|
Book One
Of the Causes of Improvement in the Productive Powers of Labour,
And of the Order according to which its Produce is Naturally
Distributed among the Different Ranks of the People.
CHAPTER IV
Of the Origin and Use of Money
WHEN the division of labour has been once thoroughly
established, it is but a very small part of a man's wants which
the produce of his own labour can supply. He supplies the far
greater part of them by exchanging that surplus part of the
produce of his own labour, which is over and above his own
consumption, for such parts of the produce of other men's labour
as he has occasion for. Every man thus lives by exchanging, or
becomes in some measure a merchant, and the society itself grows
to be what is properly a commercial society.
But when the division of labour first began to take place,
this power of exchanging must frequently have been very much
clogged and embarrassed in its operations. One man, we shall
suppose, has more of a certain commodity than he himself has
occasion for, while another has less. The former consequently
would be glad to dispose of, and the latter to purchase, a part
of this superfluity. But if this latter should chance to have
nothing that the former stands in need of, no exchange can be
made between them. The butcher has more meat in his shop than he
himself can consume, and the brewer and the baker would each of
them be willing to purchase a part of it. But they have nothing
to offer in exchange, except the different productions of their
respective trades, and the butcher is already provided with all
the bread and beer which he has immediate occasion for. No
exchange can, in this case, be made between them. He cannot be
their merchant, nor they his customers; and they are all of them
thus mutually less serviceable to one another. In order to avoid
the inconveniency of such situations, every prudent man in every
period of society, after the first establishment of the division
of labour, must naturally have endeavoured to manage his affairs
in such a manner as to have at all times by him, besides the
peculiar produce of his own industry, a certain quantity of some
one commodity or other, such as he imagined few people would be
likely to refuse in exchange for the produce of their industry.
Many different commodities, it is probable, were
successively both thought of and employed for this purpose. In
the rude ages of society, cattle are said to have been the common
instrument of commerce; and, though they must have been a most
inconvenient one, yet in old times we find things were frequently
valued according to the number of cattle which had been given in
exchange for them. The armour of Diomede, says Homer, cost only
nine oxen; but that of Glaucus cost an hundred oxen. Salt is said
to be the common instrument of commerce and exchanges in
Abyssinia; a species of shells in some parts of the coast of
India; dried cod at Newfoundland; tobacco in Virginia; sugar in
some of our West India colonies; hides or dressed leather in some
other countries; and there is at this day a village in Scotland
where it is not uncommon, I am told, for a workman to carry nails
instead of money to the baker's shop or the alehouse.
In all countries, however, men seem at last to have been
determined by irresistible reasons to give the preference, for
this employment, to metals above every other commodity. Metals
can not only be kept with as little loss as any other commodity,
scarce anything being less perishable than they are, but they can
likewise, without any loss, be divided into any number of parts,
as by fusion those parts can easily be reunited again; a quality
which no other equally durable commodities possess, and which
more than any other quality renders them fit to be the
instruments of commerce and circulation. The man who wanted to
buy salt, for example, and had nothing but cattle to give in
exchange for it, must have been obliged to buy salt to the value
of a whole ox, or a whole sheep at a time. He could seldom buy
less than this, because what he was to give for it could seldom
be divided without loss; and if he had a mind to buy more, he
must, for the same reasons, have been obliged to buy double or
triple the quantity, the value, to wit, of two or three oxen, or
of two or three sheep. If, on the contrary, instead of sheep or
oxen, he had metals to give in exchange for it, he could easily
proportion the quantity of the metal to the precise quantity of
the commodity which he had immediate occasion for.
Different metals have been made use of by different nations
for this purpose. Iron was the common instrument of commerce
among the ancient Spartans; copper among the ancient Romans; and
gold and silver among all rich and commercial nations.
Those metals seem originally to have been made use of for
this purpose in rude bars, without any stamp or coinage. Thus we
are told by Pliny, upon the authority of Timaeus, an ancient
historian, that, till the time of Servius Tullius, the Romans had
no coined money, but made use of unstamped bars of copper, to
purchase whatever they had occasion for. These bars, therefore,
performed at this time the function of money.
The use of metals in this rude state was attended with two
very considerable inconveniencies; first, with the trouble of
weighing; and, secondly, with that of assaying them. In the
precious metals, where a small difference in the quantity makes a
great difference in the value, even the business of weighing,
with proper exactness, requires at least very accurate weights
and scales. The weighing of gold in particular is an operation of
some nicety. In the coarser metals, indeed, where a small error
would be of little consequence, less accuracy would, no doubt, be
necessary. Yet we should find it excessively troublesome, if
every time a poor man had occasion either to buy or sell a
farthing's worth of goods, he was obliged to weigh the farthing.
The operation of assaying is still more difficult, still more
tedious, and, unless a part of the metal is fairly melted in the
crucible, with proper dissolvents, any conclusion that can be
drawn from it, is extremely uncertain. Before the institution of
coined money, however, unless they went through this tedious and
difficult operation, people must always have been liable to the
grossest frauds and impositions, and instead of a pound weight of
pure silver, or pure copper, might receive in exchange for their
goods an adulterated composition of the coarsest and cheapest
materials, which had, however, in their outward appearance, been
made to resemble those metals. To prevent such abuses, to
facilitate exchanges, and thereby to encourage all sorts of
industry and commerce, it has been found necessary, in all
countries that have made any considerable advances towards
improvement, to affix a public stamp upon certain quantities of
such particular metals as were in those countries commonly made
use of to purchase goods. Hence the origin of coined money, and
of those public offices called mints; institutions exactly of the
same nature with those of the aulnagers and stamp-masters of
woolen and linen cloth. All of them are equally meant to
ascertain, by means of a public stamp, the quantity and uniform
goodness of those different commodities when brought to market.
The first public stamps of this kind that were affixed to
the current metals, seem in many cases to have been intended to
ascertain, what it was both most difficult and most important to
ascertain, the goodness or fineness of the metal, and to have
resembled the sterling mark which is at present affixed to plate
and bars of silver, or the Spanish mark which is sometimes
affixed to ingots of gold, and which being struck only upon one
side of the piece, and not covering the whole surface, ascertains
the fineness, but not the weight of the metal. Abraham weighs to
Ephron the four hundred shekels of silver which he had agreed to
pay for the field of Machpelah. They are said, however, to be the
current money of the merchant, and yet are received by weight and
not by tale, in the same manner as ingots of gold and bars of
silver are at present. The revenues of the ancient Saxon kings of
England are said to have been paid, not in money but in kind,
that is, in victuals and provisions of all sorts. William the
Conqueror introduced the custom of paying them in money. This
money, however, was, for a long time, received at the exchequer,
by weight and not by tale.
The inconveniency and difficulty of weighing those metals
with exactness gave occasion to the institution of coins, of
which the stamp, covering entirely both sides of the piece and
sometimes the edges too, was supposed to ascertain not only the
fineness, but the weight of the metal. Such coins, therefore,
were received by tale as at present, without the trouble of
weighing.
The denominations of those coins seem originally to have
expressed the weight or quantity of metal contained in them. In
the time of Servius Tullius, who first coined money at Rome, the
Roman as or pondo contained a Roman pound of good copper. It was
divided in the same manner as our Troyes pound, into twelve
ounces, each of which contained a real ounce of good copper. The
English pound sterling, in the time of Edward I, contained a
pound, Tower weight, of silver, of a known fineness. The Tower
pound seems to have been something more than the Roman pound, and
something less than the Troyes pound. This last was not
introduced into the mint of England till the 18th of Henry VIII.
The French livre contained in the time of Charlemagne a pound,
Troyes weight, of silver of a known fineness. The fair of Troyes
in Champaign was at that time frequented by all the nations of
Europe, and the weights and measures of so famous a market were
generally known and esteemed. The Scots money pound contained,
from the time of Alexander the First to that of Robert Bruce, a
pound of silver of the same weight and fineness with the English
pound sterling. English, French, and Scots pennies, too,
contained all of them originally a real pennyweight of silver,
the twentieth part of an ounce, and the two-hundred-and-fortieth
part of a pound. The shilling too seems originally to have been
the denomination of a weight. When wheat is at twelve shillings
the quarter, says an ancient statute of Henry III, then wastel
bread of a farthing shall weigh eleven shillings and four pence.
The proportion, however, between the shilling and either the
penny on the one hand, or the pound on the other, seems not to
have been so constant and uniform as that between the penny and
the pound. During the first race of the kings of France, the
French sou or shilling appears upon different occasions to have
contained five, twelve, twenty, and forty pennies. Among the
ancient Saxons a shilling appears at one time to have contained
only five pennies, and it is not improbable that it may have been
as variable among them as among their neighbours, the ancient
Franks. From the time of Charlemagne among the French, and from
that of William the Conqueror among the English, the proportion
between the pound, the shilling, and the penny, seems to have
been uniformly the same as at present, though the value of each
has been very different. For in every country of the world, I
believe, the avarice and injustice of princes and sovereign
states, abusing the confidence of their subjects, have by degrees
diminished the real quantity of metal, which had been originally
contained in their coins. The Roman as, in the latter ages of the
Republic, was reduced to the twenty-fourth part of its original
value, and, instead of weighing a pound, came to weigh only half
an ounce. The English pound and penny contain at present about a
third only; the Scots pound and penny about a thirty-sixth; and
the French pound and penny about a sixty-sixth part of their
original value. By means of those operations the princes and
sovereign states which performed them were enabled, in
appearance, to pay their debts and to fulfil their engagements
with a smaller quantity of silver than would otherwise have been
requisite. It was indeed in appearance only; for their creditors
were really defrauded of a part of what was due to them. All
other debtors in the state were allowed the same privilege, and
might pay with the same nominal sum of the new and debased coin
whatever they had borrowed in the old. Such operations,
therefore, have always proved favourable to the debtor, and
ruinous to the creditor, and have sometimes produced a greater
and more universal revolution in the fortunes of private persons,
than could have been occasioned by a very great public calamity.
It is in this manner that money has become in all civilised
nations the universal instrument of commerce, by the intervention
of which goods of all kinds are bought and sold, or exchanged for
one another.
What are the rules which men naturally observe in exchanging
them either for money or for one another, I shall now proceed to
examine. These rules determine what may be called the relative or
exchangeable value of goods.
The word value, it is to be observed, has two different
meanings, and sometimes expresses the utility of some particular
object, and sometimes the power of purchasing other goods which
the possession of that object conveys. The one may be called
"value in use"; the other, "value in exchange." The things which
have the greatest value in use have frequently little or no value
in exchange; and, on the contrary, those which have the greatest
value in exchange have frequently little or no value in use.
Nothing is more useful than water: but it will purchase scarce
anything; scarce anything can be had in exchange for it. A
diamond, on the contrary, has scarce any value in use; but a very
great quantity of other goods may frequently be had in exchange
for it.
In order to investigate the principles which regulate the
exchangeable value of commodities, I shall endeavour to show:
First, what is the real measure of this exchangeable value;
or, wherein consists the real price of all commodities.
Secondly, what are the different parts of which this real
price is composed or made up.
And, lastly, what are the different circumstances which
sometimes raise some or all of these different parts of price
above, and sometimes sink them below their natural or ordinary
rate; or, what are the causes which sometimes hinder the market
price, that is, the actual price of commodities, from coinciding
exactly with what may be called their natural price.
I shall endeavour to explain, as fully and distinctly as I
can, those three subjects in the three following chapters, for
which I must very earnestly entreat both the patience and
attention of the reader: his patience in order to examine a
detail which may perhaps in some places appear unnecessarily
tedious; and his attention in order to understand what may,
perhaps, after the fullest explication which I am capable of
giving of it, appear still in some degree obscure. I am always
willing to run some hazard of being tedious in order to be sure
that I am perspicuous; and after taking the utmost pains that I
can to be perspicuous, some obscurity may still appear to remain
upon a subject in its own nature extremely abstracted.
|