If circumstances favored the consolidation of the national coinage at a single mint, I can conceive that there would be advantages of an unquestionable character. Indeed, if we repair to France, where the mints have been in times past so numerous, we find that these advantages have not been denied. I suppose that the most authoritative testimony on this subject, whether we look at it in the light of theory or of practice, is found in that country; and if we seek special authorities, there is nothing so instructive or ample as the report of Dumas and De Colmont, made in 1839, under a commission from the French Minister of Finance. This document, with its minute disclosures on the operations of mints, was for some time kept secret in France. I have understood that only _twelve copies_ were printed for the use of the Commission, who were placed under a solemn obligation not to divulge it. But I believe it found its way to publicity at the time of the Parliamentary inquiry into the Mint in 1849, which resulted in a valuable blue-book. The testimony of Dumas is for a single mint. He dwells especially on two considerations,--economy, and the perfection of the coinage; and these he places above local interests demanding multiplicity of mints. The figures by which he illustrates the superior economy are very striking. _These assume that the metal is already delivered at the mint_,--a point not to be forgotten on the present occasion. Beyond his own opinion on the question of perfection, Dumas quotes the testimony of Basterrèche, Regent of the Bank of France, who, after an examination of the subject as long ago as 1800, very positively declared that “the perfection of labor which ought to distinguish a great nation imperiously required a single mint, placed under the immediate superintendence of the Government.” And he also quotes the testimony of Humann, Minister of Finance, who, in presenting his budget in 1835, declared that the Paris mint was adequate to do all the coinage required in France,--that the concentration of labor there would promote improvement in the processes of production,--that in this way the Government would be relieved from the expense of different establishments,--that all the money from the same mint would be identical in character, and in proportion as it acquired perfection would be less exposed to counterfeiting,--and, in fine, that the superintendence of the Government would be a guaranty of security, which does not exist where the work is distributed in a large number of establishments. Such was the testimony of the minister, adopted by the illustrious authority in science, Dumas. Perhaps the case could not be stated stronger. Yet it did not prevail in 1800, when it was first given,--nor in 1835, nor in 1839,--even in France, where the tendency to concentration is so active, where the facilities for it are so great, and the disposition to take counsel of science is so confirmed.