The most prominent, and perhaps the most important of these is the well established doctrine, that the issue of paper money should be a function of the State, and should be exercised exclusively with a view to public interests. This is a conclusion on the truth of which the common sense of practical men, and the philosophic insight of the best instructed authorities, are in perfect harmony. It has long been undisputed that coining is a legitimate or rather essential function of the State, and the reasons for comprehending the issue of notes under the same prerogatives are not less forcible. There is no evil that may befall the public from the circulation of base coin, that may not arise to an equal, if not aggravated, extent from the issue of counterfeit paper. Indeed the issue of paper money is liable to risks exclusively its own and which require far more ingeniously devised safeguards than the issue of coin. The person who receives gold or silver in payment may sometimes be under the necessity of employing a few easy tests in order to prove its genuineness, but if he apply these with the most ordinary circumspection, he can successfully protect himself from loss by imposition. Now, he who receives paper money, is often placed under circumstances precisely the reverse. For, where the number of banks of issue is considerable, and the varieties of paper money in corresponding proportion, there are no valid tests within the reach of an average capacity, by means of which he may verify the genuineness of every note which he may happen to receive in the course of his transactions with the public. But even if there were such tests, and if he exercised the greatest possible care, in their application, they would not suffice to protect him from losses, arising out of the unexpected insolvency of some of the banks of issue. In order to guard efficiently against risk of this description, he would require an accurate acquaintance with the actual position and stability of every bank whose paper may at any time come into his possession; and in the case of nearly every private bank, this knowledge is obviously unattainable. In the absence of this desideratum, his only means of protection appear to consist in the prompt presentment or exchange of every description of paper, on the perfect security of which he does not possess some valid reasons for reliance.