ON rRECIOUS METALS IN USE AS MONET. 221 



the known facts as to the paper circulation of countries which use paper 

 instead of gold, and which are in circumstances otherwise analogous to 

 those of gold-using countries — e.g., Scotland, which uses one-pound notes 

 where sovereigns are used in England — that the above figures as to gold 

 used in England must be greatly exaggerated. 



But if we attempt after the manner of Jevons to make corrections for 

 tlie amount of coin exported, the imperfection of the statistical material 

 recurs upon us with aggravated force (8). 



There is added, in the case of the United Kingdom, the special 

 difficulty that the superior limit afforded by the statistics of coinage must 

 be enormously in excess, consisting as it does (for recent years) of the 

 number of coins issued from the mints in Australia as well as the United 

 Kingdom. 



Altogether it appears to us that none of these methods can at present 

 afford other than the most vague estimate of the amount of coin circulating 

 in the United Kingdom. With respect to other countries indeed the 

 objections which we insist upon may be less forcible (9). 



The Committee have cast about how to remedy the defects which have 

 been noticed (10). The suggestion has been made to reason from the 

 known number of one-pound notes in Scotland to the unknown number of 

 sovereigns in England after this manner. As the volume of transactions 

 in Scotland is to the volume of transactions in England, so is the number 

 of one-pound notes to the number of sovereigns (11). But however good 

 this suggestion may be by way of criticism, and if it is carefully handled, 

 it would not of course be sufficieutly trustworthy by itself to yield a con- 

 elusion that could be relied on. 



The Committee entertain the possibility of making inquiry as to the 

 amount of coin held by different localities or by different classes (12). Such 

 a monetary census would undoubtedly be very incomplete. But if the 

 enumeration, though not exhaustive, were sufficiently impartial and 

 sporadic, it seems possible by a cautious and methodical inference from 

 samples to attain a rough estimate (13). 



The most that can be expected from the converging lines of inquiry is 

 that three or four very imperfect estimates should be reached by inde- 

 pendent methods. The Mean of such estimates — a mean weighted accord- 

 ing to the presumed trustworthiness of the different sources — appears to 

 be the best result attainable (14). That the best will be imperfect is 

 to be feared. 



The second and third inquiries (as to the chief forms in which money 

 is employed and as to the amount of money annually used in the arts) 

 are intimately connected with the first. Accordingly we have thought 

 it best to postpone recommendations under these heads until we have 

 instituted the first investigation more perfectlv. To this end, and in 

 view of the extent and difficulty of the subject, we recommend that the 

 Committee should be re-appointed for the ensuing year. 



KEMARKS. 



(1) Mr. Kimbal, Director of the Mint at Washington, and his predecessors have 

 elahorated ' Newmarch's Method.' 



(2) See ' History of Prices,' vol. vi. Appendix XXII. There is not much objection 

 to the met/iodhy which Newmarch obtains the estunate 49,000,000/. : namely, deter- 



