the Revolution will be much more effectually averted by such a reform of our system as will enable the House of Commons to resume its old place in public estimation while time is yet on our side. And if we are to make our Committee-work satisfactory, we must not be afraid of very far-reaching changes. Let the Committee, at any rate as an experiment, try some course stricter than the usages of the House. Let no member be allowed to speak a second time (except by the indulgence of the House by way of explanation) upon any question to which he has already spoken, or to an amendment or to a motion of a dilatory character moved thereon, unless he be the member in charge of the bill or the mover of an amendment. Let it be ruled that, where two dilatory motions have been supported in succession by less than twenty-one members in the face of at least twice that number, the main question shall be put at once without further debate. Let the House consider whether it may not in certain cases adopt the American system of ordering certain bills, when committed, to be reported on a certain day, which makes it necessary for the Chairman, when a certain time has been reached, to put the remaining clauses and amendments without debate.

Let the House and those who lead it, not only by official rank, but by recognised authority, show themselves really in earnest to recover lost ground which has been sapped by the lapse of many centuries of external change, if only brought to light by the not very terrible adventurers who imitate Guy Fawkes now-a-days with a twopenny squib; and all will be well. But if divided counsels are still to paralyse concerted action, if obstruction' is to be cited by the more intemperate politicians on one side or the other less as a real blot in our parliamentary system than as a means of damaging political opponents, it will be hard to over-estimate the detriment which such conscript fathers may bring upon the State.

HENRY CECIL RAIKES.

THE HISTORY OF MONEY.

As in so many other matters, the most ancient records of money carry us away to the other side of the world-to the great empire of China. The early history of Chinese currency is principally known to us through a treatise, Wen-hien t'ung K'ao, or, The Examination of Currency, by Ma-twan-lin, a great Chinese scholar, who was born about 1245, though his work was not published until 1321. In uncivilised times, various objects have served as a standard of value. In the Hudson's Bay territory, beavers' skins have long been used in this manner. In ancient Europe, cattle were the usual medium of exchange; whence, as every one knows, the word pecunia. In the Zendavesta, the payment of physicians is calculated in the same way, but comparatively few perhaps realise that when we pay our fee, we are doing the same thing, for the word fee is the old word vich, which, as we know, in German still retains the sense of cattle. In Africa and the East Indies shells are, and long have been, used for the same purpose. We even find indications that shells once served as money in China, because, as M. Biot, in his interesting memoir on Chinese currency, has pointed out, the words denoting buying, selling, riches, goods, stores, property, prices, cheap, dear, and many others referring to money and wealth, contain the ideographic sign denoting the word shell. Indeed, Wangmang, who usurped the Imperial throne about 14 A.D., wishing to return to the ancient state of things, attempted among other changes to bring into circulation five different varieties of shells of an arbitrary value.

A curious illustration of the passage from a state of barter to the use of money is found in the fact that, pieces of cloth and knives having been used as in some measure a standard of value, almost as grey shirting is even now, so the earliest Chinese coins were made to resemble pieces of cloth or knives, and there are two principal kinds of coins-the pu coins, roughly representing a shirt (fig. 1), and the tao coins (fig. 2), which are in the form of a knife. These curious coins are said to go back four thousand one hundred years, and to have been made in the year 2250 B.C. I believe, however, that there is still much doubt on this point. Scimitar-shaped coins also at one time circulated (if I may use the expression) in Persia.

But these forms were of course very inconvenient, and the Chinese soon arrived at the opinion that money, which was intended to roll round the world,' should be itself round. A curious feature of Chinese coins, the nail-mark, appears to have originated in an accident very characteristic of China. In the time of Queen Wentek, a model in wax of a proposed coin was brought for her majesty's inspection. In taking hold of it, she left on it the impression of one nail, and the impression has in consequence not only been a marked characteristic of Chinese coins for hundreds of years, but has even been copied on those of Japan and Corea. The Chinese coins were not struck, as ours are, but cast, which offers peculiar facilities for forging, and, to use Mr. Jevons' words, the annals of coinage are little more than a monstrous repetition of depreciated issues, both public and private, varied by occasional meritorious but often unsuccessful efforts to restore the standard of currency.' Mr. Vissering gives us several interesting illustrations of the financial discussions of the Chinese. As to the desire of your majesty,' for instance, says Lutui, 'to cast money and to arrange the currency, in order to repair its present vicious state, it is just the same as if you would rear a fish in a cauldron of boiling water or roost a bird on a hot fire. Water and wood are essential for the life of fish and birds. But in using them in the wrong way you will surely cause the bird to be scorched and the fish to be cooked to shreds.'

Not only did the Chinese possess coins at a very early period, but they were also the inventors of bank notes. Some writers regard bank notes as having originated about 119 B.C., in the reign of the Emperor Ou-ti. At this time the Court was in want of money, and to raise it Klaproth tells us that the prime minister hit upon the following device. When any princes or courtiers entered the imperial presence, it was customary to cover the face with a piece of skin. It was first decreed then, that for this purpose the skin of certain white deer kept in one of the royal parks should alone be permitted, and then these pieces of skin were sold for a high price. But although they appear to have passed from one noble to another, they do not seem ever to have entered into general circulation. It was therefore different from the Russian skin money. In this case the notes were used instead of the skins from which they were cut, the skins themselves being too bulky and heavy to be constantly carried backward and forward. Only a little piece was cut off to figure as a token of possession of the whole skin. The ownership was proved when the piece fitted in the hole.' True bank notes are said to have been invented about 800 A.D., in the reign of Hiantsoung, of the dynasty of Thang, and were called feytsien, or flying money. It is curious, however, though not surprising, to find that the temptation to over-issue led to the same results in China as in the West. The value of the notes fell, until at length it took

very