These appearances seem inconsistent with the principles above laid down; and a reason must be given why these principles do not operate their effect in this example.
I answer, that circumstances are infinite, and must constantly be attended to; and there are in the case before us several specialities not to be overlooked; I shall therefore point them out, in my answers to the three questions, as they lie in order.
As to the first, I answer, that these shillings are in so small a quantity, in proportion to the gold species, that they cannot be employed in payments. Now it has been said above, that exchange (in trade) regulates the value of the pound sterling, and considers it as a determinate value, according to the combination of the intrinsic worth of all the several currencies, in proportion as payments are made in one or the other. Now (generally speaking) no commercial obligations are acquitted in silver. I do not understand by the word payments, a few pounds sterling sent from farmers in the country, perhaps in payments of their rents to their landlords; nor what falls into the public offices, in the payment of taxes. It is trade alone, and the payment of bills of exchange between different countries, which can ascertain the true value of that currency in which mercantile payments are made. Were these worn-out shillings in such plenty as to allow bills of exchange to be acquitted in them, I make no doubt but they would fall below the value of the 1⁄21 of new guineas; every one would be glad to dispose of them for guineas, at the rate of their currency; and guineas, then, would be as difficult to be got for silver, as silver is now to be had for guineas. This would bring the standard still lower than it is at present; that is, below the value of the gold: but as payments cannot be made in shillings, their currency cannot affect the standard.
The second question is, Why they should be so difficult to obtain in change for guineas, which are above their value?
I answer, that it is not the intrinsic worth of the light shillings which makes them valuable, and difficult to be got; but the utility they are of in small circulation, forces people to part with their guineas for a less valuable currency. These shillings I consider (now) as marks, not as material money, fitted to a standard. Every body knows the difference between marks or counters, and specie of intrinsic worth. The copper coin of most nations is marks, and passes current, although it does not contain the intrinsic value of the denomination it carries; nor ought it to be a legal tender in payments above a certain sum. Such a regulation preserves its usefulness for small circulation, and prevents it, at the same time, from debasing the standard, and involving in confusion the specific currency (as I may call the gold and silver coins) when properly proportioned, and of just weight.
But shillings in England, although they be at present in a manner no better than marks, because of their lightness; yet in the eye of the law they continue to be lawful money, and a legal tender in payments. It is therefore of great consequence that such shillings be not in too great plenty. That would have been the case, had government come in to the plan proposed for the coinage of shillings below the standard; such shillings would have been coined abroad, and run in upon England, to the great detriment of the nation; and although they had been proscribed in payments, beyond a certain sum, yet they would have been so multiplied in small payments, as to have furnished a means of buying up the gold coin, and carrying it out of the country for an under-value. Whereas the worn shillings do not produce that bad effect, from the scarcity of them, and from the impossibility of imitating them in foreign mints[[5]].
[5]. It is commonly believed that shillings are coined at Birmingham, and that government winks at the abuse, because of the great scarcity of silver in England. I find no foundation for this belief, after the inquiry I have made.
In the first place, Mr. Harris, who was the best assay-maker in Europe, told me, that a bag of those shillings had been sent to the mint by the Lords of the Treasury, to be tried by him: that he had found them to be English standard, to the most scrupulous exactness: that he did not believe any such correct assay could be made, except at the mint: that all the engravers of the mint declared it was impossible to imitate a worn shilling.
The trials I myself made were of a different nature. I examined the shillings with a magnifying glass; and found almost every one different in the impression, as well as in the weight. In some the back-part of the head was worn, in others the face: none, in short, were worn perfectly alike.