按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
real and nominal price； it is of none in buying and selling； the
more common and ordinary transactions of human life。
At the same time and place the real and the nominal price of
all commodities are exactly in proportion to one another。 The
more or less money you get for any commodity； in the London
market for example； the more or less labour it will at that time
and place enable you to purchase or command。 At the same time and
place； therefore； money is the exact measure of the real
exchangeable value of all commodities。 It is so； however； at the
same time and place only。
Though at distant places； there is no regular proportion
between the real and the money price of commodities； yet the
merchant who carries goods from the one to the other has nothing
to consider but their money price； or the difference between the
quantity of silver for which he buys them； and that for which he
is likely to sell them。 Half an ounce of silver at Canton in
China may command a greater quantity both of labour and of the
necessaries and conveniences of life than an ounce at London。 A
commodity； therefore； which sells for half an ounce of silver at
Canton may there be really dearer； of more real importance to the
man who possesses it there； than a commodity which sells for an
ounce at London is to the man who possesses it at London。 If a
London merchant； however； can buy at Canton for half an ounce of
silver； a commodity which he can afterwards sell at London for an
ounce； he gains a hundred per cent by the bargain； just as much
as if an ounce of silver was at London exactly of the same value
as at Canton。 It is of no importance to him that half an ounce of
silver at Canton would have given him the command of more labour
and of a greater quantity of the necessaries and conveniences of
life than an ounce can do at London。 An ounce at London will
always give him the command of double the quantity of all these
which half an ounce could have done there； and this is precisely
what he wants。
As it is the nominal or money price of goods； therefore；
which finally determines the prudence or imprudence of all
purchases and sales； and thereby regulates almost the whole
business of common life in which price is concerned； we cannot
wonder that it should have been so much more attended to than the
real price。
In such a work as this； however； it may sometimes be of use
to compare the different real values of a particular commodity at
different times and places； or the different degrees of power
over the labour of other people which it may； upon different
occasions； have given to those who possessed it。 We must in this
case compare； not so much the different quantities of silver for
which it was commonly sold； as the different quantities of labour
which those different quantities of silver could have purchased。
But the current prices of labour at distant times and places can
scarce ever be known with any degree of exactness。 Those of corn；
though they have in few places been regularly recorded； are in
general better known and have been more frequently taken notice
of by historians and other writers。 We must generally； therefore；
content ourselves with them； not as being always exactly in the
same proportion as the current prices of labour； but as being the
nearest approximation which can commonly be had to that
proportion。 I shall hereafter have occasion to make several
comparisons of this kind。
In the progress of industry； commercial nations have found
it convenient to coin several different metals into money； gold
for larger payments； silver for purchases of moderate value； and
copper； or some other coarse metal； for those of still smaller
consideration。 They have always； however； considered one of those
metals as more peculiarly the measure of value than any of the
other two； and this preference seems generally to have been given
to the metal which they happened first to make use of as the
instrument of commerce。 Having once begun to use it as their
standard； which they must have done when they had no other money；
they have generally continued to do so even when the necessity
was not the same。
The Romans are said to have had nothing but copper money
till within five years before the first Punic war； when they
first began to coin silver。 Copper； therefore； appears to have
continued always the measure of value in that republic。 At Rome
all accounts appear to have been kept； and the value of all
estates to have been computed either in asses or in sestertii。
The as was always the denomination of a copper coin。 The word
sestertius signifies two asses and a half。 Though the sestertius；
therefore； was originally a silver coin； its value was estimated
in copper。 At Rome； one who owed a great deal of money was said
to have a great deal of other people's copper。
The northern nations who established themselves upon the
ruins of the Roman empire； seem to have had silver money from the
first beginning of their settlements； and not to have known
either gold or copper coins for several ages thereafter。 There
were silver coins in England in the time of the Saxons； but there
was little gold coined till the time of Edward III nor any copper
till that of James I of Great Britain。 In England； therefore； and
for the same reason； I believe； in all other modern nations of
Europe； all accounts are kept； and the value of all goods and of
all estates is generally computed in silver： and when we mean to
express the amount of a person's fortune； we seldom mention the
number of guineas； but the number of pounds sterling which we
suppose would be given for it。
Originally； in all countries； I believe； a legal tender of
payment could be made only in the coin of that metal； which was
peculiarly considered as the standard or measure of value。 In
England； gold was not considered as a legal tender for a long
time after it was coined into money。 The proportion between the
values of gold and silver money was not fixed by any public law
or proclamation； but was left to be settled by the market。 If a
debtor offered payment in gold； the creditor might either reject
such payment altogether； or accept of it at such a valuation of
the gold as he and his debtor could agree upon。 Copper is not at
present a legal tender except in the change of the smaller silver
coins。 In this state of things the distinction between the metal
which was the standard； and that which was not the standard； was
something more than a nominal distinction。
In process of time； and as people became gradually more
familiar with the use of the different metals in coin； and
consequently better acquainted with the proportion between their
respective values； it has in most countries； I believe； been
found convenient to ascertain this proportion； and to declare by
a public law that a guinea； for example； of such a weight and
fineness； should exchange for one…and…twenty shillings； or be a
legal tender for a debt of that amount。 In this state of things；
and during the continuance of any one regulated proportion of
this kind； the distinction between the metal which is the
standard； and that which is not the standard； becomes little more
than a nominal distinction。
In consequence of any change； however； in this regulated
proportion； this distinction becomes； or at least seems to
become； something more than nominal again。 If the regulated value
of a guinea； for example； was either reduced to twenty； or raised
to two…and…twenty shillings； all accounts being kept and almost
all obligations for debt being expressed in silver money； the
greater part of payments could in either case be made with the
same quantity of silver money as before； but would require very
different quantities of gold money； a greater in the one case；
and a smaller in the other。 Silver would appear to be more
invariable in its value than gold。 Silver would appear to measure
the value of gold； and gold would not appear to measure the value
of silver。 The value of gold would seem to depend upon the
quantity of silver which it would exchange for； and the value of
silver would not seem to depend upon the quantity of gold which
it would exchange for。 This difference； however； would be
altogether owing to the custom of keeping accounts； and of
expressing the amount of all great and small sums rather in
silver than in gold money。 One of Mr。 Drummond's notes for
five…and…twenty or fifty guineas would； after an alteration of
this kind； be still payable with five…and…twenty or fifty guineas
in the same manner as before。 It would； after such an alteration；
be payable with the same quantity of gold as before； but with
very different quantities of silver。 In the payment of such a
note； gold would appear to be more invariable in its value than
silver。 Gold would appear to measure the value of silver； and
silver would not a