Let me state the case otherwise. Suppose France buys in England for 1000 pounds weight of her guineas in Virginia tobacco; and that England buys in France for 1000 pounds weight of her louis d’ors of Bourdeaux claret. Is not this called par? Will not France pay her debt to England with 1000 pound of gold bullion? Whereas England must pay 1080 pounds to France; because 1000 pounds weight of her louis d’ors, is worth in France 1080 pounds of any bullion of the same standard. The 1000 pounds then compensates the 1000 pounds; the 80 pounds over must be sent to France, and the carriage of this quantity only, must be paid for according to the principles of exchange. Here is evidently a balance of trade against England of 8 _per cent._ above the real par of the metals. Will any body say that the 8 _per cent._ is paid for the transportation of 80 pounds of bullion due? Certainly not. Now if the English should declare that they, for the future, would coin neither gold or silver bullion for any person, but at the rate of 8 _per cent._ below the value of the coin; and if it be true, that this regulation would have the effect of linking the price of bullion, on many occasions, to 8 _per cent._ below the coin; in that case, would not the English and the French acquit their debts of the 1000 pounds weight of their respective coin upon the same conditions? In this case, would not the price of exchange vanish, since there would be no bullion to be sent by either party? But in the first case, would not England be obliged to send 8 _per cent._ above the quantity of gold bullion she received from France, and would not the transportation of this cost money, and would not this transportation be marked by a certain price of exchange, and consequently, would not the price of exchange rise against England? But to this it is objected, that by the former example, the exchange marked 8 _per cent._ against England with great reason; because it is plain, that there is a balance of 8 _per cent._ against England, since she has sent that proportion over to France in bullion. Very true. But had England, instead of taking to the value of 1000 pounds weight of louis d’ors in claret, taken only for 100 pounds weight, the exchange would have still marked 8 _per cent._ loss; because the 100 pounds of louis d’ors must be paid with the 108 pounds of bullion, although England by this trade has evidently gained 892 pounds of bullion, which France must send her as a balance. As matters of fact, when they can be procured, tend greatly to confirm theory, by forming a solid basis whereupon to reason, I shall here profit of one which has fallen into my hands, and by applying it to the present question, endeavour to give some additional force to this reasoning. [Sidenote: and at a medium 4 per cent. as is proved by a matter of fact.]