Principles of Political Economy, Vol. 1

by Wilhelm Roscher

In Europe, also, the obtaining of the precious metals during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries took a great stride, especially in Germany;[839] but, on the other hand, the Spanish gold and silver mines were closed in 1535 by a law. In the seventeenth century, there was another lull, followed, at the end of the eighteenth, by a second period of activity which has not yet closed. The great development of the production of gold in the Ural mines since 1819, and in the Altai mines since 1829,[840] the revival of the production of silver in the old Spanish [pg 411] mines since 1835,[841] and Pattinson's discovery, by means of which the poorest lead ores containing silver may be refined, are here of great importance.[842] Shortly before 1848, it was estimated that all the mines of the old world produced annually about 274,000 kilogrammes of silver, and 56,000 kilogrammes of gold, with an aggregate value of over 69,000,000 thalers.[843][844]

Section CXXXVII.

Revolution In Prices At The Beginning Of Modern History.

The mere discovery of new and richer mines need not, of itself, lower the price of the precious metals. Their price depends on their cost of production; and it may be very much increased, even under the most favorable natural conditions, by the unskillfulness of labor, the dearness of the means of [pg 412] subsistence, of machinery and of auxiliary substances, by insecurity to property or to the person; by war, oppressive taxes[845] etc. The new mines can produce a decline in the price of the precious metals only to the extent that, for the same amount of capital and labor expended, they, spite of all such deductions, produce a greater result.[846]

I opine that the price of metallic money, since the discovery of America, has diminished until the present time in the ratio of from three to four to one.[847] The prices of wheat in France, [pg 413] from 1800 to 1850, were about seven times as great as in the second half of the fifteenth century; and in England about six times as great. But, it is not to be overlooked here, how wheat may have grown dearer in itself (an sich) and how gold declined considerably less than silver. True, this decline of the precious metals was not an entirely steady one. We meet at the beginning of the modern era with a real revolution in prices. The prices of rye, in lower Saxony, from 1525 to 1550, were twice as high as from 1475 to 1500. According to Garnier, the French prices of wheat, from 1450 to 1500, were, on an average, 408 francs of the present time per setier; from 1501 to 1520, 5 francs; from 1522 to 1540, 11.26 francs; from 1541 to 1560, 11.69 francs; from 1561 to 1580, 21.33 francs; from 1581 to 1600, 32.51 francs; during the first half of the seventeenth century, 22.77 francs; in the second half, 26.83 francs; from 1701 to 1750, 19.64 francs. Similarly in England, where wheat cost, from 1560 to 1600, 2.64 times as much as from 1450 to 1500.[848]

Now, the increased production of the mines cannot be the only cause of this great perturbation in prices. It commenced, in most countries, at a time when the supplies from America were still too small to account for such an effect. One of the chief causes of the phenomenon was, that precisely at this period, there was in so many nations a transition from a sluggish circulation of money, made still more sluggish by the custom which everywhere prevailed of hoarding treasure, to a rapid circulation, which was made still more rapid by the use of all kinds of substitutes for money. (§ [123]).[849] In the earliest ripe fruit of European civilization (Italy), this transition had long been accomplished; and, on that account, the value in exchange of the precious metals was there, for a long time previous, comparatively low.[850]

From the second third of the seventeenth century, the value of the medium of circulation seems, on the whole, to have remained stationary.[851] Tooke seeks to demonstrate the steady [pg 415] decline of the value of money until late in the eighteenth century, from the fact that the wages of labor increased during that time; but I should rather connect the latter phenomenon with the simultaneous elevation of the classes engaged in manual labor. And so Adam Smith infers a rise in the price of money after the beginning of the eighteenth century, from the prices of wheat;[852] but it would be better to consider the cause of this to be the unusually long series of good crops.[853] An equally unusually long series of bad harvests, during the second half of the century, accounts satisfactorily for the simultaneous rise of the medium prices of corn. The great war which lasted from 1793 to 1815, too, according to a very prevalent opinion, must have caused the value of money to decline; a fact which is generally accredited to the increase of paper money in so many states.

Every great war may very easily have for effect to slacken the speed of the circulation of money, to promote the hoarding and even the burial of treasure for a rainy day, and to paralyze credit and its power to supply the place of money. Hence, it seems preferable to seek for the cause of the variations in price, during the great war, in the commodities themselves whose price was affected; since their production must [pg 416] have been enormously disturbed. It rendered the brawniest men and the most powerful horses unproductive, and even employed them as agents of destruction. It interrupted trade in a thousand ways, or drove it into unnatural channels, and turned the intellectual interests of nations into every direction save that of economic industry. To this must be added the absence of security everywhere.[854]

The cessation of these restrictions upon production, in consequence of the restoration of peace throughout the world and the great progress afterwards made in almost all branches of industry, explain why, from 1818 to 1848, the precious metals have apparently stood higher than during the period immediately preceding.[855][856]