Readings in Money and Banking: Selected and AdaptedPhillips, Chester Arthur
General
Readings in Money and Banking: Selected and Adapted
Phillips, Chester Arthur
Banks and banking; Banks and banking -- United States; Money
When once a substance is widely employed as money, it is conceivable
that its utility will come to depend mainly upon the services which it
thus confers upon the community. Gold, for instance, is far more
important as the material of money than in the production of plate,
jewellery, watches, gold-leaf, etc. A substance originally used for many
purposes may eventually serve only as money, and yet, by the demand for
currency and the force of habit, may maintain its value. The cowry
circulation of the Indian coasts is probably a case in point. The
importance of habit, personal or hereditary, is at least as great in
monetary science as it is, according to Mr. Herbert Spencer, in morals
and sociological phenomena generally.
There is, however, no reason to suppose that the value of gold and
silver is at present due solely to their conventional use as money.
These metals are endowed with such singularly useful properties that, if
we could only get them in sufficient abundance, they would supplant all
the other metals in the manufacture of household utensils, ornaments,
fittings of all kinds, and an infinite multitude of small articles,
which are now made of brass, copper, bronze, pewter, German silver, or
other inferior metals and alloys.
In order that money may perform some of its functions efficiently,
especially those of a medium of exchange and a store of value, to be
carried about, it is important that it should be made of a substance
valued highly in all parts of the world, and, if possible, almost
equally esteemed by all peoples. There is reason to think that gold and
silver have been admired and valued by all tribes which have been lucky
enough to procure them. The beautiful lustre of these metals must have
drawn attention and excited admiration as much in the earliest as in the
present times.
2. PORTABILITY
The material of money must not only be valuable, but the value must be
so related to the weight and bulk of the material, that the money shall
not be inconveniently heavy on the one hand, nor inconveniently minute
on the other. There was a tradition in Greece that Lycurgus obliged the
Lacedaemonians to use iron money, in order that its weight might deter
them from overmuch trading. However this may be, it is certain that iron
money could not be used in cash payments at the present day, since a
penny would weigh about a pound, and instead of a five-pound note, we
should have to deliver a ton of iron. During the last century copper was
actually used as the chief medium of exchange in Sweden; and merchants
had to take a wheelbarrow with them when they went to receive payments
in copper _dalers_. Many of the substances used as currency in former
times must have been sadly wanting in portability. Oxen and sheep,
indeed, would transport themselves on their own legs; but corn, skins,
oil, nuts, almonds, etc., though in several respects forming fair
currency, would be intolerably bulky and troublesome to transfer.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account