NICKEL FOR SILVER
By HAROLD MATTINGLY
AND so it seems that the chapter of silver coinage in this country is drawing rapidly to its close. It has been a long chapter, an interesting and an honourable one. Between the first silver penny of King Offa of Mercia and the silver Maundy penny of today lies an interval of over 1200 years. During the whole of that long time, almost, the silver has been of the finest standard— usually 11 oz. 2 dwts. of silver to 18 dwts. of alloy. It often paid the penalty of fineness in being imitated abroad in inferior metal. These base imitations circulated freely, especially in the Low Countries, and the lords who issued them made their mean little profit. There could, however, be no stronger testimony to the credit that our coinage deserved and enjoyed. There was one painful lapse, under Henry VIII, who, driven to desperation by the need to finance his wars and other extravagances, debased the silver till it represented only one part fine in three. Repentance soon followed, and Elizabeth restored the good old standard. After the Great War of 1914-1918 it was considered necessary to reduce the silver content to one half. The first of these reduced coins were repellent in appearance. Their colour was unattractive, and they had a habit of coming out in yellow blots. Technical skill, however, soon remedied these defects, and our silver now presents a clean and pleasing surface. The story of the weight of the coin is rather different. It may be said to be normal for coins to fall from their original weights, and our penny was no exception to this rule. Struck first at over 22 grains, it fell at intervals and by degrees to 16, 12, to, 8 and even less.
For a long time the penny was the only silver coin struck. Half- pennies and farthings were added in due course ; but, even before that, they might be produced by the halving and quartering of the penny. Edward III introduced the groat and half groat (4d. and 2d.) ; Henry VIII the shilling ; Edward VI the crown, half-crown, sixpence and threepence. Elizabeth tried an experiment that did not last with a three-halfpence and a three-farthing piece. Charles I, when he melted down silver plate to pay for his Civil War, struck silver pounds and half pounds, which are dear to the modern collector, but must have been intolerably clumsy to use. The florin (as.) was introduced under Victoria ; the double florin (4s.) had a short trial late in the reign. We have still with us the crown, as a rare survival, the half-crown, florin, shilling and sixpence. Fourpenny, twopenny and penny pieces are struck only for the King's Maundy distribution. In a few years we shall see this silver no more. It is a sad end to a fine history, even if it is inevitable. It is a moment that invites one to look back in the past history of money and exchange and to look forward to the systems that are likely to command the future.
If we look back to the primitive stages of commerce, we find exchange by barter—goods passing directly for goods. This was simple and straightforward but extremely awkward, and men came to feel the need of some general measure of value by which all commodities could be appraised. Out of this need arose metallic currency, particularly in the precious metals, gold and silver. Some- times gold, sometimes silver was predominant. Occasionally the two were combined in bimetallic systems, but these were usually un- stable, as the metals tended to shift in relative value. Copper and its alloys were not so often used to express full value, but frequently as tokens, dependent for value on their exchangeability with coins of the precious metals. The advantages of the currency of the precious metals were obvious. A coin expressing real value com- manded immediate confidence at home, and was readily accepted as bullion even beyond the boundaries of its State. But there were disadvantages too. When the increasing demands of trade made it desirable to expand the coinage, the lack of sufficient precious metal might act as a clog on natural progress. In the nineteenth century the world long denied itself the extra currency that it needed, until accidental discoveries of gold in Alaska and Australia seemed to provide the necessary impetus. In modern days paper money in various forms has been rapidly replacing metal. Fora long time the paper was covered more or less completely by a gold- reserve. But the world was beginning to work on a new principle—credit, not value-money—a.nd, when the currency of notes swelled to vast proportions the gold cover came to be more and more of a pretence.
The currency of the future seems likely to consist of paper, valueless in itself, and of coins of base metal, nearly as valueless, to express the smaller values. If such is to be the world in which we have to live, we may as well try to realise the principles on which it will be based. Our media of exchange will no longer carry value in themselves. We shall have confidence in them according to the measure in which we trust our financial stability and the wisdom and self-control of our Government. It will be our general reputation for financial honesty that will determine their acceptability abroad. When the higher denominations are already represented by paper, it is, in theory, a matter of small importance if the lower denominations no longer make as brave a show and represent the same values as before. But the man in the street is accustomed to his silver, and its disappearance may bring home to him what has long been true—that credit, not metal—value, is now the real basis of our coinage. It seems desirable, then, that the public should receive some instruction about the principles on which currency is now handled, and about the checks actually imposed on inflation when the door to it would seem to be open wide.
When I put this point recently to a friend he observed that the public might be happier if it did not know on what a thread our financial safety depended. But, if we are going, as we firmly believe, to retain our financial honesty, under the new .system, and if, as we again believe, the bases of our position are still sound, it is surely safer to trust the public with the truth than to hope fondly that it will not be concerned to inquire into it. Grounds for confidence surely exist. But they no longer lie in the actual fineness of the coins we handle.
It may be hoped that our coins, whatever their metal, may be finely designed and produced, so as not to disgrace our old and grand tradition. And the question might even be raised whether it is not time to reconsider the whole question of choice of types, to discard one or two which are lacking in modern interest and to replace them by others that speak directly to our modern taste. But this is a large subject, and one that concerns the artist and the historian of coinage as well as the Deputy Master of the Mint and the general public.
Previous page
