Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 16.djvu/751

Rh {{11fine|reckoned equivalent to one ox. The recognition of these objects as universal legal representatives of value, or, in other words, as money, may be traced back to the epoch of a purely pastoral economy.&ldquo; The Icelandic law bears witness to a similar state of things; while the various fines in the different Teutonic codes are estimated in cattle. The Latin word {{abbr|{{lang|la|pecunia}}|Latin: &ldquo;money&rdquo; or &ldquo;wealth&rdquo;}} ({{abbr|{{lang|la|pecus}}|Latin: &ldquo;livestock&rdquo;}}) is an evidence of the earliest Roman money being composed of cattle. The English fee and the famous term feudal, according to its most probable etymology, are derived from the same root. In a well-known passage of the Iliad the value of two different sets of armour is estimated in terms of oxen. The Irish law tracts bear evidence as to the use of cattle as one of the measures of value in early Irish civilization. Within the last few years it has been prominently brought before the public that oxen form the principal wealth and the circulating medium among the Zulus and Kaffres. On the testimony of an eye-witness we are assured that, &ldquo;as cattle constitute the sole wealth of the people, so they are their only medium of such transactions as involve exchange, payment, or reward.&rdquo; We find that cattle-rents are paid by the pastoral Indian tribes to the United States Government. From the prominence of slavery in early societies it is natural to suppose that slaves would be adopted as a medium of exchange, and one of the measures of value in the Irish law tracts, {{lang|ga|cumhal}}, is said to have originally meant a female slave. They are at present applied to this purpose in Central Africa, and also in New Guinea. On passing to the agricultural stage a greater number of objects are round capable of being applied to currency purposes. Among these are {{nowrap|corn—}}used even at present in {{nowrap|Norway—}}maize, olive oil, cocoa-nuts, and tea. The most remarkable instance of an agricultural product being used as currency is to be found in the case of tobacco, which was adopted as legal tender by the English colonists in North America. Another class of articles used for money consists of ornaments, which among all uncivilized tribes serve this purpose. The haiqua-shells mentioned before are an instance, cowries in India, whales teeth among the Fijians, red feathers among some South Sea Island tribes, and finally, any attractive kinds of stone which can be easily worked. Mineral products, so far as they do not come under the preceding head, furnish another class. Thus salt was used in Abyssinia and Mexico, while the {{nowrap|metals—}}a phenomenon which will require a more careful {{nowrap|examination—}}have succeeded in finally driving all their inferior competitors out of the field, and have become the sole substances for money at present.} }

4.Metallic Forms of Money. Their Superiority over other Substances. Special Advantages of Silver and Gold.—The use of metals as a form of money can be traced far back in the history of civilization, but, as it is not possible to ascertain the historical order of their respective adoptions for this purpose, we will take them in the order of their value, beginning with the lowest. Iron, judging from the statement of Aristotle, was extensively employed as currency. One remarkable instance of this which at once occurs to the mind is the Spartan money, which is clearly a survival of the older system that had died out among the other Greeks, though by modern writers it has been attributed to ascetic policy. In conjunction with copper, iron formed an early Chinese currency, and till recently it was a subsidiary coinage in Japan. Iron spikes are used in Central Africa, while Adam Smith notices the use of nails for money in Scotland. Lead has also served as money, as it does at present in Burmah. Copper has been more widely employed than either of the previously-mentioned metals. Its use in China as a parallel standard with iron has just been mentioned. The early Hebrew coins were chiefly composed of it, while down to 269undefined the sole Roman coinage was an alloy of copper. Till a very recent period it formed the principal money of some poorer European states (as Sweden), and was the subsidiary coinage of the United Kingdom till the present bronze fractional currency was introduced. Tin was not so favourite a material for money as copper, but the early English coinages were composed of it, probably on account of the fertile tin mines of Cornwall, and in later times halfpence and farthings of tin have been struck. The next metal which comes into notice is silver, which up to the last few years was the principal form of money, and even still is able to dispute the field with its most formidable rival. It formed the main basis of Greek coins, and was introduced at Rome in 269undefined The mediæval money was principally composed of silver, and its position in recent times will have to be subsequently noticed more at length. Gold, which is the most valuable of the metals widely used for monetary purposes, has been steadily gaining ground with the growth of commerce. The earliest trace of its use in common with that of silver is to be found &ldquo;in the pictures of the ancient Egyptians weighing in scales heaps of rings of gold and silver.&rdquo; The only other metals used for money—platinum and nickel—may be easily disposed of. The former of these was coined for a short time by the Russian Government, and then given up as unsuitable. The latter is only used as an alloy. The examination of the forms of currency, both metallic and non-metallic, in which we have been engaged leads to certain definite conclusions as to the course which the evolution of currency is pursuing. It appears (1)that the metals tend to supersede all other forms of money among progressive peoples, and (2)that certain metals tend to supersede the others. From this we are led to consider the qualities which are desirable in the material of money, and to conclude that the presence or absence of those qualities is the reason of the adoption or rejection of any given substance. (1)In the first place, it is necessary that the material of money should be desirable, or, in other words, possess value; and to this condition all the commodities we have reviewed conform, for otherwise they would never have attained the position of being a medium of exchange. This quality, then, is not the reason for the preference of some forms over others. (2)The second requisite clearly is that the value of the article shall be high in proportion to its weight or bulk, or, to put the same truth in another way, it is requisite that it shall be portable. Want of this quality has been a fatal obstacle to many early forms of money retaining their place. Skins, corn, and tobacco were found very difficult to transfer from place to place. Iron and copper too suffered from the same defect, while sheep and oxen, though moving themselves, were expensive to transfer. (3)It is further desirable that the material of money shall be the same throughout, and that one unit shall be equal in value to another. This is a reason for rejecting the widespread currency composed of cattle, as the difference between one and another head is of course often considerable. The metals possess a particular advantage in this respect, as, after being refined, they are almost exactly homogeneous. (4)A fourth requisite is that the substance used as money can without damage be divided and, if needed, united again; here also the desired quality is peculiarly possessed by the metals, as they are easily fusible, while skins or precious stones suffer greatly in value by division, and it need hardly be added that the same is the case with regard to animals. (5)Money must also be durable. This at once removes from the articles suitable for money all animal and many vegetable substances. Eggs or oil will not keep, and consequently soon lose their value. Iron, too, is liable to rust, which, combined with its low value, is a reason for its disuse as currency. (6)Money should be easily distinguishable, and there should be no trouble in ascertaining its value. This condition is one of the reasons why precious stones have never been much used as money, their value being hard to estimate. The same objection applies to most non-metallic currencies, and is only obviated even in their case by the process of assaying. (7)The last condition which 