MONEY: ITS ORIGIN AND VALUE. 317 
a measure that both capitals in 1548 were again of equal value, but both only 
worth 85 per cent of their value in 1400. From this time, and during the seven- 
teenth century, gold and silver were both declining at a nearly equal rate, the 
silver somewhat faster. Both reached in 1660, in the same year, what is very 
remarkably the lowest point. The capital in gold had then only 44 per cent, the 
capital in silver 37 per cent of its original value. 
During the eighteenth century both rose again slowly, and were again of 
equal value in 1750. Again declining, they reached the formerly quoted lowest 
ipoint in the beginning of the nineteenth century. 
During those 400 years both metals rose and fell about in the same pro- 
portion, except after the discovery of America. During those 400 years the 
value of gold was changed to four times less and of silver to six times less than 
at the time of their value in 1500. The remarkable fact that both capitals were 
only once in each century of equal value is the best proof against the admissibility 
of bi-metalism. 
The continuous rise of the value of gold and silver during the fifteenth 
century was apparently not the consequence of a declining production of the 
mines in Europe and Asia — which certainly is nowhere proved by facts — but 
only the consequence of the progress of trade and manufacture and the accumu- 
lation of wealth of the nations. There were relatively few wars during this time, 
and the advancing abolition of old feudal prerogatives kept pace with the con- 
solidation of more natural and healthier forms of government. Agriculture, 
industry and trade were flourishing, and the increasing wealth was followed by a 
larger demand for costly ornaments and vessels of precious metals. 
The news of immense treasures of gold brought over to Europe by the 
Spaniards from the newly discovered America checked suddenly the advance of 
the value of gold to a remarkable degree. The news spread through the world 
in the quickest possible manner, and was of course largely exaggerated. Ac- 
cording to Humboldt's statement, the gold imported from America from 1494 to 
1540 did not exceed $25,000,000, or only about $500,000 for every year. 
Therefore the supposition of the inexhaustible wealth of America caused the 
sinking of its value rather than the really imported amount of gold. The subse- 
quent religious troubles, the change of the old tradeway to India by the discov- 
ery of a more convenient one around the Cape of Good Hope, and the unsafe 
condition of the governments combined, together with disastrous wars, made the 
nations at first less rich, later poorer, and diminished the demand for the precious 
metals. The value of gold, which was twelve and a third times higher than that of 
silver in 1400, declined directly after the discovery of America to ten times, and in 
the beginning of the sixteenth century to less than eight times. When the Spaniards 
found no more gold to appropriate in AmericJ, silver was brought over, and the 
discovery of the rich Mexican mines was sufficient to bring down also the silver 
value, and to enable in this manner the precious metals to reach again the same 
standard of value. The amount of silver imported from America has been as 
much exaggerated as formerly that of gold. The silver imported did not exceed 
