itself fractional, and must be doubled and carried to 31 to make even numbers.

"The franc is simply a monetary word, which expresses five grams of silver nine-tenths fine. It is the French monetary unity. Gold having a value of 15 times greater than silver, it requires 153 francs each of 5 grams of silver (say 5× 15-77 grams) to buy 5 grams of gold, or 155 grams of silver to buy 10 grams of gold. As 31 is the smallest even number of this relation, 31 is the smallest number of franes which can be represented by a piece of gold having an even weight of grams. No enlightened government would consent to confine its gold coinage to pieces of 31 francs and its multiples. We therefore perceive that France has made complete abstraction of metrical weight in its gold coins, not one of which weighs an even number of grams.

"The proposed 25-franc piece would weigh 8 grams .0625, and, in fact, would more nearly approach an even metrical weight than any French gold piece now existing.

"This relation of 15 to 1 is practically prescribed by the French law, which enacts that 155 (5×31) pieces of 20 francs, being 3,100 francs, shall weigh 1,000 grams, or one kilogram; but the same ratio would exist between 124 (4 × 31) gold pieces of 25 francs, which would also contain 3,100 francs, and would also weigh one kilogram.

"The United States have never attempted to fix a decimal weight for their gold coins, although they were among the first to adopt a decimal monetary system. The present gold dollar weighs 25.8 grains troy, which is about equal to 1671 milligrams, and exceeds the metrical weight of the French 5-franc piece about 584 milligrams

"A gram of gold nine-tenths fine is equivalent in round numbers to 30 pence English, or 60 cents of the United States. Consequently, 58 milligrams taken from the dollar would reduce it about 33 cents, or 292 milligrams taken from the half eagle of five dollars would reduce it 171⁄2 cents, being about 34 per cent.

"It is needless to expatiate on the comparative merits of a decimal, a duodecimal, or a binary system, for the reason that the decimal system has become a fixed fact in a large portion of the civilized world, rendering any change practically impossible. In like manner the unification of the coinage of the world has become a question of a nature more practical than scientific in character, chiefly falling within the domain of commerce and finance.

"To prevent any misapprehension on either side of the Atlantic, it should be distinctly understood that the conference did not propose, nor was any proposition or suggestion made in that body, or elsewhere, to

abandon the use in any way of the word 'dollar,' or 'sovereign,' or 'thaler,' or 'florin,' or 'ruble,' for any other local denomination of money, or in any way to substitute the word 'franc' for any or either of them. By the proposed unification, all those terms will be practically rendered synonymous or mutually convertible, but every nation will continue to use the names with the local emblems it may prefer.

"That such will be the case is now fully evident from the fact that since the adjournment of the conference in July last a preliminary treaty has been signed by accredited representatives from France and Austria, providing for the issue of a gold coin of the weight and value of 25 francs, for the international use and convenience of those two important powers, and by which the 10 florins of Austria are made precisely equal in weight and value to the 25 francs of France, the coin of each nation to be stamped with the head of its respective emperor.

"A specimen or medal in gold, showing the weight and diameter of the proposed coin, with its reverse inscribed 'Or. Essai Monétaire, encircling 25 franes, 10 florins, 1867,' has been already struck by order of the government of France, a duplicate of which was recently delivered at Paris to the Emperor of Austria."

A similar specimen or medal in gold has also been struck, inscribed on its reverse "5 dollars, 25 francs, 1867," three duplicates of which, with the proper official letters from M. Dumas, "senator of France and President of the Commission on coins and medals," were intrusted to Mr. Ruggles for delivery to the President, to the Secretary of State, and to the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States. A fourth specimen was presented to the distinguished delegate.

The diameter of this proposed international coin is 24 millimetres, exceeding a little that of the present half-eagle of the United States, and that of the sovereign of Great Britain, while the medallion of the Emperor, in bold relief, on the face of the coin to be issued in France, distinguishes it at once from the ordinary "Napoleon" of 20 francs, which is only 21 millimetres in diameter.

PROFESSOR LEVI'S SPEECH ON THE PROPOSITION OF TAKING THE FIVEFRANC AS A BASIS OF INTERNATIONAL COINAGE.1

With great deference to the proposal of the committee, and much as I agree in the principle therein embodied, I must be allowed to express that it seems to me quite inexpedient and impracticable to take the piece of five francs in gold as the unit of the monetary system for all countries, because it is too small as a gold coin, very easily lost, too costly to pro

1 This speech, and the following report by the delegates from Great Britain, of the doings of the international monetary conference, are extracted from the official "Report of the International Conference on Weights, Measures and Coins, held in Paris, June, 1867," and "Report on the International Monetary Conference, &c., presented to the House of Commons by command of Her Majesty," in pursuance of their address, dated March 9, 1868. London: printed by Harrison & Sons. Page 75.

duce, much more subject to wear and tear and diminution in value, and too small for large transactions of commerce and finance. In England the introduction of this piece as a unit would be impossible. But it may be taken as a sub-multiple.

It has been suggested that the five-franc piece in gold is very nearly the fifth of the pound sterling, and that it might be made identical. But the value of the pound is 25.20 and not 25 francs. To reduce the value of the pound to 25 francs, we should have to reduce its weight of gold from 7.322 grams to 7.258 grams; whilst, according to the proposition which we have just passed, to make the gold coinage nine-tenths fine, the pound would become heavier in weight by .0166. We have now some 80,000,000 to 100,000,000 sovereigns in circulation. From 1856 to 1866 only, there were issued 49,200,000 sovereigns. If a new pound were coined of 25 francs exactly, the same would have to circulate together with the old pound of 25.20, but the difference between the two would be so slight that we should constantly mistake the one for the other. It was said that government might declare the value of the pound now in circulation at 25 francs, because in effect it is somewhat lighter in weight, and if necessary a seigniorage might be charged. But allowing all this, such difference would not reach 20 centimes on each pound; and if the government should declare the pound 25 francs, which is worth more, the bullion merchants would soon buy it for exportation. And how would old debts and old transactions be affected by such a change? Two pence per pound would have to be given in each case where contracts are pending on the old coinage; and the labor of altering all the books and accounts for that difference would be still more inconvenient, as it is small and in a manner indefinite.

If, therefore, I cannot see my way to approve of the suggestion of reducing the pound to 25 francs, it would be useless for England, and from an international point of view, that France should coin a piece of that sum, which otherwise would not be required in France. Nor does it seem that the maintenance of the pound is likely to lead to the decimalization of the British coinage. The only scheme proposed for that based on the pound sterling is, that which contemplates the division of the pound into 1,000 mills instead of 960 farthings, but serious obstacles attend the carrying out of the scheme. The first is the necessity of altering seriously all the copper coinage, including the penny, which is an old unit in the kingdom, and some of the silver coins also. Change the penny, and what shall be its equivalent for penny postage, penny toll, and all the taxes and all the wages regulated by that coin? Four mills would be too little; five mills too much. Any change in the name of the copper coinage is necessarily attended with great difficulty. A still greater defect of the pound and mill scheme is that many of the coins. which this new system would introduce have no distinct equivalent in the coins already in existence. They would stand alone and unchangeable, except with a sacrifice of fractions in every transaction. Another

defect is the undeniable fact that with three decimals, counting always by thousands, no great facility of calculation, no great economy of time, no great conciseness of expression, would in fact be attained. The number of figures required in the present system to express all the sums from one penny to 10 shillings is 250; in the pound and mill scheme it is 335. It would be easier, moreover, especially as it is more familiar to us in England, to conceive the idea embraced in 17 shillings 11 pence than in 895 mills.

Possibly the liability to errors also is even less in the present system than in the other. The only recommendation of that scheme is the maintenance of the pound. But though bankers and merchants confine their attention to that unit, dealing as they do with large transactions, the government could not overlook the penny, and could not ignore the interests of the millions whose daily transactions might be seriously deranged by such a change. A better mode of arriving at a decimal and international system of coinage, it seems to me, is that England should take the 10-franc piece as a unit, and divide it into 100 pence of the current coin; especially since, in reality, the penny is intrinsically, if not nominally, equal in value to the 10-centime piece. What would be the difficulty of her issuing such a coin, which, as suggested, might be called a ducat, and a tenpenny piece as the tenth part of it? Being altogether a new coin it will be easy to issue it of the new alloy, and nearly all the existing coins would continue untouched. It would certainly be better that the shilling and the half sovereign should be withdrawn, because they would be too like the 10 pence and the 100 pence; but otherwise no change would be caused in any of the coins in use. Should the 10-franc piece be found too small as a unit, we may easily have a larger unit in a piece of 100 francs, or of the value of nearly four pounds sterling. For France the unit of 10 francs in gold would be very convenient, as it would perfect her decimal system, and would improve her money of accounts by taking a unit ten times larger than the franc. The United States would have to double their dollar, but the value of everything is now greater than it was some time ago. We find in England that the halfpenny and the farthing are but little used, since we have to pay a penny now for what we paid a halfpenny before, and the experience of the United States will be the same. What we should aim at is, the adoption of one and the same unit by all nations; a unit with subsidiary coins alike everywhere. We must remember that all questions of prices, wages, fares, &c., are generally by such subsidiary coins as the franc, the pence, &c. Unless we attain uniformity in these we effect no real reform. Now, by adopting the 10 francs we have all

If issued in the first instance as a subsidiary coin or token, the gold ducat might be declared by law to be of the value of 100 pence, notwithstanding the slight difference in relation to their nominal value. Should, however, the coin and the decimal system founded upon it find favor with the public so as to justify the government in declaring it a primary unit, then its relation to the sovereign would be regulated by tariff according to its intrinsic value.

this absolutely, and therefore I commend it to the earnest attention of the conference. I have much pleasure in announcing that the Chambers of Commerce, the International Decimal Association, and the Metric Committee of the British Association, have all decided that great advantage would result by the adhesion of Great Britain to the principles of the monetary convention concluded December 23, 1865, between France, Italy, Switzerland, and Belgium, by article 12, of which convention the right of accession is, under certain conditions, reserved for other states. I apprehend that the British government could not authorize her representatives at the Monetary Conference held at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to make any engagement on this question, because it has not yet been discussed by the nation; but I do not doubt that the resolutions of this and the other conference will have a great influence on public opinion in England, and that, animated by the most sincere friendship for France and for the great sovereign who so wisely presides over her destinies, and most desirous to be united by material, moral, and intellectual bonds with all nations, England will applaud and accept with pleasure the propositions which we may adopt with a view to introducing uniformity in the coinage of all countries.

REPORT BY THE DELEGATES FROM GREAT BRITAIN.1

May it please your lordships, we have the honor to lay before you the minutes of the proceedings of the recent International Monetary Conference which we were instructed to attend on behalf of her Majesty's government.

The invitation to the conference emanated, as your lordships are aware, from the French government, and its object was stated to be the discussion of the means by which a complete or partial uniformity might be established between the various monetary systems at present in existence in the countries of Europe and in the United States of America.

The convention of December 23, 1865, concluded between the governments of France, Belgium, Italy and Switzerland, which established an identity in the weight and fineness of the coins of those countries, as well as in the conditions under which they might be manufactured and pass current, was especially indicated as a basis for the deliberations of the conference; the right of joining the convention having by the 13th clause been reserved to all other countries which might be prepared to adopt its provisions.

The necessity for an understanding between the governments of those four states originated in the alteration of the relative value of the precious metals occasioned in recent years by the influx of gold from the newly discovered fields of California and Australia, and the disturbing

1 Report, addressed to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, by the Master of the Mint and Mr. C. R. Wilson, on the International Monetary Conference, December 2, 1867, signed by Sir Thomas Graham and C. Rivers Wilson.