This, in a few words, is, I think, the answer to the question proposed. Princes have for several centuries, in almost every nation in Europe, been gradually debasing the standard of their money-unit; and the debts they have contracted during the debasement have constantly been an argument against the restoring it. But had they first regulated all their debts upon the footing of the last debasement, stipulating with their creditors that they were to be paid upon the footing of the then currency, that is to say, according to the French stile, au[au] cours du jour of the stipulation; they then might, without any advantage to their creditors, and with great profit to themselves, have restored the standard, and so prepared the means of executing the same operation as before, upon a new emergency.
Writers against this practice have used wrong arguments to dissuade Princes from it.
Those who have writ against this practice of debasing the standard, have made use of wrong arguments to dissuade Princes from following such a measure. They have first represented it as hurtful to their own interest. This we have seen is not always true. They have also endeavoured to prove that it is vastly prejudicial to commerce. This is the great point laboured by Dutot, in his Reflexions Politiques sur le Commerce; but to very little purpose. All the facts and arguments he has produced to prove (by the source of exchange) that the variations made in France in the standard value of their crown of three livres did hurt to the trade of that nation, prove nothing at all, as it would be easy to shew, were this a proper place. The hurt done to manufactures is greater; but, in a trading nation, those establishments being under the influence and direction of merchants, who are perfectly instructed as to every consequence of such alterations, the manufacturers, after a very short time, raise their prices to the full proportion of the increase in the denomination of the coin.
The proper arguments against it are three.
The real inconveniencies which proceed from this exercise of power, may be reduced to three.
1. It disturbs the ideas of a people with regard to value.
1mo, It disturbs the ideas of a whole nation with regard to value, and gives an advantage in all bargains, to those of the society who can calculate, over those who cannot.
2. It either robs the class of debtors or of creditors.
2do, It robs the whole class of debtors when the standard is raised; and it robs the whole class of creditors when it is debased.