Measure and Value. Numbers descriptive of Distance.

Previous

Before the introduction of railways we scarcely possessed any standard by which an idea could be formed of the distances and movements of the planets by comparison with those which exist on the terrestrial globe. Thus, the mean distance of the moon from the earth is about 237,000 miles. A steam-carriage on a railway, proceeding uninterruptedly, at the rate of 25 miles an hour, would run 237,000 miles in 1 year, 4 weeks, and 2 days. This falls within the limits of our conception. We may imagine something analogous to this, supposing a carriage, or rather a succession of carriages, to be kept constantly at work for rather more than two years, and working 12 hours per day. But our powers of imagination fail us in estimating a distance equal to that of the earth from the sun, namely, ninety-five millions of miles.[12] Our steam-carriage illustration is here no longer available, since it falls far beyond the boundaries of probability. Proceeding uninterruptedly at twenty-five miles an hour, it would require 433 years to move over a space equal to ninety-five millions of miles.—Dr. Lardner.

Precocious Mental Calculation.

A rare exceptional instance of this faculty being cultivated and matured for a highly-useful purpose, is presented in the case of Mr. Bidder, the eminent civil engineer, known in his childhood as “the Calculating Boy.” (See a portrait in the Boy’s Own Book.)

George Parkes Bidder, when six years old, used to amuse himself by counting up to 100, then to 1000, then to 1,000,000: by degrees, he accustomed himself to contemplate the relations of high numbers, and used to build up peas, marbles, and shot, into squares, cubes, and other regular figures. He invented processes of his own, distinct from those given in books of arithmetic, and could solve all the usual questions mentally more rapidly than other boys with the aid of pen and paper. When he became eminent as a civil engineer, he was wont to embarrass and baffle the parliamentary counsel on contested railway bills, by confuting their statements of figures almost before the words were out of their mouths. In 1856, he gave to the Institution of Civil Engineers an interesting account of this singular arithmetical faculty—so far, at least, as to show that memory has less to do with it than is generally supposed: the processes are actually worked out seriatim, but with a rapidity almost inconceivable. They are accomplished mentally by occupying the mind simultaneously with the double task of computing and registering. The first—computing—is executive, or reasoning, and is that portion of the process, which, whilst it is the most active, is not that which causes the greatest strain upon the mind. The result is recorded by the second faculty, registering, which is the real strain upon the mind, and that by which alone the power of Mental Calculation is limited.

Experience has shown that, up to a certain point, the power of registering is as rapid as thought; but the difficulty increases, in a very high ratio, in reference to the number and extent of impressions to be registered, until a point is reached, the registering of which, in the mind and by writing, are exactly balanced. Below that point, mental registration is preferable; above it, that by writing will be as quick, and more certain.

All the rules employed by Mr. Bidder were invented by him, and are only methods of so arranging calculation as to facilitate the power of registration: in fact, he thus arrives at a sort of natural algebra, using actual numbers in the place of symbols. When he first began to deal with numbers (in his 6th year), he had not learned to read, and certainly long after that time he was taught the symbolical numbers from the face of a watch.

A brief outline of Mr. Bidder’s method is given in the Year-Book of Facts, 1857, pp. 149-152. The paper, in extenso, has been edited and published by Mr. Charles Manby, F.R.S., Honorary Secretary to the Institution of Civil Engineers.

The Roman Foot.

The late celebrated architect and antiquary, Luigi Canina, made a great number of inquiries as to the length of the ancient Roman foot. He measured very carefully the Antonine and Trajan columns, and found them (exclusive of their pedestals and some pieces let in to repair them) exactly alike. This height, which was known to have been 100 Roman feet, was measured with extreme care by means of rods of wood carefully dried, and found to be exactly 29·635 French mÈtres. Measuring chains were then constructed of this length, and the Roman miles (mille passuum) carefully measured down the Appian Way as far as the twelfth mile, and were found to correspond with the traditional sites of the milestones. The great length of these measurements being such an extensive check, their accuracy was at once accepted by the Roman archÆologists as the best authority known. This would make the ancient Roman foot 11·66753 English inches; and the mile 4861·41 English feet; being about one-eleventh less than our English mile of 5280 feet. For rough reckoning the antiquary may deduct one-eleventh from Roman miles to bring them into English; or may add one-tenth to English miles to bring them into Roman; the ratio being 10:11, but inversely. There is a common error in supposing the Roman mile, or mille passuum, was 1000 paces, or single steps. This is not the case: the military passus consisted of two steps (gressus), or about 5 feet Roman.—Notes and Queries.

The Peruvian Quipus.

The well-known contrivance of the Quipus, or method of counting and even recording events by means of cords, was equally ingenious and original. The quipus of the Peruvians were of twisted wool, and consisted of a thick cord, with threads more or less fine, attached to the main part. The smaller lines were covered with knots, either single or double. The size of the quipus varies much, sometimes the main cord being five or six yards long, and at others not more than a foot; the branches rarely exceeding a yard in length, and being sometimes shorter. In the neighbourhood of Lurin, on the coast of Peru, a quipu was found which weighed twelve pounds. The different colours of the threads had different meanings: thus, the red signified a soldier, or war; the yellow gold; the white, silver, or peace, &c. In the system of arithmetic, a single knot signified 10, two single knots 20, a double knot 100, a triple knot 1000, and so on to higher numbers. But not only the colour and mode of combining the knots, but also the laying-up of the strands of the cord, and the distances of the threads apart, were of great importance in reading the quipus. It is probable that in the earliest times this ingenious contrivance was merely used for enumeration, as the shepherd notches the number of his sheep on a stick; but in the course of time the science was so much improved that the initiated were able to knot historical records, laws, and decrees, so that the great events of the empire were transmitted to posterity; and, to some extent, the quipus supplied the place of chronicles and national archives. The registry of tributes, the census of populations, the lists of arms, of soldiers, and of stores, the supplies of maize, clothes, shoes, &c., in the storehouses, were all specified with admirable exactness by the quipus; and in every town of any importance, there was an officer, called the quipu camayoc, to knot and decipher these documents.—Markham’s Visit to Peru.

Distances measured.

Many people hear of distances in thousands of yards—a usual measure of artillery distances—and have very little power of reducing them at once to miles. Now, four miles are ten yards for each mile above 7000 yards, whence the following rule: the number of thousands multiplied by 4 and divided by 7 give miles and sevenths for quotient and remainder, with only at the rate of ten yards to a mile in excess. Thus 12,000 yards is 48 7ths of a mile, or 6 miles and 6 7ths of a mile: not 70 yards too great. Again, people measure speed by miles per hour, the mile and the hour being too long for the judgment of distance and time. Take half as much again as the number of miles per hour, and you have the number of feet per second, too great by one in 30. Thus 16 miles an hour is 16 + 8, or 24 feet per second, too much by 24-30ths of a foot.—AthenÆum, No. 1854.

Uniformity of Weights and Measures.

A collection of the Weights and Measures of the various countries of the world, made, under the auspices of the International Association, for obtaining a uniform Decimal System of Measures, Weights, and Coins, was among the curiosities of the International Exhibition of 1862. Few persons are perhaps aware of the extraordinary diversities in weights and measures, and in their use, which exist in our own country. The price of com, for instance, will be quoted in at least fifteen different ways in as many different localities; at so much per cwt., per barrel, per quarter, per bushel, per load, per bag, per weight, per boll, per coomb, per hobbet, per winch, per windle, per strike, per measure, per stone. The word bushel is in some places used for a measure, in others for a weight, and this weight is by no means the same in all places. In different English towns the bushel means—168 lbs., 73½ lbs., 62 lbs., 80 lbs., 75 lbs., 72 lbs., 70 lbs., 65 lbs., 64 lbs., 63 lbs., 5 quarters, 144 quarts, 488 lbs., and in Manchester, while a bushel of English wheat is 60 lbs., a bushel of American wheat is 70 lbs. The meaning of a stone is almost equally various. An acre of land expresses seven different quantities. These variations in measurement must be highly inconvenient, and prejudicial to trade; and the labours of the above-named Association are directed to bringing about a uniformity, which seems greatly called for. The metrical system employed in France is that which is advocated. This has been already established in Belgium, Holland, Sardinia, Lombardy, Greece, Spain, Portugal, and many other parts of the world. Great Britain and the American States still adhere to their old systems.

Trinity High-water Mark.

Trinity High-water Mark is placed in various parts of London, as described in the Register of Tides in the River Thames, printed by order of the Honourable Court of Commissioners, of the 26th of October, 1849; and every bench-mark in London is shown in feet and decimals of feet above an oblate spheroidal datum plane, decreasing in radii towards the north pole from the centre of gravity between the parallels of latitude at London and Liverpool, about 2·02 feet, or 24¼ inches, which is evidently worthy of consideration, at a rate of 2 feet to the mile in 40 miles of sewer. The difference at Liverpool is also given in the aforesaid Report; and this may prove of public utility if reported on by the engineer employed in the levelling of the main drainage of London. The Ravensbourne drainage is a specimen of such levelling. The approximate mean water at Liverpool is 12½ feet below the level of Trinity High-Water at London, as described identical with the level of the datum plane of the Ordnance survey of London, which is also 12½ feet below the level of Trinity High-Water mark.

Origin of Rent.

The want of intelligent workmen, without the concurrence of other causes, might have destroyed the old English predial polity, if that system had not failed through its own nature; having been essentially rude and awkward and uncommercial. Under the Plantagenets, service could in general be reduced to money at the discretion of the lord or the option of the tenant. The service often cost the tenant more than it was worth—he found it cheaper to pay than to work: on the other hand, money must have been at all times welcome to the lord, and he did not at all times require labour. In the course of time agricultural service went out of use altogether, and money was regularly tendered and accepted instead of it: so that the improved rent, as it has been called, now paid by a farmer, appears to be a compound—historically considered—of the ancient mail or gable, and of a great variety of petty charges, which were originally compensations for tributes of corn, malt, poultry, bacon, and eggs—or fines for the non-performance of acts of tillage, carriage, porterage, and the like. The elements of rent were recognised in Scotland longer than in England, because petty charges subsisted in Scotland for some time after they had been abandoned in England. At the beginning of the eighteenth century, David Deans—the tough true-blue Presbyterian farmer—still paid “mail duties, kain, arriage, carriage, dry multure, lock, gowpen, and knaveship, and all the various exactions now commuted for money, and summed up in the emphatic word Rent.”—Heart of Mid-Lothian, chap. viii.; Law Magazine, N. S., No. 27.

Curiosities of the Exchequer.

Mr. Foss, in his Lives of the Judges, tells us that the Court of Exchequer was anciently sometimes called Curia Regis ad Scaccarium; and its name was derived from the table at which it sat, which was “a four-cornered board, about ten feet long and five feet broad, fitted in manner of a table to sit about, on every side whereof is a standing ledge or border, four fingers broad. Upon this board is laid a cloth bought in Easter Term, which is of black colour, rowed with strokes, distant about a foot or span, like a chess-board. On the spaces of this Scaccarium, or chequered cloth, counters were ranged, with denoting marks, for checking the computations.”

In the old Court of Exchequer, at Westminster, before the coronation of King George IV., might be seen the chequered cloth which covered the table of that Court. This table, at which sat the officers of the Court, and the king’s counsel, was ten or twelve feet square, and was covered with a woollen cloth, the groundwork of which was white, with a very dark blue chequered pattern over it; the dark stripes being about three inches wide, leaving between them white squares of about four inches across.

Again, the cover on the table of the Exchequer Court in Dublin is composed of a thick woollen substance made in squares of black and white, resembling a chess-board.

The origin of the word Scaccarium (whence Exchequer) is not certain. Madox, the historical authority upon the subject, considers the most likely derivation to be from Scaccus, or Scaccum, a chess-board, or the ludus Scaccarium, the game of chess. He then refers to the chequered cloth mentioned by Foss; adding, “from the Latin Scaccarium cometh the French Eschequier, or Exchequier, (Exchiquer,) and the English name from the French.”

Mr. G. A. Sala, in a communication to Notes and Queries, 3rd S. No. 81, however, traces exchequer to the Italian Zecca, treasury or mint; whence, also, he derives the word cheque; remembering that in old time our goldsmiths were Lombards and Venetians.However this may be, the forms by which accounts were kept in the Exchequer, and receipts given for moneys paid by “the King’s debtors” in those days, when few persons knew how to write and cipher, and “double entry” was unknown, were strictly observed down to a period scarcely thirty years ago. The rude wooden “tallies” that were prepared as quittances for payment, and stowed away in the Exchequer as entries of receipt, were still maintained in their sham employment until finally abolished by an Act passed in 1834. The officials who superintended, or were supposed to superintend, the operation of cutting, delivering, and keeping the tallies were paid by fees on all receipts; and as the national revenue augmented their incomes became enormous. A “Tallier,” or, as the name became latterly, “Teller,” of the Exchequer enjoyed at last an income from his sinecure office of more than 30,000l. per annum.

The Tally was a slip of willow-wood, cut to a length proportioned to the magnitude of the pecuniary transaction it was intended to record. Its indications were rendered by notches, which signified various sums, according to their size and shape.[13]

When fabricated the instrument indicated this meaning. A large notch of an inch and a half in width signified 1000l.; a smaller notch, one inch in width, signified 100l.; one of half-an-inch signified 20l.; a notch in the wood slanting to the right signified 10l. (in combination this notch was placed before the 20l. notch); small notches signified 1l. each; a cut sloping to the right signified 10s. (in combination placed before the 1l. marks); slight indentations, or jags, in the wood signified shillings; strokes with ink on tally signified pence; a round hole, or dot, signified a halfpenny; a farthing was written in figures.

When split in two lengthwise across the notches, each section of the tally, of course, corresponded exactly. One half was then delivered to the party paying money, as a receipt, and the other kept by the officers of the department, as a check or record of the transaction. On neither side was the slightest value attached to the tally; but down to 1834 no payment could be made into the Exchequer without summoning the officers of the Tally, who gravely notched and split the willow wand, and handed over the Exchequer half to be placed in careful custody. The absurdity came to an end in that year; but by way of farewell ceremony, is reported to have burnt down the Parliament Houses; certain furnace flues having become overheated by burning a lumbering mass of Exchequer tallies. Nor was the tally the only idle formality observed when payments were made into the Exchequer. Centuries ago the Royal moneys were actually received and kept in that department; but for a long while past the actual cash has been lodged in the Bank of England, where it is more safely guarded, and more conveniently administered. Nevertheless, every sum received on Exchequer account was still nominally brought to the Exchequer Office; and for that purpose a Bank clerk regularly attended every day with a bundle of cancelled notes, which were solemnly counted over and checked, and deposited as a precious trust in a massive iron chest secured with three keys, each in the custody of different officers.

The tally in course of time failed to satisfy the payers of money to Exchequer account, and a written quittance became necessary. This also in its turn grew obsolete in form and language, but was in like manner preserved in all its antique unintelligibility until the Act of 1834.

Such was the “tally” system of olden time, and, undoubtedly, it in some way is involved in the origination of what is known as the “tally shop” system of to-day.

Formerly, in the Exchequer business, the collectors and receivers charged with the receipt of public moneys from the taxpayers were required to find sureties for their honesty. These security bonds were valid only for a year, and, therefore, annually renewed, to the great profit of the law and other officers of the Crown. When each collector had duly settled his account, and paid-in all the proper moneys into the Exchequer, for any year, he received back his bond, signifying a discharge from all further liability, and this was called getting his quietus. The practice and the term are now disused, but they evidently constituted the point of Hamlet’s allusion:—

When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin.

What becomes of the Public Revenue.

Of the seventy millions of the Revenue more than one-third is disposed of by the interest of the National Debt, a charge not liable to any important variation. It was less by 89,412l. in 1862 than in the year before. But the difference is very slight on such a sum as 26,142,606l. The armed force of the country is the next great channel of expenditure. The Army in 1862 absorbed 15,570,869l., an increase of 399,000l. over its cost in the previous year. The Navy required 12,598,042l. in the same period, or 733,626l. less than in 1861. Together they account for more than 28,000,000l. of the public expenditure. The naval and military operations in China figure in both years of this return. In 1861 they drew from the Exchequer 3,043,896l.; and in 1862 a further sum of 1,230,000l. The votes or money for fortifications rose suddenly from 50,000l. in 1861 to 970,000l. in 1862. There are small variations, both of reduction and increase, dispersed through an immense number of items, but when the gross sum they absorb is reckoned up, the difference between one year and another is scarcely worth noting.

Queen Anne’s Bounty.

The origin of this revenue, which is considered to effect little compared with what might be accomplished under improved management, is as follows. We know that in olden times the Romish Pontiff had the “tenths” of the net annual income of good livings, as well as first-fruits. When the Pope and Henry VIII. quarrelled, and the Papal supremacy was subverted, not only was the supremacy in ecclesiastical affairs transferred from the Pope of Rome to England’s supreme ruler, but also the tenths and first-fruits likewise. At length Queen Anne came to the throne, when (with the consent of her Parliament) she nobly refused to receive what the Church should enjoy, and placed the income under the direction of a Board called “the Governors of Queen Anne’s Bounty.” Their revenue for the improvement of poor livings is considerable, but it might be largely increased. The Pope would have had the real present value, and not that of centuries since; yet, strange to say, while some old benefices have been freed from payment no new rich livings have since been included, and all the old ones are rated according to the absurd scale of assessment made in the time of Henry VIII. To illustrate this the writer compiled the following, some time since:—


Benefice.

Diocese.
Value in
King’s
Books.
Value in
Clergy
List.
1. Stanhope
2. Whitchurch
3. Halsall
4. Croston
5. Edgmond
6. Houghton-le-Spring
7. Bingham
Durham
Lichfield
Chester
Manchester
Lichfield
Durham
Lincoln
£676 8
8 17 0
24 11 5
31 11 0
468 0
1240 0
447 0
—————
£3471 1
£4848 0 0
1458 0 0
3500 0 0
1050 0 0
2600 0 0
1600 0 0
1503 0 0
——————
£16,559 0 0

Thus, seven benefices which now pay only 34l. as tenths to the fund, would, if rated according to the present net value, furnish 1600l. annually. If this were altered, and a graduated scale of taxation upon all valuable livings adopted, we should soon see a more equitable and less objectionable management of ecclesiastical affairs. If all the rich clergy regularly assisted the poor benefices, would not the rich laity do the same?

We quote the above from a communication to the Times, 1862. It has been significantly remarked that a Report of the Receipts and Expenditure of the Bounty is desirable.

Ecclesiastical Fees.

A Return issued in 1863, gives a curious list of Fees payable by members of the sacred profession. The Bishop of Lichfield had to pay 624l. on his appointment to that see; the Bishop of Bath and Wells 450l. on his translation from Sodor and Man. To this prelate the Attorney-General, or “his office,” presented a demand for nearly 30l.; the Secretary of State (including stamp), 23l.; a mysterious impersonality, “the Petty Bag-office,” absorbed 167l. When the Bishop had his audience of Her Majesty the homage fees were 94l., and the Court Circular charged a guinea for its line and a half of history. The bill winds up with an item of 21l. for “passing documents through the various offices.” Bishop Baring’s “homage” on translation from Gloucester to Durham cost him only 21l. 6s. 8d. The Bishops of Chester and Lichfield add an item of 11l. 2s. and 12l. for gloves. The fees on the consecration of a church or churchyard are heavy, but it is noticeable as a rule that the bishops waive the customary payment to themselves.

Burying Gold and Silver.

The practice of burying treasure in the earth has uniformly prevailed in all countries harassed by intestine commotions, or exposed to foreign invasions. Of sums so deposited a very considerable proportion has been altogether lost; and this has, no doubt, been one of the principal means by which the stock of the precious metals has been kept down to its present level. Every one is aware that, during the Middle Ages, treasure-trove, or money dug from the ground, formed no inconsiderable part of the revenues of this and other countries. And though the burying of money has long ceased in Great Britain, such has not been the case with our neighbours. Wakefield tells us that, down to 1812, the practice was common in Ireland; and though much fallen off, it still continues to this day to be occasionally resorted to in that part of the kingdom. It has always prevailed, more or less, in almost every part of the Continent. The anarchy and brigandage that accompanied the Revolution of 1789 made the practice be carried to an extraordinary extent in France; and there, owing to various causes, it still maintains a broad and firm footing. Dupuynode, in 1853, estimated the sum at 40 millions thus rendered sterile. Yet, we doubt whether the burying of treasure be at present as prevalent in France as in many parts of Germany, and in Hungary, Russia, Italy, Spain, and European Turkey. The feeling of insecurity that has prevailed in all these countries, especially since 1848, has given a stimulus to this practice. Of the many millions that were distributed among the countries round the Black Sea, during the late campaigns in that quarter, the greater portion is believed to be as much withdrawn from circulation as if it had never been dug from the mine.

It is impossible, of course, to form any estimate of the sums that are thus annually, as it were, placed in mortmain. They are always greater when wars or revolutionary disturbances are in progress; when their occurrence is anticipated, or but little confidence is placed in the permanence of existing institutions. There can, at all events, be no question that the sums which have been disposed of in the way now stated in the different Continental countries of late years have been enormous—greater, perhaps, than those absorbed by any of the usual channels of expenditure. But the practice has been carried to a greater extent in India, Persia, Turkey in Asia, and other eastern countries, than anywhere in the western world. Despotism and a want of security have always prevailed in these countries. The inhabitants have been, in consequence, accustomed to regard the money they have committed to the earth as their only real wealth, and have availed themselves of every opportunity to place portions of their means beyond the grasp of their avaricious and tyrannical masters. And as many of the hoards so deposited will never be brought to light, the practice has, undoubtedly, been a principal cause of the constant flow of bullion to the East.

Bernier, “that most curious traveller,” as he is called by Gibbon, has some remarks on this subject, in which he calls the empire of the Mogul an abyss of gold and silver, which the people buried to escape the injustice and exactions to which they were exposed. At a later date, Mr. Luke Scrafton refers to the same practice. “In India,” he says, “the Hindoos bury their dead under-ground, often with such secresy as not to trust their own children with the knowledge of it; and it is amazing what they will suffer rather than betray it. When their tyrants have tried all manner of corporal punishments upon them, and that fails, resentment prevailing over the love of life, they frequently rip up their bowels, or poison themselves, and carry the secret to their graves. And the sums lost in this manner in some measure account why the silver of India does not appear to increase, though there are such quantities continually coming into it, and none going out.”

The comparative security that was lately enjoyed by the natives in most parts of India may have done something to lessen this habit, in the countries directly under the Company’s government; but there was in Oude, and many other parts of India, previous to the late insurrection, a good deal of disorder, oppression, and robbery. And since that unfortunate outbreak, insecurity and disorders of all sorts have immeasurably increased, and have proportionally stimulated the practice of hoarding. The rebellion in China led to similar effects; and we have been assured by those who, from experience and observation are well qualified to form an opinion on such a subject, that it may be moderately estimated that in India and China, during the half-dozen years ending with 1857, a sum of not less than 100,000,000l. sterling has been consigned to the earth.—J. R. Macculloch; Ency. Brit., 1859.

Thirty years ago, hoarding coin went on in England to a considerable extent, and greatly augmented the scarcity, and consequently the value, of the precious metals. Even the old practice of making a stocking was by no means given up in rural districts. A writer in the Quarterly Review, 1832, states, “We ourselves, but a few days back, personally witnessed an old crone, the wife of a small and apparently poor farmer, in a wild pastoral district, bring no less than three hundred sovereigns in a bag to a neighbouring attorney, to be placed by him in security; her treasure having accumulated till she was afraid to keep it longer at home. Such examples are by no means so rare as may be imagined. The failures of so many country banks in 1825 destroyed the confidence of country-people in the bank-notes of the present banks, and causes their preference for gold. The failure of many attorneys, as well as of country banks, which received and gave interest on deposits, and, (with the exception of the savings’-banks, which are very limited in the amount of the deposits they allow,) the total absence, in the rural districts of England, of any safe and accessible depositaries for the savings of the economical, such as the invaluable Scotch banks, have tended most injuriously to discourage economy; and where that principle was strongly ingrafted, have converted it into a practice of hoarding—have caused it to stagnate in unprofitable masses, which, spread through proper channels, would have stimulated new industry and new accumulations, and added both to the wealth of the owner, and to the general stock.”

Results of Gold-seeking.

The question as to the probable continuation, increase, or diminution of the Supply of Gold is of the greatest interest; though nothing but the vaguest conjectures can be offered respecting it. Though gold be very generally distributed, it is extremely doubtful whether there be many places in which the deposits are so rich and so extensive as in California and Australia; and even in these the produce is either stationary, or has begun to decline. The myriads of adventurers that are attracted to prolific diggings can hardly fail, in no very lengthened period, to rifle the richest beds. And when this is done—when the excitement caused by the original discovery is worn off, and the great prizes in the gigantic lottery recur only at distant intervals,—then, unless some new and equally promising discoveries should be made, a serious check will be given to the gold-seeking mania. The process of quartz-crushing is believed to produce only moderate profits, and is not of a kind to collect crowds of competitors. The few fortunes that have been realized in California and Australia have not been made by the diggers, but by the merchants and others who have supplied their real or imaginary wants, or bought their gold-dust and nuggets on advantageous terms. Of those engaged on their own account in the search of gold, very few have retired from the pursuit with anything like a real competence. The great majority have hardly realized the wages current in the districts before the deposits were discovered; and the conviction seems to be everywhere gaining ground, that more is to be made by cultivating the surface of the earth than by digging in its bowels, or crushing its rocks.—J. R. Macculloch; Ency. Brit., 1859.

What becomes of the Precious Metals?

The indestructibility of Gold is one of its many characteristics, and some very curious questions arise from the fact. We know that at a very early period of the history of the human race, gold was discovered in very large quantities, and was used for a variety of ornamental and useful purposes. Among the latter may be named its employment as a medium of exchange, not exactly in the form of money, but nearly approaching to it. Pieces of the precious metal were cut into certain lengths and were stamped with figures denoting their weight, and these circulated freely among the buyers and sellers of those remote and primitive times. What was known as a talent of gold weighed, it is supposed, 125 lbs., and Dr. Adam Clarke estimates that the revenue of King Solomon in gold, was equal in value to about 4,683,375l. sterling. To some extent this estimate is confirmed by the Bible; for it is stated in the book of Kings that “the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year, was six hundred and three score and six talents of gold,” without reference to silver, which the same authority states, “was nothing accounted of in the days of Solomon.” According to Calmet, the precious metals expended by the same monarch in building Jerusalem and the Temple, amounted in value to eight hundred millions of pounds sterling, and the questions naturally suggest themselves as to where this enormous amount of material came from, and what has become of it also.

It is sufficient for our purpose to know that the precious metals did actually exist in very large quantities; and there is little doubt that they had been accumulating almost from the period of the creation of man. The early history of the Jews abounds with statements as to the uses to which gold was put. The subsequent conquests of Rome doubtlessly led to its absorption at one time of a very large proportion of the accumulated mineral wealth of the world.

It is also plain that the Romans could not employ the precious metals for domestic purposes, or at least not to any considerable extent. Watches, spoons, and plate were the inventions of much later times. Since it is clear that many hundreds of tons of gold found their way to Rome during its prosperous time, and equally clear that gold is indestructible, we may well inquire, “What has become of the vast treasures?” Was it, after the decline and fall of Rome, distributed among other nations? Were large quantities of the precious metals buried in the earth, which still holds them in its keeping?

Amidst a multitude of suggestive replies there remains the undoubted fact that gold is indestructible. Who shall say, in short, in the presence of the certain knowledge we have, that war, conquest, and spoliation have been the rule among nations for centuries past, that some of the “talents” of King Solomon, are not existing at this moment in the shape of sovereigns, in the pockets of the subjects of Queen Victoria? Or, who will have the hardihood to assert that the very watch-guard, or trinket he or she may wear, is not a bon fide part of the treasure forwarded by the Queen of Sheba to Solomon the wise?

The fact seems to be clearly demonstrable that much of the gold and silver spoken of in Scripture and in ancient profane history is in active circulation at this hour amongst the inhabitants of the globe.—Mechanics’ Magazine.

Tribute-money.

The coins of the British Prince Cunobelin were not only stamped with the figures of animals, but with the word TASCIO, which signified TASK, TAX, and TRIBUTE. The payment of them into the Exchequer acquitted the subject of duties on merchandise, and was also a commutation of personal services. “I have thought,” says the learned Camden, “that in old time there was a certain sort of money coined on purpose for this use, seeing, in Scripture, it is called tribute-money; and I am the more confirmed in this opinion, because, in some of the British pieces, there is the Mint-master stamping the money with TASCIO, which among the Britons meant the tribute-money.”

The First Lottery.

The first Lottery in England of which we have any account, took place in 1569, the proposals for which were published in 1567 and 1568. It consisted of 10,000 lots of ten shillings each: there were no blanks, and the prizes consisted chiefly of plate. There were then only three lottery-offices in London. The lottery was drawn at the west door of St. Paul’s Cathedral; and the profits were intended for the repair of the havens of the kingdom, and other public works. M. Greillier considers this number of lots much underrated, and raises them to 400,000; and he arrives at that conclusion because the drawing was continued uninterruptedly both day and night, between the 11th of January and the 6th of May. The first Lottery for sums of money took place in 1630.

Coinage of a Sovereign.

The number of operations necessary for the conversion of an ingot of Gold into Sovereigns is greater than most persons are aware of. In the first instance it is melted; in the second it is cast into bars; in the third the bars are rolled; in the fourth they are cut into short lengths; in the fifth they are annealed in copper pans; in the sixth they are flattened into fillets; in the seventh the fillets are adjusted; in the eighth they are punched, and blanks produced; in the ninth the blanks are weighed singly by automaton balances; in the tenth the blanks are marked, or have their edges raised; in the eleventh they are annealed in cast-iron pans; in the twelfth they are blanched in an acid bath; in the thirteenth they are washed in cold water; in the fourteenth they are dried in hot beech-wood saw-dust; in the fifteenth they are muffled; and in the sixteenth stamped on both sides, milled on their edges, and made perfect for circulation! Thus sixteen operations, separate and distinct from each other, have to be performed in the production of sovereigns from an ingot. But the ingot will be after all only partly converted; the perforated “fillets,” amounting in weight to nearly half that of the original ingot, must be returned to the crucible, recast into bars, and these bars passed through the routine processes above enumerated. The fillets resulting from this second crop of sovereigns will again have to be melted, and yet again and again, if the ingot is to be made to yield all its value in coin; and thus the sixteen operations will be multiplied before the last sovereign is obtained from the precious wedge of gold.—Mechanics’ Magazine.

Wear and Tear of the Coinage.

It has been discovered by the Mint authorities that the intelligent or intelligible life of coins is much shorter than it was prior to the introduction of the railway system and cheap travelling. People move about now more frequently than they used, and so does money. Whether the former wear out sooner from their greater activity is a problem for social economists, but that the latter does is certain. Towards the close of the last century careful experiments deduced the fact that deterioration among ten-year-old silver coins of the various denominations was as follows:—Crowns, 3½ per cent.; half-crowns, 10 per cent.; shillings, 24½ per cent.; and sixpences, 38 2-10ths per cent. Now, the loss is nearly as follows on coins of the same age:—Crowns, 5 per cent.; half-crowns, 12 per cent.; shillings, 30 per cent.; sixpences, 45 per cent.; and threepences, over fifty per cent. This increase is evidently due to “fast living,” so to speak, and the weakest individuals; or, at any rate, the smallest, suffer most from its consequences. The gold coinage does not deteriorate in anything like the same ratio, and this from obvious causes. It is not subjected to anything like the same course of treatment. It moves in higher and more circumscribed circles, is only a legal tender when of legal weight, and is therefore nursed with more care under the porte-monnaie system. Of copper and bronze moneys, pence and halfpence suffer the most rapid deterioration, farthings being the longest lived of the three denominations. They are all tokens of value merely, and their shortcomings are less noticed, and, indeed, of far less consequence to the public.—Mechanics’ Magazine.

Counterfeit Coin.

There is little doubt that the method first employed in the manufacture of money was that of pouring fluid bullion into earthen moulds previously impressed by some rude artist with the device intended to be represented on the coin; and that (as now in some remote localities of Central India) a small cylindrical vessel, forming a smelting-furnace, a pair of tongs, a cutting-tool or file, and a pair of scales, constituted the entire apparatus for a mint. It is not a little singular that the casting process is that resorted to by counterfeiters up to this day. The customary mode adopted for the production of spurious money at present is precisely identical, indeed, with that employed in the manufacture of genuine coin by the monarchs and the moneyers—as the fabricators of money were then termed—of the Heptarchy, only that the coiners of to-day use appliances superior to those of the tenth century. A private coiner of the nineteenth century, whether in Birmingham or London, expends very little in the purchase of his plant of machinery. He provides himself with a pennyworth of plaster of Paris, which he converts into a mould; making a genuine coin serve as the medium for impressing the material when in a soft state with the devices—the obverse and reverse. If he cannot steal pint measures from a publican, he will have to invest a portion of his capital in Britannia-metal spoons at a shilling a dozen, and these he will break up and melt in an earthen pipkin, purchasable for another penny. With a tobacco-pipe for a ladle he will take up sufficient of the fused metal to create a florin, say, and this he will pour into the moulds. As soon as these are filled, and the base compound has become solidified, the moulds are separated, and any defects observable in the graining or milling of the edge are made good with a file or some other implement adapted to the nefarious purpose. If, after this, a clever confederate can finish the work by depositing a coat of silver (by galvanic agency), so much the better for the manufacturer, his chance of uttering being thus much enhanced.—Mechanics’ Magazine.

Standard Gold.

In 1855, an alteration was made in the quality of gold marked in Goldsmiths’ Hall, it being represented to the President of the Board of Trade that it would be advantageous alike to the manufacturer and the public: instead of there being only two different standards, there are now five—viz., 22, 18, 15, 12, and 9 carats. If, on the purchase of a watch, the cases, instead of having the mark of “18 carat,” the gold of which would be worth 67s. per oz., should be marked only “12 carat,” the gold is worth only 45s. per oz., and the purchaser has been legally robbed of the difference in value, which, supposing the cases to weigh 1 oz. 10 dwts., would be 33s.

When purchasing a gold watch, therefore, see that the cases are marked “18 carat;” if they are not so marked, do not make the purchase.

Interest of Money.

Among the curiosities of the Exchequer, it may be mentioned that about the year 1857, there were paid into its account the proceeds of a lottery prize, drawn in the reign of George II., but which had remained unclaimed for 102 years. The original amount of the prize was 490l., to which in the course of a century there had been added 1499l. 8s. for interest. The sum of 1989l. 8s. was therefore handed over for the public service; but even now we have no doubt that if the purchaser of the ticket, warned by this announcement of the fact, can come forward and prove his claim, the money will be honourably refunded to him from the Exchequer.

Interest of Money in India.

In the Institutes of Menu, which were drawn up about B.C. 900, the lowest legal interest for money is fixed at 15 per cent., the highest at 60 per cent. Nor is this to be considered a mere ancient law now fallen into disuse. So far from that, the Institutes of Menu are still the basis of Indian jurisprudence; and we know, on very good authority, that in 1810, the interest paid for the use of money varied from 36 to 60 per cent.; Ward places it at 75 per cent., and this without the lender incurring any extraordinary risk.

Origin of Insurance.

Mr. G. F. Smith, in a paper read to the Institute of Actuaries, is of opinion that the earliest direct mention of Marine Insurance is in an ordinance of the City of Barcelona, of the year 1433, in which it is ordered that no vessel should be insured for more than three-quarters of its value; that no merchandise belonging to foreigners should be insured at Barcelona, unless freighted on board a ship belonging to the King of Arragon; and that merchandise belonging to Arragonese subjects on board vessels belonging to other countries should only be insured for half its value. It appears most probable that the inventors of Marine Insurance were the Italians, who, as is well known, were the leading commercial nation in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. It was in Venice that the first Bank was established, and that a funded debt, transferable from hand to hand, was first introduced. Bills of exchange, if not invented in Italy, were used extensively by the Lombard merchants and money-dealers; and book-keeping by double entry is of Italian origin; as is also the phrase, “Policy of Assurance.”

After the Great Fire, Assurance Offices were set up. One of these is described, in Phillips’s World of Words, under the heading “Phoenix Insurance Office, the first office that was set up in London for the insuring of houses from accidents by fire, so called from its emblem or device: the rate for ensuring 100 pounds on a brick house, is 6 shillings for 1 year, 12 shillings for 2 years, 15 shillings for 3 years, 19 shillings and sixpence for four years, 1 pound 10 shillings for seven years, and 2 pounds 1 shilling for eleven years: the number of houses so insured since Anno Dom. 1681 is ten thousand.” A second is mentioned as the “Friendly Society, one of the offices settled in London for the insuring of houses from casualties by fire: the reward or consideration-money paid for insuring to the value of 100 pounds in this office, is 1 shilling 4 pence per annum for seven years. The device of it is a sheaf of arrows, and the number of houses insured since A.D. 1684 is 12,500.”

Stockbrokers.

Stock-jobbing or broking was contemporaneous with the creation of our National Debt, in the reign of William III., 1695, and gave rise to that class of money-dealers who have the exclusive entrÉe to the Royal Exchange. “William,” says Mr. Francis, in his work on the Stock Exchange, “had already tried his power in the creation of a national debt: jobbing in the English funds and East India stock succeeded; and the Royal Exchange became what the Stock Exchange has been since 1700—the rendezvous of those who, having money, hoped to increase it, and of that yet more numerous and pretending class, who, having none themselves, try to gain it from those who have.”

In the course of the Session of 1771, a Bill was brought into the House of Commons, “for the more effectually preventing the infamous practice of Stock-jobbing.” It passed the committee, but was not further proceeded in.

Lord Chatham, in the previous year, 1770, had, in Parliament, denounced “the Monied Interest as a set of men in the City of London, who are known to live in riot and luxury upon the plunder of the ignorant, the innocent, the helpless. Whether they be the miserable jobbers of ’Change-alley, or the lofty Asiatic plunderers of Leadenhall-street, they are equally detestable.... By the monied interest I mean that blood-sucker, that muck-worm, which calls itself the friend of Government—that pretends to serve this or that administration, and may be purchased on the same terms by any administration—that advances money to Government, and takes special care of its own emoluments. Under this description I include the whole race of commissaries, jobbers, contractors, clothiers, and remitters.”

In the South Sea year, patriots were made or marred by jobbing: “from the Alley to the House,” said Walpole, “is like a path of ants.”

Yet, it is an established fact, that, abroad and at home, all parties having large financial operations, approach the London Stock Exchange with more confidence than any other money-market in the world.

Tampering with Public Credit.

Thirty years ago, it was wisely said by a writer in the Quarterly Review: “It is physically impossible to carry on the commerce of the civilized world by the aid of a purely metallic currency—no, not though our gold and silver coins were every tenth year debased to a tenth! Why, in London alone, five millions of money are daily exchanged at the clearing-house, in the course of a few hours. We should like to see the attempt to bring this infinity of transactions to a settlement in coined money. Credit money, in some shape or other, always has, and must have, performed the part of a circulating medium to a very considerable extent. And (by one of those wonderful compensatory processes which so frequently claim the admiration of every investigator of civil as well as of physical economy,) there is in the nature of credit an elasticity which causes it, when left unshackled by law, to adapt itself to the necessities of commerce, and the legitimate demands of the market. Well may the productive classes exclaim to those who persist in legislating on the subject, and are not content with determining who may and who may not give credit to another, what kind of monied obligations shall, or shall not, be allowed to circulate—that is, to be taken in exchange for goods at the option of the parties,—well might they exclaim, as the merchants of Paris did to the minister of Louis, when he asked what his master could do for them—“Laissez-nous faire,”—“Leave us alone, to surround ourselves with those precautions which experience will suggest, and the instinct of self-preservation put in execution.”

Over-speculation.

During the prevalence of a speculative mania there is not one person in ten among the English public that can be induced to weigh any arguments or facts that run counter to their fancies; but by the small proportion capable of giving heed, the following rÉsumÉ of British banking experience during the twelve years from 1846 to 1857 will be considered valuable.

In 1858 an interesting paper was published by Messrs. Waterlow and Sons, under the ominous title of British Losses by Bank Failures, and extending from 1820 to 1857. In the great mania for the establishment of new banks, it may not be out of place to call attention to the general facts proved in this document. Omitting, then, the years previous to 1846, which may perhaps be considered to be out of date, and taking the twelve years from 1846 to 1857 inclusive, it appears that the liabilities of the private banks which suspended payment amounted to 6,700,000l., and those of the joint-stock banks to 40,800,000l., making a grand total of 47,500,000l. To this, moreover, must be added another 1,500,000l. for some banks, the liabilities of which are not mentioned.

Value of Horses.

As an example of the large sums produced by the sale of first-rate Horses, we may quote the following prices from the sale of the stud of the late Earl of Pembroke, at Paris, in 1862. The condition of the horses was so good that, in spite of their being aged, some of them sold for more money than Lord Pembroke paid for them years previously. Thus, a pair of bay carriage-horses, aged respectively 13 and 14, bought at Anderson’s seven years ago for 400l., fetched 600l.; and another pair, which had been bought at the same place for 600l., fetched 1088l.! Never was the policy of buying a good thing, and taking care of it, more practically proved than at this sale. Elis, a brown carriage-horse, more than 16 years old, sold for 100l.; Pilot, a bay, upwards of 15 years old, fetched 220l.; Papillon, 14 years old, 384l.; Abeille, 13 years old, 200l.; Grasshopper, a chestnut cob, 13 years old, 128l.; Zouave, a grey carriage-horse, 12 years old, 304l.; Calthorpe, a bay carriage-horse, 12 years old, 280l.; Sebastopol, a grey carriage-horse, 11 years old, 240l.; Pigeon, a brown phaeton-horse, 9 years old, 140l.; Solferino, a bay carriage-horse, 16 hands high, and 7 years old, 640l.; and Glaucus, a bay carriage-horse, 6 years old, 448l.

Friendly Societies.

The repeated failures of Friendly Societies to effect the object for which they were projected, prove how the best intentions may be defeated through want of proper foresight and calculation of probabilities, which so often reduce to certainty results which, to unthinking minds, appear mere chances.

In 1863, Mr. Tidd Pratt, the Registrar, reported: Sixty-five societies have been dissolved in the course of the year. The causes of such societies not being able to meet the claims of the members are to be found in incorrect tables for the contributions, small number of members, insecure investment of funds, and unnecessary expenses of management, which actually, in some instances, take 10s. out of every 1l. subscribed. Most of these societies still hold their meetings at public-houses, with the landlords for treasurers; and the members are required by the rules of most of the old societies to spend a monthly sum in beer “for the good of the house,” which amount is generally taken from the box, whether the members have or have not paid their contributions; and in many instances the money is not repaid to the society. In the correspondence of the year it is stated, in a letter to the Registrar respecting the affairs of a society, that it has spent nearly 1300l. of the funds “for the good of the house.” There is generally a strong party in favour of it. One letter states that a female friendly society will be obliged to break up unless they are allowed to have an annual feast and music; and an objector who is contending with the managers against any such application of the trust-funds writes:—“I can do nothing with them unless you assist me by sending a very saucy letter to the stewards.” Sometimes the law is evaded by paying an extravagant rent for the room, the excess being really allowed in beer.

The Registrar considers it to be proved by thirty-five years’ experience that some further provisions are necessary to secure to working men that they shall not be required to subscribe to these societies more than is necessary, and that they shall be certain of obtaining the benefits paid for. Returns which have been obtained from only 128 unions show about 1150 inmates in their workhouses who have been members of friendly societies which have been broken up or dissolved.

Wages heightened by Improvement in Machinery.

It is stated, in a Report of the Commissioners appointed in 1832 to inquire concerning the employment of women and children in factories, that “in the cotton-mill of Messrs. Houldsworth, in Glasgow, a spinner employed on a mule of 336 spindles, and spinning cotton 120 hanks to the pound, produced in 1823, working 74½ hours a week, 46 pounds of yarn, his net weekly wages for which amounted to 27s. 7d. Ten years later, the rate of wages having in the meantime been reduced 13 per cent., and the time of working having been lessened to 69 hours, the spinner was enabled by the greater perfection of the machinery to produce on a mule of the same number of spindles, 53½ pounds of yarn of the same fineness, and his net weekly earnings were advanced from 27s. 7d. to 29s. 10d.” Similar results from similar circumstances were experienced in the Manchester factories. The cheapening of the article produced by help of machinery increases the demand for the article; and there being consequently a need for an increased number of workmen, the elevation of wages follows as a matter of course. Nor is this the only benefit which the working-man derives in the case, for he shares with the community in acquiring a greater command over the necessities which machinery is concerned in producing.—G. R. Porter.

Giving Employment.—Indirect Taxation.

Mr. Babbage relates the following illustrative anecdote: An Irish proprietor, whose country residence was much frequented by beggars, resolved to establish a test for discriminating between the idle and the industrious, and also to obtain some small return for the alms he was in the habit of bestowing. He accordingly added to the pump, by which the upper part of his house was supplied with water, a piece of mechanism so contrived, that at the end of a certain number of strokes of the pump-handle, a penny fell out from an aperture to repay the labourer for his work. This was so arranged, that labourers who continued at the work obtained very nearly the usual daily wages of labour in that part of the country. The idlest of the vagabonds of course refused this new labour-test; but the greater part of the beggars, whose constant tale was that “they could not earn a fair day’s wages for a fair day’s work,” after earning a few pence, usually went away cursing the hardness of their taskmaster.

Never sign an Accommodation Bill.

Nothing is more deceptive than imaginary wealth. “We are apt,” says Sir E. B. Lytton, “to rely upon future prospects, and become really expensive while we are only rich in possibility. We live up to our expectations, not to our possessions, and make a figure proportionable to what we may be, not what we are. We outrun our present income, as not doubting to disburse ourselves out of the profits of some future place, project, or reversion we have in view.”

By no means is this artificial state of living more nourished than what are familiarly called “bill transactions.” This has been illustrated in novels and tales, but never more to the purpose than in the following passage in Pisistratus Caxton. “To sign an Accommodation Bill, and still more, to renew one when due, is opening an account with ruin. One always begins by being security for a friend. The discredit of the thing is familiarized to one’s mind by the false show of generous confidence in another. Then, what you have done for a friend, a friend should do for you—a hundred or two would be useful now—you are sure to repay it in three months. To youth the future seems safe as the Bank of England, and distant as the peaks of Himalaya. You pledge your honour that in three months you will release your friend. The three months expire. To release one friend, you catch hold of another—the bill is renewed, premium and interest thrown into the next pay-day—soon the amount multiplies, and with it the honour dwindles—your name circulates from hand to hand on the back of doubtful paper,—your name, which, in all money transactions, should grow higher and higher each year you live, falling down every month like the shares in a swindling speculation. You begin by what you call trusting a friend, that is, aiding him to self-destruction—buying him arsenic to clear his complexion,—you end by dragging all near you into your own abyss, as a drowning man would catch at his own brother.”

A Year’s Wills.

The Registrar-General has drawn from a calendar of the Wills and Administrations of the year 1858, the following interesting calculations. 210,972 adults died in the twelvemonth, and 30,823 persons left personal property behind them; 21,653 had made their Wills; the other 9170 had made none, and letters of administration had to be taken out. 89 persons with more than 10,000l. (one worth 100,000l.) died without making a Will. The aggregate amount of property left by all these persons is estimated at 71,860,792l., averaging 2331l. each. Distinguishing between the men and the women, we find that 102,049 adult men died in the year, and 21,454 left personal property—for one who left any, four leaving none; 108,923 adult women died, and 9369 left personal property. The average amount left by the men was 2751l.; by the women, 1371l. Omitting now any estimate for the first ten days of the year, and dealing only with the actual Wills and administrations of the rest of the twelvemonth, the personal property of those who died leaving any, 29,979 in number, amounted to 69,893,380l., of which 57,396,350l. was left by the men, and 12,497,030l. by women. The stream of wealth flowed thus:—

Persons. Dying worth Left
22,513 Less than 1000l. 5,762,880l.
6277 1000l. but less than 10,000l. 20,010,500l.
1020 10,000l. but less than 50,000l. 21,960,000l.
102 50,000l. but less than 100,000l. 7,100,000l.
67 Above 100,000l. 15,060,000l.
———— ——————
29,979 69,893,380l.

Only one property was sworn as high as 900,000l. and under 1,000,000; 1935 were under 20l. The property divides nearly equally at 20,000l. About 35,000,000l. belonged to 29,392 persons, none having more than 20,000l., and the other 35,000,000l. belonged to 587 persons, fifty times fewer than the former company. Of those who left above 100,000l., 37 were described as esquires, a term which would include men who had made their fortunes by trade or commerce; ten were titled personages, five were bankers, four merchants, three clergymen, one cotton manufacturer, one corn merchant, one hotel-keeper; one was in the navy, one in the Indian army, one in the Indian Civil Service, one was a spinster. Three medical men left more than 50,000l. A person described when he made his will as a commercial clerk left above 30,000l.; 17 “labourers and mechanics” above 1000l. Of 75 lawyers, 15 died without making their Wills. The foregoing statements, which must be taken as approximations rather than an absolute accuracy, relate to England alone. In the year ending March 31, 1859, legacy-duty was paid in the United Kingdom on 62,441,611l., but that does not include property passing from husband to wife or the converse, no legacy-duty being then payable; succession-duty on real property was paid upon 29,242,630l., and, estimating that to be taxed to the next successor at half its saleable value, it will amount to 58,485,260l. On this assumption 123,926,871l. passed by death to another generation of successors. It is certainly a remarkable fact, that (upon an average) on every death, including alike men, women, and children, more than 100l. of property paying legacy-duty, and perhaps 187l. of property of every kind, is left for the benefit of successors in the United Kingdom.—Times.The extraordinary circumstances under which Wills are sometimes made have given rise to the following suggestive remarks by an able writer in the Saturday Review:—

“If the matter is considered in reference to general principles, there is no more curious power in the world than the right which people exercise by Will of legislating after they are dead and gone, without restraint and without appeal; and it is perhaps even more singular that they exercise this power without being subject to any formalities whatever except the presence of two witnesses. To sell a house or a field is a matter which requires care and inquiry, and the circumstances ensure a certain degree of notoriety. But property of any amount may be disposed of in any way that caprice may dictate by an instrument which may be executed under any circumstances, and kept in any custody. No one but the testator need know its contents, and he may, and often does, prepare it with the most wanton caprice, and leave it in the most absurd depository to take its chance of loss or discovery as it may happen. It is well worth consideration whether the unlimited power which the law of England confers of making whatever Wills a testator chooses ought not to be qualified by some special provisions as to the manner in which such wills should be made.”


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

Clyx.com


Top of Page
Top of Page