the entries in pence (for the parlance will follow
the currency, since no one would speak of a sovereign as a 240-pence piece, or of a 5l. note as one
of 1,200d.). Now imagine a customer going to a tradesman, to whom he owes 2091. 16s. 7d., and
inquiring the amount of his debt. The tradesman opens his book and finds the above number of
pennies set down. Forthwith a calculation has to be made to settle the notes and coins it has to
be paid in, besides disputes as to the items. Other cases innumerable of intolerable inconvenience
present themselves at once.
(2.) See the following answer to No. 37 of the
Circular Queries by J. Ross Snowden, Esq.:—
“A. The scope of this inquiry may admit of
“ the suggestion, that if the decimalization
“ of the British coinage were effected by
“ adopting, in place of the pound sterling,
“ a new unit of the value of one hundred
“ of the present divisions of the pound
“ (say 100 farthings, halfpence, or pence)
“ all prices and coins under the present
“ system would be exactly measured in
“ the new unit and its parts, which would
“ also be almost exactly commensurable
“ with the dollar of the United States.
“ A unit of 100 halfpence, for example,
“ which might be called a dollar, would
“ be equal to 31°013 of the United States,
“ an approximation to our unit so close
“ that the moneys of the two countries,
“ under such a system, might be deemed
substantially identical.”
&
&
44. Does not every Decimal System of
Accounts necessarily consist in taking the
lowest Money Unit, and stating in Arabic
notation the cumulative amount of that coin
contained in any given sum ?
1.) In the £ and mil scheme do we not take
the farthing (changed in its value and called a
mil) as the basis of the system, and then pro-
ceed to state all values in the number of these
new farthings contained in that value *
(2.) On the subject of retaining or abandoning
the pound sterling, see the evidence of Messrs.
IIankey, Question 135; Airy, Question 294;
Herschel, Question 516; De Morgan, Question 728,
729; Bowring, Question 1537, in the Report of
the Committee of 1853.
Answer. Of course ; observing, however, that
on the principle of the decimal arithmetic, frac-
tions of the lowest money units, in cases where
it is necessary to take account of them, are ex-
pressible without any breach of continuity in the
system of notation and reckoning.
(1.) Yes.
I 14
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION: ; ; ; ;
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
(2.) In the penny scheme do we not take, in
a similar manner, the penny as the basis, but
without any change in its value 2
(3.) In addition to this advantage, will not
the statement of values by the number of
pence contained in them, rather than by the
number of farthings or mils, necessarily involve
greater conciseness and simplicity of expres-
sion, there being only one fourth the number of
pence as compared with the number of far-
things in any value?
(4.) Is it not an advantage in any Decimal
System that it does not necessarily involve the
introduction of a farthing column into all ac-
counts, seeing that all sums under a penny are
now voluntarily omitted from a sense of con-
venience in a very large proportion of ac-
counts?
9. See, for an example, Question 59.
(2.) Yes.
(3.) If it be considered the accomplishment
of any object to throw overboard a large part of
it (in point of fact three fourths), of course it
may be so accomplished with greater facility and
with a less extensive mechanism than if the
whole work be grappled with.
(4.) It would be extremely easy in the Pound
and Mil Scheme to keep accounts to the nearest
5 mils by omitting the terminal figure whenever
the exact mils are 0, 1, 2,-adding some small
easily made mark, (as or +) to the end (still
omitting the last figure), if that be 3, 4, 5, 6,
or 7, and increasing the last figure but one
(omitting the last) by a unit, if the last be 8 or
But the proposal ignores the small dealer, the little
weekly bills (where halfpence and farthings appear in almost every item), and all such small
current accounts, and indeed many much more considerable ones.
So much stress is laid in the
previous questions on the convenience of small dealings over the counter that it is quite unex-
pected to find a change proposed which, while it equally unsettles all received notions, advantages
none but bankers and merchants of the highest class.
(5.) In those cases in which it is found de-
sirable to introduce fractions of the penny, is
there not reason to believe, that it will be
found more convenient to express those frac-
tions binarily than in a decimal form, seeing
that such has been the result of practical expe-
rience in the United States?
(6.) The Director of the Mint states (Ques-
tion 31), “The change has been effectual as
“ to the use of dollars and cents, but not of
“ the mil, the fraction of a cent being ex-
“ pressed binarily.”
(5.) See answer to Question 36 (1) (10). To
retain the fractions}, #, #, would be to perpetuate
one of the most objectionable features of the
present system, and to sacrifice the continuity of
notation which is the great and essential advan-
tage of the Decimal System. Nothing could be
proposed more calculated to bring that system, if
adopted in England, into disrepute, than such a
partial and garbled adoption.
(6.) The short-sighted view which prevailed
in the choice of the American unit, without any
original provision of a coin for the lower subdi-
vision into mils, and the necessity of having a
payable value at least one step lower than the
cent, appear to have perpetuated a vicious usage
which is a blemish on their system. We should accept it as a warning, and not as an example.
46. If the penny be taken as the lowest unit
of a Decimal System of Accounts, and if all
sums be written down in the number of pence
of which they consist, will not this afford a
Decimal System of Accounts which may be
used in conjunction with and without involv-
ing any disturbance of our existing system of
coinage, or changing the character of the £
sterling as the great unit of account, as the
basis of our system of exchange with all the
world, and as the great integer by which all
our principal calculations and estimates of
property and of obligations are made?
47. (1.) The fractions of a penny would be
written as fractions #, #, #. Is this a disad-
vantage? º
(2.) Is it not the case, that practically in all
countries, even in those in which the Decimal
System is most completely carried out, the
ultimate subdivision of coins is binary P
it down in an account book as 3. c. instead of 0'5.
Answer. See Answer to Question 43. There
is no reason why anybody should not keep
his accounts as proposed if he think it prefer-
able. If it should become (which I do not
think it ever will), a common practice to name
the price of a thing in pennies (say 276,500
pence for a plot of ground) one of two things
must happen, either it will have had to be trans-
lated out of £ s. d. into this language by the
vendor, and back again, into £ s. d. by the pur-
chaser before it can be understood what is meant
between them, or it will be understood perse; in
which case what will have become of the pound
sterling as the great unit of value?.
Answer. (1.) I consider it an enormous one.
It is no less than a tacit abrogation of the Deci-
mal System. See Answer to Question 45 (5.)
(2.) The ultimate subdivision of the coin, or
indeed of anything divisible which can be given
in exchange for any other, may be binary on the
principle of “splitting the difference;” but it is
one thing to pay a half-cent and another to set
The former is attended with no inconvenience,
the latter with all those which attend a systematic violation of system.
(3.) Is not this shown by the fact that in
France, Portugal, &c., the 5-centime piece and
the 5-rei piece are the lowest coins in general
use or generally expressed in accounts 2
(3.) What may be the usage in Portugal I
know not ; but in all the bills which I have paid
in France, so far as I can remember, I have found
this lowest coin set down with the figure 5, and
never under the fractional form #, of course
excepting where the franc has been broken into sous, in which case it appears as an odd sou
and not as the half of anything.
(4.) In the United States is not a half-cent
universally expressed instead of 5 mils?
(5.) What is the inconvenience of writing
such values as fractions? Are they not as
easily added in this as in a decimal form, and
are they not more easily multiplied?
Such a thing now, however, hardly ever occurs.
(4.) See answer to Question 45 (6.)
(5.) The inconvenience is great. There are
more marks to make with the pen, they need
small and often illegible figures in printing. Few
people write them neatly, nor all alike, some thus:
#, or */2 ; some write qrs., some do not keep them
in line, and very few write them evenly. But
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS
115.
these are trifles compared to the inconvenience they have as utterly opposed to the decimal idea
the object of which is to establish a continuity of notation between the integer and its parts.
They are not quite so easily multiplied in some cases as in a decimal form (e. g. 9 × 3), and the
addition is easy only in the rare instances where the fractions are very legibly written or
printed.
48. This system would not include fractions
of the penny. Is it desirable to incur the
inconveniences of the £ and mil scheme, the
abolition of our present copper coinage, the
abandonment especially of the penny, &c., for
the purpose of comprehending in a Decimal
System of notation and account keeping the
fractions of a penny, which under the present
system are so seldom required, which, when
required, can be so easily expressed as fractions,
and which are in so many cases voluntarily
omitted for the sake of convenience P
49. (1.) If the Decimal System is to be tried
for the sake of simplicity and convenience in
account keeping and calculation, is it not the
most prudent and safe course to make a trial
of it, in the first instance at least, of a sys-
tem of account only, without disturbing the
coinage 2
(2.) How far would this be accomplished by
simply authorizing the expression of all sums
of money in the number of pence of which
they consist
50. If the Decimal System of coinage recom-
mended by the Committee of the House of Com-
mons (£ and mil scheme) be adopted, will it
not necessarily involve the introduction of
more than two monies of account 2
Will not this necessarily give rise to diffi-
culty, trouble, and confusion ?
Answer. The fractions of a penny are not
seldom required. And it is not solely or princi-
pally to comprehend these in a Decimal System
of notation and account keeping that the £ and
mil scheme is desired, but to enable the Decimal
Principle to be carried on into calculations where
the unit must be considered as indefinitely sub-
divisible. After all, if there is to be a decimal
coinage, surely one would not coin florins, cents,
half-cents, and quarter and eighths of cents,
instead of halfpence and farthings in mil value.
This would be to fall into the American error
without the same excuse for it, and in a more
cxaggerated form.
Answer. (1.) To use it as a system of account
without coins to correspond, if voluntary, would
ensure its rejection. People will not translate
their receipts and payments into another lan-
guage before they enter them up in their books.
If compulsory it would be received with a storm
of indignation as a needless and most galling
hardship. It might certainly be used, however,
in stating the public accounts.
(2.) It would not be accomplished at all.
answer to Question 43 (1.) and 45 (3.).
See
naming the figures; thus 19'803 would be read “191. eight, nought, three.” I cannot perceive
any possible inconvenience.
Values must have denominations, and the figures, of which a sum
decimally expressed consists, must have special names to indicate to what order or column they
belong.
51. Is there any country in which more
than two monies of account are now in prac-
tical use 2
52. Is it not important, with a view to the
simplicity and facility in calculation which are
supposed to constitute the great recommen-
dation of a Decimal System of coinage, that
there be not more than one hundred steps
between the highest and lowest monies of ac-
count
sented.
It is, moreover, a less change to enlarge them to 1,000 than to contract them to 100.
Nor is it easy to perceive any vast difference in respect of simplicity and facility of calcula-
tion (other than the advantage of a continuous system on the decimal side.)
[I have read Dr. Gray's reply to Question 385 (Preliminary Report), and I confess myself
not impressed with the same view. Beef is not always exactly 8d. a pound, nor is sugar
always exactly 4d. ; each system would have its cases of case.]
Answer. We should have one “money of ac-
count” if we reckoned in mils only, or in cents only,
or inflorins only, or in pounds only ; two if we chose
to use two denominations, three if three, and four
if all. There would almost instantly arise a usage
admitting of no ambiguity. The calling over a
book of accounts would probably be done by
naming the pounds as such, and the rest by
Answer. See answer to Question 53.
Answer. If it were a fact that the larger unit
of value in this country were not more than
one hundred times the smallest value which the
business of life requires to pass in payment, it
would be needless complication to make more
than 100 steps from the highest to the lowest,
whether coin or money of account. But we
find 960 such steps, and they must be repre-
53. Is not this the case in all the principal
decimal coinages now in use, ear. gr., franc and
centime in France, dollar and cent in the
United States, &c. 2
(1.) By an Act of Congress passed in the
year 1792, it was ordained that “the money of
“ account of the United States shall be ex-
“ pressed in dollars or units, dimes or tenths,
“ cents or hundredths, and mils or thou-
“ sandths.”
(2.) Notwithstanding this long-existing state
of the law, we are now told, upon the authority
of the Director of the Mint, that in that
country they “have but two denominations of
“ Money of Account, the dollar and cent.”
And further, we are told “ that below the cent
“ they do not usually reckon in mils or
Answer. (1.) Taking this explanation of what
is meant by “money of account,” i.e., the deno-
minations in which accounts are directed by law
to be kept, whatever be the coinage ; I am not
aware that in England we have any “money of
account” at all. Certain denominations are legal,
but they are the names of coins ; and the “good
and lawful money ’’ in which payments are en-
forceable, refers to coin of the realm or its legal
equivalent in notes. It appears from the Act of
Congress cited, however, that the United States
have in fact four “monies of account’ (see
Qu. 51), but that usage has ejected two of them—
or rather—(2) that owing to the fundamental
error committed in the choice of their unit,
which necessitated the use of some mode of pay-
ing a less value than a whole cent, while the mil
Sir J. F. v.
Herschel, Bart. .
*g
P 2
116 I).ECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
“ decimals, but in binary fractions of a cent,”
that is, in vulgar fractions.
being only the fifth part of a farthing, was too
small a value to circulate and keep up the recol-
lection of that denomination by its visible exis-
tence; the principle of “splitting the difference” by a half-cent, and perhaps the calling it a half-
cent when coined by that name instead of 5 mils, drove that money of account out of use. The
“dime” was disused as a name, because being only 5d. in value, it did not want a special name ;
but with or without a name it figures as a money of account, i. e., as the denomination of the
C. $ d. c.
figure to the left of the unit in writing a sum, such as 73 in columns, 0 || 7 || 3.
(3.) What inferences are to be drawn from (3.) The inferences to be drawn from these facts
these facts 2 appear to me to be, that the American unit is
ill chosen, and should have been either only half
or else five times what it is—that the French unit produces no inconvenience, and that the
proposed English mil would work in all probability satisfactorily, and remain a money of account.
(4.) Do they indicate that, be the law what
it may, in Decimal Coinage more than two
Monies of Account, and more than one hun-
dred steps between the highest and the lowest
unit, are found to be practically inconvenient,
and, in truth, unworkable.
(5.) And further, that the broken parts of a
low unit, such as the cent in the United States
and the penny in this country, are more con-
veniently represented by Vulgar Fractions
than by Decimal notation.
(6.) Upon what other supposition can this
established departure in practice from the
millesimal division of the dollar distinctly laid
down by the law be accounted for 2
(7.) The annexed statement deserves atten-
tion ; it appeared in “The Times,” April 4:—
“New Orleans, March 19.
“Cotton.—Sales to-day, 3,500 bales, at an
“ advance of #c., the market closing firm.
“ New Orleans, middling, 134c. to 134c.
“Sugar has advanced c. and sells for
10}c., to 10}c.
“Breadstuffs quiet. Pork firm.
“vanced #c.; kegs, 14;c.
“Freights.-Cotton to Liverpool, 0#d, and
“ to Havre, ºc.”
The broken parts of the cent are all stated
in vulgar fractions, in opposition to the law
already quoted.
These fractions, , 4, #, 3, 4, can none of
them be stated accurately in tenths of a cent.
Lard ad-
£1,397 17s. 9d, consols, to find the effect of the odd 8th per cent.
(4.) In my opinion, no.
(5.) I think not. See answer to Qu. 46 (5).
(6.) See Answer to (2) of this general query.
\.
(7.) The very prevalent commercial practice of
quoting shades of price-variation in 8ths of the
generally adopted unit, however that unit be
locally divided, is, as it appears from this and
similar quotations, employed “on change" in the
United States. Our stockbrokers do likewise
where the unit is the pound sterling. That such
a practice would prevail among brokers who have
not the close-dealing interest of their principals is
very natural. Agreed as to the unit—they agree
to “split the difference” and then (the half being
acknowledged as a market price) another splitting
of the difference generates the quarter, and so on.
The practice is no doubt fostered and preserved
in use from habit, and from the tendency of our
own brokers, and is certainly an inconvenient
one and a remnant of commercial barbarism.
Take the price of stocks for instance: to buy
We have a division sum to
execute, viz., to divide £1,397 17s. 9d. by 800, whereas, were the shade of price one tenth, the
work would stand thus: £1' 398 to the nearest mil, were a Decimal System in use.
(8.) In the case of a rise of cent in cotton,
this, stated decimally, must be given as a rise
of 1 mil or "2 mils. There is, however, a
small difference ; the first is too little, the
second is too much. What must be the effect
of this unavoidable difference, small per lb.,
when multiplied into the number of lbs. con-
(8.) The inquiry, what would be the effect of
# — Tºo of a unit is absolutely of no moment as
regards the question at issue. One or the other
habit of quotation being established the other is
excluded, and no commercial question could pos-
sibly arise about this odd 40th. The only point
of any consequence is, which practice (supposing
difference between the Decimal Coinage of this
tained in 3,500 bales of cotton 2 What is the
lesson to be derived from those considerations Ž
a Decimal currency) gives least trouble in calcu-
lation. Which is easier, to divide 3500 by 800
or by 1,000 * The latter is performed by merely
putting a dot between the 3 and the 500. Which is most readily calculated, fºl'7253 consols at 3
or fºr on a Decimal System of Coinage 2 There is little doubt that were such a system adopted
in England, we should have meetings of committees from the Stock Exchange, Chambers of
Commerce, etc., and conferences with American committees, to agree to abolish the system of
8ths, and adopt the 10ths.
54. If with us the £ sterling be retained as
the principal Money of Account, does not a
subdivision into one thousand parts become un-
avoidable, with the addition of intermediate
Monies of Account between the ºf and the
mil 2
Answer. Yes; only that I should not call it an
addition of Monies of Account. We now use
the words pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings,
and it seems no additional inconvenience (if any
at all) to use instead the words pounds, florins,
cents, and mills. We now write (awkwardly
enough to be sure) 43 16s. 6}d., or 1 qr., while,
on the other system, we should have only to write £3' 826. The “monies of account” must be
written and spoken of in either system in some form or other. Some might prefer to write it
£3-82.6 or £3.82,6, or £3.82 + if he liked better to keep his account to the nearest penny, but
these are rather conveniences than the reverse.
55. Will not this constitute an important Answer. I cannot perceive where the disad-
vantage lies. As compared with the United
country and the Decimal Coinages now in use | States currency the advantage would be all on
in other countries, much to the disadvantage of the side of the British mil system. See Qu. 53.
our Decimal System as regards simplicity and
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 117
convenience of calculation, and especially of
mental as distinguished from written calcula-
tion, which the middle and lower orders are
constantly called upon to perform in their
daily transactions f
56. (1.) Under our present system is not the
high value of our Integer, the £ sterling, a
source of great convenience and advantage,
especially as compared with the lower value of
the franc in France and the dollar in
America,
(2.) First, as facilitating the conception in
the mind of large values, and expression of
them in fewer figures and with fewer words;
(3.) Second, as admitting of a greater multi-
plicity of clean fractional divisions f
already small enough not to need much subdivision.
the larger fractional subdivisions would ever be used.
Answer. (1), (2), (3). The high value of our
integer £1, is advantageous as a unit compared
with the dollar, inasmuch as it admits of a really
available division into 1,000 mils, giving the mil
a visible and tangible existence, which the dollar
does not. It has some (though a very trifling)
advantage over the French franc in respect of the
consideration, (2) i. e., in our eyes, though in
France, where individual fortune and expen-
diture are not so large as in England, the franc is
a better unit. There is no advantage in multi-
plying the clean fractional subdivisions of a unit
Were the franc divided into 960 parts, only
As to the advantages of “clean fractional
subdivision ” generally, I consider them exaggerated, in the prominence in which they are placed
in these questions; at the same time not denying it to have some, and those by no means
unimportant.
57. By the adoption of the Decimal system,
will not this advantage be converted into a
great inconvenience 2
Will not our high Integer, by necessitating
the intervention of one thousand steps between
the top and the bottom of the scale, instead of
one hundred steps as in other countries, become
the source of confusion and inconvenience, and
render the adoption of the Decimal Scale in its
most advantageous form impossible with us?
Answer. Quite the contrary. I consider that
it will put us in possession of the Decimal
System in its most advantageous form. 1st, It
will save us from a breach of continuity in our
notation of the ultimate payable value. (See
answer to Question 36 (4) and 48.) 2dly, It will
tend in small dealings to bring the odd farthings
into view, and to call attention to the nice shades
of retail value by which changes of wholesale
price are followed out with the least disadvantage
to the small consumer. (Answer to Question 6,
(3), (4).) 3dly, It will give a homogeneity to all statements of money value down to the minimum
numerabile, and thus bring out into evidence a most extensive range of aliquot subdivisibilties
available for retail transactions, which are masked and overlaid by the £ s. d, system. (Answer
to Question 15.) 4thly, It will show at once at a mere inspection of the figures the exact
divisibility, or the reverse, of every sum that can be paid, down to the ultimate farthing, by 2,
by 3, by 4, by 5, by 6, by 8, by 9, by 10, and by 11.
58. And further, will there not necessarily
be a less number of clean fractional parts under
a system which resolves the £ sterling into one
thousand mils, than under the present system,
by which it is resolved into 960 farthings, in-
asmuch as 1,000 admits only of fifteen divisions
without a remainder, whilst 960 admits of
twenty-seven divisions without a remainder ;
and the results thus produced are again sus-
ceptible of division under the present system,
but will not be so under the Decimal system ;
ea. gr., the eighth part of 960 is 120, which is
again divisible by 2, 4, &c. without remainder;
but the eighth part of 1,000 is 125, which is
not susceptible of further division by 2, 4, &c.
without remainder
59. In Commercial, Trading, and Banking
accounts all sums less than a penny are now
omitted from considerations of convenience and
saving of time in account-keeping. But under
a Decimal system, which divides the £ integer
into mils, the fourth or mil column must in all
cases be retained, as the omission of it would
involve the omission of all sums up to 23d.
The effect of this will be an increase of
10 per cent. in the number of figures used in all
such accounts. Will not this increase in the
number of figures used in such accounts inter-
ſere with the brevity and simplicity of ex-
pression, and the saving of time in account-
keeping which are anticipated from the Decimal
system P
(See Answer to Question 8 (2.).)
Answer. This question seems to be an itera-
tion of Question 15, the answer to which
see. See also as respects 120, the answer to
Question 36 (12).
Answer. The example here set down will
show that it is perfectly practicable to keep an
account to the nearest 5 mils (see answer to
Question 45(4)), which is the nearest correspond-
ing prime element of the Decimal System to the
penny in the present. As regards the 10 per
cent. increase in the number of figures mentioned
in the Question, it would appear to be founded on
some, such estimate as Mr. Minasi's concerning
which see Note on answer to Question 2 (5).
A. B. C.
a-—º--→ a-—--— | a_-_^—
£ fo. m. | #! fe. m. || 4 f.c. m.
17 25 O 17 25 17 25
8 37 I 8 37 8 37
I 28 2 1 28 1 28
376 79 3 || 376 79 . . 376 79 5
2 4 2 . 2 5
1 1 O 5 1 1() . 1 10 5
16 7 6 16 7 . 16 7 5
111 93 7 || 111 93 . 1 l l 93 5
21 47 8 || 2 || 48 2| 48
6 9 7 7
554, 38 5 554 38 . 554 38 5
The column on the right hand for the dots, 5's,
or other marks, (which need only be counted
up in pairs, not summed as figures,) need only be very narrow, occupying quite a trifle of room
in an account-book.
As regards the increase of trouble in account-keeping, therefore, the advan-
tages anticipated (on which the testimony is almost unanimous) will not be interfered with to
any sensible extent.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
P 3
Il 8
DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION3
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
60. The Decimal scheme now under our
consideration will retain the shilling and six-
pence as fractional Coins, but will it not destroy
the peculiar advantage which now attends
them, namely, their convenient divisibility ?
A shilling resolved into 50 mils is divisible
only by 2, 5, 10, and 25 ; but the same shilling,
resolved by our present system into 48 far-
things, is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16,
and 24.
61. (1.) Is it not a serious objection to the
proposed scheme that it will deprive the lower
classes of their divisors 2, 3, 4, 8, and 16, as
applicable to the coins most familiar to them,
thus interfering with the facility with which
they now obtain the third and fourth parts of
every thing which they require, and to the use
of which they are well accustomed; whilst, on
the other hand, it will give them the divisor 5,
which is wholly useless as a divisor of the
commodities which they purchase, or of the
money which they use?
likely to be thrown out of use. There will be
prices.
(2)
&
“A glance of the eye is sufficient to
divide material substances into succes-
sive halves, fourths, eighths, and six-
teenths. A slight attention will give
thirds, sixths, and twelfths. But divi-
sions of fifth and tenth parts are among the
most difficult that can be performed with-
out the aid of calculation. Among all its
conveniences the decimal division has
the great disadvantage of being itself
divisible only by the numbers two and
“ five. The duodecimal division, divisible
“ by two, three, four, and six, would offer
“ so many advantages over it, that while
“ the French theory was in contemplation,
“ the question was discussed, whether
“ the reformation of weights and mea-
“ sures should not be extended to the
“ system of arithmetic itself, and whether
“ the number 12 should not be substi-
“ tuted for 10 as the term of the periodical
“ return to the unit.”—QUINCY ADAMS's
Report, p. 71.
&
Ç
C
Ç
62. The proposed scheme involves an abso-
lute change in the value of all the lower coins.
The penny and all multiples of the penny other
than six and twelve will not be interchangeable
at equivalent values with the new Decimal
Coins; and again, the two lowest monies of
account in the Decimal System, cents and mils,
will be uninterchangeable at equivalent value
with any of the present copper coins, although
these latter form parts in odd pence of a large
proportion of existing contracts, especially
amongst the lower classes, and constitute an
immense proportion of the existing coinage.
From this cause it is anticipated by some
persons that confusion and difficulty in their
accounts, some unavoidable loss and injustice,
and a vague but dangerous impression of more
extensive injustice will arise amongst the mass
of the people.
Whereas a decimal scheme founded upon
the penny or the halfpenny would involve no
real change in the value of any of our coins,
but would only involve some additional trouble
to the richer classes by giving a new nume-
rical form to their high integer, the £ sterling,
but not involving any absolute change in its
value.
Do you think these apprehensions well
founded, and what is your opinion of the ex-
tent and importance of this difficulty 2
63. Will not the advantage of the change
be experienced, if at all, by the commercial
and higher classes,…those who keep extensive
'Answer. A shilling is divisible into 50 parts
under the Decimal System, into 48 under the
present. And there will be coins to render the
division practicable. Of course, if aliquot divisi-
bility be the only divisibility that is regarded,
there is nothing further to be said, the conclusion
is against the Decimal System. But this does
not appear to me a just view of the matter.
Answer. (1.) Any man poor or rich can purchase
either a third or fourth part of anything divisible
which he is able to pay for, and the shopkeeper
will tell him the price of it to the nearest far-
thing or mil. After all, whoever wants to buy
a thing must ask the price of it. If a rich person
goes to buy a pound of cinnamon, he does not
ask the price per cwt., and if a poor one goes to
buy an ounce of tea why should he not ask the
price per ounce? Calculate as he will, he cannot
get it a mil cheaper than the shop price, but if
he think it dear for the quality, he may go to
another shop. Neither are these divisors at all
plenty of commodities sold at easily divisible mil
(2.) It appears from this quotation that the
question was discussed whether or not to adopt
a duodecimal arithmetic in France, and that the
proposal was rejected ; which, at least, proves
that the originators of the new system knew how
to draw a line between a wild and purely vision-
ary proposition, and a rational and advantageous
one. Material substances are practically divided
into halves and thirds by artificial processes,
surer than those natural ones suggested by
Mr. Adams, nor does it appear what connection
the more or less easy division of material sub-
stances can possibly have with the payment of
coins or the calculation of prices.
Answer. With due notice given and the proper
steps taken for preparing the public mind for the
change, and perhaps also with a concurrent cir-
culation of the new coins with the old for a time,
and the gradual withdrawal of the old, I should
hardly expect that any but the very lowest and
most ignorant persons (and those unduly excited
for purposes of mischief) would receive the im-
pression of injustice being done or intended. A
certain amount of difficulty and confusion must
be expected, and in some few cases where un-
principled parties have to do with ignorant ones,
possibly some losses and hardships, to the extent
of a few odd pence or halfpence. Also just at
first mistakes would be made. I am far from
underrating the importance of such difficulties,
or the probability of evil-disposed persons making
a handle of them to excite tumult. But of the
extent to which they may be expected to prevail,
I do not consider myself a competent judge. As
regards the halfpenny system, it would, I think,
puzzle all parties and be well received by none.
Answer. Questions 63, 64, 65. These Ques-
tions appear to contain a kind of summary of the
arguments specially insisted on in the previous
ANSWERS. TQ.I.ORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 119.
accounts, and enter into large calculations,—
and not by the lower classes, who usually
employ the smaller coins, and are familiar
principally with the penny and its multiples
and subdivisions 2
64. In connexion with the foregoing consi-
derations, it has been suggested that a vast
majority of the smaller money transactions in
a community are not transactions of written
account at all ; that they arise out of retail
purchases made in the market or the shop, the
calculations connected with which are neces-
sarily performed in the head, and are not re-
duced to writing. That for these purposes,
namely, adaptation to the existing division of
our weights and measures, for distinctness of
mental conception and facility of calculation
in the head, our existing coinage is better
adapted than a Decimal Coinage ; whilst the
supposed superiority of a Decimal Coinage for
purposes of written accounts and calculations
is not applicable to such transactions, and
would not prove beneficial to the great mass
of the people with whom such transactions are
of constant daily occurrence.
How far do these considerations constitute
a just ground of objection to the introduction
of a Decimal Coinage 2 or what reply can be
made to them 2
65. Looking to the considerations alluded to
in the preceding questions, the Superior facility
of division possessed by 12, the further very con-
venient and almost unlimited facility of divi-
sion arising from our peculiar mode of reckon-
ing the £ integer into shillings, pence, and
farthings; the harmony which exists between
our fractional coins and our weights and mea-
sures, the doubtful advantages in facility of
calculation to be obtained from Decimal Coins
unaccompanied by decimal weights and mea-
sures, and the brevity and convenience of ex-
pression, oral and written, which attaches to
our present coins;–duly weighing, on the
other hand, the advantage of assimilating the
progression of coins to that of figures, the
simplicity and facility in keeping Accounts
and making calculations, the saving of time in
education and of labour by the substitution of
simple for the proverbial inconvenience of |
compound arithmetic, which it is expected will ||
arise from the introduction of Decimal Coin-
a,962 –
sº submit these questions to the conside-
ration of my colleagues, with great diffidence
as regards their incompleteness, and the mis-
takes which, I doubt not, will be found to be
involved in them ; but, at the same time,
with a full assurance that they are calcu-
lated to promote that “further sifting in pub-
lic opinion” which both the Chancellor of the
Exchequer (Mr. Gladstone) and the President
of the Board of Trade (Mr. Cardwell) alluded
to in their remarks, quoted in our Preliminary
Report, as necessary to “secure a right under-
“ standing of the subject by the public, without
“ which it would not be safe for the Govern-
“ ment to take any steps in regard to it.”
The advantages of our present system of
Coinage, the difficulties necessarily involved
in a change, and the objections which may be
reasonably urged to each separate system of
Decimal Coinage, constitute a branch of the
subject which has not perhaps been sufficiently
regarded in preceding investigations. Hence
these Questions, the object of which is to draw
attention to considerations which must be
thoroughly sifted and weighed before the sub-
ject can be correctly understood by the public,
or a decision be safely taken by the Govern-
ment. - -
OVERSTONE.
April 1857.
ones, and from the paragraphs finally subjoined
| to the whole series, to be rather addressed by the
noble proposer to his colleagues of the Royal
Commission, as comprising such a summary. In
submitting, therefore, for consideration the above
replies to the previous inquiries, seriatim, I
feel that I have done all that I can properly do
without stepping out of my province.
J. F. W. HERSCHEL.
Collingwood,
June 15, 1857.
Sir J. F. W.
Herschel, Bart.
P 4
| 20 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
J. R. McCulloch,
Esq.
Professor Miller.
(Communicated by Lord Overstone.)
LETTER from J. R. McCULLOCH, Esq. to Lord Overstone.
MY DEAR LORD, Stationery Office, April 4, 1857.
I HAve looked carefully over the queries in regard to the Decimal Coinage which you were
so good as to leave with me, and they appear to be so complete and exhaustive that I really have
nothing to add to them. In truth, this is a matter to which I have never paid much attention, and
in regard to which I am but slenderly informed. I have been in the habit of considering coins as
being intended to fulfil two great objects, viz., to serve as standards of value, and as instruments
by which to facilitate the interchange of commodities. As respects the former function the
designation of the coin signifies little, the grand consideration being that its weight and purity
should be maintained invariable ; and that if substitutes be used in its stead they should be imme-
diately convertible into the standard. In their second function, or as instruments for facilitating the
interchange of commodities, I have always thought that our present coins were far more serviceable
than coins issued on the Decimal principle. But you have shown this so very conclusively in your
queries that I do not know that anything more needs be said on the subject. The only advantage
of using coins issued on the Decimal System instead of those now in circulation, would be found,
if it be found at all, in the greater facility of keeping books and accounts. But a greater good is not
to be sacrificed to a less. And I will venture to say, that for every transaction in which a Decimal
Coinage would be of advantage, there are at least from ten to twenty or more in which the present
system is decidedly preferable. The retail transactions of the country, settled by the intervention
of shillings, pence, and farthings, are incomparably more numerous than those that involve the use of
pounds. And as the subdivisions of the pound in our present coinage are more various and more
commodious than they would be under the Decimal System, and as everybody, even those who
can neither read nor write, is familiar with their use, I cannot help thinking that to change them
would be an act of gratuitous folly.
The introduction of the Decimal System in France was part and parcel of that gigantic revolu-
tion that overturned everything that was established in the country. But even in France its
adoption has been attended with the greatest difficulty, and it cannot yet be said to be fully accom-
plished. Many parts of the system have had to be abandoned; and no one familiar with French
money will pretend to say that it is so well suited for retail transactions, that is, for the real business
of the country, as ours.
I have no idea, supposing an effort were really made to introduce the Decimal System, with its
florins, mills, and so forth, that it will succeed without a vast deal of trouble. The present system
is associated with our earliest recollections, with all that we have practised, and with all of which
we have heard, and about which we have read. Were the new system decidedly better suited to
the end in view, that is, to enable small transactions to be more readily and easily settled than the
existing system, it might be eventually introduced, though with a good deal of difficulty. But
when it would be the reverse of this, when it introduces a new set of outlandish terms, and when it
makes the settlement of small transactions much less easy, I should doubt whether its general
adoption would be possible, and if possible nothing would be gained by it. This, therefore,
seems to me to be a case in which we had better act on the common-sense principle of letting well
alone. At all events, before we disturb what is well, we should have sounething better in view,
which is not the case in this instance.
Such merchants, bankers, &c. as wish to keep their books on the Decimal principle may do so
at this moment with nearly as much facility as they would do were a Decimal Coinage in existence.
Suppose a merchant had to enter a sum of 1 l. 15s. 9%d. in his books, and that he wished to use
decimals, he would write 1' 7906, or, if he wished for extreme accuracy, 1 790625. And this he
might do very easily by having a table affixed to his desk containing the decimals of all the
fractions of a pound, and conversely. It would be seldom that a clerk would have to look into
this table, as he would soon come to remember the decimals for all the principal parts of the
pound, and when he had occasion to look at it he would find the equivalent at a glance.
Seeing, therefore, that our present coins serve incomparably better than coins issued on a
Decimal System, for at least ten out of eleven of all the transactions in the country settled by the
intervention of coins,—and seeing, also, that the advantage, such as it is, of keeping books and
accounts on the Decimal System may be readily secured with our present coins,—I conclude that
it would be most unwise, or as I have already expressed it, that it would be an act of gratuitous
folly, to disturb our existing coinage system.
Trusting to your goodness to excuse this lengthened epistle,
I am, &c.
The Right Hon. Lord Overstone, (Signed) J. R. McCULLOCH.
&c. &c. &c. -
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
W. H. MILLER, PROFESSOR of MINERALOGY in the UNIVERSITY of CAMBRIDGE.
Answer to Question 1. Decidedly.
2. The inconvenience of performing the most simple arithmetical operations, such as adding,
subtracting, multiplying, and dividing by even low numbers, as compared with the trouble of
performing the same operations with a Decimal Coinage, on account of the odious division by
twelve in passing from pence to shillings, and by twenty in passing from shillings to pounds, and
also on account of the complication and liability to error of the present system in accounts.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 121
3. I consider the present system inconvenient for the purposes of retail transactions. My
objection is not by any means restricted to the inconvenience of our present coinage for the
purposes of account-keeping and calculation.
4. In an imperfectly civilized country, having but little trade, the primary purpose of coins is
for adjusting retail payments. In this country the two purposes cannot be separated.
5. With us one of these purposes cannot be made subordinate to the other.
6. I cannot allow that the merit of a coinage depends solely on its fitness for small payments,
independently of its use in accounts; yet, assuming the merit of a system of coinage to be decided
by its fitness for small payments, a Decimal Coimage would have a great advantage over our
present system in finding the price of three or four articles bought at once ; also, in giving
change.
The substitution of a Decimal Coinage for our present system would promote the convenience
of the most humble buyers and sellers in the long run, quite as much as—probably more than—
that of the affluent and educated classes.
7. Yes.
8. I see no advantage in breaking the integer into a large number of clear fractional parts.
I do not consider this an objection to the Decimal System.
9. Mere assertion,-so often repeated, that, with the usual effect of such repetition, many
people are more than half persuaded to believe it true.
These considerations have no validity as objections to a Decimal System of coinage. The
fallacy consists in attributing to the decimal division the inconvenience due to the badly-selected
names, ‘ decimétre, centimétre, millimëtre,' or ‘kilogramme, hectogramme, decagramme, deci-
gramme, centigramme, milligramme,’ which must ever remain a stumblingblock to the people.
The evil of such names caused in Holland the substitution of the following :—‘pond,’ ‘ons,’
‘lood,” “wig tje,’ ‘korrel; and in the Lombardo-Venetian kingdom of “Libbra nuova,’ ‘oncia,”
“grosso,” “denaro,' ‘grano,' for kilogramme, hectogramme, decagramme, gramme, decigramme.
10. This fractional divisibility is not wanted, so long as the smallest coin is small enough, and
not too small. The proposed mil answers this condition extremely well.
11. No ; the mind regards the ºth, or rºoth, or roºth as unit, and then deals with any
number of them as integers; but, so long as they retain the badly-chosen names, they lose much
of their utility. - -
12. These examples are not fair. The fact that the penny contains four mils is suppressed
The example to be fair, should have stood thus:—
S. d. far. S. d.
7 6 3 OT 7 6;
2 6 2 33 2 6%
1. 3 () 22 1 3 |
O 9 3 53 O 9; -
7s.6d. 3 farthings.
2s. 6d. l farthing.
The prices are assumed so as to be convenient in our present system. In London I often see
things marked with such prices as 9s. 11d. 3 farthings per pound or yard. The prices might
have been 5 cents, 7 cents, 12 cents, just as well.
30 pence is a very convenient amount for the performance of this operation, and so would
30 mils be.
I presume the buyer of 11b. of these candles would have to pay 1s., and consequently the com-
putation of the cost by the annexed rule would be of but small practical use.
The convenient sum of 30 pence again used, suppose it had been 1s. 5d.
These examples may possibly be found in some curious old book of arithmetic. But do they
occur in the market and in the huxter's shop P
A selected case. How many coins will be required to pay 100 mils?
A selected case. How many coins will be required to pay 20 mils?
13. This is the same as objections 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and the answer to it the same
a. Mere assertion. Erroneous.
The old Scandinavian arithmetic proceeded by twelves, that of the Phoenicians and Celts by
twenties. Hence the frequent reckoning by dozens among ourselves, by the gross in Germany
and England. The German schock or 3 score, and the six score in use in England for many
purposes.
14. Not fair ; farthings should be added. But leaving this unfairness out of the question for
the present, in section 6, the shilling column on an average of accounts, would have had five cases
of two figures instead of only two. For the pence column there would be two cases very nearly
of two figures. Therefore, in fairness, the number of figures would have been 31.
If we introduce the farthing in order to make the accuracy in the three columns equal, or nearly
so, we shall have to introduce 0 in three cases, and 3* marks in each of the remaining seven cases;
i. e., we must add 24 marks. The total number of marks in each case would then be 55, 34, 52
respectively.
It would be just as easy to take as an example such a number of mils as might be divisible by 3,
4, 6, and 12.
15. How often are such divisions required 2 Objections 8, 9, and 10 over again.
16. Yes.
17. Yes; because it happens but rarely that the price of 11b, or 1 yard of any article is exactly
11., or 1 florin, or 1 cent, or 1 mil.
* Every fraction, such as #, consists of three different marks, the two figures and the horizontal line,
Q
Professor Miller.
mºms
122 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION: . . . .
Professor Miller.
18. The weights for weighing bullion are decimal. No inconvenience would arise from using
Decimal Coinage, leaving the weights and measures unchanged. Our coinage is not so far binary
as our weights. The binary system in weights arises simply from want of skill in the arts at the
time the present weights were introduced. This system is an ignorant application of the binary
system to the old Roman 10 librae weight, which approaches very closely to our 7lb., and from
which our 7lb. was obviously derived. -
19. Yes. It would require but small pressure to substitute 100lbs. for the hundredweight,
50lbs. for 56lbs., 25lbs. for 28lbs., and 10lbs. for the 14lbs. •
20. How many articles are sold at the exact price of 1s. per pound compared with those sold at
different prices? - -
21. This assumes that 1 lb. costs exactly 1s. Meat, tea, sugar, coffee, articles most commonly
bought by the poor in small quantities, do not cost exactly ls, per pound
22. In all these particulars the change would be beneficial.
23. All this assumes that the unit of weight or length costs exactly a multiple of the unit of
money.
The proposed Decimal Coinage would greatly promote the use of the single mil, which would
be a great advantage to the working classes. If the pound of tea costs exactly 3s., the poor man
would not get an ounce for 24d. .
The Spanish piece of 6} cents differs from 6 cents by half a farthing,-no very great loss. Have
the Americans no 5 mil piece to pay the 12% cents? -
24. This supposes a people so rude as not to possess either weights or measures.
This is a great mistake on the part of Mr. Q. Adams. -
This division of the Spanish dollar took its origin in the practice of forming small coins by
cutting the dollar in two with a chisel and mallet, then each half in two, then each quarter into
#wo, and lastly, each eighth into two. The Tºth of a dollar obtained in this manner was called a
bit. An expert operator, however, went to work in a different manner, and extracted 17 bits
from a dollar, each of which passed for the value of ºath. +
This inconvenience arises from the circulation together of two different systems of coinage.
The remedy is the withdrawal of the old coins from circulation. As they form a considerable
proportion of the (silver) metallic currency in the United States the remedy is not easily applied.
With us the case is widely different.
25. Division by 2 is not convenient. It has been frequently remarked, that a gold coinage of
5s, would not be so convenient as one of 6s. ; because with the former, and the gold coins of 10s.
and 20s. Only multiples of 5s. could be made up ; while with the latter 2s., 4s., 6s., 8s., 12s., 16s.,
&c. can be made up. So also the 4d. silver coin is preferred to the 3d. coin.
26. I cannot agree with Sir J. Herschel in considering this misfortune great.
A Decimal System of weights and measures certainly ought to be adopted, but, if there is any
difficulty in obtaining such a system,--and I believe there might be a difficulty in introducing a
decimal subdivision of the yard or of the foot, -the change in weights would be much easier; do not
on that account deprive us of the advantage of a Decimal Coinage.
27. It would be a great convenience, but by no means essential to the efficiency and usefulness
of a Decimal Coinage. My own opinion is, that the introduction of Decimal Coinage should precede
any attempt to decimalize weights or measures. -
28. The whole advantage of a Decimal Coinage would not be obtained till weights and perhaps
measures were decimalized likewise. The gain, however, from a decimalization of the coinage,
without waiting for that of weights and measures, is so great, that no effort should be spared in
trying to obtain it. It must also be remembered that the decimalization of our coinage is a very
easy matter.
a. This is done in the most roundabout way possible, and a long string of useless decimals
retained, in order to make the example look complicated.
b. Much is gained.
29. It will not tend to make the present system of weights and measures inconvenient. But it will
tend to make the public understand and feel the advantage of decimal scales generally; and this
may not force, (see section 31,) but lead the country into the adoption of decimal weights and
Ill ea Sll res. - -
a. It is impossible in any system to liquidate accurately all reckonings.
30. Is the convenience of subdivision a matter of any importance P Facility in counting
appears to be of much greater value.
31. The change, if made, would very probably lead the country into the adoption of decimal
weights, and possibly of decimal measures.
32. When a Decimal Coimage is proposed it is objected that decimal weights and measures ought
to precede. If a decimalization of weights and measures had been proposed the objection would
have been that the Decimal Coinage should have been introduced first. Next, the introduction of
both together is a scheme too vast to be contemplated. And so the present inconvenient system
must remain in use to the end of the chapter. -
33. The reason on which this recommendation is founded is undoubtedly wrong. I apprehend
the only possible reason for such a recommendation is the difficulty of making a change so exten-
sive. In measures of length the difficulty would be great ; in weights it would be inconsiderable.
In money where the change is so small, affecting only the copper coinage,_and the power of making
the change rests with the Government, the difficulty is trifling. .
Analytical chemists, who use the balance more than any other class of persons, and are not
restricted by law to the use of antiquated and inconvenient weights, always use decimal weights;
either the grain and its multiples and submultiples by 10, or else the French system of weights.
The use of the latter has greatly increased of late. It so happens that the magnitude of the kilo-
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. I23
gramme and its subdivisions, as well as that of the mêtre and its subdivisions, renders them much
more convenient for use than our lb. and the yard with its subdivisions into inches and tenths or
eighths. . . . . . -
34. In times and places where material civilization did not exist, every trader was his own
balance and weight maker, and subdivided his measures of length for himself. In such a case it
was easier to use a binary scale than any other. At the present time, in this country, weights and
measures of length are obtained from people whose business it is to make them, and to whom it is
just as easy to construct decimal multiples, and submultiples of the unit of length or of weight as
to construct them according to any other system. :
Systems of weights proceeding according to the binary scale are sometimes used. Sir G. Shuckburg
used them in his experiments on the weight of a given volume of water. I have employed
them occasionally. I find that they are not convenient on account of the trouble of making out
the amount of the weight employed. To make up a given weight with them, or to pay a given
sum with money thus subdivided, would be very perplexing.
35. Thé natural thing in our subdivision of the pound is, that it was adapted to the systems of
arithmetic in use among the Scandinavian, Anglo-Saxon, and Celtic races, by whom this country
was peopled, which proceeded by twelves and twenties or scores, remnants of which are found in
the “gross' and ‘schools,' noticed in the remarks on section 13. Now, the natural subdivision
of the unit of money, the 4 1, is that which is in accordance with the system of arithmetic at
present in use, i. e., the decimal subdivision. -
36. How often is the price of a whole ‘thing' exactly a dollar, or half a dollar, or a quarter of
a dollar P -
In every case of buying and selling, small differences—less than the smallest coin in circulation—
must be disregarded, whatever subdivision of the unit of coin we adopt.
Small fluctuations in the price of a large quantity of an article sold must be met by disregarding
small differences.
a. I do not see the advantage of the possibility.
b. The loss, I imagine, usually falls upon the purchaser; he, therefore, ought to be provided with
small coins. His loss will then be not greater than the least of these. -
c. In all sales and in all money transactions, whether of broken or unbroken parcels, small
money remainders must be neglected, when they are less than the smallest coin practically in
circulation.
d. These sums are selected on purpose. In the course of trade it might just as easily happen
that the price was more easily divisible by thirty-two if expressed in mils.
e. Again, assuming the price of the unit of article to be the unit of coin.
f. The contrary may be the case just as frequently. -
g. The prices are determined by the cost of production, combined with competition—not by
competition alone.
37. Addition, subtraction, and multiplication, on a small scale, are the chief arithmetical
operations required in the market or huxter's shop ; division very rarely. A purchaser asks for
one ounce or two ounces, not for ºth or ºth of a pound of tea, with us; or for 3 or 5 grossi, not
rämth or ºth of a libbra of tobacco, in Lombardy. The buyer in one case thinks only of the price
of the ounce of the article, in the other of the price of the grosso. For, though it makes a good
example in a book of arithmetic to deduce the price of the ounce from that of the pound, by
dividing by 16, yet in trade it is well known that the price of the pound is invariably less than 16
times that of the ounce, in price, or in weight, or in quality.
In a country where the coinages of two or more countries circulate together, a money of
account different from one or all of the material coinages may be possible, though a great incon-
venience. With ourselves, the inconvenience would not be tolerated.
38. 1st–No.
2nd—No. - - -
3rd–Yes; and for this reason they should be decimal with their value marked upon them in
terms of the next lower unit, or perhaps of the lowest unit.
4th—Yes. t
5th–That this is the natural tendency is assumed.
39. It is accidental, being due to the progression by twelves and twenties of the arithmetic of
the Scandinavians, Anglo-Saxons, Phoenicians, and Celts. -
What was the reason for retaining the inconvenient guinea so long P
40. The advantage of this divisibility is purely imaginary.
41. These divisions are not required. Objections 1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, over again.
42. I do not admit this. A coinage of account differing from the actual coinage is a thing not
to be tolerated in a civilized country. For this reason, at last, the guinea was suppressed.
43. Why are all these decimals added ?
The nearest integer mil is surely accurate enough. The second line should be 333, the fourth
167, the sixth either 62 or 63.
a. This would be to introduce a money of account different from the coins in use, for I presume
nobody would be wild enough to think of withdrawing our present gold coinage, and the 2s., 1s.,
and 6d. silver coinage. Besides, the new money of account in large sums would be unintelligible
both to ourselves and to foreigners, and would require to be reduced to pounds.
Unit of 100 halfpence would be near enough to the American dollar, to be used in very small
retail dealings, which do not occur between the two countries, and different enough to require
reduction in accounts to the amount of ten shillings.
44. No. It consists in taking the lowest money unit, which the case requires, &c.
45. The £ is the basis of the system. . The mil is not to be used unless the case absolutely
requires it, and even then should the final result give 10 or 20, or any other multiple of mils by 16,
the final 0 might be omitted, and so of the cent and florin. º
Professor Miller.
Q 2
124 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
Professor Miller.
If conciseness and simplicity of expression are of more importance than accurate dealing we
might stop at the pound. &
a. Not in the least. The proposed new system involves only three columns after the pounds,
with room for one figure each. The present system, stopping at a penny, frequently has four
figures after the pound column. The omission of all sums under a penny greatly deranges money
accountS:
b. No ; each fraction consists of three marks. This result, in the United States, arises from
the inconveniently small size of the smallest unit. The mil is too small for a coin, and it is very
difficult to introduce into an account a coin that has (practically) no material existence.
46. A coinage different from that in which accounts are kept, is very perplexing. Large sums,
expressed in any unit except pounds, could not be distinctly apprehended, and would, therefore, on
every occasion, require to be reduced to pounds. Such a change as is here proposed would be
troublesome to foreigners, who all know the value of a pound in terms of the coins of their own
country.
The pound for the unit, with its present inconvenient subdivision, is preferable to the penny
as unit.
The recommendation of the penny as unit would tend more than anything else to postpone the
decimalization of our coinage.
47. Yes; a great disadvantage. Each of the sums #, #, #, consists of 3 separate marks,
equivalent in trouble to three figures.
It is not the case that the ultimate subdivision is binary where the Decimal System is completely
carried out: Switzerland, for example.
In the franc coinage the centime is a coin so small as to be seldom used, and is hardly required in
accounts. Tºoth of £1 = 24 centimes, is not too small to be used in payments or in accounts. In
France the Decimal System is not so completely carried out as in Switzerland, in consequence of
retaining the old copper coinage with the name of sou, though now the use of the word sou is
growing less frequent.
The inconvenience of uniting such values as fractions is that each consists of three marks.
They are not by any means so easily added or multiplied as in a decimal form.
48. The ‘fl’ and mil scheme is not recommended for comprehending in a Decimal System of
notation all the fractions of a penny, but to render easy the arithmetical operations regarding
coins between £1 and the lowest coin, and of avoiding the inconvenience of dividing the £1 into
20s. and the shilling into 12 pence. A proof of the inconvenience of the present system is
afforded by the slovenly habit of omitting the fractions of the penny. -
49. This would be quite useless on account of the trouble of converting pence into decimals.
People always think in pounds. A moderate sum expressed in pence would convey no idea.
50. At present the prices of many things, such as wine per dozen, coals per ton, are stated in
shillings, without introducing difficulty or confusion.
51. Prussia, Saxony, Naples.
52. Not in the least.
53. The American dollar = 50:17 pence. I cent = } penny nearly. 1 mil = # Jo a
penny = } farthing. -
The inference to be drawn from these facts is, that the cent is not small enough for the smallest
coin, and that the mil is much too small.
Experience seems to prove that in this country, where prices are high, the farthing is about the
smallest coin that can ensure a circulation for itself. . The half farthings coined some dozen years
ago were, I believe, very little used. Shopkeepers have an interest in keeping small coins out of
circulation. The Government, in its care of the interests of the poorer classes, ought to keep up
an abundant supply of the smallest useful coin. For this reason I should like to see a coinage of
single mils only (not 2 mils or 5 mils) below the cent.
The United States Mint does not obey the law of 1792.
It is not the number of steps, but the small value of the lowest unit, that is inconvenient and
unworkable.
When the lowest unit is too small and the next higher unit is too large there is a strong induce-
ment to use # or #.
It is because the American coinage is not decimal throughout.
ºs to Wilson's Diary for 1853 the copper coins of the United States are 1 cent, cent,
and + cent.
“ UNITED STATEs.
S. d.
1 dollar = 100 cents cº º º º = 4: O
I cent - = 0 0}
Gold coin–Eagles and half-eagles, or 10 and 5 dollars = 40s. and 20s.
Silver coins—They have both Spanish and American dollars, and 2, #, and 4 dollars; 10, 5, and
1 cent pieces; also } and Tºr dollars, or 1 and # shillings (not English), equal to the Spanish
1 and 4 reales.
2
• on 3. I. l 33
Copper coin—1, #, and 3 cents.
54. What harm is there in this 2 . In Prussia the thaler is divided into 30 silver groschen, and
the silver groschen into 12 pfennige. In Saxony the money of account consists of thalers,
gutegroschen, and pfennige. I thaler = 24 gutegroschen, 1 gutegroschen = 12 pfennige. In Lübeck
the money of account consists of marcs, schillings, and pfennige. In Naples it consists of
ducati, tari, carlini, grani. The subdivision would only be into 100 parts, unless greater accuracy
is required. Or into only 10 under the circumstances above mentioned.
55. A difference in our favour. Having a larger unit with a name, and other convenient units,
also with names, to take hold of the memory in mental calculation.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. I 25
56. On this account the 33 as an integer has a great advantage over the franc, dollar, gulden,
or silver rouble.
This is no advantage.
57. Not in the least.
These steps will not be inconvenient if we select good short names for them. The name of
florin for the first is very unfortunate. That word being in Austria used to denote a coin worth
2s. O' 39q.; in the Zollverein, a coin worth about 1s. 8d.: in Holland, a coin a trifle smaller; and
in Poland, a coin worth 5' 62d. Rose, the name suggested by Wyon, or rupee, as suggested by
Sir John Herschel, would have been much better. Rupee is a very appropriate name, being the
word for silver in sanscrit, the parent of the languages of Europe. The steps of 10 places each,
with appropriate names, would furnish convenient resting-places for the memory in mental calcu.
lation. The calculator would use just as many of them as were serviceable and no more, and,
with the aid afforded by additional names, might perform calculations that would be impracticable
with the franc or the lira for unit.
58. This is no disadvantage. Objections 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 41 over again.
59. Sums less than a penny are omitted on account of the intolerable clumsiness of our present
system. In the mil system no sum less than £1 will require more than three figures in order to
be recorded accurately to 1 mil. In our present system, in order to be accurate only to 1 penny,
the entry of a sum less than £1, on account of having 20s. to the £1, in half the number of
items requires 3 figures, and on account of having 12d. in the shilling, in the number of
items requires also three figures, and in Tº of the number of items requires four figures. The
difference in the number of figures, if in one case we stop at the mil, and in the other at the
penny, is very small. On the other hand, having only one figure to a column is a great advantage.
The width of column in the new system is less than in the old. In the present system there is
great inconvenience in not expressing accounts in terms of the smallest coin practically in use.
It is not known whether certain discrepancies are due to a mistake, or to the omission of all sums
under one penny in bankers' accounts.
The proposed new system will very greatly diminish the trouble, and at the same time introduce
more minute accuracy.
60. I see no advantage in the divisibility of the 1s, and 6d.
61. A poor person never asks for a ‘third 'of anything.
This division of material substances is not often required.
The division of any material substances into 5 or 10 parts does not require the aid of calculation
any more than division into 2 or 3 parts.
62. In Switzerland a revolution is got up on very small provocation. I never heard of any dis-
turbance produced by the late sweeping change in the coinage of that country.
Any possible loss or injustice would be most trifling compared with that which of necessity
occurs in every purchase where the fair price is one half of the halfpenny—the smallest coin
practically in use—less than the price demanded.
This change would interfere—not with a large portion of existing contracts, but with every
existing contract.
These apprehensions are not well founded. The difficulty is of no importance, except in tolls—
a penny or halfpenny toll is demanded, not because a penny or halfpenny is the fair price for the
convenience of using a bridge or for keeping a road in repair, but because it so hº ppened that
the coins in existence were a penny and a halfpenny. • -
63. The lower classes will derive a larger benefit than the higher from the abu, lance of the
small coinage put into circulation.
64. I have never found small money transactions so easily carried on as in Switzerland, where
the Decimal Coinage is perfect.
The shillings and pence above nine, especially those which consist of two words—such as
sixteen—are very perplexing in calculations performed in the head,
For distinctness of mental conception and facility of calculation the Decimal System, in which
no small coin would enter with a higher number than 9, is much superior to one in which 10... 19,
and 10, 11 occur.
65. The brevity and convenience of expression, oral and written, which attaches to our present
coins, remains to be discovered.
W. H. MILLER.
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
W. MILLER, Esq., Cashier of the Bank of England.
Answer to Question 1.—I do.
2. I have no objection to any of them down to the sixpence, and my only objection to the lower
coins consists in their not being in decimal relation to the rest.
3. I have no objection to the coins as quantities, and consider them in that respect well adapted
to our wants, and therefore would preserve them all, except that I would give the pence a decimal
relation to the florin and pound. This would render the coinage much more valuable for all
purposes of retail transactions, and indeed for all other transactions.
Professor Miller.
W. Miller, Esq.,
Cashier of the
Hank of England.
Q 3
ºf £6 * DECIMAL COENAGE COMMISSION:
W. Miller, Esq.,
Gashier of the
Bank of England.
f
The whole coinage might then be recorded and dealt with arithmetically. . . ." . .
The present irregular gradations of money are a great hindrance to education. This has
been well proved, but it is the most serious hindrance to the acquisition of the science of arith-
metic to those to whom a thorough knowledge of it would be of the greatest service. Watchmakers,
machinists, carpenters, masons, handicraftsmen of all kinds, whose schooling seldom exceeds three
years, have no time for scientific arithmetic or practical geometry. Their minds are burdened
and confused by the immense number of heterogeneous quantities they have to deal with in com-
pound arithmetic, and they make no progress. -
Therefore, and for many other reasons, my objection to our present system is not restricted to
the disadvantages which attach to it in keeping accounts of money, or to its application to calcula-
tions of money, though the inconveniences in these would be alone sufficient in my mind to justify
a change. -
4. I consider the primary purpose of coins to be to pay debts. -
I do not consider them as fractional subdivisions of the integer, but as integers or aggregations
of integers. This is how the system was constructed, per synthesis :—Before the introduction by
the Normans of the Roman shilling, 32 corns of wheat taken out of the midst of the ear were of
the weight of one silver penny, which was the chief coin ; 5 pennies made a shilling, which was not
a coin, but a weight of silver, and 60 shillings made the pound. This was both weight and
money. It was not uncommon to write large sums in pence decimally. º
The coins were then all of one kind. Accounts of money all of one kind are more easily kept,
and calculations are more easily made, and if the coins also are all of the same kind or denomina-
tion, they will accord with the terms of the account or of the calculation, and the money will be
easily reckoned. To have the money of account recorded in one denomination and to pay or
receive the coins in another, would be a monstrous absurdity, not to be tolerated for a moment if it
were possible to avoid it
5. I cannot see two purposes. If they are best for accounts and best for calculations, they must
necessarily be best for the discharge of those accounts and calculations, being in the same terms.
6. It is. A large proportion of the retail purchases are made for the coin's worth, or the articles
are made to be sold for the coins. The question of the merit or demerit of any system of coins
must depend upon their adaptability to all payments, great as well as small.
I know of no complaint, except that which I have stated in reference to their non-arithmetical
relation, therefore it is that I wish to retain them.
The use of the coinage is undoubtedly the first consideration, and the only object any one could
have in altering it would be to add to its usefulness. The use of the coinage is to pay debts, large
or small, whether recorded in accounts and the subject of calculations, or reckoned on the spot,
without pen, ink, or paper. -
Almost all retail market commodities are sold either by tale or by weight.
Vegetables.—Greens, watercresses, spinach, and other small things are sold for the money's
worth.
Turnips, carrots, parsnips, radishes, onions, &c., are made up into bunches to fit certain
COll] S.
Cabbages, cauliflowers, lettuces, celery, horseradish, apples, pears, cucumbers, melons, and
most fruits are sold by tale according to their size and quality. - -
Potatoes are sold by weight, generally, in London ; in the country, very often, by the peck,
Peas and beans by the peck and its parts. -
It is quite clear that here 1,000 parts would have the preference over 960, as they would afford
more gradations of price.
Fish.—Herrings, mackerel, haddocks, soles, whiting, and nearly all other small fish are sold by
tale, as are also lobsters, crabs, oysters, and prawns, according to quality.
Salmon, turbot, cod, eels, and sturgeon are either weighed or sold singly. If weighed they
would be weighed to two ounces. Dried salmon is weighed to an ounce.
Poultry and eggs are sold by tale.
Butcher's meat is sold by the pound.
Bread, butter, bacon, cheese, are also sold by the pound.
But bread is most frequently sold by the loaf without a very nice regard to weight, and fancy
bread, biscuits, and other baker's commodities are sold by tale. Biscuits sometimes are sold by
weight.
The articles here mentioned that are sold by tale, could, as was said of the preceding class, be
better fitted with their prices in mils than under the present system.
The articles sold by weight are generally of uneven weight, except butter and bread. You ask
for a pound of cheese or bacon, and you get a pound and one or two ounces. Beefsteaks and chops
the same; the vendors cut as close to the weight as they can. *
In weighing joints of meat, it is the custom of butchers to weigh only to two ounces. These
cases of uneven weight are the most difficult to deal with under the present system, and are
supposed by some to be much more so under the mil system; yet when they are thoroughly
inquired into it is surprising how all the difficulties vanish.
In London alone there are upwards of 20,000 retail shops, in which the fractions of a penny are
In COnStant uSe.
Of 1,000 sales made in these shops, those with the fractions of a penny would bear the proportion
of about 400 to 600 with even pence.
Of the 20,000 shops there are about 800 cheesemongers and bacon factors, and 1,740 butchers.
These latter cannot divide their commodities into even pounds; nor always cut off from the mass
as much meat, or cheese, or bacon as would exactly meet the requirements of their customers.
I have examined the small books that pass between butchers and their customers in various parts
of London and the districts round, and they all tell the same tale, whether you take Giblett's of
Bond Street, Bannister's in the City, or any of the suburban tradesmen's books. There is a slight
difference in the prices, but the principles upon which the business is transacted are precisely the
S8 Ill 62.
Out of upwards 3,000 entries there is not a single instance of weighing below two ounces,
except in the case of a steak or chop or veal cutlet, where the weight has been below a pound."
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS.
127.
The following is a page from one of the books, and is a fair specimen of the ordinary working:—
W. Miller, Esq.
Cashier of the

Bank of England
A. B. C.
As it is. As it would be with Decimal As it would be with De-
Coins. cimal Weights and Coins.
1853 — weight º, — | Weight. º — º* * *-*
- - - lbs. £ s. d. 1 lbs. £ F. M. | 36 F. M.
April 25 | 1. Shoulder of lamb 5% 11d. || 0 5 *0 | 5, 4.6 O 2 53 5 * 5 46 O 2 53
,, , 2. Beef steak – - || 1 14 oz. . 8d. 0 1 3 || 1 14 oz. 33 || 0 O 63 l’9 || 33 || 0 O 63
, 26 || 3. Rump steak - || 1: 1s. | 0 || 9 || 13 50 || 0 0 87 1 ''75 50 | O O 87
, 27 |4. Leg of mutton - | 84 8}d. | 0 6 2, 8; 36 || 0 3 15 || 8°75 || 36 || 0 3 15
May 2 5. Fillet of veal - || 8 10d. | 0 6 10%| 84 42 | 0 3 46 i 8'25 || 42 O 3 46
2, 4 6. Lamb chops - I 6 oz. 1s. 0 1 4}| 1 6 oz. 50 O O 70 1 * 4. 50 O O 70
3 2 95 7. Suet º - || || 80. 0 0 4 || || 33 O O 17 * 5 || 33 O O 17
» 5 8. Calves' liver - || 1 || 8a. 0 1 0 || 1% 33 O O 50 || 1 5 33 O 50
, , 9. Leg of mutton - | 84 8%d. | 0 6 °0%| 84 35 | 0 2 98 || 8 5 25 C, 2 98
,, , |10. Leg of lamb - || 5 10d. O 4, 2 5 41 O 2 ()5 5’ 4, 1 || 0 2 05
,, , |11. Suet - - - | # 8d. | 0 0 4 || # 33 O O 17 5 || 33 O () 17
32 53 12. Brisket of beef - || 8 7d. O 4, 8 || 8 29 O 2 32 8 : 29 O 2 32
1 19 () 1 9 53 1 9 53
* Errors in the original, which make a difference in the totals.
Ilet us examine what difficulties there are attending all three systems in working out these
reckonings by head, supposing that they were purchases made in the market to be reckoned
instanter.
A 1. 5}lb. at 11d. Half is 5%d., and 5 × 11 = 55, and 55 + 5} = 603d, which,
* - by the pence table, we know to be 5s. 0}d.
B 1. 5%lb. at 46m. Half is 23, and 5 × 6 = 30, which + 23 = 53, and 5 × 40
- = 200, and 200 + 53 = 253.
C 1. 5' 5 at 46. . Half is 23, and 23 × 10 = 230, which + 23 = 253.
A 2. 11b. 14oz. at 8d. = 21b. — ºth, and Sd. -- 8 = 1 d, and 8d. × 2 = 16d., and
16d. — la: = 15, and 15d. = 1s. 3d.
B 2. 11b. 14oz. at 33. = 2ib. – 4th, and 8 + 33 = 4, and 33 × 2 = 66, and 66
— 4 = 62.
C 2. 11b. 9 dismes at 33. 3' 31b. × 9 = 30, and 30 + 33 = 63.
A 4. 8}lb. at 8%d. Call it 91bs. – }. Then } = 2d., and 9 × 8d. = 72d., and
- - 72d. = 6s., and 9 × #d. = 4}d., and 4} + 6s. = 6'4}, and
- 6s. 4d. – 2d. = 6s. 2%d.
B 4. 8%lbs. at 36 mils. Call it 91bs. – }. Then 36 mils -- 4 = 9 mils, and 36 × 9lbs.
- — 9 mils = 315. - -
8 * 75 at 36. Here 4 times 9 = 36. Then 8 75 x 4 = 35, and 35 × 9 = 315.
Enough is here given to shew that even in these most trying cases, a Decimal Coinage is worked
by head, and by a head burdened by the pence table, with more facility than the present admits of.
It is true there are insignificant fractions of a mil occasionally thrown over, there are the same
in the pence ; but they are of no consequence to any one ; and the great advantage of displacing
a system of makeshifts, learned by rote, special and technical, for one purely arithmetical, and of
universal application, is not to be overlooked.
The poor often buy a single candle, an ounce of butter, an ounce of cheese, a rasher of bacon,
half an ounce of tea, and so forth. Upon these small transactions they are great losers, and
always must be. There is as much trouble in weighing and making up an ounce of tea as of a
pound. In these minute divisions, besides the loss of time there is a greater waste.
In these small matters I am convinced that the mil system would be of advantage over the
present.
There are 2700 grocers' shops in London. The grocers weigh to exact pounds, half pounds, and
quarters, but no lower by the divisional process; they then go to ounces and aggregations of
ounces; and this is the case in every other trade where weight is used, and exact weights can be
given. In all these the pound and mil would serve better than the present system.
There are 1040 linendrapers. These frequently reckon to the one-sixteenth of a yard ; but
there is no difficulty in this any more than there is with the ouijce.
Q 4
128 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
W. Miller, Esq.
Cashier of the
Bank of England.
In all these dealings there would be this great advantage, which would be the saving of many
a penny in the poor man's marketing, that all persons would reckon to the mil, the 1000th of
a pound, while at present there are a great many tradesmen who never go lower than a halfpenny
partly on account of the difficulty of paying a farthing, which would not apply to the mil.
With an abundance of five mil pieces and the present pence a difficulty of this kind could
hardly be felt,
In considering the “use of the coinage” I have wandered perhaps rather too far; but my object
has been to demonstrate once for all that in the distribution of commodities in the retail markets,
the mil system of coinage would more effectually answer every requirement than the system of
of coinage at present in use.
7. I do.
8. It is not impossible ; on the contrary, it is obviously quite possible to break the integer into
more clear fractional parts than under the present system. Under the mil system, the pound
can be divided, of course, by 1000 divisors, without a remainder. Under the present system, it
can only be divided by 960.
For the adjustment of prices, 1000 parts will give a greater variety than 960, and must be so far
preferable.
In marketing, generally, beyond halves and quarters, people do not divide. When halves and
quarters fail them, they go down to a lower denomination. Where pounds are concerned, to ounces,
and so on.
If the money of account be fairly represented in the coins, and it descend to so low a value that
anything beneath it would be of no consequence to any one, as in the Mil System it would do, I can
see no objection to the Decimal System.
9. This is simply a re-assertion of the matter in dispute.
If the gradations of money, weights, and measures were all gradations of 12, if that were the
governing number of a system which worked well, the passage would have some force, notwith- ‘
standing decimal arithmetic ; but we have no system. Where a system ought to be, we have but
an accidental accumulation of upwards of one hundred and fifty incongruous units; the duodecimal
shilling we received at the point of the Conqueror's sword. These various uuits are the remains
of many barbarisms, which hinder education, and stultify the mind.
Authority in such matters, weighed against the experience of nations, and the conclusions of
reason, is not of much gravity, however old it may be ; it only affords additional evidence of the
fact that wise men have been mistaken in all ages.
The following, which is an extract from a rare tract lately reprinted by the Political Economy
Club, entitled, “Quantulumcunque, concerning Money,” to the Lord Marquess of Halifax, by
Sir William Petty, 1682, is a fair counterpoise to the extract from Vaughan.
“The use of farthings is but to make up fragments in silver, and to adjust accompts; to which
end of adjusting accompts let me add, that if your old defective farthings were cryed down to 5
a penny, you might keep all accompts in a way of decimal arithmetic, which hath been long desired
for the ease and certainty of accompts.”
To the first part of the extract from Napoleon's Memoir, a conclusive answer is to be found in
the fact, that with all his boldness and all his power, he never proposed to abandon the Decimal
Coinage; and the concluding step of the issue of the centime in bronze has been completed in the
present reign. But the remarks in the latter part of the extract are directed against the Decimal
system generally, and are diametrically opposed to fact and reason. The fallacy of them consists
in the supposition that the Decimal System renders thought more laborious. It is a fact that the
best and quickest mental calculators use the Decimal mode. There are some people, and mere
boys of fourteen years old, who can extract the cube roots of numbers, and can multiply long lines
of figures together, entirely by head. We had a boy who could do this, in the Bank of England, a
short time ago; but he knew little of weights and measures, nor had his brains been much addled
by compound arithmetic. But these people, before they commence their work, get rid of all
incongruous quantities. And it stands to reason that this would be the case in the natural course
of things.
The arithmetical system is a purely natural system, based upon decimal numeration, and decimal
numeration has sprung up spontaneously, as Quincy Adams observes, “from the nature of man
and things.” Being, thus, a natural mode, it would seem to follow that the practice of it should be
more conducive to the health of the mind than the practice of any other; and that, therefore,
instead of the contrary, this method universally applied should be the best calculated to “aid con.
ception and imagination, to assist the memory, and give power to thought ;" and that the prac-
tice of any other, special and confined as it must be in its application, would have a tendency to
weaken the powers of the mind by limiting the scope of their operatic.m.
Man's first instruments of number were the five fingers on each hand.
That they were five was no accident. Nature has a peculiar regard for the number five, and
has had from the earliest manifestations of life upon earth to the present age, and it is no idle fancy
nor irreverent, to suppose that, as the fingers existed in the Divine mind, and were elaborated in
nature, through the rude shapes of the geologic ages, they were five in number because they were
destined to become to the future man the most admirable and perfect instruments of his intellectual
faculties, and amongst them of that of number.
And when man impelled by his mature recorded his countings, and founded the numeration
table for all ages, he unconsciously took up for the human mind a preordained burden not too
great for its powers.
There never was a duodecimal arithmetic, and though the Romans sowed their uncide broadcast
over the earth, a duodecimal arithmetic has nowhere sprung up. -
Our compound arithmetic leads the minds of the generality of people away from the healthy
practice of a natural and universal science, and encumbers them with a multitude of special contri-
vances, which make the very idea of arithmetic distasteful in the highest degree.
The considerations in No. 9 are altogether opposed to experience and reason, and are of no
value whatever in this argument.
10. I cannot imagine such a combination. A binary scale may consist of any of the products
oftwo ; but when you introduce another power into any of the gradations of the scale, you destroy
tº binary property immediately. Such a combination cannot exist as a duodecimal and a binary
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 129
scale. Try whether ours is such. You cannot divide a pound by two and come down either to
a shilling, a penny, or a farthing. You cannot divide a shilling by two and come down either to
a penny or a farthing. You cannot divide a pound by twelve, and come down either to a shilling,
a penny, or a farthing. You cannot divide a penny by twelve. Wherein then consists the com-
bination of the binary and duodecimal properties of the scale?—There is no such thing. 12d.
can be divided by twelve and its factors, so can 12 mils. There is nothing in nature that makes
the value of a shilling a constant and unvarying price. There is hardly anything in a grocer's
shop, or any other shop, a shilling a pound ; but it is just as likely to be 10d., 11d., or 13d., or 14d.
or intermediate halfpence or farthings; and it is a curious fact, that of common things, exactly a
shilling a pound or a yard, is an exceedingly rare price, especially in those commodities in which
the poor principally deal.
Between the farthing and the shilling there are 48 different prices of course ; between the mil
and the shilling there are 50. Of these there are prices divisible without a remainder :—
In the farthings, In the mils,
by 2 24, 25
» 3 16 16
, 4. 12 J2
» 5 9 10
2, 6 8 8
, 7 6 7
, 8 6 (S
, 9 5 5
, 10 4. 5
90 94.
Now, every one of these prices could be paid in mils without the passing of a single mil, which
is an immense advantage over the present scale.
But the overwhelming advantage which the decimal scale possesses is the power of obtaining a
percentage without any arithmetical operation. This capability of division or multiplication by
10, 100, 1000, and so on, is cautiously kept out of view by those who talk about duodecimal and
binary combinations. -
This proves beyond all question that the decimal system proposed by the Committee of the
House of Commons, going no further than the favourite shilling, actually affords four more grada-
tions of price, evenly divisible by prime numbers, than the present scale.
How then can there be “an inferiority as regards fractional divisibility” in the proposed decimal
system of coins 2
11. I do not deny the powers of the number 12; but applied to things that are to be subjects of
arithmetical operations, it destroys the rhythm of the decimal scale and introduces confusion. I see
no force in the remark of Napoleon.
12. 1stly. Were it not that I have the pence table in my mind, I should say certainly not the
first; but it depends upon use.
2ndly. If we have the mils, we shall no longer be working with half crowns or seven-and-six-
pences, but with sums of mils. We make up our minds to relinquish this power when we propose
our system of mils. But the half mil is a quantity of no value, except where it is part of a price;
and in all cases of that kind of course it would be expressed. It is not to be supposed that any
of the supporters of the mil scheme of coinage contemplate the disuse of vulgar fractions. They
might as well think of getting rid of arithmetic altogether.
3rdly. The calculation with the mil system is decidedly the easiest; and when a person becomes
accustomed to the values of those regular decimal divisions of the integer, it would be done at a
glance. .
4thly. “Take half-a-crown, &c.” People do not take half-a-crown and double it, and halve it,
and so on. There is nothing in the half-crown which makes this easy. 30 mils would do just the
same. With 125 mils considered as ºth the calculation is just as easy.
5thly. Price's candles. The difference would be that when Price had got rid of his stock, he
would make up his candles in the more convenient quantity of 10lbs. to the box, and sell them at
460 mils the box, and then every one would know that a pound would be 46 mils; and if that
were too much, somebody would set set up candle making and undersell him.
6thly. We prefer to call it 125, and admit that you cannot pay a single fraction named. What
then 2. The utmost that can be left out of the reckoning is half a mil, or 4 per cent. less than
half of a farthing. Half-a-crown is no more a frequent price than a shilling, and 120 mils are
just as likely to occur as half-a-crown as a price of those things which are sold in divisions of the
pound or yard. Again, the greater, number of these fractions are never made. The halves,
guarters, and eighths of yards are made of velvet, silk, or of sonne expensive material, and then
the shopkeeper always contrives to take the fraction to compensate for his trouble in making so
small a sale, and this is always expected by the buyer and readily conceded.
But fractions of this kind, I mean those which cannot be paid, it has been shewn, in answer to
Question 10, are and must be more numerous under the present system than under the mil system.
In purchasing a quantity of diaper or cotton stuff, for towels or pinafores or things of that
kind, a certain length is required for each, and they annount up in the whole to so many yards
and an eighth, there is almost always a fraction, because the price of the whole yard might be
anything from 73d. to 15d., rising by farthings or halfpence, and the fraction goes sometimes one
way, sometimes another, and nobody either gains or loses anything in the end.
Payments, too, under the mil system would generally be made to greater nicety than they are
at present; for now the farthing is often omitted; then the mil, though it would be excluded
from banking and mercantile accounts, would always pass, because it would not need to be paid
in the coin itself, as the four and five mil pieces would always serve.
W. Miller, Esq.,
Cashier of the
Bank of England.
R.
ºf 30 DECIMAL: COINAGE COMMISSION : . . . . .
W. Miller, Esq.,
‘Cashier of the
Bank of England.
7thly. 125, the equivalent of half-a-crown, would be paid with that coin.
124 mils would be paid much more easily than 2s. 53d.
.62 mils would be paid in 1 shilling and 3 ordinary pennies.
Nothing could be better or easier; but it is not by a few selected cases, and selected
because they are favourable to one side of the question, that the relative value of the two
systems is to be judged.
13. Nearly the whole of this question has been dealt with before.
The construction of coinage is not a divisional process. We know well the history of our
coinage, and we know that it was accumulative and not divisional.
What Mr. Adams meant by the “Decimal arithmetic” not being “adapted to the multiplication of
material substances,” is hard to imagine, without further explanation, so we must leave this question.
14. A common triumph the Decimal System has over any other is the comparatively small
number of figures used; but it is not so much the smallness of the number of figures used, as the
ease with which they are used, which constitutes the excellence of the Decimal System of money.
Such comparisons as these are of no value. They are but “indifferent honest.” The best
answer to them is, that between the pound and the mil there are 1000 steps ; between the penny
and the pound there are 240. Let the farthing be introduced into the comparison, and see how
the case stands.
£ s. d. Mils. Pence.
1 0 0# = 1°003 = 240;
O 17 8+ = 885 = 212].
o is 6 - 777 = iss;
O 9 94 = 491 = 117;
0 5 74 = 281 - 67%
0 4 103 = 245 = 58%
O 3 8+ = 184 = 44}
O 1 5# == 73 - 17;
AE4 7 54 .#4 - 372 £ 10494
49 figures. 34 figures. 50 figures.
The penny does not comprehend the whole of our wants.
The following are all the gradations between the farthing and the mil and a shilling The
present system requires 126 figures, the mil 91 figures.
d. Mils. d. Mils.
# — 1 64 — 25 half shilling.
# — 2 6; — 26
# — 3 6# – 27
1 — 4 7 — 28
# — 5 # — 29
1} – 6 7; – 30
. 1; – 7 7# — 31
2 — 8 8 — 32
24 — 9 8} — 33
2% — 10 8; – 34
23 — 11 8# — 35
3 — 12 9 — 36
34 — 13 94 — 37
34 — iſ § – 38
3# — 15 9; – 39
4 — ió 10 — 40
4} — 17 104 —— 41
4; — 18 104 — 42
4# — 19 10; — 43
5 — 20 11 — 44
5} — 21 i 13 — 45
5% — 22 11% — 46
5% — 23 11% — 47
6 — 24 12 — 48
49
50 shilling.
With regard to the number of figures used, it must be remembered that almost all retail accounts
have to do with the fractions of a penny. Now beginning at a farthing and going up to a pound
by gradations of a farthing requires 3880 figures, in vulgar fractions, written with difficulty, and
applied with difficulty to any arithmetical rule; while the equivalents in mils require only 2685
figures, a difference in favour of the mils of 1195 figures, the mils being, at the same time, all
in harmony with arithmetic.
Beginning at a penny, and going up to the pound by gradations of pence, under the present
system. it requires 610 figures to express all the gradations; beginning at a mil, under the mil
system, would only require 47 figures more.
The penny system destroys our whole system, and does not comprehend our wants.
With regard to conciseness of expression in words, taking the whole of the gradations of the
present scale, beginning at the penny and going up to the pound by gradations of pence, requires
5342 letters; while to express the equivalent sums in pounds, florins, and mils requires only
5211 letters, a difference in favour of the mils of 131 letters. But if we went to farthings, how
immensely might we swell this advantage.
Can there be a doubt, when the whole case is stated, as to which are the easiest to work with ?
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 131
It is the non-interchangeability of the coins at present in use with the money of accounts kept
decimally that we complain of, and the reason why we want an alteration. That is our starting
point. By keeping accounts in pence, you do not alter the money. We know that we might
at any moment do that ; but it would not give us a complete Decimal System unless we went
down to the centime, a point too low for us, and involving too many figures. -
We might keep our accounts in pence, and pay our debts and receive our credits in pounds and
shillings, but no sane person would think of doing so. He keeps his accounts because he wants to
know the value of what he possesses, what he has to pay, and what to receive, in the current coin
of the realm; and he keeps them in the leading terms of the coinage.
The equivalent of 4l. 7s, is not £4’342 but £4' 350; and if the column had been properly
worked out it would have amounted to that sum. Now £4,350 is divisible, without remainder,
by 2, 3, 5, 6, 10, 15, 30, 50, whole numbers. It is divisible besides by 4,350 different divisors
without a fractional remainder. -
No. 14 therefore falls to the ground. Beyond all question the superiority rests with the mils.
15. What commodity is there of the price of a pound a yard, or of the price of a pound a
pound? Nothing of any consequence to any mortal man. The pound is only one price in one
thousand prices in the scheme of mils. -
The answer given in No. 10 might be considered sufficient; but this involves the whole pound,
and is connected with the question of the limitation of its fractions to pence.
The 1,000 mils can be divided a thousand times without a remainder. They afford a thousand
gradations of price. -
The 960 farthings can be divided 960 times without a remainder, and afford 960 gradations of
price. -
The 240 pence can be divided 240 times without a remainder, and afford 240 gradations of
price.
Of these gradations of price there are the following in the respective categories divisible by the
prime numbers without a remainder :-
Nº. In the Mils. In the Farthings. In the Pence.
2 500 480 120
3 333 320 80
4 250 240 60
5 200 192 48
6 i86 160 40
7 142 137 34.
8 125 120 30
9 111 106 26
10 100 96 24.
1927 1851 462
All these prices and their divisions can be more easily paid by the mil system, more easily
recorded, more easily dealt with by any arithmetical rule, and have this great advantage over all
irregular quantities,— one which never for a moment ought to be lost sight of,--that they yield a
per-centage without any arithmetical operation.
These considerations comprehend every objection which can be founded upon the non-divisibility
of the integer.
The integer is but one price, and not a frequent one of anything divisible ; and when that is
said, there ought to be nothing more needed.
There is no force in No. 15. Its instances are garbled, and consequently worthless in the
argument. -
16. It is. By far the largest number of all calculations have to do with money; and we should
then have at least one side of the question rational.
17. There is at present nothing homogeneous between them.
18. We have no binary system in our coinage; and I do not use the word here in a narrow or
restricted sense. I maintain that it is not practically a binary system. In neither weights,
measures, nor money, can you arrive at the integer, either by a binary or a duodecimal division.
Take the most favourable to this view, the avoirdupoise weight. -
In the ton you cannot get down to the pound ; you cannot get lower than thirty-five pounds.
In the pound, which is your strongest point, you cannot reach the integer by any possible
division. You can go eight stages down to the dram. Let us see how that acts :--1 dram at 960
farthings a pound = 1/2 #. So No. 18 starts with a fiction. See No. 10. -
19. It will. This has been shown. See No. 15. The coinage in the mil scale would be more
comprehensive, and would adjust a greater variety of debts. It affords more prices capable of
division by the prime numbers. -
20. See answer to No. 15.
21. All these questions hinge upon the supposition that a shilling a pound, a shilling a yard, a
shilling a foot, are comparatively frequent prices; there never was a greater mistake.
See Answer No. 10.
22. No doubt it would, else there would be no reason for a change.
23. Nearly the whole of this is wrong. It is from no want of respect to Mr. Yates that I say
this, because I know so much of his fairness, that I am sure none would be more ready to
acknowledge this than himself.
W. Miller, Esq.,
Cashier of the
Bank of England.
-e
T. 2
132 , DECEMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
... W. Miller, Esq.,
Cashier of the
Bank of England.
The United States have called in the coins mentioned here, and the reason does not apply with
the mil system, the fractions of which are insignificant, while the half of a cent is nearly a whole
farthing, a value too large to be lost.
I can neither admit the force nor the truth of it.
24. See answers to Nos. 6, 10, and 15.
Mr. Quincy Adams here does but describe the inconvenience which resulted to the United States
from a hasty and inconsiderate introduction of a good thing in an unprepared season.
What they did, we wish above all things to avoid. Both in France and the United States they
rushed wildly into decimal account-keeping, as some people would have us do here, without
altering the coins so as to enable the people to pay their debts contracted in the new
denomination. *
They kept their old coins, and have only just now attempted to get rid of them.
25. The late Lord Ashburton does not make this argument a bit stronger. 7:#d. a pound, or a
yard, is a more frequent price than a shilling a pound, or a yard. See Nos. 10 and 15. -
26. It is a great misfortune. They do not fit the present coinage, as no one knows better than
Sir John Herschel. If they did we might multiply them one into the other without any difficulty.
The only way I see at present of making them all perfectly homogeneous is to decimalize them
all : but it is better to have the coinage decimalized than neither, because we can take parts for
the weights and measures, and one side of the work at least will be congruous.
Ultimately it should do so; but so large a change, in so huge and complicated a machine as
our trading system, which must be kept going, can only be made by minute, well-timed, and
well-ordered changes, spread over a considerable time.
27. See the preceding.
I think the coinage should be dealt with first.
The next step, which could create no inconvenience to anyone worth a moment's consideration,
would be to keep the accounts and to weigh all merchandize by pounds. See my paper on this
subject.
28. If this case of 215 tons and so on werenot of a peculiar class of cases, and if this class lost
any great convenience by the change, something might be urged against the change upon this
point. There is a great deal of work in the first example not recorded ; in the other it is quite
straightforward and simple: I do not think much stress can be laid upon this.
29. They will be just in the same condition that they are at present.
See Nos. 6, 10, 15, and 23.
30. I should think it would be a great advantage, especially in working the stock account.
However, I am not “a great practical authority,” and I cannot say.
3]. I do not see how it necessarily follows. A Decimal Coinage might make more evident to
the country at large the advantages which would attend a change, and thus force it on. But should
it not be found desirable, the Decimal Coinage could not force the country into a change.
32. If the thing be good in itself, do it for its own sake. It is all the better too, to do
it, if you have the belief that it will be a step to a further good, which is not quite practicable
without.
33. It is not ; for reasons before stated in 26. -
Unfortunately for the French their chief weight, the kilogramme, is more than two pounds, which
is a very awkward unit. One pound is far better. In decimalizing it, we should still retain our
half pounds and quarters, and the twentieth part, which would be 5 in the column of hundredths,
would be a most convenient substitute for the ouncé, under the name of quintin or quint.
At present the halves and quarters are the only binary divisions in general use as divisions;
below that, recourse is had to the next category, ounces. Tenths and half tenths would be more
convenient than eighths and sixteenths in fractional weights, and the system would be harmonious.
We should have, then, the only divisions now practically made use of as bisections.
34. The integers of our weights and measures are not divided by a binary scale. Below halves
and quarters, divisions of the integers are not common.
35. The pound sterling, the shilling, and the penny, are three but very uncommon prices, as I
have abundantly shewn.
You cannot pay for a quarter of a pound of rice at 3% a pound, or sugar at 7%, or a thousand
things at a thousand prices, such as we see in the grocer's shops every day we choose to look.
What is good for wholes is good for their parts. The pound, our standard coin, is such, because
it is a convenient quantity to keep up to its weight; but it is not an integer with fractions, as I
regard it, or as it grew up in history; it is an aggregation of integers.
I do not think it natural or convenient, and I do think I have proved the contrary.
36. See 23. There is nothing new here ; there is not a point to found an argument upon.
37. I do not think there is anything in this question not answered before. We cannot abandon
a duodecimal system, for we never had one. The extract from Mr. Quincy Adams suggests an
impossibility.
38. They are some of the requirements; but of the integer it should have been said that it
should be so small as not to require a fracture ; and the most important is left out, that the coins
of account should be in arithmetical relation to each other, so that a percentage might be taken
without any arithmetical operation. A bisection is, no doubt, more easily made than any other
section, but there does not appear to be any natural tendency to subdivide commodities by continual
halving ; a board, for instance, or a piece of cloth.
39. It is not a just description ; and the observations that follow are not correct. See No. 15.
40. If by a “binary or duodecimal scale” is meant the present scale, then I answer it does not
afford peculiar facilities for clear fractional parts. See No. 15.
41. We shall lose them in some cases, to gain them in more.
This question has been answered over and over again. See No. 15.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. J33
42. That would not be to keep accounts of our coinage, and would be a monstrous piece of folly W. Miller, Esq.,
to attempt. Cashier of the
43. It could not be accomplished at all; the whole coinage must necessarily be changed to the Bank of England.
denomination of the penny.
The thing is totally impracticable without giving up the present coinage, which is altogether
out of the question.
44. The mil scheme as nearly as possible aims at that.
45 to 48. These have all been answered.
49. Certainly not.
Anybody may do it at present who chooses; but it would never be done except at the point of
the bayonet.
50. No, the money would be all of one kind.
51. Yes, England has four.
52. Not of the least importance. If the coins be convenient, a thousand steps afford a most
decided advantage.
53. They quote prices in vulgar fractions, as doubtless we should continue to do.
The half cent they bring into account in small dealings shows that the dollar is not sufficiently
comprehensive.
It is not to be supposed that we should give up the use of vulgar fractions.
54. It does. At present we have 960.
55. The comparison will be very much to our advantage.
56. It is of great advantage. A large proportion of sums are for even pounds. It is this which
would give in point of saving of figures to the pound and mil scheme the great advantage over
the penny. -
57. Certainly not, we have 960 parts at present, we shall then have 1,000; but we shall not
be always thinking of the pound when we are laying out a florin.
The most advantageous conditions of a decimal coinage are when it embraces all the values
proved by experience to be the most useful and necessary.
58. Answered before. There will be a greater number of clear fractional parts.
59. In such accounts it would be desirable to limit all sums to the five-mil piece, as it is now to
the penny.
Upon the whole I think there would be no increase of figures.
60. A shilling is but one price. Forty-eight mils will do the same.
61. See No. 15. So far to the contrary, it will give the “lower classes,” and all other classes, a
larger number of prices divisible by 2, 3, 4, 8, and 16, and all other numbers besides.
62. It is just possible that noisy malignant people might seize the occasion of any sudden
change, if such were attempted, to make themselves of importance; but it is to be hoped that if
the change be made it will be by minute and well-understood steps. And when the contemplated
change has undergone the ordeal of a Parliamentary discussion little need be feared from
agitators.
63. A decimal system would be of far greater benefit to the artisan and middling classes than to
the upper, except, perhaps, in the arithmetical part of the education of the women, who are sadly
perplexed and disgusted by the complex and unintelligible rules of compound arithmetic.
64. I think the decimal coinage proposed will be best for all.
65. As some of the questions are many times repeated without involving any additional principle,
I have thought it, in some cases, needless to do more than to refer to some general answer; but
I have given to them all a careful and respectful attention. Such I have considered but due both
to the subject and to Lord Overstone, who, in the spirit of fairness which characterises all his
actions, has given them the advantage of his countenance and protection.
Bank of England, May 23, 1857. W. MILLER.
(Communicated by Lord Overstone.)
Rev. PETER THOMAS OUWRY.
Answer to Question 1. Yes, so much change as to render simple arithmetic applicable to all Rev. P. T. Ouvry.
money calculations.
2. Chiefly because it involves compound rules of arithmetic.
3. My objection is restricted to the inconvenience of our present coinage for the purposes of
account-keeping and calculation.
4. For the convenient interchange of commodities. I do not consider them as fractional
subdivisions of an integer ; but as several distinct integers chosen larger or smaller, according to
the magnitude of transactions; large dealings are transacted in multiples of pounds; smaller in
multiples of shillings or pence. I consider that the relations of the several integers were adjusted
after the integers themselves were chosen, and that no considerations of fractional subdivision
entered into the matter at all. Though account-keeping and calculation be not their primary
purpose, yet it is most desirable to choose a scale of coins which would facilitate this necessary
object.
R. 3
134 3 ºr DEUIMAL GOTNAGE COMMISSION: "º
Rev. P. T. Ouvry. , 5. The object.of adjusting retailpayments is entitled to priority, but there is no occasion that
. * - ; the other object should be sacrificed.
* , . . . . . . . . . . . as: . . . … “ ſº g e tº
* 6. It'is.; small payments may be made in several different ways, with nearly equal convenience.
There may be nothing to complain of in our present system of coinage in this respect, and yet a
modified’system’möfe compatible with accounts and calculation may be equally free from complaint.
... It is admitted that the use of the coinage is of first importance ; the question is, whether the
coinage may not be made consistent with simple arithmetic without injury to that use.
7. Yes; that is, I would so adjust the coinage as to reduce all accounts and calculations to
simple arithmetic.
8. Ten has no doubt fewer divisors than twelve. I believe that our retail transactions are
carried on by the multiplication of smaller integers, rather than the division of larger ones.
Things cost so many pounds, or so many shillings, or so many pence, or so many farthings. Even
when divisions of an integer are made, there is a tendency to give them a new integral name,
rather than one showing the fraction of the larger integer. We prefer to say ten shillings rather
than half a pound ; and we never speak of a quarter pound, we say five shillings or a crown.
So we say sixpence, or fourpence, or threepence, which are fractions of a shilling, but which are
thought of as multiples of a penny. Even a halfpenny is more viewed as an integral coin than as
half a penny ; and a farthing is never thought of as a quarter penny. We should easily get into
the habit of estimating values in pounds, florins, and cents; and I think they would be quite as
convenient for all retail transactions as pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings.
9. If simple arithmetic founded on the number ten, be good for the astronomer and the
computer, surely it is equally good for the people.
I do not see how the more numerous fractions of twelve than ten helps the customer and dealer ;
you use multiples of various integers rather than fractional parts.
The fallacy consists in the supposition that men make fractional parts of their money instead
of reckoning it.
10. Yes, certainly, in that respect, from the nature of the case.
11. I think not ; it is a matter of habit. When people become accustomed to simple arithmetic
for all purposes they will greatly prefer it.
12. The examples given are chosen with reference to the present system ; the only fair
comparison would be of the whole of the cases which might arise.
When pounds, florins, and cents are substituted for pounds, shillings, pence, and farthings,
retail transactions will be based on these new integers, and people will halve them and quarter
them as they do now with the present integers if they want to do so; but practically they
* things in florins or cents, and I should say business would be transacted with greater
acility.
Add together all the fractions of a quarter florin and a sixpence, 59 figures are used, on our
present system, 44 on the proposed system:-
£ florin cents. £ s. d.
25 6
24 5%
23 5%
22 5}
21 5
2O 4;
19 4%
18 4#
17 4
16 3
15 §
14 3}
13 3
12 2#
------------- - - 11 2%
10 2}
9 2
8 1
7 #
6 l #
5 1
4 3.
2 +
l
325 63
13. I do not think the construction of a coinage is a matter of division ; I believe it to be one
of multiplication. See Answer 8.
I see nothing more really natural in one system than another, it is merely a matter of habit
and custom. May not the integers of our present coinage be considered a fortuitous concurrence
of integers rather than the result of deliberate choice 2
14. This would go to prove that compound arithmetic is easier than simple arithmetic; most
people would prefer simple arithmetic.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S GUESTIONS. J 35
If the farthings were inserted the numbers would be in favour of the mil system ; still more
would this be the case if all the fractions of a pound were added in the two systems. The pence
column should be reduced to farthings in order to enter into comparison. * .
If all the fractions of a pound were written the number of figures would be, under
the present system of coinage - , - • ‘ -> tº - : * - 3948
If all the fractions of a pound were written down on the pound florin and cent system, -
the number of figures would be º - - - - - - 2893.
15. This question puts forward the advantages of a duodecimal notation over a decimal one ;
but notwithstanding it seems more advisable to alter the coinage than to alter the arithmetic.
The facts stated cannot be gainsayed; nevertheless, the only fair comparison between the £. s. d.
and farthing system, and the £, florin, and cent system, as to number of figures used, is to write
down all the gradations from one farthing to a pound, and from one cent to a pound, and then it
will be seen, as I have stated in the last answer, that the present system would require 3948 figures,
the £, florin, and cent system only 2893.
*
III.
16. Our weights and measures want revision more than the coinage. They might be very
much simplified and made to fit with the pound, florin, and cent coinage sufficiently. -
17. No, it cannot.
18. It requires much latitude of consideration to imagine our weights and measures binary.
Almost every possible system of notation is found in them, and often the same nominal weight is
different for different purposes and in different places. There should be one pound to weigh
everything, and 100lbs. should be a hundredweight.
In long measure there should be only miles, yards, feet, inches, and tenths.
We are so used to variety of measures of capacity that no expedient alteration would be found
inconvenient.
Tº
19. I think there would be little difference ; our coinage does not measure our weights and
measures now ; we should be no worse off under a Decimal System.
20. I think not. We reckon prices by multiplication of integers not by division. In the cases
put the florin and cent system would adapt themselves to halves and quarters. If an article were
a shilling a pound, an ounce would be sold at some different rate founded on a lower integer and
not on the fraction of a shilling. Sixteen ounces of tea, for instance, are not sold at the same
proportional price that a pound would be. I do not know of anything usually sold in inches, except
butter at Cambridge ; and as butter varies from 10d. to 20a, a pound; there is no particular
facility in the duodecimal basis more than in the decimal.
21. Not in the particular case put. An ounce is not generally the sixteenth of an article at a
shilling the pound. An article at 1s. the pound would probably be sold at 1d. the ounce.
Small quantities are adapted to the small integers rather than to the fractions of larger ones.
The use of cents in small retail transactions rising as they do from one to a hundred, would pro-
bably facilitate business and cause purchasers to get better value for their money than they
now do.
22. Yes, in every one, on the whole.
23. Our system of weights and measures is so exceedingly irregular, that a judicious alteration
would be generally acceptable ; and I believe such alteration might be made as would allow of
the use of simple arithmetic in all calculations, which would be an immense advantage.
I should say 1,000 has more divisions than 960, not so many different divisions, but more of the
smallest integer, which would be the basis of small retail prices, so that small purchasers would
be gainers instead of losers. -
24. I do not think people use thirds, eighths, or twelfths in retail transactions. After the
quarter they calculate on some lower integer on a scale of prices higher than those charged on the
higher integer scale. Mr. Adams says that the Decimal System, as applicable to coins, is inade-
quate and in some respects inconvenient. The only inconvenience he mentions is its incompati-
bility with ºth and Tººth, which are not represented in our coinage now.
25. Lord Ashburton's remark is quite correct. Under a Decimal System we may halve and
quarter the integers, but not more. . If the inability to carry the binary division beyond the
quarter is inconvenient it must be balanced against the other advantages of simple arithmetic.
26. Sir J. Herschell's expression amounts to this, that we have got into habits inconsistent with
the Decimal System, which he considers a misfortune. Why not change a bad habit? I should
certainly concur with his further observation.
27. I think Mr. Airy's view most correct.
It is very desirable that the division of weights and measures should fit the divisions of the
coins, but it is not essential.
It would be best for all to be done at once.
28. This shows the desirableness of introducing simple arithmetic into our weights and
measures system to the greatest practicable extent.
29. I think it would not make weights and measures more inconvenient than they are ; it
would tend to the introduction of simple arithmetic into the weights and measures, which is very
desirable.
30. It will, so far.
31. Yes.
32. The natural and proper course is that which is most convenient and practicable.
Rev. P. T. Ouvry.
wºmmº"
R 4
136 - DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
Rev. P. T. Ouvry.
33. A duodecimal scale has undoubtedly some advantages over a decimal one. If our arithmetic
were duodecimal, no one would think of making either coins or weights and measures decimal ; but
simple arithmetic being decimal, the balance of advantage seems to me with making coins and
weights and measures so. . .
No doubt, when there are advantages and disadvantages on either side, there will be difference
of opinion as to the balance. As a matter of fact, the most advanced nations have introduced the
Decimal System without difficulty. -
IV.
34. Too much weight is given, I think, to the tendency to subdivide. I believe subdivisions
beyond the half and quarter are generally made in the units of the next lower integer ; and we
betake ourselves to multiplication as soon as we can. We speak much more of feet than half and
quarters of yards, and of inches than half-feet.
35. We speak of ten pounds, one hundred pounds, &c., and we also speak of ten shillings, rather
than half a sovereign. In ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, I believe, in asking the price of an
article worth half a pound, the answer would be ten shillings; and a quarter pound is never
mentioned ; it is either a crown, a new integer, or five shillings, a multiple of a new integer. In
like manner the subdivisions of a shilling are always a definite number of a new integer, pence ;
no one says that an article is worth a half-shilling or a quarter-shilling. This habit of using
definite numbers of fresh integers of lower amount would facilitate the change to a decimal
notation. The multiples of cents would be very convenient.
36. The Decimal System admits of the shilling and the sixpence, that is, the half and quarter
florin. Do we now use thirds, eighths, twelfths, or sixteenths P I do not see that these small
differences would arise. We should do then as we do now. The price of an ounce is not the
sixteenth of the price of a pound. You get the pound, half pound, and quarter pound at the same
rate; but ounces are usually sold at a higher rate. Take tea at 2 florins or 4 shillings the pound ;
you would get half a pound for a florin, and a quarter pound for a half-florin or shilling ; but if
you wanted an ounce of the same quality of tea you would probably be charged fourpence for it,
a price not calculated on the fraction of the price of a pound at all. The tradesman will make
his own bargain ; the purchasers of small quantities now pay a higher relative price ; it would
be the same under the new system. Small articles would be priced in cents, and the fractional
part of the larger integer would not enter into the calculation.
The loss from purchasing very small quantities now falls on the purchaser ; the use of cents
would, I think, help him rather than otherwise, there being now an indisposition to split a penny,
though an article may not be worth so much.
The price of bread, for instance, rises or falls by halfpence ; it is 6d., or 6%d., or 7d., or 7%d.
per 4 lb. loaf ; under the new system it would be 24, or 26, or 28, or 30 cents, which would be
quite as convenient.
The difficulty of subdivision pointed out is entirely met by the prices of all small articles being
based on the integer of the cent.
The true price of commodities is just as likely to be 17d. or 13d. or 11d. or 7d. as a divisible
number of pence, so that I do not see the inconvenience of pricing things in cents, which would
allow a greater conformity to the true price from being a smaller denomination. Are not things
now often priced at a shilling, not because they are worth a shilling, but because of its being an
integer ? The habit of pricing in cents would lead to fairer dealing and greater economy, besides
the advantage of simple arithmetic.
37. Nevertheless Canada has adopted a Decimal Coinage. I admit a combination of the two
systems is the best, and such a combination I believe to be practicable.
38. (1.) The integers of a coinage should be divisible into halves and quarters; nevertheless, the
units of the next lower integer are practically used more than those halves and quarters. We use
shillings and pence, not half and quarter pounds, or half and quarter shillings.
(2) Exchange is more a matter of multiplication of integers chosen smaller and smaller, accord-
ing to circumstances; fractions are not popular. So that the relations of the several integers are
well understood I do not think it matters much about their fractional parts. We use pence
and shillings, and we know how many pence make a shilling, and how many shillings make a
pound ; it would be the same with cents and florins.
(3.) Nothing can be more inconvenient than to count a heap of coins, consisting, as now, of
halfcrowns, florins, shillings, sixpences, fourpences and threepences; a heap of florins, half-
florins, or shillings, quarter-florins or sixpences, and one other new silver coin of 10 cents,
would be far easier to count.
(4.) Mental arithmetic is independent of any particular system of coinage, I believe, and depends
a good deal on a number of standard results of calculation being stored in the memory like an
extended multiplication table. Whether a Decimal System is preferable or not on this ground
I do not know.
(5) Is there any such tendency to divide beyond the half and quarter 2
39. The account of the factors of the integers of our present coinage is quite correct.
It would be equally correct to say that—
A pound consists of twenty shillings;
A shilling 5 y twelve pence ;
A penny 22 four farthings.
And I think that a system in which—
A pound would consist of ten florins.
A florin 52 one hundred cents,
would be quite as convenient for exchanges, and more so for calculation.
Does the history of our coinage show that it was a system ever deliberately adopted ? Did not
the several integers grow up independently, and were adjusted afterwards to each other ?
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 137
40. The Duodecimal System is more divisible than the Decimal; but any advantages thence Rev.
arising are more than counterbalanced by the inconveniences of a double notation.
41. There will be the difference between decimals and duodecimals in that respect, so far as
shillings are concerned, or, rather, between dividing the pound into 1000 and 960. -
42. With as little change as possible. I do not think it can be done without some change. W
have, however, already made the most important change by the introduction of the florin.
43. To keep accounts in pence would be very inconvenient. The plan would not show on
inspection the numbers of the two higher integers, which is a fatal objection. I should prefer the
florin and cent to the dollar and cent. - -
Rather than Mr. Snowden's suggestion I would make the crown into the dollar, and then the
scale would be,
CentS. £ s. d.
4 dollars = 400 = 1 O O
I dollar F. 100 = O 5 O
# dollar - 50 = O 2 6
# dollar ~ 25 = 0 1 3
- 20 = O 1 O
IO - O O 6
44. It does.
~45. Yes, but admitting coins of the exact value of our present sixpence and shilling.
Yes ; but in the penny scheme we lose sight of the pound in accounts.
The omission of everything under a penny makes accounts more simple ; but the farthings
ought not to be left out.
It is an advantage of the pound and mil system that accounts would be more complete.
If it were desirable to make the penny the lowest integer in a Decimal System, it might be
convenient to retain halfpence and farthings ; but I do not think the penny system fit to be intro-
duced from its omitting to show the number of pounds in accounts on inspection.
If we had florins and cents we might, too, have half and quarter cents.
46. One pound = 240 pence. I do not see how the two could be used together decimally.
47. I think it is inconvenient to write fractions; but it certainly is not inconsistent with a
Decimal Coinage that some persons should choose to use in their accounts a binary division of the
lowest integer. -
48. The penny, in my judgment, should be kept as a coin, and be worth four cents or farthings,
which would diminish its value four per cent. It would not, however, be an integer of account.
I do not see that the omission of the fractions of a penny is an argument for the advantage of a
system. The fractions of a penny ought not to be omitted; the pound, florin, and cent system would
be more complete.
49. Yes; all that is required is to make 50 farthings equal to a shilling instead of 48, leaving
the penny very slightly altered in value.
Some of our coined pence now weigh sixteen to the pound, others twelve, so that their intrinsic
value is not represented by them. I have seen a practical suggestion to make the rimmed pennies
worth five farthings, the lighter ones four, which would, I think, be a good plan.
It would be troublesome to keep accounts in pence. The account would not show the number
of pounds, a fatal objection in my judgment.
50. I should propose the pound, florin, and cent., which might be written as £ ( fl. c.
florins and cents only, but I see no difficulty in accounts being kept thus:– 46 || 7 || 45
314 || 6 || 32
51. I don't know. g
52. Such is the case with florins and cents, though I don't see the difficulty of keeping
the pounds separate.
53. Florin and cent are as good as franc and cent, dollar and cent, and have the great advan-
tage of not interfering with our pound either as a coin or in account.
The inference is that florin and cent should be preferred for our money of account. It does not
follow because four moneys of account, stopping at a coin of so small value as a dollar, was found
inconvenient, that the pound, florin ,and cent should be so. To express fractions of cents frac-
tionally will not interfere with the Decimal System.
Most persons would find any change inconvenient. I believe many arguments were used a few
years ago only to prove that it was easier to keep accounts by cutting notches in a stick than by
writing figures in a book.
The statement from the “Times” shows existing habits. Would it not be just as easy to quote
changes of price in tenths
So are different measures in our markets now quoted in opposition to the imperial bushel.
When decimal notation, as applied to coins, weights, and measures, is taught in our schools, it
will, I should think, become an established habit to use it. Many of the present generation will
assuredly refuse to change their old habits. Men are not given to change even for the sake of
improvement. Most persons, I suppose, would answer these questions summarily, by replying to
the first question, No.
54. Pound, florin, and cent is as easy as pound, shilling, pence, and farthings. If more
desirable, florins and cents might alone be used in account, though I cannot see the inconvenience
of a pound column.
55. We are speaking of a Decimal Coinage in this country. It may be a question whether
uniformity of coinage throughout the world is desirable ; uniformity of weights and measures
throughout the world certainly is. I think the pound, florin, and cent system is best for us,
looking to what is at present. A different system consisting of two moneys of account may be
better in itself, but any change in this country should preserve the pound, shilling, sixpence,
penny, and farthing, which should be adjusted by the trifling alteration of four per cent, in the
value of the penny to a decimal notation, so that 1,000 farthings equal the pound.
P. T. Ouvry.
S
{
138 . . . . . , DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION: , . . . .
Rev. P. T. Ouvry.
Scales of notation.
56. It is so convenient and advantageous that I would keep it in our accounts. . . . . . . .
57. No, I think not. - g 3. . . .
If you keep accounts in florins and cents you have only 100 steps, and by cutting off the florin
unit you show the pounds. - * * , , • . . .
r . . . . florins. cents. £
478,346 27
One way is just as convenient as the other.
fl. C. :
47,834 || 6 | 27 * * 2
We have now four monies of account and three
58. I,000 has fewer different divisors than 960. But the simple arithmetic arising from
making 1,000 farthings equal the pound renders the balance of advantage in its favour.
59. They are, but surely they ought not to be. A Decimal System will remedy this defect.
I don't see how it can be argued as an advantage that part of an account is left out for the sake
of convenience. A complete account is the best. For all items of account in which shillings
are expressed by two figures the number of figures in the two accounts would be the same ;
though one is complete, the other omits the fractions of a penny. There would be one more
figure in each item in the decimal accounts when now the shillings are expressed by one figure.
s. d.
17 6 F 8°75
9 6 F 4°75
13 7; = 6'82
4 2} = 2° 10
60. This inconvenience must be submitted to.
61. Do the lower classes divide by 8 or 16? They may have # or # under the Decimal System.
A man who can readily divide a thing into 3, 6, or 12 parts would as easily divide it into 10 or 5.
Yet the Decimal System was adopted in preference.
62. It slightly alters the penny and the farthing; wages are paid in shillings, which would not
be altered in value. Would not the people look favourably on the change, inasmuch as they
would get 50 farthings for their shilling instead of 48. - - -
I think alteration of the pound, in order to keep the farthing intact, quite out of the question.
I do not think the alteration in the farthing would produce any inconvenience whatever.
63. I think the advantage will be to all classes, and very particularly to school children.
64. I think our weights and measures want simplification more than our coinage. If the
adoption of a Decimal System seriously interfered with the convenience of the mass of the people
it ought not to be adopted.
65. The advantages mentioned outweigh the disadvantages. -
I think the change may be made prudently, with certainty of result, with increased convenience,
and that no material disturbance of our present system, or injurious interference with our habits, is
necessarily involved. -
A comparison of our present scale of coinage with a new one proposed as most practical and
convenient.
The Names of our Their Value in The Names of the new Remarks.
present Coins. Plorins and Cents. Coins proposed.
fl. C.
Sovereign - - 10 () Sovereign.
Half-sovereign dº 5 O Half-sovereign. -
Crown ( . sº sº * - To be dropped.
Half-crown - * * *se To be dropped.
Florin gºe gº 1 O Florin."
Shilling sº º O 50 Half-florin.
Sixpence gº gº O 25 Quarter-florin.
Fourpence - tºº *s sºme To be dropped.
Threepence - gº * º To be dropped.
10 Ten-cent piece. A new silver coin.
5 Five-cent piece. Our present rimmed 12
to the lb. penny.
Penny tº tº () 4 Penny - - || Altered 4 per cent.
Halfpenny - Ǽ O 2 Halfpenny. - -
Farthing tº gº () I Farthing - - || 1,000 to a pound.

The only actual new coin would be the ten-cent piece, which would be easily distinguishabl
from the quarter-florin, and not produce the difficulty of counting now caused by our threepenny
and fourpenny pieces.
PETER THOMAS OUVRY.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. J39
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
ANSWERS to such of the QUESTIONS contained in LoRD OVERSTONE's Paper as are
numbered with the same numbers entered in the Margin hereof.
JOHN PATERSON, Albany, U.S.
Answer to Question 8. The number 12 = 2**3 has no more prime factors than the number
10 = 2'5, although the former has four divisions (2, 3, 4, 6,) while the latter has but two (2,5).
But then the only fractional parts of the shilling that have been coined are the half (sixpence)
and the third (the groat); and I believe the latter is now very little in use. (MEM.—The writer
was not aware of the threepenny piece.) The crown (five shillings), itself unsusceptible of any
clear fractional division, and I believe also the halfcrown (the fractional 2% shillings), have long
held a place in the regular coinage. Until the latter part of George the Third's reign the
standard unit, the pound, had no coined existence ; and then what is the number 20 but the
double of 10, the basis of the Decimal System of which the crown is the half 2 If the pound
sterling be adhered to as the British monetary standard unit, the Decimal System can be intro-
duced with very little disturbance to the coinage. Suppose we write,_
1. The Gold Coinage: S.
1 pond (pound or sovereign) equivalent to the present º - 20
# pond ( = 5 solls, or florins)
# pond ( = 2; Solls
2 pond º tº *- -> º º º - 40
3 pond º - º - º -> - - 60
This would certainly answer every convenient and useful purpose of a gold
coinage.
2. The Silver Coimage:
1 soll (fºr of the pond) equivalent to the present florin, or tº-
# soll ( = 5 penns) - - <- - º -
+ Soll ( = 2; penns) - º - tº- wº t- 6d.
2 solls -> º sº tº- ºs e º " - 4
3 solls --> tº- tºº tº- º G- ſº - 6
This would give a sufficiency of silver pieces, and involves no serious depar-
ture from the present system of coinage.
3. German Silver Coinage :
1 penn (fºr of the soll) equal to º wº- º - 2
# penn ( = 5 mills) 32 º º - º - 1
+ penn ( = 2; mills) , sº - 4- tº * - ()"
2 penns gº * º tº º Eº - 4
4. Copper Coimage:
1 mill (Ty of the penn) equal to -> - º ... O'96 farthing.
2 mills - º tº -> º tº - 1 '92.
3 mills º - --> * º - 2'88 , ,
The two last divisions do depart from the present system of coinage; but, if once introduced,
would they not be equally convenient in retail business as are the pieces at present in use ?
Whatever be the unit that is convenient in practice, take its half and its quarter, and then its
tenth part (instead of its eighth) for a new unit, to be again divided in a similar manner ; also
the double and treble of the unit will generally be found convenient.
By adopting this method of subdivision the advantages of the Decimal System in calculation
are combined with those of the binary system (as far as this system is indispensable) in the
practice of actual admeasurement and the adjustment of payments in business.
In answer to the second question of No. 8, therefore, I do not consider indivisibility by the
number 3 to be an objection to the use of the Decimal System in business transactions. Retail
customers frequently call for the half or the quarter of Some unit denomination of an article, but
scarcely ever for the third part or even the eighth. In the latter case, instead of the eighth part,
some new denominational unit usually appears, and this might be the tenth with equal convenience
as the eighth.
10. It is believed that if the preceding graduated scale of coinage be examined and compared with
one deduced from the radix 12, no particular advantage will be found to attach to the latter; but,
on the contrary, the former offers some variety in pieces that may become useful. For instance,
in the duodecimal system the half and quarter of the shilling are respectively sixpence and three-
pence; but in the Decimal System we should have the $ soll = 5 penns; the + soll = 2; penns,
and also the dipenn = 2 penns, and tripenn = 3 penns, if need be, and similarly with respect to
each of the other denominational units. As the pieces 2 penn and 3 penn would be of German
silver and the # soll of common silver, difference in size is alone sufficient to protect against
mistakes in the handling—a remark which applies at the same time to the 2-soll and 3-soll pieces
of silver compared with the # pond (= 2% soll) of gold, &c.
;
55
13. The most perfect radix would be composed of the product of the first three prime numbers,
2, 3, 5 = 30, which in fact constitutes the scale used by astronomers. This scale would require
thirty separate arithmetical characters, the same number of characters requisite to constitute a
philosophical alphabet; but this radix, although so satisfactory in theory, would prove to be
entirely unwieldy in arithmetical practice, and we must therefore resort to one of lower
dimensions. The first one that offers is the Senary 2,3 = 6, of which the duodecimal scale is
only a complication, formed by introducing no new factor, but merely by uselessly repeating the
factor 2. The senary scale, requiring but six characters, on account of the great number of
repetitions of figures that it introduces into the result of operations of any considerable extent,
becomes exceedingly inconvenient in arithmetical practice. Then, since we can retain but two of
the three prime factors 2, 3, 5, in a manageable scale, we are referred to the radix 2,5 = 10 as
the most suitable choice. And although the number 10 lacks the property of divisibility by 3, it
John Paterson,
Albany, U.S.
*...*
S 2
140 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
John Paterson,
Albany, U.S.
possesses the equally advantageous and beautiful property, that 10 – l = 32, while, on the other
hand, 12 — 1 = 11, an inconvenient prime, which calculates better when referred as 10 + 1 to
the established radix.
The second clause of No. 13 is already considered in the remarks on No. 10. I do not know
that inorganic substances are more accessible to duodecimal than to decimal division, but in several
departments of organic nature the quinary combination prevails extensively.
16. It is admitted here that the use of the Decimal System of coinage in the United States has
been acceptable from the time of its first introduction, and is found to be more convenient than
the less congruous system of England, which is slowly disappearing from among us, while as yet
there is no serious thought of departing from the English denominations of weights and
Iſle&SUlréS.
17. As commodities are weighed or measured either in multiples of unit denominations or the
submultiples of half or quarter, and then for a less quantity resorting to an inferior denominational
unit, as stated in reply to No. 8, it would seem that the system of coinage there detailed would
exactly fulfil the condition of perfect commensurability of denomination between money and
commodity so far as relates to the principal standard unit of any particular weight or measure.
With the subsidiary units incommensurability would in general appear and give rise to
discrepancy ; but the minor difficulties thus occasioned could as easily be surmounted in Europe
as in America.
18. An experience of half a century says that the people of the United States find it
convenient to use the Decimal Coinage without any alteration in the system of weights and
In ea.SUll’OS,
19. The British quarter = 28 pounds, involves the factor 7, which is incommensurable with
both duodecimal and decimal scales, so that a change from the former to the latter scale in this
instance would only substitute one incommensurability for another, leaving no particular advantage
either way. But a result of daily experience in this country may here be mentioned to obviate a
possible introduction of fractional quarter-units of weight, measure, or coin. It is quite customary
in retail business to sell certain commodities, as flour, sugar, &c., in quantities of 14 pounds, or
its half = 7 pounds, and of its fourth part = 3% pounds (a fractional quarter), the price being
regulated upon that of 14 or of 7 pounds, and no inconvenience found in the practice ; but the
binary subdivision is carried no farther, and the next resort is to one pound, the seventh part of
the quantitative unit, from which the subdivision really commenced. The American system of
coinage has to suit the very convenience of the public actually fallen into the method of sub-
division here advocated. In gold we coin the eagle = 10 dollars, the half-eagle, and the
quarter-eagle = 2; dollars, and even the tenth or one dollar, as also the double eagle equal to 20
dollars;–in silver, the dollar, half dollar, and quarter dollar = 2; dimes; also the dime and half-
dime = 5 cents, and also the three-cent piece ; and in copper the cent and half cent, the sub-
divisions being always in the order of unit, half, quarter, and tenth, while the multiples may be
two or three. In addition to this evidence in favour of the convenience of the system may be
adduced the example of bank issues, the bills of which are almost confined to the denominations
of 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 dollars, with no attempt to follow the order of binary multiples.
In linear measure the Duodecimal System has, perhaps, its strongest foothold, the yard being a
multiple of the foot by 3, and one quarter of a foot being a whole number—3—of inches. Yet,
notwithstanding this exemption from fractional divisibility, the engineers and accountants of the
public and other extensive works in this State, consulting their own convenience alone, and
adopting the foot as the standard unit of lineal measure, have very generally resorted to its
decimal subdivision, carrying the records down to tenths (and not inches or twelfths) and
hundredths of the foot.
Then, although the Decimal System may not offer any peculiar facilities in the retail trans-
actions quoted in No. 19, it does not appear that the Duodecimal System has any other advantage
but that of possession of the field. ?A
30. I think that articles made up in parcels of ten will be quite as easily managed as if they
were put up in dozens, and that class of society (if any such does still exist), which do their
counting by means of their fingers, would evidently find their facilities increased thereby. And
as it is quite as matural to begin with a simple unit and ascend in quantity by multiples as it is
to assume a compound unit and proceed by subdivision, the ascending reduction or direct process
may take the steps 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10, from which would rationally follow the inverse process or
descending reduction by the steps 10, 5, 2, and 1, or else 10, 5 = }, 2} = }, and 1 = \,.
31. The adoption of the Decimal Coinage has not forced this country into the use of Decimal
Weights and Measures, although it has called the attention of scientific men to the propriety of
such a change, as soon as a community of nations shall agree upon the details.
34. If the Binary and Denary Systems are combined, as is here recommended, the queries in
this number will be answered.
36. After reading this long paragraph, suppose a customer to call for the third of a pound of
tea at 7s. 7d. the lb., what quantity shall the grocer weigh out 2 and what shall the customer pay
for it? The weight must be 5 ozs. and 53 drams, which costs two shillings and sixpence and 1%
farthing, and there exists neither weights nor coins capable to consummate this simple trans-
action. Or take a yet simpler case, which might readily be supposed to occur:—One-third of a
pound of sugar is required at the rate of fivepence per pound,--it costs one penny and 23 farthings.
If similar applications are not frequent, nor even occasional, it is a proof that, notwithstanding
the use of the Duodecimal System of Coinage, third parts of any units whatever of weight or
measure are not in demand in this community.
The ternary partition of quantity not being required for convenience, the difficulty of adjusting
integral quantities and payments falls wholly upon binary subdivisions. Now, upon the funda-
mental principle that both labour and material are to be paid for, the retailer, when subdividing
commodities into parcels less than fourths, is authorized, and also sanctioned by universal custom,
to charge for such parcels at a higher rate than for that of the undivided quantity. A customer
ought not to demand one ounce for Tºth of the price of a pound.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 14'ſ
As to the remarks of the Canadian Legislative Report, that the people of the United States
and Canada have for sixty years clung to the use of the eight-shilling division of the dollar, they
are applicable only so far as the influence of the State of New York extends, for in the New
England States the dollar is six shillings, in Pennsylvania it is seven shillings and sixpence, in the
Southern States six shillings and sixpence, while in the legal currency of Nova Scotia and Canada
it is five shillings, and in England no silver was coined into a multiple of two shillings, but, on
the contrary, there appeared the crown of five shillings, and its half ="2% shillings.
37. A coinage graduated according to units, halves, and quarters, and to multiples by 2, 3, 5,
and 10, it is believed would, in connexion with the principles of retail transactions above referred
to, be found to meet the exigencies of small trafficking, with facilities equally as great as are now
obtained under the Duodecimal System.
39. See No. 36. I have tried to show that the number 3 is very seldom required as a divisor,
either of quantities purchased or of money paid, but as a multiple this number does come into
frequent use, and the Decimal System is no hindrance to its application.
40. The number 12 is oftener divisible than 10, but not by more factors, but the Duodecimal
System has all the advantage of being divisible into five clean fractional parts, while the Decimal
System is susceptible of only three. But when all is taken into account, the shilling in coinage,
the pound troy in weight, and the foot in linear measure, are the only quantities now divided
duodecimally, while the utmost extent of irregular division obtains throughout the entire system
of weights and measures and coins. The advantage of the Duodecimal System is, therefore, now
but partial, and an attempt to make it supersede the Decimal System entirely would produce more
disturbance and result in fewer benefits than a resort at once to the Decimal System complete.
49. By the method offered in No. 8, the inferior coinage of pence and farthings is all that
would be disturbed. To leave the penny as it is, and count in pounds and pence only, would
overstrain the method as used by dollars and cents; the transition from the pound, as the unit or
base of the system, to its 240th part, producing too great an accumulation of figures in a
column, and thus tending to beget an aversion to a subsequent resort to the Decimal System.
50. The preceding objections apply still more forcibly to the scheme of pounds and mils,
although the relation of unity to its one thousandth part is more readily apprehended than that
of 1 to 960, the ratio of the pound to the present farthing. But when accounts are kept in
dollars, dimes, cents, and mils, or in pounds, sols, penns, and mils, columnar inconvenience is the
very difficulty that is completely avoided. All the four denominations are theoretically necessary
though the first three (or in reality the first and third) of the former scheme are practically in
use in this country.
51. I do not know, but for some time past I have observed some such tendency in English
practice. For instance, new novels in three volumes are now generally advertised at the price of
31s. 6d., instead of £1 11s. 6d., as formerly. The expressions eighteenpence, twentypence, &c.,
instead of one shilling and sixpence, one shilling and eightpence, &c., are also frequently met
with ; and although accounts have not been kept in pence, it is quite probable that they would be
in one or both forms, as well as in that of pounds, if the attempt were made to restrict ordinary
calculations to the two denominations of pounds and mils.
53. On account of the smallness of value of anything less than a quarter of a cent it is
generally neglected, and then the vulgar fractions #, 3, #, #, 3, of a cent being simpler than their
corresponding decimals, have, for that reason, been preferred, but the precedent was bad, from the
English division of the penny into #, #, and 3. Thus the sum of £19 17s. 3}d. would be decimally
expressed, approximately, either by 19 ponds, 8 solls, 6% penns, or by 19 ponds and 86% penns,
the last expression having the advantage in point of simplicity of notation, the former in
facility of apprehension. But as one mil is in value nearly equal to one farthing, the preceding
approximation is not sufficiently close to the truth. If, instead of the pound sterling, the pond
were made ten shillings as the base of the system, the soll would be the present shilling, the
coinage would be disturbed no farther than it is already proposed to do, and the degree of
approximation would be sufficient. But as there is an attachment to the pound as the grand
national standard monetary unit, perhaps the most satisfactory of all modes would be to continue
the writing of accounts in three columns, but modified so as that the preceding sum of
£19 17s. 3}d. = #219'86354165 will read 19 ponds, 8 solls, and 63% mils. In this way the
example of No. 43 will appear.
£ s. d. £ s. m.
I F I
6 8 F. 3°33}
5 O - 2° 50
3 4 - I '66;
2 6 == I 25
1 3 - 62%
£1 18 9 £1 9:37;
[MEM.—The foregoing answers, drawn up by John Paterson, of the city of Albany, in the
State of New York, were transmitted by J. B. Plumb, Esq., an eminent banker of Albany, to
Chief Justice Draper, who received them to-day, and transmits the foregoing copy to Lord
Monteagle, in fulfilment of his promise to that effect.—29 June 1857.]
John Paterson,
Albany, U.S.
S 3
f42 . . . . " " DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSIGN": " "...' '
very Rev.
Dr. Peacock,
Dean of Ely.
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle)
The Very Rev. the DEAN of ELY, Lowndean Professor of Astronomy in the
- - University of Cambridge. . . - . . . .
Answer to Question 1–Yes. - . . - -
2. Its want of conformity to our system of numeration. -
3. On both accounts. The existing system presents the residual units below the # in the
descending scale only, requiring a tedious arithmetical process to reduce them either to the
decimal scale (which so many processes, require) or to a multiple of the lowest subordinate unit
involved. The other presents the whole simultaneously. - -
4. For both purposes; but more especially the latter. The subdivision of the materials of
retail trade will readily adjust itself to the existing coinage, whatever it is, in spite of tem-
porary inconveniences. Nothing is so certain as acquiescence in a new coinage, if proper means
are taken to introduce it. - - -
5. The second ; but I believe the decimal will be found practically as convenient as our
existing system, even for the purposes of retail trade, notwithstanding the superior divisibility
of the shilling and the penny ; the relations of its members will be more promptly and clearly
perceived, and no reductions be necessary. In fact, we think in decimals. I formerly enter-
tained and expressed a different opinion, but I had not then paid much attention to the subject.
6. There are many advantages attendant upon the calculations, in retail trade, being made in
multiples of the smaller units of the coinage, instead of subdivisions of the large ones. This
can hardly be done with our farthings or even our pence, in consequence of the difficult
reductions which they require. In France, America, and Portugal, where the centesimal or
millesimal system of coins are used, retail transactions are nearly all conducted by multiples.
8. Admitted ; but the objection is more than compensated.
9. Napoleon was a very powerful but a very inaccurate thinker ; but in the passage from
which this quotation is taken, he has expressed, with singular precision and force, the causes
which opposed, in the first instance, the introduction of the new metrical system in France. It
seems to me unquestionable that the decimal scale of coinage presents a much more precise and
clear conception to the mind, of the relation of its members than any other. This argument should
be reversed.
12. The examples referred to in this and some subsequent queries are not fair, and the argument
founded upon them seems to involve a partial misconception of the real points at issue. The
values of one system admit not generally of accurate translation into another, and when the
Decimal System is established such conversions would never be required. Addition is one only
of many operations required in retail trade, and examples are not wanting where the advantage
thus pleaded is reversed. Thus—
s. d. Mils.
11 7# • 585
9 11; - 499
17 10} - 893
10 4% 520
.#2 9 10} £2 |497
There are 27 figures in one and 16 in the other. -
If the Decimal System was adopted, all the examples given in this No. would require to be
taken in a reverse order. -
The relative convenience of the two systems is not to be tested by such examples. If small
fractions of a pound or any other concrete unit were used the process would generally be reversed.
We should start from an inferior unit and proceed by its multiples, a process which is more compre-
hensive and rapid than proceeding by successive subdivisions; few shopkeepers would bisect
more than twice, rarely more than once. - . . -
13. Admitted ; but this is the only objection. What is its practical value 2
Not necessarily so ; it is rather cumulative than divisional.
Mr. Adams should have omitted numeration and multiplication ; with respect to them there can
be no question. - -
14, I think the reverse may be easily proved with respect to Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5; if there is
any advantage in No. 4 it is only from its requiring longer time and more precise subdivisions by
lines or commas. With respect to No. 6, the necessity for the conversion ceases altogether when
the Decimal System is once in operation. -
15. Trade has little or nothing to do with such subdivisions of the £1 ; they are absolutely
immaterial. , - ºr . . . c = - * * * -: * : * Z. - . .
16. Yes, with reference both to the existing and proposed systems. A decimal metrical system
would be the most convenient as superseding reductions and presenting quantities in a form at
once adapted to decimal arithmetic and the application of logarithms. This last consideration is
of the highest importance. . -
17. There is no necessary connection between them, though great advantages would result
from such a connection when our mixed or concrete numbers are reduced to multiples of the lowest
of their subordinate units, and the adjustment is made. The advantage of the adoption of a
general system consists chiefly-in-superseding all such reductions.
18. Very partially so. Our present system of coinage cannot properly be considered as binary.
The Spanish piece of eight, adopted by the Americans as their primary unit of coinage, was a
proper basis of a binary coinage, but the Americans decimalized it. -
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 143
19. Why do our engineers and surveyors decimalize their measures, the foot rule included,
whereon extensive calculations, involving price and measures of quantity are concerned 2 Does
not this practice originate in the sense of the violence done to our arithmetical associations by the
use of multiples or submultiples of concrete units, which are not decimal P
20. By no means ; the values of the higher units will be estimated generally from those of the
lower.
21. Suppose under the Decimal System of coins one pound is sold for 40 mils, would not this
advantage be to a great extent reversed ? It is not fair, when arguing the merits of two systems,
to assume that one only is in operation. * *
22. Upon all these points the advantages of the Decimal System appear to me to be absolutely
incontestable.
23. The processes of trade will readily adjust themselves to the coinage, and when it is found
not to be convenient to proceed by division, tradesmen will proceed by multiplication. It is
strange to find Mr. Yates arguing against the Decimal System when he is advocating the
adoption of the French system of coins, weights, and measures in toto. The argument, if true,
affects a small part of the subject only.
24. Experience has refuted Mr. Adams. The Americans have, to a great extent, abandoned
the binary subdivision of their dollar. If the French Government had withdrawn the old coinage,
and replaced it by one adjusted to the Decimal System exclusively, no great delay would have
ensued upon its reception. •
26. Sir J. Herschel will give his own answer. I believe his evidence was very much mis-
represented and misunderstood. He was very desirous of advocating a decimal metrical system,
and was made to say what he did not mean, that the adoption of the second must precede it.
27. If such be Sir J. Herschel's opinion I differ from him ; but I feel very strongly the
importance of a decimal metrical system, more especially for contracts and accounts.
If not made simultaneously, which might be too vast an operation. I think the decimal
coinage should undoubtedly take precedence.
28. In a complete Decimal System, practice, as an arithmetical rule, would rarely be used. If
it extended to coins only, the mixed numbers would generally be reduced to a multiple of the
lowest unit.
No person would think of applying practice to such an example; it is also most unfairly
selected.
29. The result need not be deprecated; but whatever its influence in forcing further reforms
may be, I do not think it will arise from any serious addition to the inconvenience which they
Il OW OCC3S1OIl. - *
Bankers reject all below a penny; public convenience would soon fix the limits, beyond which
it would not answer to puh their calculations. -
30. This would in fact be a great convenience; how much more rapid would calculation be if the
practice was general; the number of parcels would give the number of lbs. without reduction.
31. A very strong argument in favour of the adoption of a Decimal Coinage.
32. Coins may be introduced or withdrawn by the authority of Government as rapidly as may
be required. No operation is so easy as the introduction of a new coinage ; look at France,
America, Belgium, and latterly Switzerland. In this country, with an unlimited command of
machinery for coinage, perfect organization and facility of communication, the change of the
coinage would be made not only rapidly but certainly.
33. The Commission of 1821 changed our measures of capacity both for wine, beer, and corn,
less for the sake of uniformity—which was desirable—than to satisfy a philosophical fancy of no
practical utility whatever. The alteration of the corn measure produced great inconvenience;
the old Winchester bushel should have been retained, as much the most important of our measures
of capacity. -
I have changed my opinion. -
34. It is this departure from the decimal scale in the subdivision of our primary units, which
produces all the intricacies of our arithmetic. It is somewhat against the views advanced in this
No., that our railway surveyors and engineers generally divide their measuring staffs into
decimals; surveyors of lands, with the chain, proceed by the decimal scale, and then reduce the
results to the barbarous scale of acres, roods, and perches ; and our foot rules are now divided
decimally as well as duodecimally. Are not these facts proofs of a growing desire amongst
practical men to emancipate themselves from our metrical system 2
35. Why require us to do that in the first instance, which we must not do in every important
arithmetical process; in the arbitration of exchanges, and in almost every transaction of life 2
36. Wherever the Decimal System of coinage has been introduced it has taken root almost
immediately, and superseded the ancient coins both in accounts and trading transactions. The case
was somewhat different with the French metrical system in the first instance, as no sufficient care
was taken, in the troubles of the revolution, to supersede the old measures, and to replace them
by the new ones. The Bourbons, on their return, in conformity with their reactionary system,
sanctioned the continuance of the old by the side of the new system. I believe that after the
revolution in 1830 the Decimal System was introduced to the exclusion of all others. The same
system prevails universally in Belgium. - *
Is this conclusion confirmed by recent experience in America? No attempt has been made
there to introduce a decimal metrical system.
If we consider the rough mode in which the prices of small portions of commodities are
estimated no apprehensions need be entertained. A very short experience would be sufficient for
their adjustment. We may be quite certain that the loss and gain will be pretty equally
distributed.
Very Rev.
Dr. Peacock,
Dean of Ely.
S 4
144 - DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
Very Rev.
Dr. Peacock,
Dean of Ely.
Has any such difficulty ever occurred in France 2 .*
Prices of such articles will be estimated in mils and its multiples, as they are by cents in
France and America. They proceed by the ascending and not the descending scale.
Altogether unfounded.
37. A Decimal Coinage must precede decimal accounts, on account of the reductions which must
otherwise precede it. No law can enforce the adoption of decimal accounts, but a Decimal
Coinage would at once make it general ; accounts must follow coinage.
Mr. Leavitt, whose authority is quoted, advocates the simultaneous use of a decimal currency
for accounts with a duodecimal coinage, differing four per cent. from the other, for retail
transactions. It is not easy to conceive the enormous confusion which such a mixture of systems
would produce.
38. Which is considered as the integer or primary unit, the pound, the shilling, or the penny ?
No system in this respect can be comparable to the decimal : it requires no reductions.
Is the present system comparable, in nearly all these particulars, to the decimal, clearness of
conception included ?
The tendency to multiply is at least as natural as that to divide, whilst the process of multi-
plication is made easier. -
39. It is the factor 3, amongst the divisors of the shilling, which totally upsets the uniformity
of the system, and leads to indefinite decimals.
Most probably accidental; and with reference to most arithmetical processes undoubtedly
unscientific.
41. The multiples of the mil between 1 and 1,000 afford every variety of intermediate value
which the business of commerce or trade can require. In all these Nos. it is the same issue
which is involved—division against multiplication,--which is the easiest ?
42. This is impossible. The Government may require their accounts to be decimalized, and
contracts to be drawn up in decimals; but without a Decimal Coinage the reductions which must
precede accounts in the ordinary transactions of life would be perfectly intolerable.
43. All attempts to make our English commensurate with foreign coinage, such as the franc or
dollar, must be nearly useless, in consequence of the variations of exchange. This is the rock
upon which the universalists have split.
44. Yes.
45. The penny system of decimalization displaces the £ sterling ; it is also somewhat too high
in value, taken as the lowest member of the scale, for the purposes of retail trade.
Bankers would probably reject all sums less than 5 mils, as they now reject all sums less than a
penny; in that case a simple dot or stroke would supersede the column of farthings.
46. Quite impracticable. The wildest advocates of the penny system have never ventured to
propose this.
47. Certainly not. But why write them as fractions if your units, whether of coins or account,
are sufficiently low * The rea in Portugal is really a coin of account, and so to a certain extent is
the cent in France ; but in poor countries, lower coins are required than in ours. With respect
to the half-cent in the United States, it is used as a mark merely, which is at once translatable
into 5 mils, or the corresponding decimal, 5 of a cent.
49. This is of course impracticable.
50. It will require the cent and mil only. The first will be principally a coin of account ; the
second so nearly identical with the farthing as hardly to be distinguishable from it in the popular
mind. There will be coins of two and five mils, which in time would supersede the halfpenny
and penny, but the penny, halfpenny, and farthing would or might be allowed to circulate, after
proclamation to that effect, for four mils and two.
52. No inconvenience would have resulted from centesimalizing the florin, replacing the term
mil by cent; this change would not in the least interfere with the system, but it is of little
importance.
53. The mil in this scale would only be one fifth of the proposed mil of our coinage ; it is too
small to be represented by a material coin.
No inference of any importance whatever.
Perfectly easy to work, but not required.
The smallest variations of price become important, as that of lbs. of cotton, when multiplied by
large numbers. The merchant must in all cases decimalize such transactions when he makes out
his accounts. This would hardly be affected by any system of coinage.
54. Admitted.
55. I think not ; it is nearly a matter of indifference whether we millesimize the £ or
centesimalize the florin. I should, in some respects, have rather preferred the latter.
56. Certainly ; a high primary unit of value is required in a rich country.
57. Answered before.
58. Yes.
59. If bankers should determine to admit no sum less than five mils into the column of mils, a
dot or stroke rapidly written and rapidly summed would occupy that column or replace it; if four
mils be the unit a similar abbreviation would be practicable ; no difficulty would, in fact, in any
case, attend the management of this column ; it would be retained or modified according to
circumstances : but, even in the first case, decimal accounts would be much more rapidly written
and summed than by the present system.
61. A duodecimal arithmetic would have many recommendations; but who would propose it 2
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 145
62. Our copper coins are tokens or representatives only of value, having reference to gold. The
penny and the farthing might continue to circulate as four mils and one mil respectively, the shilling
being commutable for twelvepence halfpenny. The operation would be similar to that which took
place with the change of the Irish shilling, and would be effected as easily. This near coincidence
of the farthing and mil is one of the circumstances which would greatly facilitate the introduction
of the new system. I take it for granted, however, that the old copper coins would be withdrawn
from circulation as rapidly as was found to be convenient, and replaced by new coins. -
I believe this danger to be very slight, and the amount of individual loss too trifling to be
noticed.
I think Lord Overstone would hardly sanction the penny system of Mr. Rathbone, or any
interference with the £ sterling, as the great unit of our coinage.
63. There can be no doubt with respect to the first. Admitting a small change in the representa-
tive value of the penny, its multiples and submultiples would remain nearly unaltered, except
in giving charge for a shilling. .
64. Noticed before.
65. This query seems to admit the general advantages of a Decimal Coinage. Many of those
advantages are quite independent of a decimal metrical system, though much increased if
combined with it.
The proverbial inconvenience of compound arithmetic is here referred to. This most especially
affects the education of the lower orders and of many of the upper. A great proportion of
schoolboys are never able to conquer it ; and those who do so must devote rarely less than a year to
a study which unduly burdens the memory, and which, by diverting the mind from the higher
departments of decimal arithmetic—decimals as usually called—puts a stop, not merely to the use
of logarithmic tables, but to all the higher applications of mathematics. It is well known that
French boys advance much farther in arithmetic and its applications, after the same length of
study. This is in a great measure owing to their admirable Decimal System. Why are tables of
logarithms so rarely seen or used in our counting-houses f
I believe the adoption of the Decimal System, if once fairly undertaken by the Government, to
be certain and inevitable. There is no example of its failure, where proper precautions were
taken to introduce a sufficiency of the new coins, and to withdraw the old coins which were
incommensurable with them, and it is now rapidly extending to every part of Europe. -
I see no advantage likely to result from the further ventilation of the question. There is no
doubt that 19-20ths of those persons who have really studied the subject are in favour of its
adoption, and very little impression is ever likely to be made upon the remainder.
I think Lord Overstone has done full justice to his well-known acuteness and ability in his
pleadings in favour of our existing coinage ; but it is sufficiently singular that nearly all those
elaborate and carefully worked out arguments resolve themselves into so few which really merit,
consideration ; or rather, if we assume that the Decimal System is once introduced and adopted,
there is only one which remains, and that is, the want of a sufficient number of binary subdivisions
in decimal coins ; he seems, however, to have ignored the rapid change of habits which a change
of the coinage would introduce. If convenient subdivisions were wanting in our coins, trades-
men and others would reverse their order of proceeding, adopting generally multiples of an
inferior unit instead of subdivisions of a higher. They would proceed from mils to shillings and
not from shillings to mils ; from ounces to pounds, and not from pounds to ounces.
I do not believe there is any sufficient reason to delay the adoption of this measure. It has
already been sufficiently discussed, and it is not likely that the public generally will ever be better
prepared for it than they are at present. A preparation has already been professedly made for it
in the introduction of the florin. The system is generally noticed in our new books of arithmetic.
Examples in our better schools are given in illustration of it: it has been repeatedly and ably dis-
cussed at various public meetings, and it is well known that the opinion of an immense majority of
those whose opinion is worth considering is in favour of it; what, therefore, is likely to be gained
by delay ?
GEO. PEACOCK.
(Communicated by Lord Overstone.)
ROBERT SLATER, ESQ.
Answers to Questions 1, 2, and 3. I do not consider that any change in our present system of
coinage is required from any inconvenience felt by the people in the practical working of that
system, either as regards the keeping of accounts or the purposes of circulation.
4. The original design of all systems of coinage was doubtless to promote the exchange of
commodities; but the scientific as well as primary object of the coins themselves, I consider to be,
the easy adjustment of retail rather than wholesale transactions. This is effected by the sub-
division of the highest integer of money value into the most convenient aliquot parts, in proportion
to weights and measures of general commodities, so as to facilitate not only the settlement of
small transactions, but the calculation of broken quantities at given prices. These qualities are
possessed by the binary and duodecimal system of our present coins in an eminent degree.
5 and 6. Coins for circulation, and monies of account, are two distinct ideas. The general
convenience of the people at large, by whom the coinage is circulated, ought, I think, to be
regarded as of prior estimation, rather than the convenience of a section of the people, for
purposes of account, more especially as the varieties of coins must always be greater for the
necessities of circulation than for monies of account, and because the former must always
comprehend whatever the latter can require.
7. I do not recommend the Decimal principle for our coinage, but would not object to it as an
experiment, provided it was introduced with a low rather than a high integer, on a well-digested
plan, simultaneously with a decimal division of our weights and measures.
Very Rev.
Dr. Peacock,
Dean of Ely.
R. Slater, Esq.
146 * DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
R., Slater, Esq.
tº
8, 9, and 10. The reasons in favour of the number 12, assigned by Vaughan (1675) and
Napoleon I. appear to me unanswerable, and present most valid grounds of objection to the
proposed introduction of a Decimal System of Coinage. The factors of 12, harmonizing so
conveniently with the divisions of our weights and measures, and being so much more numerous
than the factors of 10, which do not so conveniently harmonize, are a great aid to mental calcu-
lations, which every one learns in the purchase of the common necessaries of life. The advantage
of a Decimal System seem chiefly confined to simple addition, while the operations of multipli-
cation and division (at least while the weights and measures continue unchanged in their propor-
tions to a Decimal Coinage) are rendered more laborious from the greater number of figures
required to obtain a result, rendering mental calculations impossible.
11, 12, and 13. The more condensed any object that the mind has to deal with the easier is it
managed. This is exemplified by the examples in Question 12:—7s.6d. is of the same value as
375 mils, but the twelfth part of 7s.6d. (7+d) is seen at a glance, while the twelfth part of 375
is a mental operation of some difficulty. The duodecimal system, so to speak, presents the result
before the mind's eye without calculation, while decimals impose labour. If the mind does not
at once see its way to a correct result, the calculation must be made on paper, and hence much
loss of time where there are numerous transactions.
The real perfection of any system of coinage is to be tested by the greatest variety of payments
which may be made by the smallest number of pieces. At present (in the absence of a knowledge
of what the pound and mil plan will introduce) there is no means of forming a perfect comparison
between that and our present system; but, if there is a difference in that respect, I should suppose
it would be in favour of £ s. d.
14. By the three separate systems (according to Mr. Minasi's calculation, see Society of Arts
Journal, 5 Oct. 1854), where the sum of all figures in ordinary accounts are under 10l.,
1st. The tenpenny system requires a less number of figures than our present system of
£ s. d. by 2-3rds per cent., while the pound and mil plan shows an increase of 94 per
Cent.
2nd. For the same reason the tenpenny system must be more concise, as, requiring fewer
figures, it can be expressed or written in fewer words.
3rd. I consider our present system of £ s. d. possesses the advantage over the two others
for mental conception of the sum stated.
4th. The tenpenny system, I conceive, has a greater tendency to accuracy, as it has only
two decimal places (which in accounts may be reduced to one), while the pound
and mil plan has three decimal places, and our present system three distinct money
columns.
5th. The present system of £ s. d. I think the easiest for mental calculations.
6th. The integer of tempence and its cents is in perfect harmony with the coins now in use;
but the decimals of one pound are not so, and would not interchange with any of our
coins lower than sixpence.
A system of decimal monies, whether for circuiation or account, which is incapable of division
by 3, 4, 6, and 12, as is shown by the examples stated, cannot be a system deserving of recom-
mendation as an improvement on our present coinage.
15–23. The superiority of our present system is here strikingly exemplified in the greater
number of aliquot subdivisions of 11. than it is possible to obtain under the pound and mil system,
and in the smaller number of figures required in stating results. At present it is not usual to
post anything in the ledger of lower value than one penny. Under a Decimal System with
ten pence as the integer, the same rule would doubtless be observed, thereby assigning one
place of decimals only, on the right hand of the unit. But by the pound and mil system three
decimal places are indispensable, because the value of the third place in a single sum may amount
to nearly 24d.
The impossibility of dividing decimals exactly by 3, 6, 8, 12, and 16, appears to me to be a
fatal objection to such a system being introduced, when it is considered that in long measure
we have 12 inches to the foot and 3 feet to the yard ; in measures of capacity we have 8 bushels
to the quarter, 36 gallons to the barrel, and 54 gallons to the hogshead; in avoirdupois weight,
16 drams to the ounce, 16 ounces to the lb., 14 lbs to the stone, 28lbs. to the quarter, and 112 lbs.
to the cwt.; in troy weight 24 grains to the pennyweight, and 12 oz. to the pound; besides
numerous other non-decimal divisions. In contracts as to time weekly wages are divided into
6 days and daily wages into 12 hours, all of which subdivisions bear a relative proportion to
the binary or duodecimal principle on which the coinage is founded. Until these objections
could be overcome (and that can alone be accomplished by a decimalization of our weights and
measures) it would be hopeless to expect a system of Decimal Coinage to be introduced either
satisfactorily or successfully.
16, 17, 18, 19, 21, and 22. Under any system of Decimal Coinage, whatever may be decided
upon as the integer there seems no possibility of avoiding inconvenience and confusion, unless
the weights and measures are simultaneously decimalized. Coins themselves are still, as they
always have been and ever must be, dependent for their current value on certain weights. The
fluctuations in the prices of the precious metals, like all other cºmmodities, are governed by
supply and demand, but the quantity of the metals is always determined by its weight. For this
reason, if there were none other, coins and weights ought to bear a relative proportion to each
other in their respective subdivisions, otherwise the exchange of commodities cannot be effected
without inconvenience. Our present system possesses that advantage, which we should lose by a
Decimal System of Coinage.
22. It is proved that the pound and mil scheme would involve a greater number of figures, and
possess less brevity of expression, whether spoken or written (14). In stating accounts, that
system must therefore possess less facility, without possessing greater simplicity, than our present
form. In calculations, however, it is submitted that the duodecimal system is most convenient, as
these are more readily performed mentally than they could be effected by decimals:–ex. gr., take
366 at 1s. 9;d. This is at once seen to be 30; dozens at ll, 1s. 9d. = 321. 12s. 6d. + 10s. 10%d.
= 33l. 3s. 4d. This result is at once arrived at by means of the number 12 (the quantity being
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. I 47
divided, while the price is multiplied, by that number); but it can be as speedily obtained by the
number 20 (240 pence being 20s.). The 360 is equal to 1%, and the 1s. 93d. to 211. 15s., in the
same proportion, producing 321, 12s. 6d., which, added to 6 at 1s. 9%d. = 10s. 104d, gives the
former result of 33l. 3s. 4d. This is only an exemplification of the facility for mental calculations
afforded by the system of £ s. d, which the Decimal System could not afford, as broken quantities
and pieces would require to be calculated by pen and ink.
23 and 24. In retail transactions (which are the object and end of all wholesale operations) it seems
more natural to think of halves, quarters, thirds, eighths, twelfths, &c., than of any decimal
division. It is not that this mode of thought has been induced by the binary and duodecimal
principles which have hitherto prevailed in our weights and measures, because in those countries
where the decimal system of division has been in use for many years (as in France and the United
States) the practice of the lower orders, who form the great bulk of the retail customers in every
community, still clings to the binary and duodecimal principle. This truth is referred to most
successfully in Quincy Adams' Report to the Senate of the United States, in which the binary prin-
ciple is described as the most convenient, although in the face of a system of Decimal Coinage.
He there speaks of the eighth and sixteenth of the dollar being introduced, in order to facilitate
such binary operations, and refers to these as among the most useful of their coins.
25. One great advantage possessed by our present system is, that each coin, being itself an
aliquot part of the pound, is divided on the same principle, and is composed of distinct coins, so
divisible, down to the lowest denomination, viz.:-
AE. s. d.
0 is subdivided into 11 denominations of coins.
2 3 10 33
O
#
#
Our present coinage is therefore most convenient for the payment of every variety of retail
operations, which cannot apply to any decimal coln, the value of which terminates in the figure 5.
The sixpence (equivalent to 25 mils) is therefore incapable of such subdivision.
26 and 27. I entirely concur in the opinion stated by Sir John Herschell for the reasons assigned
at No. 16. The coinage is itself dependent on the weights and measures, and not the latter on
the former. If any preference were therefore to be given, it ought rather to be yielded to the
weights and measures, so that the people might become familiar with the change before the
coinage was altered. - -
To introduce the decimal division into weights, measures, and coins, concurrently with the
binary principle at present in operation, might lead to some confusion in the first instance; but I
have no doubt it would soon become understood, and would afford an opportunity of testing the
estimation in which the Decimal System was held by the encouragement it would receive at the
hands of the public. In such an event I should recommend the multiple to work upwards from
the penny, rather than the decimal downwards from the pound.
28. The case given by Sir Charles Pasley appears altogether exceptional, if not imaginary, and
to obtain an exact result must of necessity involve much calculation, even if both weights and
coinage were decimalized. I am not aware of any commodity whatever, not even gold, the value
of which is so precisely regulated as to involve pence and farthings in so large a quantity as a ton.
These lower coins are more likely to be found attached to small weights. Tons are more commonly
priced at pounds alone, or in shillings, than in broken or mixed money. It is in the reduction of
the ton to the price of the lb. where I apprehend greater difficulty will be encountered
were Decimal Coinage to be introduced unaccompanied by Decimal Weights. At present such
reduction is an easy operation by mental process alone, and is an evidence of the advantage afforded
by the duodecimal principle of aiming at speedy and correct results, because tons are to cwts.
what pounds are to shillings, and the number of farthings in one shilling (48) being equal to
3-7ths of the number of pounds avoirdupois in one cwt. it is only necessary to multiply the number
of tons or cwts. by 3 and divide by 7 (an easy process by the mind) to ascertain the price of the
pound in farthings.
29. I think so for the reasons before stated.
30 and 31. This would seem to be a necessary consequence, both in wholesale and retail quantities.
32. (See ante, 26 and 27.) º
33. The arguments in favour of retaining our present subdivision of weights and measures apply
with equal force to the coinage. Dr. Peacock's opinion appears to me to be a sound one.
34 and 35. In common conversation we talk of tens, hundreds, aud thousands, and therefore may
be said to think decimally, but in the practical application of numbers we have recourse to the binary
principle as most convenient. -
36. Dr. Leavitt's opinion of the superiority of the Decimal System for the purposes of accounts
may be open to dispute, but his reasoning on the advantage of the duodecimal system is unanswer-
able ; and the inconveniences to which he refers as constantly felt in the United States, in small
retail transactions, from the absence of that quality in the Decimal Coinage, would equally be felt
here. In all cases where small coins would not admit of precise subdivision the seller would
always take advantage of the difference, and a certain loss would therefore fall on the buyer, which
might or might not be compensated by the turn of the scale. Were it otherwise, a constant repe-
tition of such differences, especially in the case of small transactions, would seriously affect the
R. Slater, Esq.
T 2
148 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
R. Slater, Esq.
profits of the seller. The smaller the coins the greater the probability of such differences, and the
greater the per-centage of loss to the consumer. Besides the inconvenience and dissatisfaction
which could not fail to arise in such small retail operations, the loss would certainly fall on the
poorer classes.
37. I apprehend that a Decimal System for accounts could not be introduced successfully unless
with a low integer, containing not more than two places of decimals, as these might be so adjusted
as to harmonize with a coinage duodecimally subdivided. The dollar is at present the highest
decimal integer in use, but even that coin (with its two decimal places) is found inconvenient for
retail operations without the aid of 8ths and 16ths. With the proposed integer of Il, and three
places of decimals, such harmonious adjustment is impossible.
38. I entirely agree as to these primary requirements for a good system of Coinage.
39, 40, and 41. I also agree as to the advantages afforded by our present system. That system
cannot be considered as the result of accident. It is founded on science as well as simplicity.
The “pennyweight,” as its name implies, was equally the 240th part of the pound troy, as it was
of a pound of silver. But the money pound itself was merely a nominal coin, and continued so for
several reigns after the Conquest. In the reign of Edward the Confessor, the silver penny was
stamped with a cross on the reverse, and, it is said, was broken into quarters for smaller monies.
This seems to have been the origin of our farthings, which afterwards became a part of the regular
coinage. The subdivision of the coins, however, as they existed in the reign of Henry II., was
admirably suited for convenience ; and, with some few exceptions, it remains the same at the
present day. The pound, besides being divided into halves, quarters, eighths, and twentieths, was
divided into the noble of 6s. 8d., being one-third, the half-noble of 3s. 4d., or one-sixth, and the
quarter-noble of 1s. 8d., or one-twelfth. The shilling of twelve pence was also subdivided into the
groat of 4d., the half-groat of 2d., and the penny.
The subdivision of these coins was evidently intended to harmonize with the weights at the
period they were introduced. And the original adoption, as well as the long retention of that
system, can be alone accounted for by its great convenience.
42, 43,44, 45, 46, 47, and 48. Neither the decimal pound, nor the decimal shilling, can be divided
into 3d, 6th, 12th, or 16th parts precisely ; nor can they be represented by any combination of
coins under the pound and mil scheme. The only Decimal System by which such parts of a pound
and a shilling could be represented either in coinage or in account, is by an integer of tenpence.
Mr. Snowden's suggestion as to 100 farthings, halfpence, or pence being adopted as the integer
of a Decimal Coinage, is worthy of consideration, as either of these integers almost assimilates to,
or forms part of the dollar of the United States, and is infinitely superior to the 1,000 mil scheme,
which assimilates with no other system. But I submit that the tenpence divided into 100 parts
will be a superior integer, from being still more concise and convenient for accounts, and as nearly
assimilating to the franc of France,—a system of coinage now spreading over other countries in
Europe. Such an assimilation would be attended with great advantage in our exchange operations
with the Continent. As the farthings are voluntarily omitted in accounts, at present, the second
decimal place which corresponds to them might also be omitted, if thought necessary. But whether
the tenpenny or the penny be adopted as the integer, it would occasion no disturbance in the
existing coinage. Were the penny adopted, its fractions of #, #, or # would be more convenient
than its decimal parts, and are indeed in common use in the United States at the present time.
It is certainly not desirable to abolish our existing copper coinage, if it can be avoided.
49. I doubt much whether accounts would be kept on a new principle in the absence of actual
coins as a foundation for them ; but I think the advantage supposed in this question could more
effectually be gained by the introduction of a new coin of tenpence, and another of ºn of one penny.
The latter small coin would, I think, be found convenient in account sales, and in pricing and
invoicing many articles now manufactured by machinery, which at present are produced as low as
8ths, 16ths, 32nds, and even 64ths of a penny.
50. The £ and mil scheme would certainly involve more than two monies of account, owing to
its three columns of decimals, and cannot fail to lead to much confusion.
51. Our present system involves at least three monies of account. Some other nations in Europe,
which have not adopted the decimal principle, have also three or more ; but I understand there is
a growing desire to reduce them to two denominations only, as we see in the instance of Holland,
Belgium, Switzerland, &c., where the Decimal System has only been introduced of late years with
a low integer.
52 and 53. There ought not, in my opinion, to be more than 100 steps between the lowest and
highest monies of account. I know of no Decimal System using more. 1,000 steps must certainly
be attended with great labour. -
The inference to be drawn from the practice in the United States is altogether in favour of a
low unit. If they find it convenient to use a vulgar fraction rather than a decimal for a value
under a cent of a dollar, what is likely to be the result with the cent of a pound, or even the
thousandth of a pound, when values already descend to very minute fractions 2 The experience of
the United States shows that there are commoditics even there, where the lowest decimal is not
low enough, and cannot be represented so conveniently as by a vulgar fraction.
54, 55, 56, 57, and 58. The division of the pound into 1,000 mils would interfere most materially in
mental calculations, as the want of the binary or duodecimal principle would deprive us of a stage or
resting-place for determining the relative values of quantities and prices. These advantages have
been already referred to. If it is necessary at present in those countries to have recourse to
written calculations with an integer divided into 100 parts, the inconvenience must be much
increased where the integer is composed of 1,000. There would besides be no harmony between
the United Kingdom and other countries in their Decimal Systems.
59. The increase in the number of figures, as well as the labour, will be much greater; and for
the mere sake of preserving the L intact the pound and mil scheme not only offers no advantage
in keeping accounts or facilitating trading operations, but will occasion great inconvenience and loss
of time. -
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. * 149
60 and 61. The defective character of decimal numbers for binary and duodecimal division has been
already shown. The opinion on this point expressed by Quincy Adams is decisive, although it is
matter for surprise that in the United States some efforts have not been made to introduce the
decimal division into their weights and measures so as to overcome in some degree the inconvenience
he mentions. They have been doubtless prevented from attempting this by the consideration that
such an alteration would present another most disturbing element in their operations with England
and France, whose weights and measures already differ, but from which countries they draw the
bulk of their supplies. In adopting any system of decimal division applicable either to weights
and measures or coinage, I think it ought to be a primary consideration to study how far the
introduction of a new principle could be made in agreement with the already existing integers of
other countries with whom we have large trading transactions.
62. I think the confusion and difficulty apprehended by some persons as likely to arise from the
change which would take place in the value of our lower coins, if the pound and mil system were
introduced, are well founded. . If a Decimal System must be introduced at all it ought not to
involve so serious an evil; and it is only by preserving the penny intact that this can be avoided.
63. The inconvenience I should suppose will be felt quite as much by the higher as the lower
classes; if it did not meet with general acceptation. My own belief is, that it will be speedily
found to be unworkable.
64. I think the points referred to in this question most deserving of deep consideration by the
Commissioners. The bulk of ti ading operations is performed by the lower and poorer classes,
many of whom are incapable of reading or writing, far less of performing either mental or written
calculations. It is of first importance to them that the greatest simplicity should exist in all
money operations in which they are concerned. They are, I should think, much more likely to
understand calculations involving the 4th of one penny, or the 12th of one shilling than the
1,000th of one pound, however scientifically divided, for the reasons already explained, that our
present system of coinage is so capable of numerous divisions on a binary or natural principle,
while a Decimal System is capablé only of a few.
65. Looking at the question in all its bearings, I scarcely think that it is desirable or prudent to
introduce a decimal division of our coinage at all; but certainly not, unless accompanied by a
decimal division of weights and measures. The proposed pound and mil scheme I cannot conceive
will ever be found to answer the expectations formed by its advocates. That education will be
promoted by its introduction, or by means of a Decimal Coinage at all, appears to me a most mis-
taken idea. Indeed, I would regard the substitution of decimal calculations in place of the com-
pound arithmetic taught in every parish school, as a national misfortune, as in no way adapted to
sharpen the intellects of the rising generation.
In conclusion, if it is considered desirable to try the experiment of a decimal division of our
currency, I an in favour of that system which preserves the penny.
ROBERT SLATER.
104, Fore Street, City, 2d May, 1857.
(Communicated by Lord Overstone.)
ROBERT SLATER, Jun., Esq.
Answer to Question 1. I think it might be desirable to introduce smaller coins than the farthing,
to enable the poorer classes to receive the advantage of fluctuations in the value of the chief
necessaries.
2. The coins at present in use I consider convenient, except the crown piece (objectionable from
its size), and the florin and threepenny pieces, which too closely resemble in appearance the pieces
of the nearest value, which are more convenient subdivisions of higher coins.
3. The calculations necessary to arrive at the results of retail transactions are, under our existing
system, simple and readily grasped in the mind ; and the amounts, I consider, are paid with facility
in our current coins.
4, and 5. I conceive coins to have originated from the necessity of finding some ready means of
adjusting transactions between man and man, the multitude of which, in the present state of society
particularly, are small. I consider therefore that the integer of all coins, to be convenient, should
be adopted (and, in most cases, has been originally adopted), with the view to the ready and
mutual subdivision of commodities and coins. I am therefore of opinion that the main purpose of
coins is to adjust small payments; then they should be regarded as instruments of calculation ; and
lastly, in a yet inferior degree, as the medium of accounts.
6. I.ooking at the probable origin of coins it is evident that they must be made, both in the
integer and its subdivisions, capable of adjusting themselves to the ready settlement of commodities
most frequently interchanged. Our present coins do not, in this respect, descend low enough ;
for example, the lowest fluctuation of wheat in the market which can be represented by }d. on the
price of the lºaf is 2s. Again, many articles of minute value must be purchased in extravagant
Quantities. The centime in use on the continent affords foreigners a much lower subdivision of
money than we possess in Great Britain, and yet there can be no doubt but that in this country
we produce very many more articles of minute value than they, as we empioy machinery to a
much greater extent.
I consider that to afford the public every facility for the adjustment of their perpetually-recurring
transactions, and satisfaction of their small but imperative wants, is of infinitely more importance
than the saving, to a proportionately small body of the community, of a slight amount of labour in
recording their accounts.
R. Slater, Esq.
R. Slater, Jun.,
Esq.
T 3
150 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
R. Slater, jun.,
Esq.
7. I do not recommend the introduction of the decimal principle into our coinage before the
adoption of the same principle with regard to weights and measures.
8. It is a serious objection to the Decimal System that it prevents the subdivision of the integer
in the same degree as is possible under the present system of coins.
9 to 12. The advantages possessed by the number 12 over 10 are evident, from the larger number
of factors the non-decimal possesses, enabling calculations to be made and quantities to be sub-
divided so much more simply and so much more extensively than can possibly be the case with
the number 10. This is plainly and very forcibly instanced in the cases alluded to in Query 12.
By a judicious selection of coins, payments might be made by as small a number of pieces under
the decimal as under the present system.
13. The weak point of the Decimal principle consists in the impossibility of dividing
it beyond two points without fractions, whilst the requirements of society, influenced by the
nature of things in general, demand a binary division carried to the utmost extent.
14 and 15. It has been established by Mr. Minasi (see Journal of Society of Arts for
5th October 1855) that there is an economy of figures in recording sums written in pence
compared with our existing system; both these plans require, however, from 4% to 9 per cent.
fewer figures than the £ and mil system. Conciseness of expression in words and in writing
attaches therefore to the penny system in a higher degree than to the present system, whilst
both possess a considerable advantage in this respect over the mil system. . The facility for
mental conception of the sum stated must however be measured by the habits of the man
employing it; an Englishman conceives at once the sum implied in the expression 520, which a
Frenchman understands equally readily in the expression 13,000 francs. The fewer figures are
employed the less risk there will be of making errors in copying or calling over; in this respect,
therefore, the penny plan has the advantage.
In comparing with each other the mil and penny decimal systems the advantage is much in
favour of the penny, one numeral expressing a small sum in pence, which three numerals are
required to express in mils. If, to economise figures, seventy mils be written 70, they may, in
copying, be placed on the paper in such a way as to cause their being mistaken in addition for 700.
Facility of calculation is afforded in a remarkable degree by our present system, under which the
ratios subsisting between our coins and weights and measures, or abstract quantities generally,
may be employed so readily, and to so great an extent, that results may be arrived at mentally in
a short period of time, which under any Decimal System is, in the majority of instances, imprac-
ticable. As the greater number of the transactions of life are based upon prices small in
amount, and as these small sums, under the mil system, require more figures than under the penny
system, mental calculations cannot be carried so far by the mil as by the penny. The perſect
interchangeability of our coins now in use for equivalents in the tenpenny system is one great merit
of this plan, inasmuch as we might to-morrow, without the alteration of any existing coin,
introduce a Decimal System either in accounts and coinage, or in accounts alone, and not in
coinage, try practically its working, and if we found it inferior to £ s. d., at once revert to the
original without creating confusion, without compelling opponents to adopt what they regard as
highly objectionable, and without forcing the labouring classes (who have taken really no interest in
the question) to change their habits of thought in regard to money matters, if they did not see any
advantage in doing so. Contracts, whether public or private, would remain undisturbed, payments
might be adjusted with facility and exactness, and prices would not be affected. On the other
hand the adoption of the mil system would render the interchangeability for equivalents in the
new plan of all amounts (except those few composed of even shillings and sixpences) impossible, and
great confusion would arise while the country was in the state of transition. No opportunity can
be afforded of practically testing the plan, which must be applied at one and the same time to
both accounts and coinage, without the possibility of revoking the step taken, unless at the cost of
similar objections on returning to our present system ; the community at large would have a
system thrust upon them which they do not understand, and which they would be unwilling to
adopt from the loss inevitably entailed in all transactions in which small coins are employed, whilst
our postal system, rates, charges, contracts, and prices generally, based upon the penny, would be
altogether dislocated.
16 to 19. I consider it would be fraught with great inconvenience were a decimal principle to
be introduced into our coinage, without a similar principle being applied to our weights and
measures; indeed I think it would be the proper course, on making any change, that it should
apply both to monies and weights and measures simultaneously; but if a partial change were con-
templated, I conceive it would be less mischievous to introduce decimal weights and measures
before altering the system of coinage. There are many anomalies and palpable defects in our
existing weights and measures which might with advantage be cleared away, but I am not pre-
pared to say that a Decimal principle as applied to them would be an advantage, the natural
tendency being to make use of a binary subdivision of weights and measures.
20 and 21. The ratios existing between the subdivisions of our leading weights and
measures and our coinage, enable us to calculate speedily and exactly, by a mental process, the
values of small quantities, so that dealers when buying in the bulk can at once tell whether articles
purchased by them in tons, cwts., gallons, pieces of a given quantity of yards, grosses, &c. are
adapted for their peculiar requirements. Under a Decimal System they would have to perform
such calculations on paper at a loss of time, and at a risk of error, in the open market.
22. I am not of opinion that a change to a Decimal System of notation and coins merely, would
afford us any advantages in regard to facility in stating accounts, and in simplifying calculations or
payments.
23 to 25. To be convenient for purposes of caculation, there must be a series of proportions in the
subdivisions of monies, weights, and measures, and the tendency of human nature being always to
divide binarily, because tolerable exactness can be secured in that direction without great trouble,
any system founded on decimals in one of the mediums, and not in the other, is a step out
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 15T
of the right direction. Our present system in this respect is vastly superior to a Decimal
System ; thus,-
960 is divisible by 26 (smaller) whole numbers, of which 3 are divisible binarily in the 6th degree.
4 25 25 5th 32
4. 25 92 4th 52
4. 22 35 3d 33
4. 35 35 2d 3 *
4. 33 35 1st 35
240 is divisible by 18 (smaller) whole numbers, of which 3 are divisible binarily in the 4th degree.
4. 75 39 35
4. 33 35 2d 5 2
4. 5 * 35 1st ,
12 is divisible by 4 (smaller) whole numbers, of which 1 are divisible binarily in the 2d degree.
2 32 52 1st 55
Whereas on the other hand,
1,000 is divisible only by 14(smaller) whole numbers, of which 3 are divisible binarily in the 3d degree.
4. 92 33 2d 25
e tº dº 4 25 35 1st 35
100 is divisible only by 7 (smaller) whole numbers, of which 2 are divisible binarily in the 2d degree.
3 2 1st ,
2 »
10 is divisible only by 2 (smaller) whole numbers, of which 1 is divisible binarily in the 1st degree.
From this it will be seen that our present coinage admits of extreme subdivision, whilst the
decimal principle is necessarily very limited in this respect.
26. Any system of Decimal Coins without a concurrent Decimal System of weights and
measures must prove highly disadvantageous.
27. See answer to Nos. 16 to 18.
28. One of the most important operations performed in numbers representing broken sums
of money is undoubtedly the finding the price of a broken quantity of material, when the price of
a given unit of the material is a given broken sum, and in many instances our existing system
enables this calculation to be performed mentally. In the case of the example quoted, given by
Sir Charles Pasley, the calculation would be made by a person in the habit of dealing in such
materials and quantities by “practice,” as shewn forth. If only coins were decimalized, the same
plan would doubtless be resorted to by him, without any saving of labour; if both coins and weights
were decimalized, simple multiplication would be the means adopted, and I question whether the
result would be any sooner obtained.
29. If decimal coins are adopted, decimal weights and measures must sooner or later form
themselves on the country as a necessity.
30. If a Decimal Coinage were adopted it would be more convenient, for the purpose of
calculating the value of a single article, if goods were made up in tens in place of dozens, but I
question if in practice we should find this course pursued to any extent. The French make up
stockings, gloves, &c., in dozens, never in parcels of ten.
31 and 32. No system of Decimal Coinage should be adopted before the question of weights
and measures is matured, or before we have arrived at the best units for starting from in weights
and measures, to which the Decimal Coimage should be made subordinate so as to meet the require-
ments of society.
33. I consider the principles embodied in the present system of our weights and measures sound
and more practical than in any Decimal System propounded. It cannot but be admitted that the
divisions of our coins had their origin in and beautifully harmonize with the subdivisions of our
cardinal weights and measures, and are as it were dovetailed into them; whilst the weights and
measures themselves seem to have been determined upon from their capability of often-repeated
“bissection,” which Dr. Peacock considers of such great importance.
34 and 35. I coincide in the view expressed in this query ; in generalities men think of
abstract numbers and quantities decimally, in particularities binarily. For this our present coins
are well adapted.
36 and 37. Some few forms of accounts, as those of insurance offices for example, may
doubtless be advantageorsly kept in £ and mils, but the greater number of persons would find
it much more convenient to record their transactions in the decimals of a penny. But ledger
amounts only represent the totals of numberless separate transactions involving calculations, all of
which, I contend, can be more readily effected under a binary system. I quite agree with the Rev.
Joshua Leavitt, that the small transactions of daily life outnumber almost infinitely the transactions
of commerce, but when these last come to be analyzed, they will be found to have originated under
circumstances involving similar calculations; and if he arrives at the conclusion that it is impossible
to make a decimal so convenient as a duodecimal currency in regard to small transactions, I do
not see how he can arrive at any other conclusion with regard to larger, which they combine to
form.
In introducing any Decimal System, not perfectly commensurable with our existing coins, small
differences must always arise; these the tradesman will not disregard, and the loss will invariably
fall on the consumer.
38. The five points mentioned under this query I consider all important in a good system
of coinage. r
39 to 41. See answer to Nos. 23, 24.
42 to 46. The tempenny Decimal System being based upon ld, affords us the ready means, with
an economy of figures, and without any great inconvenience, of recording accounts decimally,
of which the items may have been formed, and can be paid, in existing coins. Every Decimal
System is based upon its lowest money unit, on which the multiples are built up ; in adopting the
mil, we therefore commence with a coin not now current, differing 4 per cent. from our present
R. Slater, jun.,
Esq.
T 4
152 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
R. Slater, jun, lowest coin, and consequently incommensurable with the majority of amounts as expressed in our
Esq. existing accounts. Indeed, if we multiply the mil binarily, we can never arrive at an amount for
which an equivalent can be found in our existing coins. Treating the la. in the same manner, we
cannot arrive at any sum which it would not be possible to pay in the tenpenny coinage, as we in
this case take a coin in present use, and upon that erect the decimal superstructure. There would
be no occasion to introduce any lower sum than 14, into the majority of accounts, as we do not
now generally descend below that coin, although it it is at any time necessary we can still continue
to do so. The adoption of the tempenny Decimal System would enable us to simplify our exchanges
with foreign countries, reducing the present intricate calculations to a per-centage, dollars, florins,
and francs all approximating in value to multiples of 1d. I would further remark, that the
adoption of 50d, as the integer would render it necessary, in making calculations having reference
to florins, to take two fifths of the amounts, and in the case of francs one fifth. The tempenny
integer would enable us to obtain the value of florins by multiplying by two, and of dollars by
multiplying by five (or dividing by two, and adding a cypher).
47. The practice in the United States, France, and all countries employing a Decimal Coinage,
is to quote fractions of a cent binarily, as #, #, #, &c., doubtless because it is found more convenient
in dealing with small values, whether in addition or multiplication.
48 and 49. If the Decimal System is to be tried with the view of testing its convenience in
keeping accounts, it would doubtless be the most prudent course to make the attempt without
altering the coinage; by the tempenny system this is possible, whilst by the £ and mil system it is
not feasible, as it would involve the sacrifice of the interests of the community in a variety of ways,
as alluded to in answer to Queries No. 14 and 15.
50. If the £ and mil scheme of Decimal Coinage be introduced as recommended by the
Committee of the House of Commons, it will necessitate the introduction of an intermediate money
of account between tire # and the mil, as it will otherwise be too long a step from one to the other.
I doubt if the public would allow themselves to be incommoded with more ; in France and the
Dnited States there is practically no inter mediate money of account.
51. In countries employing non-decimal monies, such as Great Britain, Denmark, Prussia, the
East Indies, &c., more than two monies of account are used ; but I am not aware that such is the
case in any country employing a Decimal Coinage. The want of it was felt in the United States,
owing to the iarge value of the unit; but, as above mentioned, the public rejected it.
52 and 53. Any system of Decimal Coinage, requiring more than one hundred steps between
the highest and lowest coins, must be excessively inconvenient, as increased labour is thereby
given to the accountant ; it is indispensible to employ numerous figures to express small values,
and the capabilities of the coinage for mental caleulation are thereby confined within very narrow
bounds. This point may be considered as having been settled by practical experience in the
United States and France, where, if it is necessary to descend in value to a sum below a cent.,
public convenience has dictated a binary subdivision, as requiring fewer figures, affording the
means of ready perception, and of being handled in mental calculations with greater facility.
The quotation from the “Times” of 4th April is undoubted evidence of this; and no American or
French newspaper can be taken up, without exhibiting similar proof of the unwieldiness and
impracticability of the thcusandth part of the unit of a Decimal Coinage.
54 and 55. The retention of the £ as the principal money of account in a Decimal System
prevents our escaping the difficulties and objections pºinted out above, which will be in no wise
lessened by the necessary introduction of an intermediate money of account; thus placing us at
a great disadvantage, as compared with other countries employing a Decimal System, and impeding
the facility of transactions of first importance, especially in the case of the poorer classes, who
more frequently employ the smaller amounts in the course of their daily experience than their
affluent neighbours.
56 to 58. Under the existing system we possess the facility of expressing large unbroken
amounts in fewer figures and words than either the French or Americans, and at the saune time
we are enabled to divide our chief money of account into many more clean divisions than they. I
have already shown, under Nos. 23, 25, that if we change the £ into the integer of a Decimal
Coinage we destroy this advantage.
59. The adoption of the mil would render it absolutely necessary to encumber our accounts with
a sum less in value than a farthing, whereas now, in all accounts of importance, we do not descend
below the penny: we could not afford to omit the mils as we now omit farthings, as this would
involve the sacrifice of all amounts below 2}d.
60. In mental calculations, under our present system, the shilling and sixpence have important
functions to perform, for which they are eminently qualified by their susceptibility of division by
factors which are aliquot parts of our weights and measures. Were these coins to be engrafted
into a Decimal System based upon the #, they would still be available as a medium of payment,
but would cease to possess their present advantages, inasmuch as the divisions of which they are
now capable could no longer be represented in lower coins.
61. A binary division, being palpably one which may be carried to the greatest practically
necessary extent with the utmost facility, commends itself above all others to our use. The
deficiency of the Decimal System in this respect is one great source of its weakness.
I think great convenier:ce might have accrued to mankind generally, if in place of the present
universal Decimal System of numeration, a system had been adopted admitting of binary sub-
division to a superior extent, had the practice been introduced, for instance, of reckoning by
eights, by twenty-fours, or by twelves, as referred to by Quincy Adams, in place of by tens, before
recurring to the unit. I should, however, think as soon of changing the habits of the people on this
point, as of establishing the £ and mil scheme of coinage, especially under our present system of
weights and measures.
62 and 63. Were the decimals of a £ to be introduced into our coinage it would be impossible
to arrange to the satisfaction of all parties the differences which must be perpetually occurring in
settling transactions or contracts entered into under our present system, and paid for in pounds
and mils.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. I53
Were the tenpenny Decimal System introduced these difficulties would never arise, as the merit
of that plan is, that it takes, at its present value, a current coin of the lowest value employed in
accounts, and from that proceeds to form decimal multiples ; hence there can be no question as to
whether penny decimal coins are equivalents of our existing coins; it is self-evident that they
must be so; and in addition to this, the language and train of thought employed in the multitude
of the money transactions of life, especially amongst the lowest classes, would remain absolutely
unchanged. It would hardly be perceived by them that we had made any change, and until the
public had seen the advantages attending it, they need not adopt it, At the present time prices
of commodities from one penny to two shillings are quoted in pence, and there is hardly a
necessary of life which is not embraced within this range. Now, a poor man laying out a few
shillings in various quarters has the trouble (small though it be) of converting pence into shillings,
by this system he is spared this trouble. Those in a higher position would find little difficulty,
from their superior education, in making their larger payments under the penny system ; the
labours of the ledger keeper would be diminished by a slight reduction of figures requisite, and
by the extra facility afforded him in additions, whilst the merchant or trader, dealing with
countries employing a Decimal System of accounts (and the bulk of our foreign trade lies with
such countries), would find that in place of his present intricate calculations he would be enabled
to reduce his accounts to a matter of simple per-centage, owing to the decimal multiples of the
penny approximating so closely to the coins of those countries.
64. I am decidedly of opinion that it would be found impracticable to make any system of
Decimal Coinage adapt itself advantageously to our present system of weights and measures. If
we allow our weights and measures to remain as they are, or if we allow the principles involved
in their divisions to continue in force, do not disturb our coinage.
65. The more I consider the question, the more satisfied I become with the advantages, for
the general purposes for which coins are employed, of our existing system, and the less reason I
see for introducing the Decimal System, especially in a partial and incomplete manner. I think
by far too much stress has been laid on the saving of time in education which it is supposed a
Decimal System affords. I consider the attention which must be given in our schools to that
portion of arithmetic termed “compound” by no means thrown away or misspent. The chief
object of all education is to quicken children's perceptions, to brighten their intellects, and to
fit them for the stern battle of life in the peculiar position in society in which they may be
placed, and I consider our existing system is eminently qualified for effecting this end, inasmuch
as it compels our children to think and reflect; decimal arithmetic diminishes the cause for a
healthy exertion of the mind, and would reduce our children to be mere machines.
The United States have a partly Decimal and partly Non-decimal System, France has a purely
Decimal System, and if we are to judge of the advantages attending education in the respective
countries by the results exhibited in the all-important point of social progress, we will, I think,
find that we have no cause to shrink from a comparion, or to regret the absence here of a Decimal
System.
ROBERT SLATER, Jun.
104, Fore Street, London, 1st May 1857.
(Communicated by Lord Overstone.)
J. B. SMITH, Esq., M.P.
Answer to Question 1. Our present system of coins is well adapted to a binary or duodecimal
system of weights and measures.
4. Coins are for the purpose of facilitating retail payments. They are not necessary as instru-
ments of accounts. In Canada they have no coins representing the money of account. Accounts
are kept there in 42 s. d. Halifax currency, the only coins circulating being British and American.
This has been felt an inconvenience, and the Legislature have just passed an Act adopting the
American system of coinage—dollars and cents, the dollar being also hereafter the unit of account—
instead of Halifax currency.
6. It is desirable to have a coinage representing the money of account.
7. Yes. º
8. The Decimal System does not admit of so great a number of divisions as the duodecimal, but
that disadvantage must be set against the advantage which the Decimal System possesses of
greater facility in calculations.
11. Those who have been accustomed to the use of the Decimal System say that it is more
favourable to distinctness of conception, the facility of recollection, and readiness and ease in
mental calculation, than our own system.
12. The mil system is not a Decimal System such as has ever yet been established. It puts an
extinguisher on mental calculation, except to here and there a genius like Bidder.
Try 30 pence as simply 300 francs, or by any other name you choose to call a tenpenny piece,
and the calculation will be even more easy than 30d.
Under a Decimal System, Price's candles would for convenience be made into 10lb. boxes,
which, at 11d. per lb., would cost 11 francs. 1 lb. would therefore cost 1:10, quite as easy a
calculation as by shillings and pence.
13. The defectiveness of a Decimal System of coins in combination with a duodecimal system of
weights and measures is obvious, and this is the defect of the American system.
14. A striking illustration of the difficulties of the mil system. How many persons out of a
hundred would be able to tell off-hand how much 883 mils are
16. Certainly not,
U
R. Slater, jun.,
Esq.
J. B. Smith, Esq.,
M.P.
*, ** **me
I54 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION : ' ' ' '
J. R. Smith, Esq.,
17. Not without subjecting purchasers of all commodities, and especially those who make the
greatest number of purchases of small quantities,—the working classes, to great inconvenience,
and the loss of fractions on almost every purchase. -
No.
18. A rational Decimal System would, but a mil system would only complicate reckoning.
23. Of course this appears to me to be unanswerable.
24. Quere, whether a duodecimal division be not more educational than natural. In countries
where the Decimal System obtains, people's thoughts and habits, in matters of weights, measures,
and coins, take a decimal turn; they don't talk of thirds, eighths, and twelfths. In America it is
natural they should do so, because their weights and measures are like our own.
26. Undoubtedly. . . . . .
27. A Decimal System of weights, measures, and coins ought to go hand in hand. Unless this
plan be adopted, the public will be subjected to all the inconvenience of change from the present to
a Decimal System twice over : first, in the change of coinage; second, in that of the weights and
II16aSUlreS.
28. Nothing gained, but much lost by public inconvenience.
29. It is surprising that America has so long submitted to the loss arising from a Decimal System
of monies and a duodecimal system of weights and measures. It is said that some shopkeepers
pay their rent out of the gains in the fractions on their retail transactions.
30. Not if you have decimal coins.
32. The country ought to decide either to adopt a system of decimal measures, weights, and
coins simultaneously, or to remain as we are.
33. It is unfortunate that the consideration of the adoption of a Decimal System of weights,
measures, and coins has not hitherto been taken together. The Committee to whom the consider-
ation of weights and measures was referred recommended the present system in preference to a
Decimal Scale, and probably it was a wise recommendation per se; and now a Commission is
appointed to consider the propriety of adopting a Decimal System of coins without reference to a
Decimal System of weights and measures, and this Commission may with equal propriety adopt a
similar conclusion. But this is after all only evading the real question of any public interest, which
is not whether it would be useful and expedient to adopt either without the other, but whether the
public would be benefitted by the adoption of a combined system of decimal weights, measures, and
coins, instead of our present system.
34. I doubt if there be any instinctive tendency to adopt either a Decimal or a Binary System.
The English and Americans, who for ages have been born and bred to think of no other than a
binary mode of calculation, may mistake this for instinct, and the Chinese, who from time imme-
morial have reckoned by decimals, and who possess a facility of calculation by this method
which astonishes an Englishman, may be said to have an instinctive tendency to the Decimal
System.
36. The convenient use of the shilling in America arises from their weights and measures being
like our own, and their coins decimal.
Par. 3. Unquestionably it will, unless you decimalize your weights and measures.
Par. 4. They will not be wanted with decimal weights and measures.
Par. 6. The tradesman would gain by a system of Decimal Coins with the existing weights and
measures. The small purchasers would be the greatest losers.
37. Par. 2. No. See answers to Nos. 13, 17, 23, 29, 36.
43. The suggestion of a unit which is an approximation to that of the United States is also sugges-
tive of regret that the present inquiry did not embrace a wider field; whether, viewing the signs of
the times, and looking forward to the enormously increasing intercourse between the different
nations of the world (our own foreign trade has doubled within the last ten years) arising out of the
facilities afforded by steam and the electric telegraph, if it be desirable to make any change at all
in our existing system of monies, weights, and measures, some attempt should not have been made
to combine all nations in assimilating their monies, weights, and measures. If this question were
fairly grappled with it might be found less difficult than is at first sight apparent.
1 American dollar is nearly 100 English halfpence;
1 Frankfort florin 55 2 English ten pennies;
1 Indian rupee 35 Half a dollar ; -
1 French franc 22 1 English ten pence.
The monies of Germany, France, America, and India (a large portion of the trading world)
approximate to each other. Why should they not be made exactly of the same value P
France, Belgium, Sardinia, and Switzerland all use the same coins, weights, and measures.
Holland, Frankfort, Bavaria, Wurtemburg, Hesse, Baden, Nassau, &c., all use the same coins.
There is an evident desire for assimilation. Canada has just decided to assimilate her monies to those
of the United States. A congress has assembled to consider the assimilation of the monies, weights,
and measures of all the states in Germany. An association is formed in the United States to pro-
mote an international system of monies, weights, and measures, and similar associations are formed
in France, England, and other countries.
46. A decimal system of money founded on the tempence as the unit of account appears preferable
to that of the sovereign or mil system, inasmuch as being founded on the penny it might be adopted
immediately without any change in our existing coinage, the shilling then passing for 1:20, or one
franc and twopence, or 20 centimes. Tenpenny and fivepenny pieces might be coined as shillings
and sixpences are worn out.
48. No.
52. Certainly.
53. The system of monies and weights and measures in America do not harmonize. The fractions
of prices of cotton, &c, quoted, viz., ; }, {, }, cents harmonize with the weights by which these
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. lö5
articles are sold. In France you see cotton quoted in francs and centimes, because the monies and
weights are both decimal. So the quotation of the French funds are not in thirds and eighths, but
69°33, 69° 13, as the case may be. -
63. It appears to me the mil system will be equally puzzling to the higher and lower classes.
J. B. SMITH.
105, Westbourne Terrace, 11th May 1857.
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
Lºrter from JAMES Ross SNOWDEN, Esq., to Lord Montragir
SIR, Mint of the United States, Philadelphia, July 30, 1857.
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your favour of the 11th of April last. It
came to my hands through the Department of State, where Lord Napier, to whose care it was
addressed, had placed it.
I am gratified to learn that my former communications were satisfactory on the points pre-
sented to my consideration. I take pleasure in making the further responses which you desire.
It was my first intention to present a general view of the subject; but on further consideration
I deemed it to be more satisfactory to reply to each of the interrogatories prepared by your
colleague Lord Overstone. These replies I herewith enclose.
By reference to my answer to the 23d query, you will observe that the suggestion you speak of
respecting the use of coins representing the fractional parts of the dollar is inaccurate. These
coins were in general use in the United States before the Act of Congress of 1792 was passed for
establishing a Decimal System of Coinage and Accounts. They thus preceded the Decimal Coinage;
and instead of being regarded as aids to that system, as is suggested, they have been serious
hindrances to it. Until a very recent period these binary coins entered largely into our circulation.
This was occasioned in some measure because our people were accustomed to their use, and also
because until the year 1853 the Mint issued but few silver coins of the smaller denominations
except the three-cent piece, the issues of which were commenced in 1851. One of the principal
objects of the recent Act of Congress to which you refer (Act of Feb. 21, 1857) was to retire
from circulation these fractional coins which thus interfered with our Decimal System. I may,
however, remark, that the law also provides for the issue of a new cent of less weight, composed in
part of nickel, as a substitute for the cumbrous copper cent heretofore issued, and it repeals all
laws heretofore passed making certain foreign coins a legal tender in payment of debts.
I beg leave to observe, that the general scope of Lord Overstone's inquiries seems to evince an
inclination to call in question the propriety of a Decimal Arithmetic as well as a Decimal Coinage.
But surely no argument is necessary to prove the advantages of a decimal over a compound system
of arithmetic. In my early youth I well remember, when computing sums in compound
arithmetic, how delighted I was when the shillings and pence, or ounces, pennyweights, and grains,
were disposed of, and the pounds were reached, in which the advance was made by tens. I
suppose everyone's experience is of like character. Custom, however, renders easy proposi-
tions otherwise difficult. On this principle Lord Overstone says, “We at once know that
the half of 7s.6d. is 3s. 9d.” The decimalist might well ask, how we at once know this 2
Certainly one unpractised with shillings and pence is compelled to make a calculation to reach
that result, involving the following figures:–the half of 7 is 3 and one remaining, and as I shilling
contains 12 pence, add 6 to 12, which is equal to 18, the half of which is 9, therefore the half of
7s. 6d. is 3s. 9d. Is it not easier to calculate that the half of 90 is 45, or the half of 100 is 50 2
Any selected cases which present apparent advantages of compound arithmetic over decimal
arithmetic are illusory ; and if more readily calculated, it is the result of custom and habit, and
does not arise from any advantages possessed by the former system over the latter. The same
remark also applies, I think, to Decimal Coinage.
As I regard with lively interest your efforts to reform your present system of coinage, I will
be happy to respond to any further communications your Lordship may find it convenient to
make.
I have the honour to be, with great respect,
Your Lordship's obedient Servant,
The Lord Monteagle, JAMES ROSS SNOWDEN,
&c. &c. Director of the Mint.
ANSWERS.
Mint of the United States, Philadelphia, July 30th, 1857.
IN compliance with the request of Lord Monteagle, the Director of the Mint of the United
States here with submits his replies to the series of questions, sixty-five in number, which were
prepared by Lord Overstone “with the view of bringing under distinct notice and examination
some of the advantages of the present system of coinage in Great Britain, and some of the
objections and difficulties which have been suggested with respect to the proposed introduction of
the decimal principle.” -
JAMES ROSS SNOWDEN,
I Director of the Mint.
QUESTIorſ.
1. Do you think any change in our present system of coins desirable 2
ANTSW. E. R.
A change in the system of coins of Great Britain is deemed desirable.
QUESTION.
2. On what grounds does your objection to our present system of coins rest ?
ANSW. E. R.
The main objection to them is, that they do not represent values in conformity to the
decimal notation of numbers. U
2
J. B. Smith, Esq.
M.P.
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S.
156 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S.
QUESTION.
3. Do you consider them as defective or inconvenient for any of the purposes of retail
transactions, i. e. for paying or receiving 2 Or is your objection restricted to the
inconvenience of our present coinage for the purposes of account keeping and
calculation ?
* ANTSWIER,
They are objectionable in both particulars. A system defective for the purposes of account-
keeping and calculation must also be so for purposes of retail transactions, i.e., for receiving and
paying, since such retail transactions, if analysed, involve calculations of the same nature as
are required in account-keeping, viz., the mental addition, subtraction, multiplication, and
division of values represented in money.
QUESTION.
4. What do you consider to be the primary purpose of coins P Do you consider them as
fractional subdivisions of the integer created for the purpose of adjusting retail payments 2
or do you consider their primary character to be that of instruments, the purpose of
which is to facilitate accounts and calculation ?
ARTSW. E.R.,
Both objects are indispensably necessary, and it is difficult to conceive that either could be
sacrificed. A system of coins unfitted to adjust retail payments would be an unendurable evil;
while it is possible to conduct commercial transactions with instruments very inconvenient for
purposes of accounts and calculation. The first purpose might therefore be considered primary.
Nevertheless we should only be satisfied with a system combining both the advantages indicated
in this query.
QUESTIon.
5. If one of those purposes must to Some extent be sacrificed or made subordinate to the
other, which do you think is entitled to the priority in our estimation ?
AINTSV. E. R.
See the foregoing answer.
QUESTION'.
6. Is not the coinage chiefly concerned in the process of buying and selling by retail 2 and
must not the question of the merit or demerit of any system of coinage be decided by
its fitness or unfitness for adjusting with readiness and simplicity the multiplied variety
of small payments 2 Are you aware of any complaint against our present system of
coins in this respect 2
Is not the use of coinage, that is, the fitness of the coins to perform their proper purpose
of facilitating the division and distribution of commodities in the retail markets, and
adjusting the small payments which arise, the consideration of primary importance,
rather than the improvement of a system of account keeping, by which the convenience
of the affluent and educated classes, of those who keep large and extensive accounts,
may be principally promoted 2
A WTSV% º R.
The answer to the third query furnishes the basis of a reply to this question. All transactions
of commerce are matters of account. They do not lose their character by being exclusively
mental or unrecorded, as is the case in retail dealings. And as long as our system of arithmetic,
in the notation of numbers, is decimal, it may be anticipated that contradictory systems, whether
in the notation of values, weights, or measures, will be found sources of constant inconvenience
in arithmetical reckonings.
II.
QUESTIon.
7. Do you recommend the introduction of the decimal principle into our coinage 2
ANTSWIEIR-
Yes.
QUESTION.
8. Is it not impossible under the Decimal System to break the integer into as many clear
fractional parts, as we now obtain under our present system of coins —Do you not
consider that this is an objection to the Decimal System
JFA NSW Biº-
It is impossible, if we regard the Decimal System in its technical meaning, but not so if we
take the simple multiples as applicable to it. I consider the force of this objection to apply to the
Arabic notation of numbers, in which we reckon by units up to ten, &c. We may assume that
this plan of notation is unalterable ; and if so, the conclusion seems to follow irresistibly that the
same system of notation should be extended to the representation of whatover other objects may
be noted numerically, whether values, weights, or measures.
QUESTIon.
9. In an old but very remarkable treatise on coin and coinage (Vaughan, 1675) this passage
OCCUl I’S ––
“Of all the numbers, twelve is the most proper for money, being the most clear from fractions
“ and confusion of account, which ought not to be neglected, by reason that of all other
“ numbers it is most divisible, being divisible into units, as all numbers are ; into two
“ parts, as no odd number is ; into three parts, as no even number is but six, and the
numbers that consist of sixes ; into fourths, into which six is not divisible ; and into
sixths.”
&
&
6
C
%
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 157
In the memoir dictated by Napoleon at St. Helena, on the new French system, is this
passage :-
“On avait préféré le diviseur 12 au diviseur 10, parceque 10 n'a que deux facteurs 2 et 5, et
“ que 12 en a quatre, savoir, 2, 3, 4, et 6. Il est vrai que la numération décimale, géné-
“ralisée et exclusivement adaptée au mètre comme unité, donne des facilités aux astro-
“ nomes et aux calculateurs; mais ces avantages sont loin de compenser l'inconvênient de
“ rendre la pensée plus difficile. Le premier caractére de toute méthode doit étre d’aider
“la conception et l’imagination, faciliter la mémoire, and donner plus de puissance à la
“ pensée.”
What validity is there in these considerations as objections to the introduction of a decimal
system of coinage 2 Or, in what does the fallacy of them consist 2
A NTSW.E.R.
The commendations quoted here appear to have weight, as showing the superiority of a
duodecimal system of numeration. The fallacy of applying them as objections to the introduction
of a decimal coinage, will appear from considering that we have irrevocably fastened upon us a
decimal arithmetic ; and whatever may be the convictions of its imperfection, it is not seriously
proposed to substitute a duodecimal arithmetic. Such being the case, any isolated system of
notation, whether duodecimal, or octonary, or quaternary, or vigintesimal, whatever recom-
mendations it may have, separately considered, must be radically defective from its incongruity
with the received or decimal system of notation.
*
QUESTION.
10. Must not there be an inferiority as regards fractional divisibility in any decimal system
of coins, as compared with a coinage founded on a combination of the binary with the
duodecimal scale 2 .*
ANTSW. E.R.
There is this inferiority ; but the same inferiority is to be found in the decimal system of
notation of all things as well as coins. Since we submit to the inconvenience in the infinite
variety of other arithmetical calculations, it will be but a trifling addition to include the coins in
the same system, especially as such inconvenience is insignificant when compared with the
advantages derivable from the change.
QUESTron.
11. Is not there great force and truth in the remark of Napoleon, that a decimal system of
dividing the integer and of expressing the fractional parts must be less favourable to
distinctness of conception, to facility of recollection, and to readiness and ease in mental
calculation, than a binary or than our present system 2
AINTSVER,
The remark of Napoleon would be true, if we had a binary arithmetic ; but as our
arithmetic, or notation of numbers, is decimal, the same mode of noting coins or values must be
most “favourable to distinctness of conception, to facility of recollection, and to readiness and
case in mental calculation.”
QUESTION.
12. Ex. gr. : Which is the more easy for conception, for recollection, or for addition
mentally 2
S. d. Mils. Pence.
7 6 −. 375 - 90
2 6 - 125 - 30
1 3 - 62 - 15
O 9 - 37 - 9
12 O 599 144
Again ; we at once know that the half of 7s.6d. is 3s. 9d., but what is the half of 375 mils?
The half of 2s. 6d. is 1s. 3d, but what is the half of 2s. 6d. estimated decimally, i.e.
125 mils, &c. &c. 2
Take another case. Any number of yards—7, 8, or 9 yards at 1s., 1s. 6d., or 2s. 6d.
per yard, or the same number of yards at 50 mils, 75 mils, and 125 mils per yard :
Which calculation will be made with the greater readiness and accuracy, mentally and in the
open market 2
Take half-a-crown—double it—treble it—halve it—divide it by 3—and add all these
products together. Is not this easily done by any common person in his head, without pen
and ink or pencil, and in the midst of confusion ?
But try the same process upon the same sum in decimal notation, namely, as 125 mils.
Will the calculation be equally simple and easy %
Now try it in pence, namely as 30 pence. Is it not obvious that the calculation again
becomes perfectly simple and easy %
Again: Price's Patent Candles are advertised in 12 lb. boxes at 11 shillings each.
Every one knows that this gives 11d. per lb. for the candles. But what will be the
calculation taken decimally 12 lb. boxes at 5' 50 mils each, how much per lb. ?
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S.
TJ 3
i58 … ." ... DECIMAT, GOINAGE: COMMISSION. º. º.
J. R. Snowden, 3, 4 " Again : * ---
Esq., Director of s. d. Pence. Mils. • . . .
the Mint, U.S. . . . . . . . 1 yard or lb. = 2 6 = 30 = 124, for more easy calculation
- *-*_-_*-** . . . was . . . * *** - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - than 125 mils.
# do. = 1 3 = 15 = 62 - -
t do. = 0 10 = 10 = impossible.
# do. - o ż, E * = 3i
# do. = 0 5 = 5 = impossible.
# do. = 0 3% = 3} = impossible.
Tº do. = 0 3 = 3 = impossible.
Tº do. = 0 2% = 2* = impossible.
Tº do. = 0 2 = 2 = impossible.
# do. = 0 13 = 1% = impossible.
ºb do. = 0 1 = 1 = impossible.
Now, consider the comparative convenience in making the necessary payments.
2s. 6d. is paid with one coin. How many coins will be required to pay 124 mils?
1s. 3d. is paid with two coins. How many coins will be required to pay 62 mils 2
Is it not by cases of this kind that the relative convenience of different systems of coinage
must be tested 2
.ANTSV E. º.
I have no doubt that in the United States every one of the examples stated could be more
readily worked in the decimal notation than in the compound notation. I do not include, with
the latter the statements of values in pence, because these are, in fact, decimally noted. A
monetary system, beginning with the penny, discarding the pound sterling, or quoting it in pence
only, and ascending to a derivative coin, or unit of account of 100 pence, is a decimal system.
The examples of this character cited in the query are therefore more easily worked than in the
compound notation of £. s. d. They therefore furnish no ground of objection to a Decimal
System. The examples, however, show the inconvenience of that particular decimal system
which proposes to divide the pound sterling into mils or 1,000 parts. I think it proper, however,
to remark, that any unfavourable inference in regard to the latter plan drawn from the
illustrations in this query would probably be fallacious. We have a right to assume that the
prices of the articles named have been in some degree dictated for facility of calculation under the
present system, and we should expect some slight revision of prices with the same object to
conform to the new system when it would be adopted. The candles, for example, might be sold
at 45 mils per pound, or 540 mils to the box, or, which would be nearer the present price, at
46 mils the pound, and 552 the box. It must be conceded, however, the difficulty of naming
established prices, under the pounds, shillings, and pence system,-in the proposed new system
of pounds and mils, is a sound objection to that plan of reform. It seems, in fact, the only
objection. But the weight of it is greatly overborne by the many countervailing advantages
which must attend any decimal system. Without being understood as expressing any preference
for a system to be noted by pounds and mils, yet it would be a subject of deep regret to me if this
plan, on which the friends of a decimal coinage in Great Britain seem generally agreed, should fail
on any such grounds. Any decimal system is greatly preferable to a non-decimal one. But it
may be well to consider that the force of the objection above referred to, namely, the difficulty of
converting present prices into the pound and mil currency, does not apply to that decimal system
which, beginning with the penny (or halfpenny), would ascend to a new unit of 100 pence (or
halfpence). The principal, and indeed the only objection. that occurs to me to the adoption of
this plan of deriving a new unit from a centesimal multiple of one of the minor recognised coins
is, that it requires the sacrifice of the pound sterling as a unit of accounts. And I am well
aware, from an examination of Lord Monteagle's excellent “Memorandum prepared for the
Decimal Coinage Commissioners,” as well as from other sources, that the pound sterling is the
unit to which the people of England from habit and association are most attached. It is to be
considered, however, that, under the pound and mil system, the penny must be discarded, which is
also a unit of accounts in all minor transactions, and perhaps in as large a number as the pound
sterling itself. It is, besides, the unit of the illiterate classes, while the pound is the unit of the
better educated. As the Decimal System will require the sacrifice of one or the other of these
units, may it not be wiser to select that plan which will throw the burden of the change upon the
educated classes, who can better appreciate the advantages of it, rather than upon the unlearned,
by whom it certainly will be misunderstood and opposed ? Again, it must be considered that the
pound and mil system requires the re-adjustment of all prices under the present sixpence, and to
some extent of all prices less than the pound sterling ; but a decimal system of pence and
100 pence (or one ducat), or of halfpence and 100 halfpence (or one dollar), would involve no
change of prices whatever. It would require only the mental conception of the new unit, which,
it is believed, could not be difficult, inasmuch as it is 100 of old units or coins already well
understood and fixed in the mind. I refer to my answer to number 37 of the former queries
(quoted number 43 of the present series) for my views formerly hinted on this subject.
QUESTrorſ.
13. The defectiveness of any system founded on the decimal principle consists in the imperfect
divisibility of its integers. º
Is not the construction of coinage necessarily a divisional process 2 Is it not the
metrical subdivision of the integer for fractional payments in connexion with retail
transactions 2
“While decimal arithmetic for the purposes of computation shoots spontaneously
“ from the nature of man and things, it is not equally adapted to the numeration,
“ the multiplication, or the division of material substances.”—J. QUINCY A DAMS,
Secretary of State Reports to Senate of United States, 1821, p. 8.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. f59
answer. . . . J. R. Snowdon,.
Coinage may be built up by decimal multiples of smaller coins, as well as by divisions of º.
the larger coin. The 3-cent piece of the United States, a most useful coin, is an example.
QUESTron.
14. In the following table compare the three systems, the present, the mil, and the penny
system. With which does the superiority rest as regards,-
1. Number of figures used ?
2. Conciseness of expression in words or in writing 2
3. Facility for mental conception of the sum stated ?
4. Tendency to promote accuracy in copying or calling over ?
5. Facility for calculations, especially those which must be made in the head 2
6. Interchangeability at equivalent value with the coins now in use ?
£ s. d. Mils. Pence.
1 O O = 1,000 ~ 240
O 17 8 - 883 F. 212
O 15 6 = 775 - 186
O 9 9 - 487 F. 117
O 6 3 - 312 F 75
O 5 7 - 279 F. 67
0 4 10 ~ 241 F. 58
O 3 8 - 183 - 44
0 2 4 F. 112 F. 28
O 1 5 - 70 ~ 17
4 7 O 4,342 1,044
27 figures. 34 figures. 28 figures. -
If we now proceed to subject these total sums to division, which system will be found the
most convenient 7
4l. 7s., divided by 3, 4, 6, and 12, gives the respective sums, 11.9s., 14. 1s. 9d., 14s. 6d.,
7s. 3d.
Pence 1,044, divided by 3, 4, 6, and 12, gives the respective sums of 348 pence,
261 pence, 174 pence, 87 pence.
But 4,342 mils is not divisible without a remainder by any of these divisors.
AINTSWIEE,
To a person familiar with the present British system the first column would probably best
fill all the conditions ; even facility of mental conception (No. 3), as a matter of course, attaches to
that system to which one is accustomed. But to an American the statement in pence is most
satisfactory in all particulars, including facility of mental calculation, since, estimating the penny
at 2 cents, a doubling of the amount gives the value, nearly, in dollars and cents.
QUESTrorſ. -
15. S. d. Pence. Mils.
1 #8 = 20 0 = 240 = 1,000
# £ = 10 0 = 120 = 500
# 48 = 5 0 = 60 = 250
# f = 4 0 = 48 = 200
# 48 = 3 4 = 40 = gºmºsºme
+ £ = - ~ – ~ e-
# ºf = 2 6 = 30 = 125
! # = – = — E tº-
9. O
Th; 48 = 2 0 = 24 = 100
Tºr 3 = - - — F. *
ly £ = 1 8 = 20 = cºmmº
# * = wº- -
T3" - , a.m-se * - * = ſº-
* : * : * ~ : * –
5: G = – – —
TT - - = *-* = tºm-
†s f - - = — = ºs-
* c = 10 = 12 = –
TÜ -> * - e-
*
By this table it appears that going down as far as the shilling the £ is divisible under our
present system, and under the penny system, into eleven distinct aliquot parts; whilst
under the mil system it is divisible only into six aliquot parts.
But observe further the subdivisibility of the quotients obtained under the present and
the penny system, compared with those obtained under the mil system.
The # 48 represented by 2s. 6d. or 30 pence, or 120 farthings, is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 20, 24, 30, 40, 60, giving respectively 1s. 3d, 10d., 7#d., 6d., 5d. &c.;
whilst the same sum, represented by 125 mils is divisible only by 5 and 25, giving as the
result 25 mils and 5 mils.
Again : the tº £, represented by 2s. or 24 pence, or 96 farthings, is divisible by
2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, and 48, giving respectively 1s., 8d., 6d, 4d, 3d., 2d., 1}d., 1d.,
#d, and #d. ; whilst the same sum, represented by 100 mils, is not divisible into a third
or an eighth part, or any of their subdivisions.
TJ 4
160 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J. R. Snowdon,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S.
The same may be said again of the shilling, which, represented by 12 pence or 48
farthings, may be divided by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, giving respectively the sums 6d.,
4d., 3d., 2d., 1}d., 1d., #d., #d. ; whilst the same shilling, represented by 50 mils, is
divisible only by 2, 5, and 25, giving the sum 25 mils, 5 mils, and 2 mils.
Now let us compare the three systems with reference to the number of figures requisite for
stating the fractions of a £ which are obtainable under each of the three systems : —
S. d. Pence. Mils.
1 #8 = 20 0 = 240 = 1,000
# * = 10 O = 12O = 500
# gé = 5 O = 6O = 250
} e = 4 0 = 48 = 200
# * = 2 6 = 30 = 125
To £ = 2 O = 24 = 100
gº + = 1 O = 12 = 50
2 4 6 544 2,225
19 figures. 19 figures. 25 figures.
A. Mr SV. Ekº.
I consider the notation in pence as a decimal system, and consequently these examples
furnish no objection to decimal coinage per se, but only to the plan of pounds and mils. But it
seems after all of very little consequence whether the particular fraction of a pound indicated can be
represented in even mils. If you have the means of noting and paying rººrgth of a pound, and
every multiple of that amount up to 999, it seems hypercriticism to object that every part of a pound,
as for example the ºth, cannot be exactly represented in mils. For practical purposes, 62 or 63
mils will denote the amount which is mathematically 62% mils. The friends of a Decimal System
might respond by asking how riºtſ of a pound sterling can be represented in your present
currency. As this cannot be done it constitutes at least as strong a reproach against the
compound system as it is against the millesimal plan, that it cannot indicate precisely the ºth of
a pound.
III.
QUESTron.
16. Is the introduction of the decimal principle into our coinage desirable without reference
to what may be the system of weights and measures in this country P
AINSW ºº,
A decimal monetary system, both of coinage and accounts, is undoubtedly desirable without
reference to the system of weights and measures.
QUESTroßſ.
17. Commodities are divided for the retail purposes of the market by means of our weights
and measures, and the practical purpose of coins is to effect the payment for those retail
purchases. Can the adjustment of our system of coinage be properly disconnected from
the adjustment of our system of weights and measures 2
A NISVºlº,
The experience of the United States shows that decimal coinage may be introduced, with
the most happy results, independent of a reform in the weights and measures. We have still the
weights and measures of Great Britain, and had formerly the same compound currency. It has
never been suggested that we were premature in discarding the latter ; though it is often
regretted that we have not reformed our system of weights and measures. It may not be
inappropriate in this connexion to present the following extract from my report on the operations
of the Mint for the year 1853. (Ex. Doc. No. 40, 33rd Congress, 1st Session.) “It seems
appropriate to my official position that I should take this opportunity to join in the urgent
demand, from various quarters, for a simple, intelligible, and well-founded system of weights and
measures. The Mint has done as much as it can (and in this step it has been followed by the
Bank and Mint of England) in repudiating pennyweights and grains in the mode of weighing and
keeping accounts, using only the troy ounce and its decimal fractions. The sanction of law had
previously been obtained for doing away with carats and carat grains in the expression of
fineness of gold, and of an equally cumbrous notation for the fineness of silver, substituting the
simple millesimal form introduced by French assayers, and becoming general in Europe. But
we are still annoyed with another standard of weight, the avoirdupois pound, with its tedious
and arbitrary divisions. The establishment of a simple and uniform system, applicable to
every kind of weight and measurement, is greatly to be desired, and is well worthy the attention
of Congress.”
QUESTron.
18. At present our system of weights and measures, and our system of coins, may be
considered as binary. Can it prove consistent with public convenience to abandon the
binary, and to adopt the Decimal System in our coinage, unless we have decided on the
same course in our system of weights and measures 2
Ajºſ SWER.
These systems are not binary in any just sense. . The coinage combines the quaternary
the duodecimal, and the vigintesimal scales. The weight troy counting from the pennyweight
combines the vigintesimal and the duodecimal notation ; the avoirdupois from the drachm
includes the sexdecimal or the progression by sixteen, by twenty-eight, by four, and by twenty.
The systems of measure, wet and dry, of length, area, and solidity, embrace every variety of
progression, differing as widely from the notation of the coinage as from a decimal notation itself.
A simple decimal coinage may lessen the annoyance of reckonings in these complex systems;
but I cannot understand how it can be supposed that the non-decimal and incongruous coinage of
Great Britain should facilitate the labour. -
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. I6]
QUESTrorſ.
19. If the retail transactions of the community originate in a system of weights and measures,
by which the hundredweight is divided into 4 quarters, the quarter into 28 pounds, and
the pound into 16 ounces ; and in which, again, the lineal measure, the yard, is divided
into three feet, and the foot into 12 inches; will a coinage, founded on the decimal
principle of division, afford a greater facility for the adjustment of such retail transactions
than the coinage which now exists
ANTSW. E. R.
A Decimal Coinage will, upon the whole, afford greater facility, though there will be exceptions,
QUESTron.
20. Take the case of an article now selling at a shilling per pound or per yard, and retailed
in halves, quarters, ounces, or inches, thesg fractional quantities are easily and readily
paid for in our present coins... But if our coinage be subjected to the decimal principle
of division, will not that facility be lost 2 -
A.N.TSW. E. R.
This case affords one of the exceptions referred to. But on the other hand suppose an
article under the pound and mil system offered at 80 mils, here the half pound, the quarter, the
eighth, and the ounce, are sold respectively for 40, 20, 10, and 5 mils, whereas at the same price
in the old system, that is, 1s. 73d. these weights could be noted in money only by the fractions
9; d. 4}#d. 2:30, 1}#d. -
QUESTION.
21. Under our present system,--
Mils. Pence.
11b. = one shilling 5() 12
#lb. = sixpence 25 6
}lb. = threepence 12.5 3
#lb. or 2 ounces = three halfpence 6:25 l
I
*lb. or 1 ounce three farthings 3-125 #
In cases of this kind will the ordinary transactions of the market be carried on under a
decimal system with simplicity or convenience comparable to that which is obtained
by the present system ż
4.
AINT SWE&s
The decimalist may suppose the price, under the pound and mil system to be 48 mils, which
would give the advantages of calculation on his side. If all things were sold by the pound
and at a shilling, these examples might have weight; but subjects to be computed in money,
and the range of prices are of such variety, that it would be very unsafe to allow ourself
to be swayed by isolated examples selected from practice under the old system. To some extent
we must be guided by general and theoretic views. Among these I hold as not open to any
just exception the view which assumes that, inasmuch as our system of noting numbers is
decimal, and at the basis of arithmetical reckonings, every approximation to that system in the
&
noting of other things will be found advantageous.
QUESTEoN.
22. Would a change from our present to a decimal system of notation and of coins secure any
advantages in brevity of expression, in facility of stating accounts, in simplicity of form,
in speed or accuracy of calculation, or in facility of payments 2
Jºſ SW ºe
Such a change would secure a great balance of advantages over the present system it is
not doubted. Any plan of decimalization would secure them ; but that which ascends from
the penny to a new unit of 100 pence (or from the halfpenny to the 100 halfpence) seems to be
recommended by the most advantages, theoretical and practical.
QUESTIorr.
23. In the report of the discussion at the Institution of Civil Engineers, of Mr. Yates'
Paper on the French system of Measures, Weights, and Coins, the following passage
occurs (p. 60):--
“The pound sterling, consisting of 960 farthing, admits of 19 divisions without a
“ remainder ; but if divided into 1,000 parts, it only admits of 8 divisions. Existing
weights and measures are chiefly reckoned by 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 24, 36, &c., which
admit of divisions by existing monies; but if a monetary decimal system be
adopted, without also adapting it to weights and measures, it must be evident that
the number of fractions will be greatly multiplied. Decimal coins will not accord
with the fractions of a pound of 16 ounces, nor with those of a yard of 36 inches.
Purchases of , #, , ºr, &c. of any integer could not be paid for decimally without
incurring a loss by fractions not represented by coins. Now those are precisely
the quantities in which the working classes principally make their purchases ;
consequently they would be the chief sufferers by the introduction of a decimal
coinage, unless there is a simultaneous adoption of decimal weights and measures.
This anomaly was severely felt in the United States, and to obviate the inconve-
nience, Spanish pieces of 6+ and 12% cents, although illegal coins, were of necessity
employed.”
Must the truth and force of this statement be admitted, or, if not, what answer can be given
to it 2
6
G
6
&
&
Ç
6
Ç
6
%
4 &
6
&
&
G
G
x
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, TJ.S.
162: # , 1 ; DECIMAL GOINAGE COMMISSION: '': ' '.
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of .
the Mint U.S.
ANTSV E. R.
. It would be certainly desirable that decimalization of weights and measures should be
introduced as well as of coinage, and it must be conceded that the full advantage of the latter
will not be manifest until the former has also been effected. To the statement made in the
extract the following criticism may be offered. It assumes that weights are to be divided.
But these transactions are small in number compared with those in which they are to be multiplied
by the price, and in such cases the facility offered by decimal coinage is indisputable. And
where division takes place the whole force of the objection is, that fractions of a mil not
represented by coins must be discarded. But fractions of a farthing are also to be discarded,
and why not those of a mil, which is a smaller coin It is a mistake to suppose that in the
United States Spanish pieces were employed from any necessity of preventing losses of fractions
of a cent. This curreney was in existence before the adoption of our decimal coinage, and it
represented prices in the £ s. d. system. The ºth of the dollar, for example, was the shilling of
New York, the 9d, of Virginia, the 11d. of Pensylvania. After the adoption of the Decimal System,
in the absence of any other small coin (the Mint making but little progress in the issue of any
other pieces than the cent and half-dollar), this Spanish money was retained, and the prices of
small things were conformed to it. They were not necessary to help the imperfections of the
decimal coinage, since they preceded it. And it may be added, that within a period of five
months, simply in virtue of an Act of Congress, declaring that thereafter Government officers
should receive them only at 20, 10, and 5 cents, but leaving their circulation and valuation
optional in other cases, they have almost entirely disappeared from the currency. Large amounts
of them have been deposited at the Mint at their value per ounce in weight, and at considerable
loss to the holders. Had the popular judgment deemed them necessary or even convenient, this
result could not, of course, be obtained. And it may be observed, that this banishment of these
coins has taken place although prices, in many cases, still continue to conform thereto ; but in
this particular also, a reform is in progress, and I have full confidence that but a short period
will elapse before the prices of retailed articles will be quoted as well as liquidated in even
CentS. &
QUESTron.
24. In the retail transactions of the shop or market, is not division into halves, quarters,
thirds, eighths, twelfths, &c. more convenient, and more in unison with the natural habits
of mankind, than the division into tenths -
“The decimal numbers, applied to the French weights and measures, form one of its
“ highest theoretic excellences. It has, however, been proved by the most decisive
experience in France, that they are not adequate to the wants of man in society,
and, for all purposes of retail trade, they have been formally abandoned. The
convenience of decimal arithmetic is in its nature merely a convenience of calcula-
tion ; it belongs essentially to the keeping of accounts, but is merely an incident
to the transactions of trade. It is applied, therefore, with unquestionable advantage,
to monies of account, as we have done ; yet, even in our applioation of it to the
coins, we have not only found it inadequate, but in some respects inconvenient.
The divisions of the Spanish dollar, as a coin, are not only into tenths, but into
halves, quarters, fifths, cighths, sixteenths, and twentieths. We have the halves,
quarters, and twentieths, and might have the fifths, but the eighth makes a fraction
of the cent, and the sixteenth even a fraction of a mil. These eights and six-
teenths form a very considerable proportion of our metallic currency ; and although
the eighth, dividing the cent only into halves, adapts itself without inconvenience
to the system, the fraction of the sixteenth is not so tractable ; and in its circulation,
as small change, it passes for six cents, though its value is six and a quarter, and
there is a loss by its circulation of four per cent. between the buyer and the seller.
For all the transactions of retail trade, the eighth and sixteenth of a dollar are
among the most useful and convenient of our coins ; and, although we have never
coined them ourselves, we should have felt the want of them, if they had not been
supplied to us from the coinage of Spain.”—QUINCY ADAMS's Report to Senate of
United States, 1821, p. 81.
Ç
&
&
6
& &
&
© (,
.
6
&
&
G
&
&
6
6
&
&
66C
G6&
%
6
&
C
&
&
ANTSVER,
The fact of the easy banishment of the Spanish money with the entire approval of the
people, proves that Mr. Adams had misconceived the causes which retained this currency. To
the question propounded, it must be conceded that the mode of division indicated is more natural
than into tenths; but the inference to be drawn is, that we should have a duodecimal notation
of numbers. Since, however, we have a decimal notation, and are likely ever to retain it, contra-
dictory scales, whether in coinage, weights, or measures, should be dispensed with, as incongruous
and necessarily inconvenient.
QUESTron.
25. The late Lord Ashburton, in a debate in the House of Commons, on this subject, remarked,
“That the capacity of division by halves and quaters which attends our shillings is
“extremely convenient for the common purposes or life, which upon the whole is the
“best criterion of any system.” Is this correct or otherwise ?
How is the shilling expressed as 50 mils to be divided into quarters, or the sixpence
expressed as 25 mils to be divided into halves
AINSWP:IR,
In such cases we, in the United States, would note (in accounts) the 3 or 4 of the mil. See
my reply to No. 36 of former queries quoted in No. 29 of the present. -
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 168
QUESTrorſ.
26. It is stated by Sir John Herschel, in his evidence before the Committee of the House of
Commons, (qu. 594,) that in his opinion “it is a great misfortune that decimal coins will
“never fit the fractions of a yard and of pounds and of measures.” Must we concur in
that opinion, and if so, must we concur in the further view of Sir John Herschel that,
“a decimal system of weights and measures, as well as of coins, ought to form a
“part of the same integral system 7” ... •
- - - - • Answer. .
It would be desirable that other systems should be decimalized as well as coinage, but there
seems no necessity that one reform should wait upon the other. -
QUESTrow.
27. In the evidence given before the House of Commons’ Committee, Sir John Herschel gives
his opinion, that the decimalization of weights and measures and of coins should go hand
in hand (qu. 598); but if that be impracticable, he inclines to the opinion that
decimalization of weights and measures should be a step towards that of coinage
(qu. 600).
( Professor De Morgan would adopt a decimal coinage first, leaving the other (decimal
weights and measures) for a future period (qu. 765).
Mr. Airy thinks the adoption of a decimal system of weights and measures desirable
to some extent, and probably concurrent with the binary system (qu. 481).
What is the correct view on those points 2 Is the adoption of a decimal system of weights
and measures essential to the efficiency and usefulness of a decimal coinage 2 Ought it
to precede, to accompany, or to follow, as a necessary consequence, the introduction of
decimal coinage 2
. ANTSWER.
See previous answer, and that to query 16.
QUESTron.
28. Is it not the fact that, next to addition, the most important operation performed on
numbers representing broken sums of money, is the finding the price of a broken
quantity of material when the price of a given unit of the material is a given broken
sum ?
Is not this operation in theory, the multiplication of a broken quantity of material by a
broken sum of money 2 Is it not usually performed, and with great facility, by the rule
denominated “Practice P”
Is it not the fact that one of the great advantages of a completely decimal system of money,
weights, and measures, would be that such operations would be performed by simple
multiplication ?
Is it not the fact that this result would not be attained unless weights and measures were
decimalized as well as money P º -
If money alone were decimalized, would not such operations be still performed by “practice,”
and would the operations be much or at all simplified ?
Take, for example, the following case, given by Sir Charles Pasley in his evidence before the
Committee of the House of Commons, as showing the advantage of the Decimal System.
215 tons 17 cwt. 3 qrs. 9 lbs. at £9 11s. 64d. a ton 2 -
Under the present system we should say—
215 tons 17 cwt. 3 qrs. 9 lbs.
£ s. d
at £1 per ton 215 it 10 — ºs
at £8 32 F 1,727 2 8 —— *s
at 10s. = } F 107 18 11 — sº,
ls. = 1%; = 10 15 10 tº
6d. = } == 5 7 11.1%;
żd. = ºr = O 4 6
at £9 11s. 64d. £2,067 7 84
If weights and measures as well as coins were decimalized, the question might be :—
Required the price of 483,597lbs. at £4 275 per 1,000lbs. 2 which would be a question
of simple multiplication.
But if only coins were decimalized, then in the pound and mil system we should have 215
tons 17 cwt. 3 q's, 9 lbs. at £9 576 per ton, which we should probably work in the
following manner — . .
100 tons - . 957 - 600
100 , - 957 - 600
10 , - 95° 760
5 , § F 47-880
10 cwt. Tº = 4 - 788
5 , = } F. 2 * 394
1 25 - To = ° 478 - 8
1 , = 1 - 478 °8
2 qrs. = } F. * 239 - 4
1 3, 5 § - * 119 - 7
7 lbs. = } - * 029 '925
1 , = } - * 004 - 275
I , = + – 004 ° 275
215 tons 17 cwt. 3 q1's. 9 lbs. = #2,067'377
Is much or anything gained in this case unless weights and measures as well as coins are
decimalized P -
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S.
X 2
164 . . . . . DECTMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S.
A NTS^S / E Rºs
Worked according to the rule of practice, the solution by the pound and mil system
appears the most expeditious and simple. In the United States such an example would be
solved by first finding the price per pound corresponding to the price per ton, that is, by dividing
the price by 2240. The weight sold, reduced to pounds, would then be multiplied by the price
per pound thus divided. The product would be the cost of the iron.
QUESTIon.
29. Will not the introduction of a decimal system of coins and accounts necessarily tend to
render the present system of weights and measures very inconvenient, and thus to force
the country into the application of the decimal principle to weights and measures for the
sake of necessary correspondence with the coinage 2
“The concurrent use of non-decimal division of commodities with a decimal coinage
“ tends, in reckoning prices, to a result expressed in a binary fraction of a cent. In
such cases, if payment be made, three-fourths of a cent is liquidated with a cent.;
a half-cent is sometimes paid the same way, sometimes not noticed. The quarter
cent is not liquidated. In accounts the three-quarters, halves, and fourths of a
cent are generally entered, and added in on footing the columns, the total being
carried to the cents, a fraction above half a cent being counted as a cent. It is
believed that no sensible loss to either party arises in the long run from this
“ practice. Even in a complete decimal system of weights, measures, and coins it
would be impossible to liquidate accurately all reckonings, unless the least coin
were smaller than the public would endure.”—Answer to No. 36 of Circular
“Queries, by J. Ross SNowDEN, Director of the Mint of the United States.
ANTSVER,
The decimal coinage would not render the non-decimal weights and measures more incon-
venient, but, by the opportunity it would furnish for a comparison between rational and irrational
systems, it would probably lead to the abandonment of the latter.
QUESTION.
30. A great practical authority, Mr. Slater, has stated that one consequence of the introduc-
tion of decimal coinage will be, that articles will be made up in parcels of ten each
instead of dozens as at present. Will not this be less convenient for subdivision than
the present practice of making up articles in dozens P g
ARTSWIER.
The consequence anticipated may not follow, and in the United States it has not ; but if it did,
I do not perceive that any inconvenience would result.
QUESTron.
31. Does not the anticipation of the change in this respect afford a practical illustration of the
tendency of a decimal coinage to force the country into the adoption of decimal weights
and measures?
ATNTS"W.S. R.
The experience of the United States shows that decimal coinage does not force decimal
weights and measures. It is certainly to be hoped that it will ultimately lead with us, and also
in Great Britain, not to an enforced, but a cheerfully accepted system of decimal weights and
In Ca,Sll PCS.
QUESTION.
32. Is not this an inversion of the natural and proper course P Ought not the country to
decide in the first instance what system is most properly applicable to weights and
measures, and then proceed to adjust coinage and accounts to that system, coins and
accounts being the means for adjusting and registering the retail payments which arise
out of transactions which have had their origin in weights and measures?
ANTSW. E.R.,
I believe that the natural course of proceeding is to do that which is practicable. If the
people will understand and cheerfully accept decimalized coins, weights, and measures, the reform
should by all means go that length ; but if not, then decimalize that system which there is reason
to believe they are prepared to adopt.
QUESTION.
33. The Select Committee of Parliament of 1821 recommended that the subdivision of
weights and measures employed in this country be retained, as being far better adapted
to common practical purposes than the decimal scale. If this recommendation be
founded on sound reason, is it not equally applicable to the case of coinage as it is to
weights and measures? Is it is not fully as true of coins as it is of weights and
measures, that the present subdivision of them is well adapted to all common practical
purposes 2
See Evidence of J. E. Gray, Esq. (qu. 378).
Dr. Peacock, speaking of the introduction of the French metrical system, says,
Encycl. Metrop. Art. Arithmetic, p. 448 —“The decimal subdivision of these measures
“ possessed many advantages on the score of uniformity, and was calculated to simplify
“ in a very extraordinary degree the arithmetic of concrete quantities. It was attended,
“ however, by the sacrifice of all the practical advantages which attend subdivisions by
“ a scale admitting of more than one bisection, which was the case with those previously
“ in use, and it may well be doubted whether the loss in this respect was not more
“ than a compensation for every other gain.” Must we admit the weight of this autho-
rity and the conclusion to which it leads P
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 165
ANTSV" º R.
The strength of this reasoning and its conclusions are not admitted. The advantages of
bisection are more than counterbalanced by the antagonism in which any system possessing
them must stand to the decimal arithmetic. Duodecimal and decimal notations are incongruous.
If in order to obtain the advantages of bisection, we adopt the former in certain cases, of course
we must accept the outweighing inconveniences of a conflict with the latter, which stands at the
base of our system of numbers.
IV.
QUESTION.
34. Is it not the fact that in all matters of abstract number and multiplication of material
things there appears to be a general instinctive tendency to adopt the decimal system,
whilst in dealing with material subdivisions, whether in length, capacity, or weight,
there is an equally strong tendency to adopt the binary system,-the decimal system in
arithmetical calculation, the binary system in weights and measures, and the retail
transactions of the market arising out of them P Are not all the integers of our weights
and measures multiplied decimally, but divided by the binary scale 2 Do we not speak
of ten yards, a hundred yards, a thousand yards 2 But when we come to subdivide the
yard, do we not think and speak of half a yard, quarter of a yard, &c., and similarly in
all other cases 2
“The earliest and most venerable of historical records extant, in perfect coincidence
“ with speculative theory, prove that decimal arithmetic, as founded in nature, is
“ peculiarly applicable to the standard units of weights and measures, but not to their
“ subdivisions or fractional parts, nor to the objects of their admeasurement or weights.”
—QUINCY ADAMS's Report to Senate of United States, 1821, p. 16.
AINTSW.E.R.,
These facts are true, and they show that a duodecimal notation would have better conformed
to the wants of man than the decimal. But as the latter has been adopted, it seems manifest
that the intrusion of duodecimal, binary, or other scales, if even convenient in themselves, must be
inconvenient in relation to the established arithmetic. Perhaps I should explain that by duode-
cimal notation or numeration I refer to that in which twelve should be substituted for ten as the
term of the periodical return of the unit. Under such a notation 10 would stand for 12;
# of 10 would be 6 ; } of it, 4 ; } of it, 3; of it, 2. Manifestly, the advantages of divisibility
without fractions give this system a superiority over the decimal, in which 10 (selected as the
term of repeating the unit) is only divisible by 2 and 5 without remainders.
GºurisTrorſ.
35. Is it not then natural and convenient that our integer of money, the £ sterling, should be
similarly treated ? That whilst we speak of ten pounds, one hundred pounds, one thou-
sand pounds, we should subdivide the ºf sterling into half a £, or 10s. ; a quarter
of a £, or 5s. ? And, again that we should subdivide a shilling into half a shilling or 6d. ;
a quarter of a shilling or 3d., and so on ?––thus applying decimal arithmetic to the
standard unit of our coinage, the 26 sterling, but not to its subdivisions or fractional
parts.
A.NTSWIER,
Since we have a decimal notation, such an arrangement is contradictory and inconvenient.
QUESTIory.
36. In the Report of the Legislative Assembly of Canada on Decimal Currency (p. 14) is
the following statement :--
“The decimal currency admits of but one aliquot division—into halves; but the New
“ York shilling, an eighth of a dollar, can be divided into sixths, quarters, thirds,
4 &
“ people during sixty years have clung to their well-worn shillings and sixpences,
perceiving them to be a great public convenience. Your Committee are of
opinion that coins representing the eighth and sixteenth of a dollar are indis-
pensable in small transactions in Canada, and that the smooth British sixpences
will continue to pass extensively as the eighth of a dollar unless a better coinage
is provided.”
In a communication from the Rev. Joshua Leavitt of New York (p. 48 of the same Report),
this further remark occurs :—
“I have no doubt of the superiority of the decimal system for the purposes of accounts, and
“ am astonished that other countries have so long delayed its adoption. Our experience
of the benefit of our federal currency in this respect is all one way. The saving of
time and labour is prodigious, and the advantage in point of correctness and of the
facility of detecting errors unquestionable. But for the purposes of small circulation,
in marketing, huckstering, and the like, I am persuaded that a duodecimal currency
like that of England, or like that which formerly prevailed in the city of New York,
is far preferable. These small transactions of daily life outnumber the transactions of
commerce almost infinitely. And it seems impossible to make a decimal currency as
convenient in these as the old currency. One reason is, that the decimal currency
admits of only one aliquot division, that is, into halves. The shilling can be divided
into halves, quarters, thirds, sixths, and twelfths; and if it were needed, a coin of the
value of two thirds of a shilling would be found manageable. In all these countless
small transactions which I have referred to, and in which every man is employed many
times every day, this capability of subdivision is of great convenience. We are con-
stantly buying a half of a thing, or a quarter, the eighth, the one third, and so on. If
the price is a dollar, we can make the change for one-half, for one quarter, and if one,
6 &
& 4
4 &
& 4
{{
6
<
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
6
6
halves, &c., and although Congress has never coined any shillings, the American .
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
º
X 3
1.66 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:. . . . .
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S.
“ two, or more pence, with our decimal eurrency, but we cannot pay the exact price of
“ one third, one sixth, one eighth, one twelfth, or any other of the fractional parts. If
“ the price is half a dollar, we can only pay for one half, one fifth, and one tenth. If
“ the price is a quarter of a dollar, we can pay for no aliquot division whatever. This
“ is a constant inconvenience, and can be got along with in no other way than by
“ disregarding small differences.” -
If a decimal coinage be introduced into this country, is there any reason to suppose that
the inconveniences here stated as the result of practical experience in the United States
will not equally occur in this country P.
Will it be possible to obtain the eighth or the sixteenth of a florin, or the quarter of a
shilling, or the half of a sixpence, under the proposed decimal system -
If the small differences, necessarily arising from this imperfect divisibility of the decimal
coins must be disregarded, upon whom will the unavoidable loss fall ?
With the tradesman will it not be an accumulating loss, consuming his profits ; and will it
not be impossible therefore for him to bear it -
Must it not therefore necessarily fall upon the small purchaser 2 -
The principle of the objection is, that the decimal system substitutes the divisors 2 and 5
for the divisors 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, which are the natural divisors for material things, and
are also the divisors of our present money, giving us the third, fourth, and half parts of
everything. - - - -
That the effect of this will be, in the sale of broken parcels of commodities, a small money
remainder involving loss to shopkeeper or customer. -
This, we see, is a source of constant inconvenience in the United States.
Let us take the descending steps from 8s.
<
8s., or 400 mils, or 4 florins, is not divisible by 32, the divisor of # oz.
4s., or 200 mils, or 2 florins, is not divisible by 16, the divisor of 1 oz.
2s., or 100 mils, or 1 florin, is not divisible by 8, the divisor of 2 oz.
1s., or 50 mils, or ; florin, is not divisible by 4, the divisor of 3 lb.
- 6d., or 25 mils. is not divisible by 2, the divisor of # lb.
In each of these cases, in the purchase of a broken quantity of material, # oz., 1 oz., 3 lb.,
4 lb., will there not necessarily arise a broken sum of money, which cannot be paid in
any coin; a small “ difference which must be disregarded,” to the loss of buyer or seller?
Mark how under a decimal coinage the difficulty occurs in an earlier stage, and in a more
serious form, than under the present coinage, precisely as we descend to the lower
amounts, to those which are the usual prevalent prices with the middle and lower classes.
If it be assumed that, instead of these prices, “ competition will determine prices in decimals
“conveniently divisible by 2, 4, 8, or 16,” and therefore in prices not corresponding to
the decimal money of account ; if, instead of one shilling, or 50 mils, the price of the
unit of the material is taken at 48 mils, is not this in itself an admission that in intro-
ducing decimal money we shall have introduced a money not conveniently adapted to the
purposes of the market 2 -
And in so doing shall we not have incurred a new set of objections, namely, the incon-
venience of being obliged to use several coins with which to pay the 48 mils, iustead of
one coin with which 50 mils may be paid -
ANTSW. E. R.
It is conceded that the use of a decimal coinage with a non-decimal scale of weights and
measures, or a non-decimal division of commodities sold, tends to introduce fractions not repre-
sented by coins. But it is not perceived that any sensible loss or inconvenience to either party
can arise on this account, since a fraction of a mil, which is also a less coin than a farthing, is
too insignificant to be liquidated, even if there were the means of doing it. Under the present
system, unliquidated fractions of the farthing must be very common. And it is unquestionably
true that, while the habit of selling commodities in a binary division (the #, +, +,) instead of by
tenths shall obtain, convenience will dictate such prices as may be divided in that way. These
would be, probably, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, &c. &c. mills, admitting of the binary division sought.
Nor is a great multiplicity of coins necessary to meet such sums. A three-mil coin (corresponding
to our 3-cent coin) in connexion with the mil and 5, 10, and 25 mil coins, will admit of a great
variety of easy payments : thus, 4 mils = 3 + 1 ; 8 = 5 + 3 ; 12 = 10 + 1 + 1, or 4 x 3;
16 = 10 + 5 + 1, or 10 + 3 + 3 ; 20 = 10 + 10; 24 = 10 + 10 + 3 + 1. And here I
may remark, that it is a great mistake to assume that decimal coins are only such as are obtained
by the decimal division of a unit, as its tenth, its hundredth, or its thousandth. Multiples of
such a decimal division of the unit may fairly be included. Thus our 3-cent coin, though neither
a decimal nor an even division of the dollar may as fairly be termed a decimal coin as three
single cent coins may be called decimal coins. Such multiples of lower denominations play a
very serviceable part in any system of coinage by facilitating change. The great utility of this
3-cent coin with us furnishes an example. Perhaps the most proper series of coins under a
decimal system, would be that which would best fulfil the condition of paying all decimal amounts
with the fewest possible coins. Coins divided by decimal subdivision of the unit will evidently
do this in an imperfect manner. If we have pieces to represent only the 10th and 100th, prices
between the rinth and ºth will require from 1 to 9 coins; from ºth to ºths, we should need
from 1 to 10 ; from ºths to ºths, from 2 to 11, &c. &c. Intermediate coins will therefore be
demanded in practice, and in the selection we may be guided by convenience alone, subject only
to the rule that no piece should indicate fractional parts of the smallest coin adopted in the scale,
Thus a series of coins in the following order proceeding from the thousandth of a £ would
probably be found advantageous in reducing to a minimum the number of pieces required to
liquidate prices: viz., L . -
Copper. Nickel and Copper. - Silver. - - Gold.
i, 3, 5 6 10, 18, 25, 50, 100 500, 750, 1000, 5000
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 167
QUESTrorſ.
37. Again : Mr. Leavitt bears testimony to the admirable qualities of the decimal currency
for accounts, but asserts that for small circulation and payments in marketing, huckstering,
and the like, a duodecimal coinage is also wanted and preferable to the other. These
small transactions of daily life far out-number the dealings of commerce. And this
statement is sanctioned by the concurrence of the Committee of the Legislative
Assembly of Canada. - -
Does not this statement distinctly point to the necessity of abandoning a duodecimal system
of coinage, but of introducing, if possible, in connexion with our present system of
coins, some means by which money transactions may be recorded in a decimal system of
notation, thus retaining the present system of coins undisturbed, but combining with it
a decimal system of reckoning or account keeping 2 . - - - -
“Perhaps it may be found by more protracted and multiplied experience that the same
“material instruments shall be divisible decimally for calculations and accounts; but in
“any other manner suited to convenience in the shops and markets ; that their appro-
“priate legal denominations shall be used for computations, and the trivial (or customary)
“names for actual weight and mensuration.”—QUINCY ADAMS's Report, p. 90.
A NTSWIEE,
This result may substantially be obtained in consistency with a decimal system. Coins
which shall be binary, ternary, sexagesimal, or duodecimal multiples of the smallest decimal
coins would be perfectly congruous with a decimal system of accounts, and would give all
necessary convenience of adaptation to the non-decimal scheme of weights and measures.
QUESTrorſ.
38. Are not the following the primary requirements of a good system of coinage 2 viz.:-
1st. That the integer should be divisible into the greatest number of clean fractional parts
to correspond with the endless variety of retail transactions which they are to be the
means of adjusting :
2d. That these fractional parts should be expressible in the shortest and most simple form
of words, and with the smallest number of figures : --
3d. That the coins should be such, both in denomination and relative value, as may pass
with the greatest facility in valuing or summing them up when presented in great
numbers : - - -
4th. That they should be such as may afford the greatest facility for mental conception, for
recollection, and for the ordinary processes of arithmetic which the people are daily
called upon to perform mentally in the tumult of the market or shop, and without the
opportunity of recording them in writing : -
5th. That they should harmonize with the natural tendency of mankind to subdivide
commodities for retail purposes by continual halving.
ANswer.
These requirements Nos. 1 and 5, are not admitted, as long as we have decimal notation of
numbers. The necessary want of harmony, with such a system, of a coinage possessing these
requirements would overbalance any supposed advantage. The other requirements appear to be
best obtained by a decimal coinage. -
QUESTrorſ.
39. Is not the following a just description of the present system 2
In the ultimate subdivision, where the binary division is alone useful, we have two binary
steps, viz., two farthings = 1 halfpenny, two halfpence = 1 penny. In rising to the next
unit, the shilling, we have again the factor 2 introduced twice, giving four 2s. besides the
number which, next to 2, is most frequently required as a divisor, viz., 3. In rising to
the next unit, the #1, we have again the factor introduced twice, giving six 2s. besides
the prime number which, next to 2 and 3 and their products, is most frequently required
as a divisor, viz., 5.
Thus giving the following table of the factors of the number of each of our present units
contained in the Superior units.
Farthing 2 x 2 || 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × 3 || 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 × 3 × 2 × 2 × 5
º
Penny. 2 x 2 x 3 2 × 2 × 3 × 2 × 2 × 5
Shilling. 2 × 2 × 5
12ound.
Does not this system fulfil to a greater degree than any other possible system some
of the above requirements Can this system be justly considered as accidental or
unscientific P
There must have been some valid reason for the adoption and long retention of our present
peculiar system of coins instead of the obvious plan of making the progression of coins
correspond to the progression of figures according to our Arabic notation.
What is that reason 2 Is it to be found in the above explanation, and in the varied and
infinite divisibility of the integer obtained through this system 2
ANSWER.
The coinage system of Great Britain is a combination, in one system, of the quaternary,
the duodecimal, and the vigintesimal notations. Practice may make it endurable, but I certainly
deem it unscientific, unless our decimal arithmetic shall be conceded to be a failure,
J. R. Snowden, . .
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S. "
X 4
168 DECEMAL COINAGE COMMISSION : ,
J. R. Snowden, X- Quresºrrow, -
*ś 40. Does it not necessarily follow that a system of coinage based upon a binary or
*****, *, * ~ * duodecimal scale must answer these requirements more completely than a decimal
coinage, seeing that 12 is divisible by more factors than 10, and that the quotients of
such division are again more divisible under the present than under a decimal system 2
And does not our present coinage afford peculiar facilities for continued division into
clean fractional parts 2 -
41. If in place of our present division of the £ sterling, a decimal division be substituted,
shall we not in many cases lose the power of obtaining an exact result 2
What is the 3d, the 6th, the 12th, or the 16th part of a £ sterling under decimal division
of the coinage 2
Under our present system it is exactly 6s. 8d., 3s. 4d., 1s. 8d., 1s. 3d.
Again, what is the 3d, 6th, 12th, and 16th part of a shilling in decimal coinage 2
- Under our present system it is exactly 4d., 2d., 1d., 3 farthings.
A NTSV E. R.
I refer to my former answers, especially Nos. 20 and 23, for an indication of my views
applicable to these queries.
W.
QurisTron.
42. If it be admitted that for all ordinary retail transactions, for the purposes generally of
paying and receiving, our present coinage is satisfactory, whilst the inconvenience is
found to arise when we come to processes of account-keeping and calculation, does it
not follow that our present coins ought if possible to be retained without any change,
that some decimal system of recording the various sums should be introduced, and that
we should decimalize our accounts, retaining our present coinage in all respects unchanged 2
—See No. 37.
ANTSWGR.
If the present coins of Great Britain could be retained in connexion with the decimaliza-
tion of accounts, it would certainly prove advantageous in preventing that conflict with established
prices which would, to some extent, take place under any other plan. See the reply to query
No. 12.
QUESTIon.
43. How far will this be accomplished by writing down all money values in the number of
pence of which they consist, ea. gr. :—
{}
43 s. d. Pence, Mils.
1 () () - 240 – 1,000
O 6 8 - 80 = 333 - 333
O 5 O - 60 - 250
O 3 4 - 40 F 166° 666
Jº 0 2 6 F 30 – 125
O 1 3 F 15 - 62° 5
1 18 9 465 1,937° 499
See the following answer to No. 37 of the Circular Queries by J. Ross Snowden, Esq. :—
“A. The scope of this inquiry may admit of the suggestion, that if the decimalization of
“ the British coinage were effected by adopting, in place of the pound sterling, a new
unit of the value of one hundred of the present divisions of the pound (say 100
farthings, halfpence, or pence), all prices and coins under the present system would
be exactly measured in the new unit and its parts, which would also be almost exactly
commensurable with the dollar of the United States. A unit of 100 halfpence, for
example, which might be called a dollar, would be equal to $1 013 of the United
States, an approximation to our unit so close, that the monies of the two countries,
under such a system, might be deemed substantially identical.”
6
6
& 4
&
G
&
Ç
Ç
&
&
%
6
6
.# ºf S\ºy"Iº.
If discarding the notation in pounds, shillings, and pence, all money values were written in
pence, this would be for all practical purposes a decimal system, though the unit, the penny, would
certainly be inconveniently small.
QUESTIow.
44. Does not every decimal system of accounts necessarily consist in taking the lowest money
unit, and stating in Arabic notation the cumulative amount of that coin contained in any
given sum ?
ANTSYWºłº,
This is substantially true.
QUESTION.
45. In the pound and mil scheme do we not take the farthing (changed in its value and called a
mil) as the basis of the system, and then proceed to state all values in the number of
these new farthings contained in that value *
In the penny scheme do we not take, in a similar manner, the penny as the basis, but without
any change in its value 2
* Keeping accounts in farthings reduced 4 per cent. in value, as stated by Dr. Gray (385).
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 169
In addition to this advantage, will not the statement of values by the number of pence
contained in them, rather than by the number of farthings or mils, necessarily involve
greater conciseness and simplicity of expression, there being only one fourth the number
of pence as compared with the number of farthings in any value 2
Is it not an advantage in any decimal system that it does not necessarily involve the intro-
duction of a farthing column into all accounts, seeing that all sums under a penny are
now voluntarily omitted from a sense of convenience in a very large proportion of
accounts 2 -
In those cases in which it is found desirable to introduce fractions of a penny, is there not
reason to believe that it will be found more convenient to express those fractions binarily
than in a decimal form, seeing that such has been the result of practical experience in
the United States ?
The Director of the Mint states (qu. 31). “The change has been effectual as to the use of
“dollars and cents, but not of the mil, the fraction of a cent being expressed binarily.”
AINTSW. E. R.
I have already remarked, in my reply to queries 12 and 15, that a system in which accounts
should be kept in pence, is a decimal system, and have intimated some of the grounds why a
decimal scheme, based on the penny or halfpenny, and from thence deriving a new unit of 100
times, such coin should be at least seriously considered, if it be not even entitled to a preference
over all others. The penny, however, seems too large to be the smallest coin of the scale.
The halfpenny, which is of the value of the American cent, is better adapted for the purpose.
Binary or other fractions of it would then rarely require expression or payment.
QUESTror.
46. If the penny be taken as the lowest unit of a decimal system of accounts, and if all
sums be written down in the number of pence of which they consist, will not this afford
a decimal system of accounts which may be used in conjunction with and without
involving any disturbance of our existing system of coinage, or changing the character
of the £ sterling as the great unit of account, as the basis of our system of exchange
with all the world, and as the great integer by which all our principal calculations and
estimates of property and of obligations are made 2
AINTSV. E. R.
If it is meant by this that it is proposed to retain the pound as a unit, and the penny as a
unit, I am at a loss to see how a decimal system of accounts can possibly consist with such an
intention. The pence would be written decimally, and the pounds decimally; but the progression
from one coin to the other, would be non-decimal. For the old progression of 12 pence make a
shilling, 20 shillings a pound, we substitute 240 pence make a pound. We should have, there-
fore, when adding values to use the awkward divisor 240 to convert the pence into pounds.
Nothing is gained by such a plan as this. If, however, it be meant that the £ is no longer to be
expressed in accounts, but pence only; that is, that 240 pence are to be written 240d. and not #1,
the scheme is consistent and decimal. But the inconvenience of having so small a unit as the
penny for all sums must be manifest, and a derivative unit of 100 pence (which might be termed
a ducat, being about the value of that coin) could not be dispensed with.
QUESTron.
47. The fractions of a penny would be written as fractions 3, #, #. Is this a disadvantage 2 Is
it not the case, that practically in all countries, even in those in which the decimal
system is most completely carried out, the ultimate subdivision of coins is binary 2 Is
not this shown by the fact that in France, Portugal, &c., the 5-centime piece and the
5-rei piece are the lowest coins in general use or generally expressed in accounts In
the United States is not a # cent universally expressed instead of 5 mils 2 What is the
inconvenience of writing such values as fractions 2 Are they not as easily added in this
as in a decimal form, and are they not more easily multiplied ?
A NSW. B. R.
There is no special disadvantage in writing by vulgar fractions, the parts of the smallest
coin. To diminish the necessity of expressing fractions at all, the smallest coin should not be
taken at too great a value, which the penny probably is.
QUESTrorſ.
48. This system would not include fractions of the penny otherwise than as fractions. Is it
desirable to incur the inconveniences of the gé and mil scheme, the abolition of our
present copper coinage, the abandonment especially of the penny, &c., for the purpose of
comprehending in a decimal system of notation and account-keeping the fractions of a
penny, which under the present system are so seldom required, which, when required, can
be so easily expressed as fractions, and which are in so many cases voluntarily omitted
for the sake of convenience 2
*
ANTSWIER,
See the previous answer.
QUESTron.
49. If the Decimal System is to be tried for the sake of simplicity and convenience in account-
keeping and calculation, is it not the most prudent and safe course to make the trial of it,
in the first instance at least, as a system of account only, without disturbing the
coinage 2 -
How far would this be accomplished by simply authorizing the expression of all sums of
money in the number of pence of which they consist
Y
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S.
J70 . . . . DECIMAL: COPNAGE COMMISSION: ; ; ,
J. R. Snowden, . . . . . . . . . . . awswax. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Esq., Director of With some modifications, such as I have intimated in my reply to queries 12 and 46, it
"the Mint, U.S. appears to me that a very practicable mode of deriving decimal money and accounts is here indicated.
——— . It might be provided, that the public accounts, bank notes, &c. should be expressed in a new
-4 - - - - - - - - - * * * * * * * * * * * * * money of acount denominated (we may suppose) the ducat, and in pence or hundredths of a ducat;
that the values of the coins of the old system in the new moneys of account should be as follows,
V12, 3- • * - - -
Ducats. Pence. Ducats. Pence.
Sovereign - - 2 40 Shilling - 0 12
# Sovereign - 1 20. Sixpence - 0 06
Crown - - 0 60 Fourpence - 0 04
. . . Ducats. Pence.
Half-crown - 0 30 Penny. - 0 01 Florin - O - 24
If all accounts were written and the coins noted at these values, a decimal system of money for
all useful purposes would be obtained. The relations of the coins to the new unit would not be
satisfactory to those who wish the subsidiary coins to be derived by decimal division of the unit.
But for practical ends, in effecting the greatest variety of payments with the smallest number of
pieces, the scale is an advantageous one. Nevertheless, the coinage of a piece of gold of the value
of the new unit (that is #ths of the pure gold in the sovereign) would be manifestly proper; to
which should be added in gold, its half or a fifty cent coin (equivalent to our gold dollar, and
which might be so named), and in silver, a tenpence +gths of the present shilling. Under such a
system, the old names of the coins would doubtless continue current, which is a matter of no
moment, if their decimal values be clearly understood and expressed in accounts ; and this in con-
sequence of the facility of converting old amounts into pence, and therefore into the new unit or
its decimals, would give comparatively little trouble.
VI.
QUESTIon.
50. If the decimal system of coimage recommended by the Committee of the House of
Commons (pound and mil scheme) be adopted, will it not necessarily involve the introduc-
tion of more than two monies of account P - -
Will not this necessarily give rise to difficulty, trouble, and confusion ?
JºANTSV E. Rºe
It may certainly prove inconvenient under the pound and mil system, to have the decimal part
always extended to the third place. -
QUESTrorſ.
51. Is there any country with a decimal coinage in which more than two monies of account,
are now in practical use 2
ANTSV. E. R.
In the sense referred to in the previous query (that each coin is a money of a ceount)
I should say, that in the present British coinage, there are three monies of account, the
£ s. and d. - - - -
- QUESTrorſ. . - -
52. Is it not important, with a view to the simplicity and facility in calculation which are
supposed to constitute the great recommendation of a decimal system of coinage,
that there be not more than one hundred steps between the highest and lowest monies of
account P -
ANTSV. E. R.
It is important without doubt.
QUESTIon.
53. Is not this the case in all the principal decimal coinages now in use, ex. gr., franc and
centime in France, dollar and cent in the United States, &c. 2
By an Act of Congress passed in the year 1792, it was ordained that “the money of
“account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars or units, dimes or
“tenths, cents or hundredths, and mils or thousandths.” -
Notwithstanding this long-existing state of the law, we are now told, upon the authority
of the Director of the Mint, that in that country they “have but two denominations
“ of money of account, the dollar and cent.” And further, we are told “ that
“below the cent they do not usually reckon in mils or decimals, but in binary
“fractions of a cent,” that is, in vulgar fractions.
What inferences are to be drawn from these facts 2
Do they indicate that, be the law what it may, in decimal coinage more than two
monies of account, and more than one hundred steps between the highest and the
lowest unit, are found to be practically inconvenient, and, in truth, unworkable.
And further, that the broken parts of a low unit, such as the cent in the United States
and the penny in this country, are more conveniently represented by vulgar fractions
than by decimal notation. -
Upon what other supposition can this established departure in practice from the
millesimal division of the dollar distinctly laid down by the law be accounted for 2
The annexed statement deserves attention ; it appeared in “The Times,” April 4:—
... * - “New Orleans, March 19.
“Cotton.—Sales to day, 3,500 bales, at an advance of #c., the market closing
“firm. New Orleans, middling, 13; c. to 134c. -
“Sugar has advanced #c., and sells for 10}c., to 10}c.
“Breadstuffs quiet. Pork firm. Lard advanced #c.; kegs, 143c.
“Freights.-Cotton to Liverpool, 03d, and to Havre, £c.”
The broken parts of the cent are all stated in vulgar fractions, in opposition to the
law already quoted. - e. - º
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. jºi
These fractions, #, #, #3, #, can none of them be stated accurately in tenths of a
cent. . . . . . . . - -
In the case of a rise of # cent in cotton, this, stated decimally, must be given as a rise
of 1 mil or 2 mils. There is, however, a small difference ; the first is too little, the
second is too much. What must be the effect of this unavoidable difference, small
per lb., when multiplied into the number of lbs. contained in 3,500 bales of cotton f
What is the lesson to be derived from these considerations 2
ANTSV. E. R.
I believe it to be the case. The inference to be drawn is, that we should seek in any
decimal system, to conform, if practicable, to that which has been found desirable by the ex-
perience of other countries. Still other signal advantages should not be sacrificed for this end. If
it be thought indispensable to preserve the £ unit, the fact that its decimalization would require
a notation to the three places of figures in the subdivision, should not be allowed to arrest the
introduction of decimal coinage. But if by a sacrifice of the £, it be deemed practical to introduce
a new unit of 100 pence, the fact that in such case, the subdivision will not extend (in general)
beyond the 2nd place of decimals, should have weight as an argument in favour of this plan.
... " - - QUESTIort, -
54. If with us the £ sterling be retained as the principal money of account, does not a sub-
division into one thousand parts become unavoidable, with the addition of intermediate
monies of account between the £ and the mil? - -
55. Will not this constitute an important difference between the decimal coinage of this
country and the decimal coinages now in use in other countries, much to the dis-
advantage of our decimal system as regards simplicity and convenience of calculation,
and especially of mental as distinguished from written calculation, which the middle and
lower orders are constantly called upon to perform in their daily transactions 2
- - A NTSV E. R.
See previous answer.
QUESTron.
56. Under our present system is not the high value of our integer, the £ sterling, a source
of great convenience and advantage, especially as compared with the lower value of the
franc in France and the dollar in America,
First, as facilitating the conception in the mind of large values, and expression of them
in fewer figures and with fewer words:
Second, as admitting of a greater multiplicity of clean fractional divisions f
ANswer.
I think the franc too small a unit, but as between the £ and the dollar, the latter has an
unquestionable superiority. Its division into hundredths, gives a small coin of singular adaptation
to petty transactions; better than the penny, which is rather large, or the centime, which is
too insignificant. The divisibility of the 4 into clean fractional parts, so far as it is dependent on
its compound subdivision into 20ths and 240ths, is obtained at too great a sacrifice of other
advantages, as I have already previously insisted on.
QUESTION.
57. By the adoption of the Decimal System will not this advantage be converted into a great
inconvenience 2
Will not our high integer, by necessitating the intervention of one thousand steps
between the top and the bottom of the scale, instead of one hundred steps, as in other
countries, become the source of confusion and inconvenience, and render the adoption
of the decimal scale in its most advantageous form impossible with us 2
AINTSW. E. R.
The inconvenience of three places of decimals, though it must be partially conceded, is, I
think, too much exaggerated ; but as I see no necessity of decimalizing downwards from the £,
and think it would be equally, if not more advantageous, to decimalize from the penny up to a
new unit, the argument here hinted I have no disposition to controvert.
QUESTron.
58. And further, will there not necessarily be a less number of clean fractional parts under a
system which resolves the £ sterling into one thousand mils, than under the present
system, by which it is resolved into 960 farthings, inasmuch as 1,000 admits only of
fifteen divisions without a remainder, whilst 960 admits of twenty-seven divisions without
a remainder ; and the results thus produced are again susceptible of division under the
present system, but will not be so under the decimal system ; ea. gr., the eighth part
of 960 is 120, which is again divisible by 2, 4, &c. without remainder ; but the eighth
part of 1,000 is 125, which is not susceptible of further division by 2, 4, &c. without
remainder 2
59. In commercial, trading, and banking accounts all sums less than a penny are now omitted
from considerations of convenience and saving of time in account-keeping. But under
a decimal system, which divides the # integer into mils, the fourth or mill column must
in all cases be retained, as the omission of it would involve the omission of all sums up to
23d. The effect of this will be an increase of 10 per cent. in the number of figures
used in all such accounts. Will not this increase in the number of figures used in such
accounts interfere with the brevity and simplicity of expression, and the saving of time
in account-keeping, which are anticipated from the Decimal System P
60. The Decimal Scheme now under our consideration will retain the shilling and sixpence as
fractional coins, but will it not destroy the peculiar advantage which now attends them,
namely, their convenient divisibility ? A shilling resolved into 50 mils is divisible only
by 2, 5, 10, and 25 ; but the same shilling, resolved by our present system into 48
farthings, is divisible by 2, 3, 4, 6, sº 16, and 24. - -
- - - 2
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
172 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION : .
J. R. Snowden, 61. Is it not a serious objection to the proposed scheme, that it will deprive the lower classes
Esq., JDirector of of their divisors 2, 3, 4, 8, and 16, as applicable to the coins most familiar to them, thus
the Mint, U.S. interfering with the facility with which they now obtain the third and fourth parts of
everything which they require, and to the use of which they are well accustomed;
whilst, on the other hand, it will give them the divisor 5, which is wholly useless as a
divisor of the commodities which they purchase, or of the money which they use ?
“A glance of the eye is sufficient to divide material substances into successive halves,
“fourths, eighths, and sixteenths. A slight attention will give thirds, sixths, and
“twelfths. But divisions of fifth and tenth parts are among the most difficult that
“can be performed without the aid of calculation. Among all its conveniences the
“decimal division has the great disadvantage of being itself divisible only by the
“numbers two and five. The duodecimal division, divisible by two, three, four, and
“six, would offer so many advantages over it, that while the French theory was in
“contemplation, the question was discussed, whether the reformation of weights and
“ measures should not be extended to the system of arithmetic itself, and whether
“the number twelve should not be substituted for ten as the term of the periodical
“return to the unit.”—QUINCY ADAMS's Report, p. 71.
62. The proposed scheme involves an absolute change in the value of all the lower coins.
The penny and all multiples of the penny other than six and twelve will not be
interchangeable at equivalent values with the new decimal coins ; and again, the two
lowest monies of account in the Decimal System, cents and mils, will be uninterchangeable
at equivalent value with any of the present copper coins, although these latter form
parts in odd pence of a large proportion of existing contracts, especially amongst the
lower classes, and constitute an immense proportion of the existing coinage.
From this cause it is anticipated by some persons that confusion and difficulty in their
accounts, some unavoidable loss and injustice, and a vague but dangerous impression of
more extensive injustice will arise amongst the mass of the people.
Whereas a decimal scheme founded upon the penny or the halfpenny would involve no real
change in the value of any of our coins, but would only involve some additional trouble
to the richer classes by giving a new numerical form to their high integer, the £ sterling,
but not involving any absolute change in its value.
Do you think these apprehensions well founded, and what is your opinion of the extent and
importance of this difficulty 2
63. Will not the advantage of the change be experienced, if at all, by the commercial and
higher classes,—those who keep extensive accounts, and enter into larger calculations,—
and not by the lower classes, who usually employ the smaller coins, and are familiar
principally with the penny and its multiples and subdivisions 2
64. In connexion with the foregoing considerations, it has been suggested that a vast majority
of the smaller money transactions in a community are not transactions of written account
at all ; that they arise out of retail purchases made in the market or the shop, the
calculations connected with which are necessarily performed in the head, and are not
reduced to writing. That for these purposes, namely, adaptation to the existing division
of our weights and measures, for distinctness of mental conception and facility of
calculation in the head, our existing coinage is better adapted than a decimal coinage ;
whilst the supposed superiority of a decimal coinage for purposes of written accounts and
calculations is not applicable to such transactions, and would not prove beneficial to the
great mass of the people with whom such transactions are of constant daily occurrence.
How far do these considerations constitute a just ground of objection to the introduction
of a decimal coinage 2 or what reply can be made to them 2
AIMSVIER,
These queries furnish arguments only against a decimal system for Great Britain, based
on the pound and mil. They must be admitted to have considerable force, but I consider them
altogether outweighed by the convenience which must attend any system of decimal notation,
even if it be less good than another which might be selected. To the plan of decimal coinage and
accounts based on the penny (to which I refer in the answer to query 49), the arguments have no
weight whatever, but in fact lend support to that system.
QUESTron.
65. Looking to the considerations alluded to in the preceding questions, the superior facility of
division possessed by 12, the further very convenient and almost unlimited facility of
division arising from our peculiar mode of reckoning the £ integer into shillings, pence,
and farthings ; the harmony which exists between our fractional coins and our weights
and measures, the double advantages in facility of calculation to be obtained from decimal
coins unaccompanied by decimal weights and measures, and the brevity and convenience
of expression, oral and written, which attaches to our present coins ;-duly weighing, on
the other hand, the advantage of assimilating the progression of coins to that of figures,
the simplicity and facility in keeping accounts and making calculations, the saving of time
in education and of labour by the substitution of simple for the proverbial inconvenience
of compound arithmetic, which it is expected will arise from the introduction of decimal
coinage ;- -
Is it on the whole prudent to make the experiment 2 Is the result sufficiently certain P Will
the increase of convenience be sufficiently great and fairly diffused over all the classes
upon which the inconvenience of the change must fall 2 Or must we come to the con-
clusion that the advantage of the change is neither so important nor so well ascertained
as to justify the disturbance of our existing system, and of the habits and computations
founded upon it 2
AINTSV%. E. R.
The considerations referred to in the latter part of this query far more than counterbalance,
in my judgment, those presented in the former, and render a reform in the British system of com-
pound money notation eminently prudent and wise. As I have already stated, I believe any
decimal coinage preferable to such a compound system ; but I am of opinion, that the plan of
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 173
selecting a new unit of the value of 100 of the present smaller recognized coins (say 100 pence)
would present the greatest amount of advantages. In such a case, all the old prices and coins
from a penny up could be exactly expressed in the new unit and hundredths, and the facility
acquired under the compound system of converting all sums into pence, would reduce to a
minimum the inconvenience of passing from the old to the new notation. It is not supposed that
the mental conception of a new unit equal to 100 of a coin so well fixed to the habits as the penny
can be difficult ; certainly not more so than it will be to the humbler classes to embrace a new
unit (the mil) for the expression of all sums under sixpence, abandoning the penny to which they
are most accustomed as a representative of values. The 100 pence coin, while presenting these
advantages, considered simply in reference to Great Britain, will probably prove especially
satisfactory to the immense proportion of other countries accustomed to the dollar, our own
included ; since it is almost exactly commensurate by that coin, two dollars being very nearly one
ducat of 100 pence. The commercial and Social intercourse between Great Britain and America
entitles this consideration to great weight.
- J. R. S.
(Communicated by Lord Overstone.)
JAMES YATES, Esq.
Answer to Question 1.—Yes.
2. The use of our present system of coins causes dreadful loss of time, makes us liable to
frequent mistakes in calculation, is quite insufficient for making exact payments in purchases of
small amount, is to an enormous extent rejected in larger transactions, is ill adapted for computing
per-centages, averages, and prices of articles sold by wholesale, estranges us from foreigners, and, as
long experience shows, does not recommend itself, by any advantages of its own, even to the
distant dependencies of Great Britain, and is much more unlikely to find any acceptance in countries
unconnected with Great Britain.
3. My last answer shows that I consider them very defective and inconvenient in both of these views.
4. The primary purpose of coins is to pay for articles purchased. They no doubt facilitate
accounts and calculation, but no one would think of keeping accounts unless he had first made
payments by the aid of coins. Also, in many countries, viz., Portugal, Brazil, Hamburg, &c., the
monies of account are either quite imaginary or they are to a greater or less extent independent of
the coinage. I therefore consider coins, viewed in reference to their primary purpose, as either
multiples or “fractional subdivisions" of the integer, intended to be used in buying and selling,
which is in fact nothing but an improved kind of barter. At the same time I think it of the
greatest importance that there should be a correspondence between coins and monies of account,
and that the coins should bear to one another such relations as may make them serve, in the best
possible manner, as “instruments of calculation.”
5. I do not think there is the least occasion to sacrifice the one purpose to the other; but on the
contrary, I believe that under a good system, both purposes would be attained, and that the pursuit
of either would aid the attainment of the other. If a priority can in any sense be given to the
one over the other, I think the use of coins for retail payments ought to have the first consideration,
because they are of the first necessity.
6. Certainly. The coinage is chiefly concerned in buying and selling by retail. A good
coinage ought to enable us to “adjust with readiness and simplicity the multiplied variety
of small payments ;” but our present system of coins does not accomplish this object. The
division of the coins by 20, 12, and 4, is inconvenient, and is consequently very much avoided
in practice. In retail transactions the use of the pound is generally rejected, reckonings and
statements of prices being made in shillings and pence, even when the value exceeds that of a
pound. In proof of this, set out to walk from Tyburn Gate along Oxford Street, Holborn,
Newgate Street, Cheapside, Cornhill, and so on to the London Docks and Blackwall. Look at
the prices of articles, as Inarked in shop windows; examine the printed and lithographed letters
circulated by tradesmen; go into the shops and attend to the questions of the customers, and the
answers of the shopmen; in short, use every possible way of learning whether the pound is a
necessary denomination in these transactions. You will find that the pound is not mentioned or
even thought of in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred. Nearly all the statements and compu-
tations, previously to the act of expressing them on paper, are by the use of shillings and pence.
Having paid some attention to this matter, I have remarked, as the general result of my obser-
vations, that watchmakers, jewellers, and silversmiths, and, to a small extent, musicsellers and
furniture dealers, use the pound, but no other trades, except that wine merchants use it for large
quantities. They sell port at so many pounds and shillings per pipe, but at so many shillings and
pence per dozen or per bottle; thus, the practice of retail traders seems to show that in general
they find no advantage in the division by twenty. They find the gold sovereign convenient as a
substitute for twenty shillings, but as a money of account they do better without it ; and I
believe they would find it easier and simpler to keep their accounts, if the pound were banished
from the columns of their books. Here is a bill for two quarters of oats, expressed “as the Act
directs,” but it is manifest that the reduction to pounds is perfectly useless. Mr. Kent, if left to
himself, prefers saying that the price of a quarter of oats is 35s, not ll. 15s. ; he only reduces the
amount of his bill 70s. to pounds, for the sake of complying with the method which law and
custom prescribe in this country.
“ Bought of GEORGE KENT, Highgate.
.# S. d.
2 qrs, oats, 35s. - - º - 3 10 O
So much for the higher denomination, the pound.
Let us now consider the lower, viz., shillings, pence, and farthings. To judge of their adap-
tation to our requirements I would propose a walk, as before, from Tyburn to Blackwall; and I
will include in my inquiries, not only poor persons and those of thrifty habits, but also luxurious
persons and fashionable ladies. Our present coinage does not enable them to get what they want,
and to pay for it honestly; but in innumerable cases they must either take more of an article than
J. R. Snowden,
Esq., Director of
the Mint, U.S.
James Yates, Esq.
Y 3
{f}{4 .' ' ' (??", DEGIMAL COINAGE GöMMISSION # * '.
•
.*
mes.Yātes, Ésq.
t * ---º t * i 3.
*
;
(they want, or pay for what they want more than its just price. They commonly practise the
§
latter alternative. Suppose, for example, any one wishes to purchase as follows:–
S. Cº. S. d.
1 oz. of tea, at 3 6 per lb. º - ... O 2;
2 , coffee, at 1 7 55 - º º 0 23
# lb. Scotch barley, at 0 2%. , tº - º 0 0;
13 yards of ribbon, at 0.7% per yard - *- º O 9;
The individual in question cannot fulfil his wishes by the employment of the coins now in use;
for the half-farthings, though coined, cannot be obtained, certainly not without a loss by carriage
and correspondence, which makes the use of them impracticable.
Besides the impossibility of paying for fractional quantities, as in the preceding examples, about
300 separate articles might be enumerated, which are manufactured so cheaply, that they might be
sold in any quantities at the rate of 10 for a penny, or even a considerably greater number for a
penny, and so as to yield at this low price a profit of at least 100 per cent, to the retail dealer. I
believe the introduction of a coinage capable of being used in such cases would be a great blessing
to the community, and would not only add immensely to the innocent enjoyments of the family-
circle, but would be very favourable to habits of sobriety, decency, and prudent economy. To
explain my meaning, I will take the actual case of a poor, but decent and respectable family in
Suffolk, only observing that similar examples might be produced by thousands from all parts of the
United Kingdom.
“Weekly earnings and expenditure of the family of Robert Crick, a farm-labourer of Lavenham,
Suffolk, as furnished by Mr. Scott, the Relieving Officer of the Union – *
INCOME. ExPENDITURE.
Family. - Age. Earnings.
Ily 9 S. g s. d.
Robert Crick - - 42 9 O Bread - º wº – 9 O
Wife - º º 40 O 9 Potatoes º - º 1 O
Boy * * - 12 2 O Rent tº G- - 1 2
Boy - - º 11 1 O Tea º gº - O 2
Boy - - - 8 1 () Sugar - sº º 0 3}
Girl - tº mº 6 . - * gº - º º à
B tº - - 4 U16 - º -
oy Thread, &c. º tºp º O ..”
Candles - tº- tº- O 3
Salt tºº º - - 0 0}
Coal and Wood tº º O 9
Butter º - tº 0 4}
Cheese - º - O 3
Total earnings º º - 13 9 Total Expenditure - - 13 9°
We may suppose these individuals to experience the following or similar desires; with our
present coinage they cannot hope to satisfy them, however proper and innocent, or even com-
mendable. Robert Crick wants a brass-headed nail to hang a picture on the wall of his cottage; his
wife wants starch, or soda for her washing. The eldest boy wants to sow mustard and cress. The
second wants a pen, an envelope, a sheet of paper, some ink, or a few wafers, to write a letter.
The third wants a slate-pencil. The girl wants hooks and eyes, a dozen of pins, a needle, a stay-
lace, a fastening for her boots, or a little thread or tape. The youngest urchin wants paper or
string, that he may fly a kite. For these, and many other purposes, a farthing would be too great
an expenditure; and it appears to me that a wise and humane legislation would provide for such
cases in this country, as they are provided for in other countries.
In the Polytechnic Institution, Regent-Street, there is a case, exhibiting a collection of articles
which are adapted to be sold for a centime.
7. Yes.
8. It is not impossible. Under the present system we have the following 15 coins —
£. s. d. S. d. d.
Gold 2 O O Silver 5 O Copper I
I () O 2 6 1%
O 10 O 2 O 4-
1 O of
O 6 0;
O 4
O 3
Compare with this the coinage belonging to the metrical system, as now used with great and
acknowledged benefit in the western parts of continental Europe. It contains 19 pieces, including
the Leopold, which, though lately demonetized in Belgium, may be continued in the list on account
of the very general currency of the English sovereign for 25 francs.
fr. cts.
Gold º - 100°
33 - º - 80°
35 - --> - - 50°
22 tº- º - 40°
55 ſº- tº- - 25°
53 º tº - 20-
2 3 - º - || O'
Either gold or silver - 5’
Silver - - - 2-50
52 - º - 2.
22 - tº - 1:
33 º - º •50
35 tºº {-} •25
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 175
er
Silver, copper, or nickel, - 20 James Yates, Esq.
Copper or nickel - 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . *
. Copper ºn - - “05 * * * s • - - -aº --- * * *----, -
22 tº - - "O3
52 tºg tºº ſº •O2
55 wº - • *Ol
The comparison proves that if we are to judge by the actual practice, the Decimal System has
the advantage in this respect. - -
9. The number which admits of division into the greatest number of aliquot parts is 60;
and this was used in ancient times for the purpose and perhaps for the reason in question.
It is now used in Germany, 60 kr. = 1 florin. It divides into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20,
30, 60. Twelve has to some extent the same advantage, its divisions being 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12.
On the other hand ten has only four corresponding parts, 1, 2, 5, 10. But ten has obtained the
preference in modern times, as the ruling number in measures, weights, and coins, at least in the
metrical system, because it coincides with the common arithmetic now adopted by all civilized
nations. If this arithmetic were founded on the number 12; in other words, if the numbers, as
arranged in columns in any computation, instead of denoting units in the first column to the right-
hand, tens in the second, hundreds in the third, thousands in the fourth, and so on, denoted so
many dozens in the second column, squares of dozens in the third column, cubes of dozens in the
fourth, and all the higher powers of dozens in succession, the same argument, which is now employed
to recommend the Decimal System, would then recommend the duodecimal. This argument was
used by Jefferson, A.D. 1784, with a view to the improvement of the United States coinage. It
has been continually reiterated on both sides of the Atlantic, and I think has lost nothing of its
force. The reasoning I refer to as originally employed in support of decimal coinage is contained
in Appendix No. III. of my Narrative of the Origin, &c. &c., and is here inserted,—-
“The most easy ratio of multiplication and division is that of 10. Every one knows the facility
of decimal arithmetic. Every one remembers that when learning money arithmetic he used to
be puzzled with adding the farthings, taking out the fours and carrying them on; adding the pence,
taking out the twelves, and carrying them on ; adding the shillings, taking out the twenties, and
carrying them on ; but when he came to the pounds, where he had only tens to carry forward, it
was easy and free from error. The bulk of mankind are schoolboys through life. Certainly, in
all cases where we are free to choose between easy and difficult modes of operation, it is most
rational to choose the easy.” ©
During the era of Napoleon, the question was fully and attentively considered by many who
were better judges than he was of such matters. Among them were practical men as well as
theorists, men of business as well as philosophers. Though quite aware of the advantage of the
number 12, from its divisibility by 3 without remainder, they preferred 10, because it was suited
to the established arithmetic.
&
K
&
& 4
G
G
& 4
Ç
6
&
6
10. I think I have shown, in the answer to Question 8, that the franc and centime system of coins
admits of as many fractional divisions as are ever required. Indeed, the divisions above enumerated
are found to be rather more than necessary, a proof of which is that the 5th, 9th, and 13th are
disused or demonetized in some countries, though continued in others.
11. I cannot see the force or truth of Napoleon's remark. Even admitting with him the supe-
riority of the number 12, that does not show any advantage in 20 and 4, which are the connecting
links between the pound and the shilling, and the penny and the farthing. As regards binary
systems, it is to be observed that the metrical system of measures, weights, and coins is throughout
binary as well as decimal. This is exemplified by the table of coins (answer to Question 8). The
inventors of the system had this principle in view, and adopted the rule that each of the principal
decimally related quantities should have its double and its half denoted and expressed by separate
weights and coins.
I will here observe (without referring to Lord Overstone), that it is not very consistent in the
opponents of the metrical system to quote the authority of Napoleon as condemnatory of it, and
at the same time to assert, that he forced it on the Swiss, the Piedmontese, the Belgians, and other
nations, which adopted it. I believe the fact was, that being never friendly to it, he did not promote
its reception even in France, much less in the adjoining countries.
12. Not approving of the pound and mil scheme, I take the liberty of translating these
English sums into francs and centimes, and I think it will be obvious at a glance which system is
more easy for conception, recollection, and addition mentally.
7s.6d. = 90 pence = 9 francs.
2s. 6d. = 30 , = 3 32
1s. 3d. = 15 , = 1°50 ,
Os. 9d. = 9 , = 0.90 ,
12s. 0d. = 144 , = 14:40
Also, to halve the figures in the last column is the work of a moment. The argument does not
here require that any notice should be taken of the difference between 1a, and 10 centimes.
According to my view, as I have always objected to three places of decimals, the next questior
will be how to reckon 7, 8, or 9 yards at 1.f. 50c. or 2f 50c., and my answer would be, that it is
far easier than the English method, and that this is proved by every day's experience in the marke
and everywhere else.
As to the next question. I admit that the metrical system fails in respect to the division by 3,
its only weak point. (Respecting 3 as a divisor, see further observations in the answers to
Questions 36, 37, 38.) - ſº º
Price's Patent Candles, if we had the metrical system, would be advertised in 6 kilogramme
boxes at 12 francs each, which gives 2 francs per kilogramme, as seen at a glance, I will endeavour,
Y 4
176 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
James Yates, Esq.
as before, to convert the next table into terms of the metrical system, and, I think, the advantage
will be in favour of this system as regards ease, clearness, and simplicity.
1 metre or kilogramme 3 francs, payable in 2 coins.
# 25 32 = 1 - 50 33 22 2 3)
# 55 35 = 1 53 23 1 > t
} 55 93 – • 75 33 39 2 ”
% 25 59 F "60 , 33 2 ”
# 39 35 F. * 50 35 59 l 33
Tw 39 - 39 - * 30 , 35 2 59
Tº 39 35 - • 25 92 39 l 55
I'm 32 25 F. • 20 2, 32 1 »
gº 53 53 F. * 15 25 53 2 33
gº = 10 ”, 1
e 25 39 3 * 29
The gradations are the same as in Lord Overstone's table, except that $ is inserted, and #
omitted. It will be found that the payments may be made with a smaller number of coins on this
plan than on his Lordship's.
14. In making the comparison I would, as before, put francs and centimes for the English
denominations, reckoning 1 franc = 10d. for the sake of easy comparison ; and because the
argument is not affected by it. I put a space between francs and centimes, as is done in the left-
hand column of £ s. d. and omit the cypher on the right hand.
francs.
24 O
21 2
18 6
1 1 7
7 5
6 7
5 8
4. 4.
2 8
l 7
104. 4.
1. The number of figures used, 28, is, of course, the same as in Lord Overstone's right-hand
column. -
2. The conciseness, ditto. -
3. I think the franc and centime system much the easiest. I consider amounts above 100 unfit
for mental conception without a break or division such as that between francs and centimes.
4, 5. I am of opinion that mental reckoning by hundreds, as in the middle column, or that of
mils, is next to an impossibility. Consequently, the franc and centime system is most favour-
able to accuracy in copying or calling over.
6. With respect to interchangeability, I find the pound and mil quite as difficult as the franc
and centime system. I am more puzzled when I try to convert shillings, pence, and
{arthings into florins, cents, and mils, than when I convert them into francs and centimes.
Nevertheless, I should advisc and expect, that tables would be commonly used for this
purpose during the period of transition. -
Take £4 7s. = 104 °40 francs. Then this sum divided by 3, 4, 6, and 12, gives 34.80 francs,
26 10 francs, 17°40 francs, and 8.70 francs. Nothing can be simpler and more convenient.
15. Again, taking £1 = 24 francs, it is divisible into 11 aliquot parts, just as under the two
English systems. Carrying the comparison to the lowest subdivision, the result is, that ,
= 3 francs, is not divisible by 8, 24, or 40; but that it is divisible by 25, 50, 100, and 150,
which cannot be used as divisors without remainder in the other systems, and that ºr = 2.40 fr.
is not divisible by 32, but it is divisible by 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 80, and 120, of which the
other methods do not admit.
Also, with respect to the number of figures requisite for stating the fractions of a £, the franc
and centime system is on a par with the others. Thus,—
fr. C.
24, -
# = 12 •-
# = }
= 3
TXU’ F. 1 2O
53 40
19 figures.
16. I cannot think it desirable, because, if carried into effect, it would be done without reason,
being merely the result of idleness, ignorance, and prejudice. Considering what has been done
and is doing in many other countries, I think such a course would be disgraceful ; and, if it were
carried into effect, it would retard more extensive and substantial improvements.
17. The two systems cannot be properly disconnected.
18. Our systems are no more binary than the metrical system, which is, and always was, per-
vaded throughout by binary arrangements. See answers to Questions 11, 21, 24, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37.
19. A Decimal Coinage will be under these circumstances better adapted for calculations in
regard to the coinage itself, or in adding and subtracting money; but not, beyond this, for
reckoning the sums due for goods in such retail transactions.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 177
20. The facility would be lost by decimalizing the coinage only, but increased beyond expression
by adopting the Metrical System, in which measures, weights, and coins, are all decimally an
most distinctly related. Let me be allowed to introduce here the opinions of Mons. Michel
Chevalier in his letters to me, which I have inserted in my Narrative, page 35 ;-
x. April 23, 1855.
“I heartily congratulate you, dear sir, on your efforts to procure the introduction of the
* Metrical System into your great nation. You would thus render a signal service to your country-
“ men, who would see all their calculations simplified thereby, as if by enchantment. It would,
‘ moreover, be a marked approximation among civilized nations; for the adoption of the Metrical
System by Great Britain would decide the question of its adoption by the rest of the world.”
“DEAR SIR, June 22, 1855.
“I have received, through your kindness, the Morning Chronicle of the 13th instant,
‘ containing the discussion (in the House of Commons) on the Decimal Coinage. I observe that
“ Mr. J. B. Smith has distinguished himself by the comprehensiveness of his views. He has
‘ rightly conceived, that the reform would signify little, if it were confined to money, and that it
&
&
G
&
&
&
James Yates, Esq.
“ ought to include weights and measures, so as to cement the union and harmony of civilized
“ nations.”
21. Under the Metrical System the ordinary transactions of the market would be carried on
with infinitely greater simplicity and convenience. Take Lord Overstone's data, using francs and
centimes, and supposing lb. to mean half a kilogramme.
lb. fr. C. lb. fr. C. lb. C.
Then 1 = 4 () or, 1 = 1 60 or, 1 = 16
# = 2 0 # = 0 80 # = '08
} = 1 0 + = 0 40 } = '04
| = 0 50 * = 0 20 # = ′ 02
Th; = 0 25 +H = 0 10 Tº = ′ 01
22. Even the pound and mil system would secure considerable advantages in these respects ;
but the adoption of the metrical system, not only in money, but in weights and measures also,
would secure infinite advantages in all these respects.
23. I fully admit the truth and force of Mr. J. B. Smith's statement in this passage.
24. The inconvenience of the partially decimal system of the United States arises from the
circumstance that their unit, the dollar, is much too high, obliging them to use cents and 4 cents.
In the answers to former questions (viz. Questions 11 and 18), I have shown that the metrical
system provides for the division into halves, quarters, &c., as well as into twentieths, tenths, fifths, &c.
25. Lord Ashburton must have known that sixpenny-pieces and threepenny-pieces are not more
abundant in this country than half-francs and quarter-francs on the Continent.
26. I agree with Sir J. Herschel that “a Decimal System of weights and measures, as well as
of coins, ought to form part of the same integral system.”
27. Thinking, with Sir J. Herschel and Mr. J. B. Smith, that “the adoption of a decimal
system of weights and measures is essential to the efficiency and usefulness of a Decimal Coinage,"
I am of opinion that the proper course is first to determine upon a system, including weights and
measures as well as coins, and then to proceed with the whole or any part of the system as quickly
as possible, leaving particulars to depend on circumstances. Dr. Otto Hubner, of Berlin, a most
eminent authority, is disposed to think that weights should be taken first, then coins, and measures
last of all. See his letter in the Appendix to my “Narrative,” p. 41.
Dr. Hodgkin, one of the Council of the International Association for obtaining a uniform
Decimal System of measures, weights, and coins, who has long attended to the subject, and has
had extensive opportunities of observation, wrote me the following letter previously to a meeting
of the Council :-
“I am very sorry that I am quite unable to be at the meeting to-day. I therefore write a hasty
note to express my strong hope that nothing may induce the meeting to give sanction or encourage-
ment to any half measures, or in fact to any plan short of that of adopting the metric system, as
authorized in many states on the Continent. The arrival at this may be gradual,—money first,
weights next, and so on ; but we must have no other final aim. Those who have proved the
advantages and facilities of the French system can arrive at no other conclusion, and must deprecate
our being obliged to unlearn our present system, and learn a new one having only limited advantages
to recommend it.”
28. I quite admit the force of this argument.
29. Here I will only observe that Mr. Snowden's remarks confirm what I said before (Question
24), that the United States unit is much too high. In France, and other countries adopting the
metrical system, the centime is not only “endured,” but considered a great convenience, and used
every day to an immense extent.
30, 31. I think that this result will follow, as stated by Mr. Slater, but without the slightest
inconvenience; rather the contrary.
32. If one choice must be made before the other, the natural and proper course is to fix the
weights and measures first, and then to base the coinage on the weights. See answer to Question 27.
33. With great respect and regard for Dr. Peacock, it appears to me that he was quite in error
with regard to the extent in which the metrical system admits of bisection. I have already
expressed my opinion that in this it is not at all deficient. I will now further add, that the myria-
metre admits of bisection eight times, yielding by this process 39 metres, 62 millimetres, and
1 half-millimetre; and that the metrical ton admits of bisection ten times, yielding 976 grammes,
562 milligrammes, and 1 half-milligramme.
Metres. Millimetres.
28 = 256 39 . O625 X 256 = 1 myriametre.
Grammes. Milligrammes.
210 = 1,024 976 562.5 × 1,024 = 1 ton.
Z
178. …, DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION: , , ,
... • * : . -
James Yates, Esq., 4 * taken the highest and lowest denominations, commonly used both in measures and
* - " " weights. - - - - - -
34, 35. I doubt whether any arithmetical tendencies can be properly called instinctive, nor do I
understand the meaning of the term in this application. There is a tendency to binary division and
multiplication, not only as the most simple but the most frequently needed, and also because it is
by much the easiest, especially in division; it is much more difficult to divide any space, article, or
quantity into 3, 6, 9, or 12 parts, than into 2, 4, 8, or 16. Nevertheless, there is so much irre-
gularity, and apparent absence of principle in the actual weights, measures, and coins of all nations,
with the exception of those which have adopted the decimal principle, that it seems scarcely ,
possible to establish any rule upon the actual practice.
In answer to the last question, I observe again, that in the metrical system, the divisions are
throughout binary, as well as decimal. See Answers to Questions 11, 18, 24, 33.
36, 37. To say, as is said in these extracts, that “the Decimal Currency admits of but one
aliquot division, into halves,” is a manifest error. It is divided into fifths. - -
This assertion of Mr. Leavitt's argues, that his knowledge of Decimal Coinage was at least very
imperféct, probably confined to his own country, in which I have reason to think the fifth of the
dollar, or piece of 20 cents is disused, or very little known. His assertions will not apply
to francs and centimes.
I do not reply to the subsequent queries, because they are directed against either the United
States system or the pound and mil system, both of them very defective, and which I should be
sorry to see attempted in this country; but the subject of the divisibility of the coinage, or of its
fitness for being divided by 2, 3, 5, and their doubles and trebles, occupies so important a place
both in Lord Overstone's questions and in the Preliminary Report of the Royal Commissioners,
that I am very desirous of making an accurate comparison of our present English coinage with the
coinage of the Metrical System in this respect. Both coinages are exhibited complete in my
answer to Question 8.
. Mr. Robert Shaw's and Dr. J. E. Gray's answers to the Questions of the Royal Commissioners
(Nos. 256–265,282–286,407,) indicate that they labour under the prevailing error of the opponents
of the Metrical System in this country of supposing that that system does not provide for binary
division. By referring to the writings of Prieur and others, who invented and explained the
Metrical System, it will be found that they were fully aware of the great importance to be attached
to division into halves, quarters, &c.; and it is impossible to examine any series of measures,
weights, or coins, belonging to this system without seeing the admirable provision which is made
for such modes of calculation. I have already (Question 33) produced examples in the case of
weights and linear measures, showing that the bisection may be carried even to the 10th degree.
I will now compare the coins so as to show their relative divisibility not only by 2, but by 3 and
by 5:—
W. Sums connected by binary division in the English coinage,_
.# S. d. s. d. d.
2 O O 2 O 4
1 O O 1 () 2 (2 coins)
10 O 6 l
5 () 3 #
2 6 1% #
1 3 (2 coins) # (2 coins) #
7# (2 coins) # (2 coins)
3# (3 coins)
- - 1% (4 coins)
In all 22 sums, represented by 32 coins.
1b. Sums connected by binary division in the Metrical Coinage,
fr. c. fr. c. fr. c. C. C.
100 8O 2 * 20 *02
50 40 - T * I () "O1
25 20 * 50 * 05
12 50 (2 coins 1() * 25
6 25 (3 º 5
2 50
1 25 (2 coins)
In all 21 sums, represented by 25 coins.
Thus the halves are represented in proportion by a smaller number of coins in the Metrical than
in the English System, showing that of the two systems the Metrical accords more with the binary
division. -
2a. Sums connected by ternary divisions in the English coinage,_
.# S. d. gé s. d. s, d. S. d.
2 O O 1 O O 10 O 5 O
13 4 (4 coins) 6 8 (4 coins) 3 4 (3 coins) 1 8 (3 coins)
2 6 2 l 6 3d.
10 (2 coins) 8 (2 coins) 4. 2 (2 coins) 1a.
In all 18 sums, represented by 31 coins.
2 b. Only 2 sums are thus connected in the other system, each having its proper coin, viz., 3c.
and le.
3 a. Sums connected by quinary division in the English coinage,
gé s. d. .# S. d. - S. d.
2 O () | O O 10 O
8 0 (3 coins) 4 0 (2 coins) 2 O
5 () 2 6
1 O 6
In all 10 sums, represented by 13 coins.
ANswers To LoRD overston E's QUESTIONs. i’9
3 b. Sums connected by quinary division in the Metrical coinage,_
fr. c. .fr. c. fr. c.
100 8() 50
2O 16 (3 coins) 10
4. (2 coins), 3'20 (3 coins) 2 -
‘80 (3 coins) 0°64 (4 coins) - ‘40 (2 coins) . .
* 16 (3 coins) f 08 (3 coins)
fr. c. fr. c. - fr. c. C.
40 25 2° 50 * 25
8 (3 coins) 5 * 50 * 05
1 60 (3 coins) I “10 . * Ol
'32 (3 coins) * 20 * O2 -
- '04 (2 coins)
In all 30 sums, represented by 52 coins. *
The following summary shows the result of the comparison —
English Coinage. Metrical Coinage.
Sums. Coins. ..' Sums. Coins.
Binary tºº *E= 22 32 21 25
Ternary tºp tº 18 31 2. 2
Quinary - &º 10 13 30 52
50 76 - 53 '79
It appears that for binary division the metrical, or franc and centime system, has the advantage over
the English, inasmuch as it expresses, in proportion, the same variety of halves, quarters, &c. by a
smaller number of coins. In divisions by 3 the English coinage has a decided superiority in con-
sequence of its duodecimal element; but this is compensated in favour of the franc and centime
system by its having three times as many quinary divisions. On the whole the facilities for division
are rather greater in using francs and centimes than in the English method.
38. I trust that I have already sufficiently answered these questions. Only one remark occurs.
I am not sure that, next to 2, the number most frequently required as a divisor is 3. But I
have admitted (Question 12,) that the weak point of the metrical system, and perhaps of all Decimal
Systems, is that the number 3 does not especially suit it. Hence the use of it will be avoided, and
this may be done without much inconvenience. In an immense multitude of cases, 3 will divide
without a remainder under this system as well as any other. See Example in Question 12.
39. In this question, Lord Overstone asks : “can this system be justly considered as accidental
or unscientific.” I think it probable that by going back to the days of Charlemagne, we might dis-
cover traces of the origin of £ s. d., or librae, solidi, denarii, and find some evidence that 20 and 12
were adopted as divisors on account of their obvious convenience, and because experience showed
their utility. Also the science of arithmetic was then cultivated even by Charlemagne himself. It
was one of the seven liberal arts. No one could take the degree of M.A. without it. Boethius
was as much studied then as Cocker and Walkinghame in our time. I think it probable, therefore,
that the alleged considerations in favour of the division of the pound troy of silver into twenty
equal pieces of silver, called soldi or sous, because they were used to pay the soldiers, and on
similar occasions, and of the soldus into 12 deniers or denarii, were present to the thoughts of the
financiers of that day. But I apprehend that the origin of the farthing was less scientific. The
penny or denarius was actually cut into two, and each half was again cut into two, and these rude
masses of copper were the halfpence ànd farthings of that day. This was no doubt accounted
clever at the time, but can it come into competition with the franc and centime system, now so
extensively substituted in its place 2
42, 43. I have no objection to use the present coins, until they are either worn out or exchanged
without loss, (which I think might be done) for the coins of the franc and centime system. But I
think it undesirable to retain them longer than they are wanted.
Supposing our present coins to continue, the expression of them by pence only would be very
bad, that being too low a unit. By far the best way is to have two denominations for all ordinary
purposes, and two places of decimals, no vulgar fractions.
The pound sterling as a money of account, might be dismissed as perfectly useless; but the
original pound might be restored, as it is now in France, the Kingdom of Sardinia, and other
countries, where the franc and centime system prevails. Thinking a distinct name desirable for
this splendid coin, which is equal in value to 100 francs, or exactly a pound, or half kilogramme of
silver, I have proposed, in my communication to the Institute of Civil Engineers, to call it a Royal,
(see the Scheme of Coinage, page 14). If we were to adopt the franc and centime system, this
coin would be useful for forming stores of gold, as in banks, and for remittances to distant countries,
whilst the money of account, corresponding to it, would be extremely convenient in expressing
large sums of money. Thus the pound might be restored to its original value, and resume its
ancient position with great advantage to all parties.
44. This is not the case with the franc and centime system. The franc is the unit of value.
The “lowest money unit” is the centime. Amounts are often expressed in francs without any
notice of centimes, either verbally or in writing (see example in the answers to Questions 8, 36, 37).
The franc and centime system also requires an indication showing which figures denote francs, and
which centimes, not a mere row of figures to be read off in one and the same denomination from
beginning to end.
45. In reference to one of the questions, “omission of sums under a penny,” I would observe
that under the franc and centime system this convenience would be secured by omitting centimes.
The modern degraded pound being discarded and the original pound restored, possibly under such
a name as Royal, large accounts might be stated in royals and francs, although it is to be observed
that the secondary units employed by the French in speaking of large sums are far higher. They
speak of mille francs, millions, or milliards. I think the annexation of vulgar to decimal fractions
James Yates, Esq.
, º ºsºsºsº
Z 2
180 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION :
James Yates, Esq.
\
though practised in Russia and Holland as well as the United States, is very awkward and inconve-
nient. This ought by all means to be avoided. The Americans, the Russians, and the Dutch were
driven to it by adopting too high a unit.
46. This appears to me quite impracticable.
47. The vulgar fractions here referred to are obviously inconsistent with the uniform application
of common arithmetic as explained in the answer to Question 9. The present Emperor, having
called in the centimes and two-centime pieces with the cap of liberty, advertised for a new coinage
by contract. The offer was taken by Messrs. Ralph Heaton and Sons, of Birmingham, in
March 1855, who issued 31 tons of single centimes=31 millions of pieces, and the same weight of
double centimes=15} millions of pieces. But great quantities of the older coins remain in circu-
lation. It is therefore quite a mistake to suppose that in France the sou, or five-centime piece, is
the lowest coin in general use. Single centimes and two-centime pieces are used every day in
transactions with the Government, as well as in shopping, marketing, and affairs of common life.
51. I think not, where the decimal computation is established.
52. I think it not only important but quite essential with respect to the principal monies of
account. I would only observe, in reference to my answer to Question 45, that it may be matter
for consideration, whether instead of denoting large sums as the French do by such terms as
“milliards,” “millions,” and “millefrancs,” it will be better to take a high secondary unit, such as
the “royal,” or piece of 100 francs. This would be analogous to the practice in regard to weights
and measures. The kilogramme is become by practice almost as much a unit as the gramme, the
hectare as the are. The litre is the unit for liquors, the hectolitre assumes the character of a unit
for grain.
53. Yes.
“What inferences are to be drawn from these facts P” The inferences I draw are, that the division
into mils is very inconvenient and difficult to work, and also that the dollar is too high a unit.
The 1,000th part of a dollar is too small, and the 100th part too large for the lowest coin.
56. I have already expressed my opinion on these points (see Questions 42, 43, 45, 52), viz.,
that as respects high values it would have been far better if the pound had retained its original
value, equivalent to 100 francs; that at its present value it is convenient as a coin equivalent to
25 francs, or nearly so, but of no use as a money of account; that the clear fractional divisions are
as numerous under the franc and centime system as under our present system. I have also
referred to the habit of the French of expressing large amounts by “mille francs,” “millions,” and
“milliards,” which practice, if found insufficient, they can alter with great facility, and without
any abandonment of the principles of their system. Their method requires fewer figures and fewer
words than ours.
With regard to the dollar and cent system, I concede to it the merit of priority. It was a first
attempt at a decimal system of coinage. It was adapted to the existing practice of the United
States, in which the Spanish dollar was the principal current coin. The statesmen and political
economists of France undertook the same task some years later, not only with superior scientific
acquirements, but with greater advantages from observation and experience, and adopted a system
which, in my opinion, is in all respects far preferable to the dollar and cent system.
57. This question supposes the “Decimal System” to mean the “pound and mil” system, which
I think would become the source of confusion, and retard the adoption of a better scheme.
63. The advantage of the Decimal System to those who keep extensive accounts will be a saving
of time and labour, with a greatly diminished liability to error; but it will also be a great advan-
tage to the lower classes by the greater simplicity of calculation, and the circulation of a small
coin like a centime.
Lord Overstone's concluding questions have reference to the pound and mil scheme, and to the
schemes founded upon the penny and the half-penny, to all of which I object as very imperfect and
of small or doubtful advantage. If we are to introduce difficulties and temporary confusion, let us
do it with a clear prospect of ultimate and important advantages.
I have written the preceding replies under an impression that it was my duty to answer his
Lordship according to the best of my ability. If he expresses “great diffidence,” how much
more do modesty and caution become an humble inquirer like myself. I think the British
public are under great obligations to his Lordship, and, so far as I have the means of judging,
to his colleagues, for the great care and attention which they have bestowed upon this difficult
and laborious inquiry; and, if their views are perhaps less comprehensive than might have been
desired, I presume that this may be ascribed to the limited nature of their commission.
JAMES YATEs.
Lauderdale House, Highgate.
June 17, 1857.
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 181
(Communicated by Lord Monteagle.)
DRAFT OF A BILL
For introducing, after a day to be named, a Decimal System of Accounts of Money, and
for enabling Her Majesty to introduce a Decimal System of Coinage. 1857.
(Sketched by Sir W.M. RowAN HAMILTON, Royal Astronomer of Ireland.)
WHEREAS it has been found by the experience of many foreign countries that a
Decimal System of Accounts and of Coinage is practicable and convenient ; and whereas
it has been expressed to be the opinion of many eminent commercial and scientific men,
examined in several instances by commissioners appointed by the Crown, and otherwise
having made known their views, that it will be advantageous and creditable to introduce
such a Decimal System into these parts of the dominions of Her Majesty, on the basis of
the pound preserved as the chief unit, but subdivided into one thousand parts or mils;
and for other weighty reasons:
Be it therefore enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice
and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and of the Commons, in this present
Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same,
I. That the presentrelations of legal value between the pound of account and the two gold
coins and five principal silver coins which are now in use and circulation, namely, the
sovereign, the half-sovereign, the crown, the half-crown, the florin, the shilling, and the half-
shilling, commonly called sixpence, shall still continue to exist, and to be of full force in law;
in such a manner that the coin called the sovereign shall still represent one pound in every
contract or account, and shall still be legally exchangeable in the currency for two half-
sovereigns, or for four crowns, or for eight half-crowns, or for ten florins, or for twenty
shillings, or for forty half-shillings, of the kind called commonly sixpences.
II. But be it also enacted, That from and after the day of
in the year of our Lord the existing values of all lower
coins, whether silver or copper, shall be depreciated at the rate of four in the hundred,
with relation to the above-mentioned gold and silver coins, without their relations to
each other being disturbed, in such a manner that unless and until they or any of
them shall be withdrawn from circulation the silver coin now called fourpence shall
still be legally exchangeable for four copper pennies; the silver coin now called three-
pence shall still be exchangeable for three such pennies; the copper penny itself shall
still be exchangeable for two copper halfpence; and the halfpenny shall continue to be
exchangeable for two farthings, as at present: but that on and after the day already
named the farthing shall cease to represent the nine hundred and sixtieth part of the
pound, and shall be reduced to represent only the thousandth part thereof, in such a .
manner that the pound or the sovereign shall then and thenceforward be equivalent, in
virtue of the present enactment, to one thousand farthings, the half-sovereign to five
hundred farthings, the crown to two hundred and fifty farthings, the half-crown to one
hundred and twenty-five farthings, the florin to one hundred farthings, the shilling to
fifty farthings, and the half-shilling, now commonly called sixpence, to twenty-five
farthings, or to six pennies of the new value, and to one farthing over.
III. And be it further enacted, That from and after the day already named whenever
any sum of money shall be found to have been expressed or stated in any contract or
account under the now existing form of pounds, shillings, and pence, if such contract
or account shall bear any date precedent to the said day, it shall be lawful, and all
courts of justice are hereby required, to interpret and construe the shillings as still
representing each the twentieth part of a pound; but to consider and treat every penny
which shall remain over and above, after the pounds and shillings have been deducted,
as equivalent only to four of the new or reduced farthings, and therefore as representing
only the two hundred and fiftieth part of a pound, and not as now the two hundred and
fortieth part thereof.
[Note. As an example of the proposed working of this Section (III) suppose that A. owes B. at
present, or will owe him before the day when the Act comes into operation, 50l. 11s. 7d., as
expressed in our present, and till then existing, currency.
It is intended that A. should be permitted to discharge his debt when the new system comes
into operation by paying to B.,-1st, fifty sovereigns in gold, or whatever is now a legal equivalent,
such as ten notes of the Bank of England for 5l. each, or one note of that Bank for 50l. 5
2d, eleven of our present silver shillings, or whatever (going no lower than the half-shilling) is
now their legal equivalent, as for instance, five florins and one shilling, or three florins, four Shillings,
and two half-shillings ; or one crown, two half-crowns, and two half-shillings, &c., and 3d, seven of
Sir
W. R. Hamilton.
umºmº
Z 3 •
182 tº- &
``"DECIMAL CoINAGE COMMISSION:
Sir W. R.
Hamilton.
our present copper pennies, notwithstanding the slight proposed depreciation of their value, in virtue
of which depreciation, it is designed to make it legal to tender one half shilling in silver and three
copper farthings, as an equivalent for the sum of seven-pence, recorded in the contract or account.
In this manner no debtor A. will save, nor will any creditor B. lose, quite so much as a single
halfpenny on any one transaction, however large, and, while all trouble of calculation will be
avoided, nothing that can be called injustice will be done.]
IV. (Turnpike Trusts.)
W. (Parliamentary Trains.)
VI. (Postage Stamps.)
VII. And be it enacted, That from and after the day already named it shall not be
lawful to draw up or to execute any contract, or to furnish any statement of account,
respecting any transaction on or subsequent to the said day, wherein the present form
of reckoning by pounds, shillings, and pence shall be retained ; but that it shall be
necessary, for the purpose of giving legal validity to any such future contract or
account, that all monies mentioned therein shall be reckoned, expressed, and stated
in the form of pounds, florins, and farthings, or in some equivalent decimal form,
with one intermediate coin of account, such as subsequent clauses of this Act may
allow.
VIII. And be it enacted, That it shall be lawful for Her Majesty to issue a new silver
coinage, each coin to be stamped and called a cent, and to represent the hundredth part
of a pound, or ten farthings of the new value; but that, whether such a new silver coin
shall or shall not be issued by Her Majesty, it shall be lawful, on and after the day
already named, to reckon and describe any sum of money as consisting of pounds,
florins, cents, and farthings, instead of pounds, florins, and farthings only, the word
cent being construed as equivalent to ten farthings, or to the hundredth part of a pound;
in such a manner that a shilling may be described either as fifty farthings, or else at
pleasure as five cents; and that a half shilling may be expressed and written in the
new system of accounts, either as twenty-five farthings, or as two cents and five
farthings.
IX. And be it enacted, That it shall be lawful for Her Majesty to issue a new copper
coinage, each coin to be called a half cent, and to be equivalent to five farthings, or to
the two-hundredth part of a pound; but that such coins, if issued, shall be only coins of
circulation, and shall not be coins of account ; in such a manner that the name half-
cent shall not be used in any legal contract or account, nor any abridged symbol to
denote it.
X. And be it enacted, That, whether such half-cents or five-farthing pieces shall or
shall not be issued, it shall still be lawful for Her Majesty to issue a copper coinage,
each coin to be stamped and called a mil, and to represent the same value as the reduced
farthing, namely, the thousandth part of the pound; but that, whether such a new copper
coin shall be issued or not, it shall be lawful, on and after the day already named, for
any person who may prefer it, to use the word or name mil instead of the name farthing
in describing any sum of money, in such a manner that a half-shilling may then be
described and reckoned, in any account, either as twenty-five farthings, or as two cents
and five farthings, or else at pleasure as twenty-five mils, or as two cents and five mils;
and that no such description of any sum of money by pounds, florins, cents, and mils,
instead of pounds, florims, and farthings, shall be held to invalidate any contract or
account.
XI. And be it enacted, That this Act may be amended or repealed by any Act which
shall be passed during the present Session of Parliament.
VIVAT REGINA.
[Sketched, May 12th, 1857. Copied for Lord Monteagle's inspection, June 22d, 1857. Obser-
vatory of T. C. D.—W. R. Hamilton. It is scarcely necessary to say that I have not had the
advantage of any legal (or indeed of any) assistance in sketching the present Draft of a Bill; and
that I have merely tried to put into some sort of working shape the views which reading and
reflection have suggested to myself, and of which, perhaps, not one is new, on the subject of the
Decimal Coinage.—W. R. H.]
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 183
(Communicated by Lord Overstone.)
FOREIGN EXCHANGE.
By JULIUS PAGE, ESQ.
IN considering the alterations of the divisions of the pound sterling as proposed by the
new Decimal System, an important point is the effect it may produce in the mode of
expressing the variations in price of many articles. Cotton, tea, and tobacco, spices,
drugs, and chemicals, are now quoted even by the wholesale traders in pence per pound
weight, and the changes in price are made by +, +, and even by ++ of a penny. The first
change from the old to the new system, were it ever to take place, might be a matter of
small importance, but the subsequent variations of the market would probably produce
more difficulties than are at present anticipated.
Thus if cotton, under the old system, is quoted 7++d. per pound, this is strictly equal
to 0.033072916’l. in decimals of the pound sterling. This there is no inconvenience in
calling 033 (that is, thirty-three mils per pound). But a rise in price of Tºrd, according
to the present mode is represented by .000260416' in the proposed notation, that is, it
is about a quarter of a mil, and therefore, in order to quote to as fine a difference as at
present, we must either have recourse to a vulgar fraction of our lowest decimal deno-
mination, thus mixing two systems, or we must call this increase 00025, whereby we
add two figures more to our already long array, and our quotations would progress in one
of the following series:— *
'0334 Or •03325
-0334 22 •0335
•033; 35 -03375
&c. &c.
The first would probably be the mode adopted, the divisions by }, +, &c. being the
most natural to the generality of persons; and of this we have an example in the United
States, for, although their coinage recognizes the one tenth part of a cent (which is their
mille) yet it is never used, and the quotations of cotton and other goods sold wholesale at
a price per pound are expressed in cents and sixteenths of cents; thus:—
Cotton 11+, 11+ OI’ 11 #, 114, &c.
There is also another species of quotation in which the difficulties arising from the
change will perhaps be greater than in the prices of goods. I refer to the foreign bill
market, the operations in which are very large. Among the thirty or thirty-one places
in foreign countries usually quoted in the printed courses of exchange there are some
where the exchanges are expressed in a variable amount of foreign money for the constant
quantity of Il. sterling, others in which the quotation is by a variable number of pence
sterling for an integer of the foreign coin; and there is also a further difference according
to whether the foreign place quotes on London in the same or a different manner to that
which we adopt here. The following is a table of all these variations:—
The variable in London, ea pressed in The variable in London eacpressed in
foreign money. pence Sterling.
2 places in Holland, f 11:18+per Ilsterl. 1 place in Russia, 37; d. for 1 rouble.
1 * Belgium, ºf 25.42% , 6 ,, Spain, 49; d. , 1 dollar.
1 * Hamburg, M. 13 6%. , 2 ,, Portugal, 523d. , 1 milrea.
3 , France, f 25-674. , I , Rio, 24%d. , 55
1 > |Berlin, D. 6'24+ , I , Bahia, 24%d. , 5 5
2 : Austria, fl. 10.33 55 $º
1 : Leghorn, 1, • A, FZ I II
# , i. } lre. 29:47# , *mse
1 > Genoa, lre, 25.75 32 These places also quote on London in the
1 : Francfort, fl. 1194 per 101. do. same manner as London quotes on
tºmºmºs them.
14
All these places quote on London in the
same manner as London on them.
J. Page, Esq.
Z 4
184 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:
J. Page, Esq.
The following six places quote on London in a different manner to our quotations on
them. s
Quotations here. Quotations abroad.
1 Venice 47 pence for 6 Aust. lire. 30 lire lă c. for Il. sterling.
1 Naples 42# , 1 , ducat. 552 grani 53 -
1 Palermo |29. I OILZ 61 tari 29
I Messina T 3.5 ,, . On Za. 1094 per cent, on a nominal par of
I New York * 4s. 6d. Sterling per dollar. *
1 Philadelphia }47; 25 1 dollar. -
6
As in the first list of fourteen places the variation is made, both here and abroad, in
the amount of foreign coin per pound sterling, no, alteration will take place in the quota-
tions by a change in our denominations. But fixing the exchange at which a bill is
bought or sold is only the preliminary step, and the amount is then to be cast out either
from foreign into English or from English into foreign money. In this part of the
inquiry it appears to be the fashion among the admirers of a decimal notation to select
all their examples from the Paris Exchange, and as that place possesses already a decimal
coinage their choice is not a bad one. But Paris is not the only continental city with
which London deals extensively in exchange operations, and if examples were taken of
these calculations on—
Berlin, where the dollar is divided into 30 groschen,
Vienna 55 florin 3) 60 kreutzers,
Hamburg , mark banco , 16 schillings (each of 12 pfennings),
there might, perhaps, be found a difference in the comparative facility of calculating by
the old and new English denominations not always in favour of the latter.
Take Hamburg as an example: the mark is divided into 16 schillings, and each of
these into 12 pfennings; therefore 1 mark= 16 schillings=192 pfennings, which is
capable of division without fractional remainders by almost all the factors of our
240 pence (except 5 and its multiples). This is a great advantage in this description of
calculation as assisting in taking aliquot parts. Although the writer of these remarks
uses decimals wherever he finds them most convenient, yet in cases similar to the above
he recollects an old rule taught him at school called Practice, which is often of great
utility in saving time and figures. Let the admirers of decimal arithmetic try to reduce
847l. 7s. 6d. Sterling into marks and schillings banco at the exchange of 13 marks
64 schillings per poundsterling by the usual and the decimal methods, and report the result
with reference to time and number of figures. The shillings and pence in the above
sum have been selected that they may have an exact equivalent in decimal notation,
viz. 847-375l., but they may as well also try such sums as 8471. 7s. 11d. (whose nearest
equivalent is 847-3961); and they will perhaps find no great improvement by the
change.
#. division of the mark into 16 schillings, being the same as the number of
ounces in the Hamburg pound weight is found to be so convenient both in wholesale
and retail business that it would be absurd to expect that the traders in Hamburg
would alter their coinage to a decimal division to assist us in a difficulty in exchange
business which we propose bringing on ourselves.
The investigation of the exchanges on Berlin, Vienna, Francfort, and other German
places, will give nearly the same results, viz., that the division of 30 and 60 parts to
the integer offers greater facilities for calculating with our present denominations than
with the proposed decimal divisions of the pound sterling.
The second list of eleven places where the variations in the exchange take place in
pence and parts of pence sterling presents a different set of difficulties. The usual
alteration in the quotations per rouble or per dollar are made in 4ths of one penny, but
sometimes the fluctuations only increase or diminish by Tºth of a penny ; thus the
quotation of bills on St. Petersburg is 373 pence per rouble, which is equal, according to
the decimal scale, to 0-15572916', which may be called 1554, or 15575, and the Tºth
of the penny being, as before observed, about 4th of a mill, the quotations would
probably range thus:—
Present Quotation. Correct Decimal. Probable future Quotation.
374 $ • 1552083' 1554 or 15525
37+%; • 15546876' 155%. , 1555
373 • 155729916’ 1553. , 15575
Q-2
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS. 185
the quotation varying either by half of one mil (representing nearly ºth of a penny), or
by 4th of 1 mil (representing nearly Tºth of a penny).
But the above disposes of the alteration only so far as it is under the control of the
London market, and it remains to be considered how far it is probable that the foreign
merchants will alter their mode of quoting to accommodate us. A very considerable time
must elapse before this can be accomplished, if it ever is done, as nothing appears more
difficult of alteration than an old accustomed exchange quotation. It is not many years
back when the ordinary mode of quoting bills between Francfort and Paris included the
old Livre Tournois as one of the steps of the comparison, a coin which had been super-
seded at the beginning of the first French Revolution in the last century, and a clumsy
proportion of 81 to 80 was comprised in every calculation in order to reduce the livres
into francs. A merchant abroad might say that as he means by a penny the wºrth part
of a pound sterling, and that this pound is not altered in value he may continue quoting
37; of these pence, or 240ths as the equivalent of one integer in his own coin, by which
means a further complication will be added to a subject already sufficiently intricate.
It may be said that we might alter our mode of quoting these eleven places into the
same method as we use for the fourteen already mentioned, and instead of stating that
one Russian rouble is worth 37}d. we might say that ro. 6.44 (that is, 6 roubles and
44 copecks,) is the equivalent of Il. Sterling, and the same with Spain and other countries.
But here the same doubt arises, whether it is probable that other nations will also vary
their quotations to accommodate them to our wishes; otherwise the matter will be in
a worse state of confusion than if we altered to the decimal parts of the pound, because
we should be using a totally different principle instead of a different division.
That the doubt here expressed of the willingness of other nations to conform to our
new quotations is not a groundless fear may be shown by the third table in page 2, con-
sisting of six places where the method of quoting has always been different in the two
countries, and, notwithstanding the inconvenience Occasioned by this mode, appears
incapable of alteration. The cryor of this system may be easily shown. If the quotation
in London on Paris for bills at three months’ date is 25:57%, and at the same time at
Paris on Ilondon it is 24.80, any excess in the difference of these amounts beyond the
actual difference of interest will show directly in which place the exchange is the highest.
The same thing occurs in comparing the exchange at London and Lisbon, where both
are expressed in pence sterling ; but take the exchange at London on Naples 42; pence
for 1 ducat, and the exchange at Naples on London 552 grani per 11, sterling, and here
it will be immediately seen that we must first reduce one of these quotations to an
equivalent according to the other method before any comparison can be made between
the two, that is, we must work out one of the following proportions:—
If 42; d. gives 1 ducat, what will 240 pence give :
Or,
If 5.52 ducats gives 240 pence, what will I ducat give?
Should the decimal division of the pound sterling ever come into operation it will be
therefore preferable in the cases of Venice, Naples, and Sicily to adopt the mode of
quotation used by these respective countries. With regard to the New York exchange
the American mode of quoting is so absurd that an alteration even to the decimal scale
would be preferable to the one they have adopted. An exchange of $487, $4.88, &c., per Il.
sterling is, however, the most natural. It was tried in the United States some years
ago, but never came into general use; for what reason must be left to them to explain.
All the preceding remarks refer exclusively to the probable effect of the Decimal
System on the operations of direct exchanges, that is, on the quoting and calculation of
foreign bills drawn or negociated in this country; but a very extensive trade in bills is
also carried on where the operation is of a more complicated character. Thus a dealer in
bills constantly requires to ascertain whether a bill drawn on one foreign place will make
a good remittance if sent to some other city. As an example:—If bills on Lisbon are
quoted here at 54 pence per milrea (that is, 1,000 reis), and the last course of exchange
received from Amsterdam states that they could be sold there at 46 Dutch florins per
40 crusadoes of 400 reis each (that is, 16,000 reis), it is required whether the purchase
and transmission of these Lisbon bills to Amsterdam will yield a profit 2 The process by
which this is ascertained is called an exchange arbitration, and the method of stating and
working it is called the chain rule, which, for this case, is as follows:—
240 pence sterling :
54 pence = 1,000 reis,
16,000 reis = 46 florins.
After cancelling those figures which are common to both sides, the resulting calculation
consists in multiplying 46 (the Amsterdam quotation) by 15, and dividing the product
by 54 (the London quotation), the quotient is florins 12:154 nearly per 11. Sterling, and
this is then compared with the direct course between London and Amsterdam to ascertain
the profit or loss on the operation.
The quotations used above are intentionally made in whole numbers for the sake of
simplicity, but fractional sums are much more common, as 54; and 46%, which of course
give a much greater amount of labour in the calculation.
J. Page, Esq.
A a
186 DECIMAL COINAGE COMMISSION:... C
J. Page, Esq.
In a card of exchange arbitrations, which is required to be made out fresh every post
day, I usually employ about forty results of calculations similar in theory to the one just
described, some being rather easier and others, more tedious in calculation than the
above examples, but having been many years engaged in these calculations I have put
down the results of about thirty thousand of them, which are arranged in tables; there
are many persons, however, who possess a much larger stock of them.
The following is a small piece copied from the centre of the one used for Lisbon bills at
Amsterdam, in which each small square represents the result of one of these calculations.
Thus when the two quotations are 54} and 44%, the answer is immediately seen to be
12-64, without the trouble of a fresh computation. *
Lisbon at Amsterdam.

\ Amsterdam Quotations.
London Quotations. H -V
44 44 44} 44; 45
|
54 12.4% 12.5% 12.74 12.8; 12 IO
54} 3# 4; 6, 7} 8%
54}. 2} 3# 5 6# 73
54; 1% 2} 3# 5} 6;
55 O 1; 23 4; 5}
Now what will be the result of abolishing the pence in our currency Ż
54 pence= 225 of a pound in decimals; but
54, = •225.52083/
544. - •22604166/
54; == '2265.625
544 – •2270837
&c.
The new quotations will evidently vary by + of a mil, as 225, 225}, .226, &c., but
as none of them will correspond exactly with the 4th and 4th, &c. of the former calcula-
tions, this table will become totally useless, as well as all those in which our quotations
are made in pence.
In this sense, therefore, the old exchange calculator will be on a par with the new
cambist who begins computing for the first time ; that is, they will both be compelled to
cast out every arbitration afresh, whereas the older one has now most of them ready
done to his hand. But this in itself can be of no benefit to the new one, though most
injurious to the other.
Let us now ascertain whether there will be any saving of time in the actual calcu-
lation by the new method. Our new quotations will be ‘225 or 2254, &c. per milrea.
The Dutch quotation will of course remain as before 45%, or 46 florins for 16,000 reis,
and the stating of the arbitration will be—
Jºl sterling:
• 225 - 1,000 reis. sº
16,000 = 46 florins.
After dividing both sides by their common measure, 1,000, the working will be .225
multiplied by 16, and the product used as a divisor to the remaining term on the
other side, that is, 46, and the result will be as before florins 12:154 nearly, and subject,
as in the previous case, to the probability of fractions on both sides, as 226% and 454.
A comparison of the working of this equation by the old and new methods will show
very little difference in the number of figures employed, and this difference rather in
favour of the old method.
But London is not the only foreign bill market, and in many of the principal cities of
Europe a large business is carried on in exchanges. The merchants there have also their
arbitrations and calculations to perform, and these will be as much deranged by an
alteration of the denominations of the pound sterling as our own. Taking the example
of Lisbon bills bought by a trader in Hamburg, should he wish to ascertain if they
will be a good remittance to London he must use our quotation for Lisbon bills, and
would at present work with a formula containing our price of, say, 54 pence per milrea;
but if we alter our mode of quoting to 225, his former calculations become useless, and
he, as well as ourselves, must begin again, so that the prospect of trouble and incon-
venience is largely increased the more it is considered.
From what precedes it is not intended to be inferred that in exchange calculations
the present modes are in all cases shorter or easier than they would be by decimal deno-
minations of the pound sterling. Under many circumstances decimals are now largel
used for this purpose, and by taking some sterling amounts terminating with 17s. 5d. or
19s. 11d. (which are rather refractory when treated by Practice), the corresponding
ANSWERS TO LORD OVERSTONE'S QUESTIONS 187
equivalents in the desitaal. coinăge may in some cases be shown to require absolutely
fewer figures than the tisual methods, but as a general rule the present notation gives
greater facilities in most cases, and especially when the German places are in question.
To bankers and book-keepers, whose principal occupation is only with the two first
rules of arithmetic, that is, the addition of long columns of figures and an occasional
subtraction, there is an evident advantage in a decimal system. To these gentlemen
each amount is a mere abstract quantity of figures, which they have to mass together
into totals in the easiest manner they can contrive; but to the parties who pay or draw
these checks and bills these sums are each the representative of the final result of perhaps
long calculations. The first on the list may be the net proceeds of a parcel of cotton sold
at 9+}d. per pound, the next the equivalent of a bill on Hamburg negociated at 13:54,
and the same of the rest, and as many of these calculations. (not mere additions) are
probably executed with much greater facility by the old than by the proposed new
method, the question must naturally arise whether it is discreet to impose these fresh
difficulties on real calculations in order to facilitate in a very small degree the mere
addition and subtraction of their final results.
J. Page, Esq.
*
... …~~~~~
L O N D O N :
Printed by GEORGE E. EYRE and WILLIAM SPOTTIswooDE.
Printers to the Queen's most Excellent Majesty.
For Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
\-
}
-×
| HIGAN
Williºſ
º
ſ




（±，±，±，±，±，±,±，±）,& 9¿¿.*
ſae-**;aeſ)
}
| *（?：（5） ***
* * · * （?:.*?>）; ~
**.***
ſae
ſº
، ، ،
rº. №,«
ģ
zºº is
tº
#
º ºr "aft