Chapter I (2)

There is here no question of an arbitrary debasement. It was simply an attempt to preserve the currency from the action of a changing market ratio, which led to the withdrawal now of the one, now of the other coins, and to the circulation meanwhile of foreign coins at a rate apparently disproportioned to the metallic content.[7] In 1361 evidence was given before the Mint authorities that "in payments the people do by abuse give foreign monies at a higher rate than they are worth, viz. the _moutons_ of Flanders and Brabant at a higher rate than the _franc d'or_, of which said _moutons_ the best specimens are worth 18 denars less than the said _franc d'or_; a silver piece called _chartain_ for 16 and even 18 denars, which is worth no more than 10," and so on. Two years later it was declared that the Mint at Tournay was on the point of stopping work, "the people having been accustomed for a long time to give a higher price for the mark of gold than in the case of other monies of this kingdom, and this by reason of the foreign merchants." Towards the close of his reign Charles V., finding his kingdom filled with depreciated imported specie, while all the good native pieces had been drawn out of the land, sought and obtained from the Pope, 1372, a Bull of Excommunication against neighbour powers who should counterfeit his monies. It was not until 1391 that the proper defensive measure of a change of ratio was resorted to, and by that time the conditions of the Mint rates in surrounding nations had so altered as to render the change partially inoperative. In 1393, accordingly, there was a great lack of the smaller silver coin, which led to a proclamation by Charles VI. on the 2nd April of that year for encouraging the minting of _petiz deniers Tournois_. The same complaint was, however, re-echoed in 1395 and 1396, but, as it appears, quite futilely, for nine years after another proclamation had to be issued against the currency of foreign coins of Scotland, Navarre, the Rhenish and Netherland provinces, etc., "which have course in our kingdom for a greater value than they are worth, by which means our monies are arrested in their course and greatly withdrawn; the gold and silver _deniers a l'ecu_ which we have minted having been melted down."

[Sidenote: ACTION OF THE STATES-GENERAL IN 1420]

When the States-General met at Paris in 1420 the depreciated state of the coinage was laid before the assembly as of prime concernment, and it was by its advice that the proclamation of the following year was issued fixing the _ecu d'or_ at a tale of 66 to the mark and of the _gros d'argent_ at 86-1/4, "it being come to our knowledge that for some time past the money in our kingdom is so diminished and enfeebled that by this means the gold and silver which abounded is in very great measure drawn away and transported, and the traffic of strangers here almost ceased, and all necessaries of life put at a great height," etc. The result of this reformation of 1421 was that during some portion of the succeeding years of Charles VII.'s reign silver came from all parts in great abundance, although in 1436 complaints were again heard that money was not being coined and did not suffice for the public needs. At this point, however, the complaints apparently ceased, and it was not till twenty years later that the step was again taken of decrying and forbidding the circulation of foreign specie.

The ceasing of the disorders in the French money is attributed to the expulsion of the English invaders, but there can be little doubt that much more simple and natural laws were at work. From the reign of Louis XI. onwards these natural laws had freer play as against the disturbing influence of mere arbitrary debasements, and it is easier to analyse their influence.

[Sidenote: FRANCE IN 1488]

From his accession in 1461 onwards the monetary history of France displays many analogies with that of the Netherlands (see Chapter II.). Thus in 1470, finding the market rate of foreign coins driven above the home Mint rate by the licence of the people (i.e. by normal market action), Louis issued a tariff to regulate the exchange rate in which the prevailing prices of the foreign specie were tolerated as an interim for a period of three months. At the end of that time it was manifestly impossible to secure a permanent reduction, and in order to prevent the transport of specie it was found necessary, 4th January 1473, to raise the value of the home coin both gold and silver (see account of French monies in Appendix No. VI.). Still the export continued, and in 1475 the process of enhancement had to be repeated as a measure of defence for the gold specie. Thirteen years later similar precautions were taken for the silver specie by Charles VIII.'s proclamation of 24th April 1488.

This is the last defensive measure of the first period of the monetary history of France, and no further act is on record previous to the great change in the relative values of the precious metals which ensued upon the discovery of the New World.

THE RATIO BETWEEN GOLD AND SILVER IN EUROPE, 1300-1500.

+-----+------------------------+-------+--------+----------------+------+---------+-----+
|Date.| Italy. |France.|England.| Germany. |Spain.|Burgundy.|Date.|
| +---------+-------+------+ | +-----+----------+ | | |
| |Florence.|Venice.|Milan.| | | A. | B. | | | |
+-----+---------+-------+------+-------+--------+-----+----------+------+---------+-----+
|1252 | 10.75 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1252 |
|1257 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 9.29 | .. | .. | .. | .. |1257 |
|1284 | .. | 10.84 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1284 |
|1296 | 11.10 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1296 |
|1303 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 12.1 |1303 |
|1305 | 10.88 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1305 |
|1308 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1308 |
|1315 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1315 |
|1324 | 13.62 | 13.99 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1324 |
|1338 | .. | .. | .. | 12.61 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1338 |
|1343 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1343 |
|1344 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 12.59 | .. | .. | .. | .. |1344 |
|1344 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 11.04 | .. | .. | .. | .. |1344 |
|1345 | 11.04 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1345 |
|1346 | .. | .. | .. | 11.11 | 11.57 |11.33| .. | .. | .. |1346 |
|1347 | 10.91 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1347 |
|1348 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 12.1 |1348 |
|1350 | .. | 14.44 |10.59 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1350 |
|1351 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 12.3 | .. | .. |1351 |
| | | | | | | | (Luebeck) | | | |
|1353 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 11.15 | .. | .. | .. | .. |1353 |
|1361 | .. | .. | .. | 12.0 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1361 |
|1365 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |11.37| .. | .. | .. |1365 |
|1375 | 10.77 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 12.4 | .. | .. |1375 |
| | | | | | | | (Luebeck) | | | |
|1379 | .. | 13.17 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1379 |
|1380 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1380 |
|1386 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 10.76 | .. | .. |1386 |
| | | | | | | | (Rhine | | | |
| | | | | | | |Provinces)| | | |
|1391 | .. | .. | .. | 10.74 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1391 |
|1399 | .. | 11.69 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 11.16 | .. | .. |1399 |
| | | | | | | | (Rhine | | | |
| | | | | | | |Provinces)| | | |
|1400 | .. | .. |11.630| .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1400 |
|1402 | 10.58 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1402 |
|1406 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 10.66 | .. | .. |1406 |
| | | | | | | | (Rhine | | | |
| | | | | | | |Provinces)| | | |
|1411 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 12.0 | .. | .. |1411 |
| | | | | | | | (Luebeck) | | | |
|1412 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 10.33 | .. | .. | .. | .. |1412 |
|1417 | .. | 12.56 | .. | 10.67 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1417 |
|1421 | .. | .. | .. | 10.29 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1421 |
|1422 | 10.16 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1422 |
|1427 | .. | .. | .. | 9.00 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1427 |
|1429 | .. | 11.04 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1429 |
|1432 | .. | .. | .. | 10.87 | .. | .. | .. | 5.822| .. |1432 |
|1435 | .. | .. | .. | 12.32 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1435 |
|1441 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |11.12| .. | .. | .. |1441 |
|1443 | .. | 12.1 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1443 |
|1446 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1446 |
|1447 | .. | .. | .. | 11.44 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1447 |
|1450 | .. | .. |10.965| .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1450 |
|1455 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | 12.2 | .. | .. |1455 |
| | | | | | | | (Luebeck) | | | |
|1456 | .. | .. | .. | 11.77 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1456 |
|1460 | 9.33 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1460 |
|1462 | 9.37 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1462 |
|1464 | 11.42 | .. | .. | .. | 11.15 | .. | .. | 9.824| .. |1464 |
|1471 | 10.58 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1471 |
|1472 | .. | 11.13 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1472 |
|1474 | .. | 10.97 | .. | 11.00 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1474 |
|1475 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |10.41 | .. |1475 |
|1480 | 10.83 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |10.87 | .. |1480 |
|1485 | 10.46 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1485 |
|1486 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |10.98 | .. |1486 |
|1488 | .. | .. | .. | 11.83 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1488 |
|1495 | 10.46 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1495 |
|1497 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |10.01 | .. |1497 |
|1500 | .. | .. |10.975| .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |1500 |
|1506 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. |10.262| .. |1506 |
+-----+---------+-------+------+-------+--------+-----+----------+------+---------+-----+

Germany--_A_, as determined by the purchase prices of the two metals in the Luebeck Mint. _B_, as determined by the Mint ordinances.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: COINAGE OF 1344]

England.

Even before the adoption of a gold coinage by Edward III., England had felt the effect of loss by exchange, owing to the introduction of gold florins by means of the Flemish trade. In the Parliament of 1339, at Westminster, complaint was made of the want of coinage. It was proposed as a remedy--(1) that every merchant should bring in 40s. or more for every sack of wool that he should import, and (2) that it should be considered by the King and his council whether it might not be advantageous to permit _florins de ecu_ (of France), and florins of Florence (i.e. gold), and other good florins to be current with the _esterlings_ (i.e. the silver penny), "but only esterlings to be compulsory for under 40s. value." In less than four years good money was being carried out of the realm, and false money brought in at such a rate that Parliament was seriously perplexed. In its debate on the matter at Westminster, 1343, the result is thus stated: "All orders of persons in the realm had loss for a long time, on account of the florins which were delivered in payment in Flanders, bearing so high a value there as to occasion a loss of one-third on all merchandise imported thence." Certain goldsmiths of London were therefore ordered to be called in to advise and to refine one or two of each kind of florin, so as to rate the fine gold in them according to the true value. And it was proposed that of this fine gold one kind of money should be made in England and Flanders, provided the Flemings were willing, to be current in both countries at such an alloy and value as should be determined by the King and Council, and all other gold money to be taken at bullion value, and all silver money to be reckoned thereby ("other sufficient money to be received according to the value of the fine gold").

The result was the first practical issue of English gold. In 1344 an indenture was made between the King on the one part and George Kirkyn and Lotte Nicholyn of Florence, goldmasters and workers, on the other, for the coining of three monies of gold, one to be current at 6s., and to be equal in weight to 2 _petits florins_ of Florence of good weight, 50 of these being coined out of the pound Tower of London.

In this indenture Edward copied the ratio prevailing in the French kingdom, viz. that of 12.61 to 1 between gold and silver. That ratio was considerably too high, and he quickly experienced the same effects which were felt by the French King from it. During his reign (1327-50) Philip of Valois coined more species of new money than all his predecessors put together, but owing to the adoption of this too high a ratio the country was gradually depleted of good money. In order to induce people to bring bullion to the Mint he offered to coin free of cost, but found nothing of avail until he followed the example of England and altered the ratio.

In our own country the same truth had been quickly grasped. It was found that the new gold money was rated too high, i.e. overvalued in relation to silver, and was therefore refused. By a proclamation of the same year, therefore, 9th July, it was withdrawn and ordered to be taken only as bullion, and a new indenture was made for the coining of gold nobles--39-1/2 out of the pound Tower, and at the value of 6s. 8d. The nobles were at once made current and tenderable along with silver, by proclamation; gold being ordered to be received in payment of 20s. and upwards.

[Sidenote: GOLD NOBLES COINED]

By this indenture the ratio was at once dropped from 12.59:1 to 11.04:1. This attempt to determine the rate of exchange is a common feature in the legislation of France and Spain as well as of England. It stands to sense, and is apparent on every page of the monetary history of the period, that it was absolutely imperative. The friction which accompanied the process can now only faintly be imagined, but that is a secondary consideration. The essential point was, that such changes were normal and inevitable, forced by sheer necessity upon Governments, such an one even as our own, which has always been most jealously conservative in matters of coinage.

TABLE OF THE VARIATIONS OF THE GOLD AND SILVER COINS OF ENGLAND, 1300-1500.

+----------------------+---------------------------------------------------+
| Silver. | Gold. |
+-------+--------------+-------+--------+----------+-----------+-----------+
| | Weight of | | | Weight | | Price in |
| Date. | the Silver | Date. | Coin. | in | Value | Pence per |
| | Penny in | | | Grains. | Declared.| Grain of |
| | Troy Grains. | | | | | Gold. |
+-------+--------------+-------+--------+----------+-----------+-----------+
| | | | | | _s._ _d._ | |
| 1300 | 22 | 1344 | Florin | 108 | 6 0 | 0.6666 |
| 1344 | 20-1/4 | 1344 | Noble | 138-6/13 | 6 8 | 0.5777 |
| 1346 | 20 | 1346 | ... | 128-4/7 | 6 8 | 0.6222 |
| 1351 | 18 | 1353 | ... | 120 | 6 8 | 0.6666 |
| 1412 | 15 | 1414 | ... | 108 | 6 8 | 0.7407 |
| 1464 | 12 | 1460 | ... | 120 | 8 4 | 0.7500 |
| | | 1470 | Angel | 80 | 6 8 | 1.0000 |
+-------+--------------+-------+--------+----------+-----------+-----------+

In the first issue of Edward III. the Troy grain of gold had been valued at .6666 of a penny. At such rate it was overvalued and refused, and in the second issue of the same year the value was dropped to .5777 of a penny. Gradually, as the ratio on the Continent changed, and came to bear on the English rate, this was in its turn found an under-valuation, and only two years later, 1346, the value was raised to .6222, making a ratio of 11.57 to 1. The change was made in consequence of loud and serious complaints of the scarcity of coin, good money being carried out and false "Lusshebournes" (Luxembourgs), worth only 8s. in the pound, being brought in. The grievance was so great that Parliament petitioned Edward most urgently to interfere, instancing in special the Lombards, "that they purchased English florins at a lower rate than that which was appointed," and praying "that such persons should not buy or sell the said money, nor make any agreement, in the sale of their merchandise, what money they would receive in rejection of English money." To this it was answered, that it should be commanded throughout England that all persons should receive for their merchandise gold, according to the currency ordained, without any agreement to be made, under pain of imprisonment and heavy ransom, and when any agreement had been made it should be at the will of the purchaser to pay money of gold or silver as he should think fit. At the same time, an ordinance was issued forbidding any person to carry out the King's good money or to bring in counterfeit.

[Sidenote: EDWARD III.'S CHANGES OF RATIO]

The effect of Edward's change of ratio--from 12.59 (the same as the French rate) in 1344 to 11.04 in 1346--told immediately on the French currency, and at the first return to good money in the first year of King John (1350-64) the ratio in that country was changed at a stroke from 12.61 to 11.11. This in its turn acted upon precious metals in England, and for three years the English King found himself futilely struggling against an outflow of silver, by such measures as the hanging and drawing of merchants, before he discovered that it was due to an overvaluation of gold. In 1353, accordingly, he lowered the weight of the gold nobles from 128-4/7 grs. to 120. At the same time, the contents of the silver penny were reduced in a greater proportion (from 20 grs. to 18). By this means the ratio of 11.04, which had prevailed since 1346, was lowered to 11.15.

That this ratio achieved its purpose, as far as England was concerned, is apparent from the simple fact that it remained unaltered for over sixty years until 1414; that it acted adversely upon and drained France of her gold is apparent from the change of the ratio there at her first immediately succeeding return to good money. Two periods of debasement had marked the short reign of John of France (1350-64), and the effect of these and of the influence of the English ratio was such that in 1360 there was no gold in his kingdom. Towards the end of that year, and in the beginning of 1361, John promulgated a reformation of the coinage--a return to good or "forte" money, and in this reformation he adopted a ratio which would act on the English stock of precious metals.

In England, Edward's action in 1353 in lowering the contents of both silver and gold coins, and altering the ratio, had given rise to great discontent, to an extent which proved how wiser and truer to the nation's interest was the King than his people. This diminution of the value of these coins, says the Chronicle, made all things dearer, so that the workmen and servants became assuming and demanded greater wages.

There is as little foundation for such an innuendo as there is for the view which regards this depreciation as an issue of base money. It was simply a measure of precaution, as stopping an invisible and insidious outflow of the currency.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND AND FRANCE IN 1360]

Looked at historically, and not at all controversially, such results as have been just described can only be attributed to the European monetary system of the time. Apart altogether from the arbitrary debasement of the coin, as, e.g., in France--apart even from changes of the ratio enacted with the mere crafty design of inducing a flow of gold, the monetary system of the time was so rough, so unscientific; the tariffing of the coins of different nations against each other was so inexact, so much a matter of rule-of-thumb, of hasty average, that it was simply impossible to issue such general tables of equivalents of coins and such a ratio as would have given stability to the various coinages of Europe. If the currency system of England had been of silver alone, a single enactment lessening the content of the unit coin, or crying up its denomination, would have stopped any outflow caused by under-valuation as compared with foreign money value. The same if it had been only gold. But being combined of the two, being, as it was, both gold and silver, it was necessary, in the case of such outflow, not merely to call down one or both of them below the value of foreign gold or silver, but also and at the same time to establish such a ratio between the two metals for _internal_ circulation as would give no advantage to exchangers acquainted with a different ratio prevailing in some particular part of the Continent. And just the same for the other European money systems. If, for instance, the English sterling had been called down to a value which would of itself have forbidden export to the Continent, but at the same time such a ratio had been left standing between these sterlings and the gold nobles (say 12:1) as was so far in excess of the ratio prevailing in some parts of Europe (say 11:1) as to overlap the amount by which the sterling had been called down, then the result could, and doubtless would, be an outflow of silver, in face and spite of the apparent higher tariff of the English sterling, as against the continental silver coins. This is the historic, patent, undeniable defect and weakness in the bimetallic system of the Europe of that day. It must be borne well in mind how different the problem then was from that which now besets the monetary world. To-day the flow of the precious metals is natural, the indicator, facilitator, and safety-valve of international trade. Such a conception was an utter impossibility to the fourteenth century. The rulers of that age had only one idea, the maintenance or increase of the treasure of the realm, first for military purposes, and then for trade; and their mental horizon was limited by the boundaries of each their little dominion. They could not grasp the idea of Europe as a monetary whole, each fought for his own head or land, and each found a ready weapon to hand in the monetary confusion of the time. In any system so rough and so non-uniform as that of Europe in the fourteenth century, any variation of one metal served as a vantage-point against the other, as a lever to press upon and force it out. One metal would have been safe (so long as no partial depreciation was allowed), two metals served simply as fulcra to each other's oscillations, to the undoing of both. The mediaeval legislator could not grasp that there was a double train of principle and event transacting itself under his very eyes--the one, changes of denomination of coins; the other, changes of ratio. In less than thirty years after Edward III. had cried down the English coins to below the competing denominations of the Continent, the changes of the European ratio had produced their effect, and Richard II. found the realm denuded of its treasure and currency.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND IN 1378]

From 1360 the ratio on the Continent gradually sank from 12:1 till towards the end of the first quarter of the fifteenth century, when it stood in France as low as 9:1.

That France experienced the process, which must have been perfectly natural and due simply to relatively diminishing production of silver in those years, 1360-1425, is seen in her alteration of the ratio from 12 to 10.74 in 1380 and to 10.29 in 1422.

In England the same train of events made itself felt at almost the same moment. In 1378 great complaints were made of the export of gold and silver, and of the enfeebled state of the money which remained in the realm, "so that if a remedy be not speedily applied, the King will receive no more than 4s. where he should receive 5s."

[Sidenote: THE MONETARY INQUIRY OF 1381]

Three years later--one year after the French King had lowered his ratio from 12.1 to 10.74--the Commons presented a petition to the King during the sitting of Parliament, 1381, complaining of the wretched want of the kingdom, which was devoid of treasure, monies of gold and silver being carried out of the realm, and those remaining being clipped to one-third their nominal value. No money at all was being minted in the Tower, and a heavy export of our metals to Scotland and Ireland was taking place. Simultaneously the officers of the Mint presented a petition to the King and his Council in Parliament, complaining that no money was being coined. The causes of this, in their opinion, were--

1. That the monies of gold and silver beyond the seas were more feeble than the monies of England, on which account the merchants could not bring bullion into England for their profit nor for the King's advantage. But if any manner of bullion of gold were brought into the kingdom, by persons travelling, it was sold to those who conveyed it out of England, to their great gain and to the injury of the whole realm.

2. That the silver of England which [i.e. when it] was found to be good and heavy, was taken into Scotland, because the money of that country was so light.

3. That the gold of England being so good and heavy, and that beyond sea so light, the _nobles_ which came from Calais were gone into Flanders, and the English _nobles_ were carried beyond the sea, to the great profit of those who exported them, etc. etc.

4. That the money of gold and silver of England was commonly clipped, so that they who thought they should have L100 would have no more than L90, unless a remedy were speedily applied.

The officers of the Mint were accordingly ordered to be called before the Lords of the Parliament for examination, and they were succeeded by others, private persons but mostly goldsmiths, who were called upon as experts. In the case of these latter the various statements of opinion are preserved for us in the Rolls of Parliament, and they possess a peculiar interest.

Richard Leye thought that the reason why no gold or silver was brought into England, but, on the contrary, that which had been in the kingdom was exported, was this, that the realm expended too much on merchandise, such as grocery, mercery, furs, etc. He therefore proposed that every merchant who imported goods into England should export an equal quantity of the produce of the realm, and that no one should take out gold or silver, contrary to the statutes.

As to the gold not agreeing with the silver (which was Article IV. of the inquiry), he thought that could not be remedied, unless the money were changed, and to change it in any manner would be productive of universal injury to Lords, Commons, etc.

To Article V. he advised that, whereas new money had been made in Flanders and in Scotland, proclamation be made that all manner of coins of Flanders, Scotland, and of all other places beyond the seas, should be no longer current in England, and that no one should receive them in payment except as bullion to be carried to the King's Mint.

Lincoln, a goldsmith, gave his opinion similarly against the permission to export gold and silver, and proposed that the gold noble should remain of the same weight as it had been, but at a greater value.

To the First Article Cranten said, that no more in value of foreign merchandise should be consumed within the realm than should be exported of commodities, the growth of England; and then, whether the money were enhanced or debased, it would hereafter remain within the realm. Also, that exchanges or other payments by letters should not be made out of Flanders, or other parts beyond the seas, to pay in England for any merchandise.

John Hoo advised a proclamation against the carrying out of gold or silver, and that the money should be received by weight.

The statement of opinion of the succeeding and last witness is extremely valuable and interesting. Richard Aylesbury opined that, provided the merchandise exported from England was properly regulated,--that is, if no more of foreign commodities were allowed to be imported than the value of the native products which should be taken out,--the money then in England would remain, and great plenty would come from beyond the seas.

He also conceived it to be expedient that the Pope's collector [of Peter's Pence] should be an Englishman, and that the Pope's money should be sent to him in merchandise and not in coin, and that the journeys of clerks should be entirely forbidden, on pain, etc.

For the feebleness of the gold, which was occasioned by clipping, he conceived there was no other remedy but that it should be universally weighed by those who received it, and that the proclamation should be made accordingly.

_The agreement of the gold with the silver he believed could not be effected unless the money were changed, but that he dared not to propose on account of the general damage which would ensue._

On account of the new money which had been made in Flanders and Scotland, he advised that all Scottish monies should be forbidden by proclamation, and also all other monies from beyond the sea, so that they should have no currency in England; and that no one should take them in payment, except at their value as bullion and for the King's coinage; that no one should export gold or silver, according to the statute in that case made, etc.

And, further, he suggested, by way of information, that the pound of gold which was there made into the sum of 45 nobles (but which pound, by reason of clipping and otherwise impairing, was then valued at 41-1/2 nobles) should be made into 48 nobles, to be current at the same value as before.

This last proposition would have reduced the ratio to a fraction over 11:1--something higher than the ratio prevalent in France. Instead of acting on evidence such as this, however, and so changing the ratio, Richard's Government contented itself with the perfectly useless prohibition of export of gold or silver (statute 5 Rich. II. cap. 1). Four years later, accordingly, the matter was again pressed upon the attention of Parliament, and even by the Chancellor of the realm, Michael de la Pole himself, in his opening speech. The English money, he said, was in greater estimation and of higher value in all other places than in England. It was therefore sought out and craftily withdrawn, and the chief or greatest remedy was to increase the value or price of the said money.

In spite of such recommendation as this the measure was not adopted, and Richard fell back on his previous expedients, crying down by proclamation the value of the Scotch coins, 1387, and of the gold coins of Flanders and Brabant, 1393, and ordaining by enactment that exporters of goods should bring in 1 oz. of gold for every sack of wool which they sold.

Such an ordinance as this last is of the commonest and most frequent occurrence in the enactments of fifteenth-century England, but always unworkable as warring against the most elementary principles of international trade.

On his accession, therefore, Henry IV. found himself heir to an accumulation of monetary evil, through the impolicy and want of courage of Richard.

[Sidenote: THE RECOINAGE OF 1414]

He was obliged, at the request of the mayors and merchants of the staple of Calais, to abolish the last unworkable ordinance just referred to, and attempted at the same time to provide a positive remedy by reviving a proclamation against the currency of silver halfpennies brought from Venice, of which three or four only were equal to one sterling in value. In 1401 the Commons complained in Parliament that nobles of Flanders were so common in England that a man could not receive a sum of 100 shillings without taking three or four such nobles, each of them more feeble than the English noble by two-pence.

A statute was accordingly passed, enacting that all money of gold and silver of the coin of Flanders and all other lands, and of Scotland, should be voided out of the land, or put to coin to the bullion.

It was all in vain. Two years later, 1403, the Commons again complained of the depletion of gold, and again a statute was passed, and so on. This futile process actually reproduces itself yearly up to 1411, when at last the question of a recoinage was fairly faced. By the ordinance for, and regulation of, the money of the realm, of that year, it was provided that, "because of the great scarcity of money at the time," the Master of the Mint should make of every pound of gold 50 nobles, and of silver 30 shillings of esterlings of old alloy.

This recoinage was carried out and finished in the third year of Henry V., 1414. Under it the contents of the silver penny sank from 18 to 15 grs., and of the gold noble from 120 to 108 grs., the consequent change in the ratio being from 11.15, which had prevailed since 1353 to 10.33.

At this latter rate the monetary system of England remained for almost fifty years, viz. up to 1460. But, though the rate endured so long, it is not for a moment to be supposed that the ensuing period was one of repose. Within eight years of the accomplishment of the reform in the English coinage, the ratio in France was lowered to a point somewhat below the established rate in England, and with considerable variation remained lower through all the years in question, 1414-1460. In 1421 it was changed to 10.29, in 1427 to 9, in 1432 to 10.87, and in 1447 to 11.44.

The effect on England, as recorded in the complaints in Parliament, was almost parallel with that in the days of Richard. In 1414 complaints were made against the circulation of galley halfpence by the merchants of Venice. Three years later proclamation was made against the circulation of the gold monies of Flanders, called _Burgundy nobles_, which were of less value than the English nobles. In 1419 it was found that money was being exported "more largely, and in many other manners, than had been accustomed, to the great mischief and impoverishment of the whole realm." And in the following year the usual statute was enacted, on the petition of the Commons, commanding foreign money to be taken as bullion. Again, two years later, 1422, the enfeebled and depreciated state of the coinage was so apparent that the collectors of the subsidy granted in that year by Parliament were instructed to accept nobles as of the denominational value of 6s. 8d. (i.e. the full value), "provided they stretched verily to the value of 5s. 8d. by weight." At the same time silver money was so scarce that "though [i.e. even if] a noble were so good of gold and weight as 6s. 8d., yet men could get no white money for it." In 1423 the Commons complained of the want of silver coins in the realm, "to the great unease and harm of the poorer people of this land," "because [says the statute, which was accordingly enacted], that silver is bought and sold uncoined at 32s. the pound of Troy, whereas the same pound is no more of value at the coin than 32s., with an abatement of 12 dens. for the coinage."

[Sidenote: THE MONETARY TROUBLES OF HENRY VI]

From the twenty-fourth chapter of the statute of 1429 it appears, quite consonantly, "that the merchant aliens had of late introduced a custom of refusing to take silver, as they were wont, for their merchandises, and of taking only gold nobles, half-nobles, and farthings, which, from time to time, they carried out of the realm into other foreign countries, where they were changed to their increase and forged into other coins, so that they gained in the alloy of every noble twenty pence, against the tenor of the statutes, etc., and to the prejudice of the King and realm. Therefore the King, willing to provide a remedy, ordained that no merchant alien should constrain nor bind any of his liege people by promise covenant or liege, to make him payment in gold for any manner of debt due to him, nor refuse to receive payment in silver for any manner of such duty or debt, upon the pain of the double value of the same."

In 1439 provision was again ordered to prevent exportation of money by merchant aliens. It was renewed in 1448, and five years later the Commons petitioned that the silver mines of Devon and Cornwall, which had not been worked for a long time, might be again opened, on account of the great scarcity of money.

The confusion of the Wars of the Roses, however, renders it slightly problematical how far the two successive lowerings of the coinage, which took place in 1460 and 1465 or 1470, are to be attributed to arbitrary action or to a natural process. By the recoinage of 1460 the noble was increased in weight from 108 grs. to 120 grs., and the value from 6s. 8d. to 8s. 4d., being a real appreciation of the grain of gold from .7407 to .7500 of a penny. At approximately the same date, 1464, the weight of the silver penny was lowered from 15 to 12 grs. In the succeeding recoinage of 1465 and 1470 these rates were again altered. A new gold coin, the _angel_, was instituted, weighing 80 grs., and valued at 6s. 8d., while the weight of the silver penny was left unaltered. The ratio was accordingly changed to 11.15.

This was the last change of the coinage made in England before the era of the discovery of America. The internal effects which the changes had on the commerce of the time are hidden from us by the disturbing influences of the Wars of the Roses.

[Sidenote: CONCLUSION OF THE FIRST PERIOD]

But it is, probably, in connection with this change of the English ratio--or with some wider, general movement, acting on both countries alike--that the last monetary ordinances of Louis XI. of France, referred to above, are to be understood.

These acts of conflicting policies mark the conclusion of the first period of European metallic monetary history, for no further changes were enacted previous to the close of the century and the discovery of America. As far as England was concerned, the monetary system remained comparatively unchanged till the days of Henry VII.

On a review of the whole period two simple facts emerge with unmistakable plainness and import.

1. It was a period in which the commercial expanse outstripped the reinforcing supply of the precious metals, and therefore in which a real decline of prices[8] prevails.

2. The evil effects of such decline were enormously increased by shortsighted, crafty manipulation of the currency by the European rulers, and by the rough, unscientific system of the prevailing coinage and exchange rates, and by the inability of the age to understand, or even to perceive, the hidden working of two metals see-sawing against each other--acting as levers against each other--cutting each other's throats. The discovery of America corrected the fall of prices and saved Europe, but it left her rulers as deadly ignorant as before of the workings of bimetallism--to give a name to what they had not even perceived as a phenomenon, much less as a system.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: This is the date accepted by the numismatic authorities. It is adopted by Orsini (_Storia delle Monete della Repubblica Fiorentina_, p. xxiv, where he states the authority for it). It is nevertheless open to serious doubt. See in De Saulcy, Documents I. pp. 115-131, references to florins d'or from 1180 onwards. On the other hand, as to the nature of the florin de compte and its distinction from the florin d'or, see M.L. Blancard, _Revue numismatique_, 1886, pp. 48, 218, and 1887, p. 259; and Vicomte D'Avenel, _Histoire de la propriete, etc._, i. p. 41.]

[Footnote 2: Est a notter que le Roi en fit forger aulcune quantite (some slight quantity) d'or du poids de 12 den. 16 gr. chacune piece laguelle auvrage il dedia seullement pour sou aulmosne aux pauvres ausquels souvent il lavait les piedz par humilite. Et en fut jamais inventee ladite piece d'or pour aultre cause que dessus et non pour monnaie uzuelle et publicque." (De Saulcy, _Documents, i._ 115, 122, 125).]

[Footnote 3: See, however, in De Saulcy, i. 31, a mention of _manteletz d'or de Flandre_ in 1265.]

[Footnote 4: Soetbeer considers the standard in 1386 as 23 fine, and asserts that, by the Mint edict of 1402, it was lowered to 22-1/2 carats.]

[Footnote 5: For an estimation of the _commercial_ effect of these debasements, see Vicomte D'Avenel, _Histoire de la propriete, etc._, i. 53-54]

[Footnote 6: For a similar table calculated in francs, see Vicomte D'Avenel, _Histoire de la propriete, etc._, i. 62, 481, where the figures are very different. On Le Vicomte D'Avenel's method of calculation, see the _English Historical Review_.]

[Footnote 7: See note on p. 397, infra..]

[Footnote 8: By prices here, and subsequently throughout this volume, is meant the price or tariff and Mint rate of the coins. There is no reference whatever to general prices.]