土曜日, 5月 25, 2019

keynes innes

イネス Alfred Mitchell-Innes (1864 – 1950)

Keynes, J. M.. 1914. “What is Money?”, review article in Economic Journal, 24( 95), September, 419–421.
ケインズ全集vol.11未邦訳
ケインズのイネス書評
3頁全文サンプルで読める



ARTICLES AND CORRESPONDENCE
From The Economic Journal, September 1914
INNES, A. MITCHELL. What is Money? (New York: Banking Law
Journal), 1913
In his theory of money the author of this pamphlet is a follower
of H. D. McLeod. The fallacy-if I am right in thinking that
this theory of the effect of credit is a fallacy-is a familiar one,
and it will not be worthwhile to discuss it in this review. The
distinctive value of the pamphlet arises from a different source,
as indicated below, and the writer's strength is on the historical,
not on the theoretical, side.
The author's contention is that, in an overwhelming majority
of the instances to be found in recorded history, the currency
has been of the nature of an inconvertible currency. 'There never
was,' he says, 'until quite modern days, any fixed relationship
between the monetary unit and any metal; that, in fact, there
never was such a thing as a metallic standard of value.' The
moneys of account, of which record remains, were for the most
part conventional units, depending for their value on custom or
on the action of the state, and having fluctuating values, in spite
of occasional attempts to steady them, in terms of gold or silver.
If it is true that coins had no stable value; that for centuries
at a time there was no gold or silver coinage, but only coins of
base metal of various alloys; that changes in the coinage did not
affect prices; that the coinage never played any considerable part
in commerce; that the monetary unit was distinct from the
coinage, and that the price of gold and silver fluctuated
constantly in terms of that unit, then it is clear that the precious
metals could not have been a standard of value, nor could they
have been the medium of exchange.' "There is not, and there
never has been, so far as I am aware, a law compelling a debtor
to pay his debt in gold or silver or in any other commodity.'
This position Mr Innes endeavours to establish by arn
historical inquiry, the value of which is, unfortunately, much
diminished by an entire absence of any references to authorities

MONEY
His first examples are drawn from classical times. The ancient
coins of Greece and of Rome, according to Mr Innes, although
composed of the precious metals, are so extraordinarily variable
in size, weight, and fineness that it is hardly conceivable that
the value of the monetary unit depended on the amount of
valuable metal in the coins. The coins, therefore, were all token
coins, their exchange value as money differing in varying
degrees from their intrinsic value. The bulk of his instances
however, are drawn from the early monetary history of France.
We find here, throughout, considerable persistence in the name
of the conventional money of account, constant variation in the
weight and alloy of the coins, and a profit always accruing to
the authority issuing the coins. 'The only reason why the
intrinsic value of some of the coins ever equalled or exceeded
their nominal value was because of the constant rise of the price
of precious metals, or (what produced the same result) the
continuous fall in the value of the monetary unit.
Mr Innes's next point is that the idea, that in modern days
a money-saving device has been introduced called credit, and
that, before this device was known, all purchases were paid for
in cash, in other words in coins', is simply a popular fallacy.
The use of credit, he thinks, is far older than that of cash. The
numerous instances, he adduces in support of this, from very
remote times are certainly interesting. 'For many centuries,
how many we do not know, the principal instrument of
commerce was neither the coin nor the private token, but the
tally, a stick of squared hazel-wood, notched in a certain manner
to indicate the amount of the purchase or debt.... By this
means all purchases of goods, all loans of money were made, and
all debts cleared. The clearing houses of old were the great
periodical fairs, whither went merchants, great and small,
bringing with them their tallies, to settle their mutual debts and
credits....
The relation between religion and finance is
significant. It is in the temples of Babylonia that most, if not
all, of the commercial documents have been found. The temple


of Jerusalem was in part a financial or banking institution, so
also was the temple of Apollo at Delphi. The fairs of Europe
were held in front of the churches, and were called by the names
of the Saints, on or around whose festival they were
held.... There is little doubt to my mind that the religious
festival and the settlement of debts were the origin of all fairs,
and the commerce which was there carried on was a later
development. If this is true, the connection between religion and
the payment of debts is an additional indication, if any were
needed, of the extreme antiquity of credit.
Mr Innes's development of this thesis is of unquestionable
interest. It is difficult to check his assertions or to be certain that
they do not contain some element of exaggeration. But the main
historical conclusions which he seeks to drive home have, I
think, much foundation, and have often been unduly neglected
by writers excessively influenced by the 'sound currency'
dogmas of the mid-nineteenth century. Not only has it been held
that only intrinsic-value money is 'sound', but an appeal to the
history of currency has often been supposed to show that
intrinsic-value money is the ancient and primitive ideal, from
which only the wicked have fallen away. Mr Innes has gone some
way towards showing that such a history is quite mythical.




From The Economic Journal, June 1915
THE ISLAND OF STONE MONEY
The Caroline Islands, at the close of the Spanish-American war,
were purchased from Spain by Germany for the sum of
$3,300,00o. The recent establishment of British authority in
these islands has brought us in contact with a people whose ideas
on currency are probably more truly philosophical than those
of any other country. Modern practice in regard to gold reserves
06