Appendix I. Bibliographies.

[pg 631]Appendix I. Bibliographies.A Brief Bibliography Of The Tariffs Of The United States.I.General Works.—Young's“Special Report on the Customs-Tariff Legislation of the United States”contains useful extracts from debates of Congress, and also valuable tables of duties; in the Index, p. cciii, under“Tariff Act,”will be found references to, and dates of, all acts to 1870. See, also, Sumner's“History of American Currency,”and his“Lectures on Protection in the United States”; A. L. Perry's“Political Economy,”chap. xiii; Grosvenor's“Does Protection Protect?”A valuable study is E. J. James's“Studien über den Amerikanischen Zoll tariff.”For different views, see Carey's“Social Science”; Bolles's“Financial History of the United States,”vol. ii, Bk. i, chap. v, Bk. iii, chaps. iii to x; and Stebbins's“American Protectionists' Manual.”II.Earlier Periods.—H. C. Adams's“Taxation in the United States, 1789-1816”; F. W. Taussig's“Protection to Young Industries”; the works of Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, Webster, and Clay;“The Statesman's Manual”; and of course the Debates in Congress, etc. See, also, Bristed's“Resources of the United States”; Pitkin's“Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States”; Seybert's“Statistical Annals”(1818); and the“American Almanac.”III.Noteworthy Documents.—Hamilton's Reports:“Report on Manufactures,”Works, ii, pp. 192-284, or American State Papers, Finance, i, 123-144. Dallas, Treasury Report of 1816, American State Papers, Finance, iii, 87-91.A report which is of the greatest importance and weight is Albert Gallatin's“Memorial in Favor of Tariff Reform”(1832). Printed separately. Unfortunately, not in his collected works.Walker's Report, see Finance Report, December 3, 1845.J. Q. Adams's Report of 1832, Congressional Documents, 1831-1832, H. R. No. 481.D. A. Wells's“Reports as Special Commissioner of the Revenue,”1866, Senate Documents, second session, Thirty-ninth Congress, vol. i, No. 2; 1868, House Executive Documents, second session, Fortieth Congress,[pg 632]vol. ix, No. 81; 1869, House Executive Documents, third session, Fortieth Congress, vol. vii, No. 16; 1869, House Executive Documents, second session, Forty-first Congress, vol. v, No. 27; and his paper in the Cobden Club Essays (second series).W. D. Kelley's“Speeches, Addresses, and Letters.”“Report of the Tariff Commission,”1882 (two vols). H. R. Miscellaneous Documents, No. 6, Part I, Forty-seventh Congress, second session.IV.Pauper-Labor Argument.—See Taussig,“Protection to Young Industries,”p. 69, note 1; Calhoun's speech, Works, iv, pp. 201-212; Greeley's speech of 1843; Cooper's“Politics,”pp. 99-109; Webster's Works, v, pp. 161-235; Cairnes,“Leading Principles,”pp. 382-388. Fifteenth Annual Report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics (1884), by Carroll D. Wright. D. A. Wells,“Princeton Review,”November, 1883, p. 261; Schoenhof,“Wages and Trade.”V.View of Early Manufactures.—Bishop,“History of American Manufactures”; Batchelder's“Introduction and Early Progress of the Cotton Manufacture in the United States”; N. Appleton,“Origin of Lowell”; G. S. White,“Memoir of Samuel Slater”; B. F. French,“History of the Rise and Progress of the Iron Trade of the United States for 1621-1857”; H. Scrivenor,“History of the Iron Trade”;“Bulletin of the National Association of Woolen Manufactures,”ii, pp. 479-488. Tench Coxe,“Statement of the Arts and Manufactures of the United States for 1810”(1814).VI.Later View of Manufactures:(1.)The Iron Manufacture.—See Swank's“Reports of Iron and Steel Association,”1882; ibid.,“Census Report,”1880; ibid.,“Iron Trade,”1876; J. S. Newberry, for an excellent article in“International Review,”i, pp. 768-780.For Bessemer steel, Swank,“Census Report,”1880, pp. 149-153; and Schoenhof,“Destructive Influences of the Tariff,”chap. vii. A. S. Hewett, Speech in Congress, May 16, 1882. Separately printed.(2.)Wool, Woolens, and Cottons.—Production and importation of wool, see“United States Statistical Abstract”;“Tariff Commission Report,”i, pp. 1782-1785; ii, p. 2432.Production and importation of woolens, see“Bulletin of Woolen Manufacturers,”vii, p. 359;“Commerce and Navigation Reports.”Prosperity of woolen manufacturers after 1867, see Wells,“Wool and the Tariff”(a letter to the“New York Tribune,”March 20, 1873); R. W. Robinson, article of December, 1872, in“Bulletin of Woolen Manufacturers,”iii, p. 354. Edward Harris,“Memorial of the Manufacturers of Woolen Goods to the Committee of Ways and Means,”Washington, 1872. John L. Hayes,“The Fleece and the Loom.”Production and importation of cottons, see“Commerce and Navigation Reports”; Census Report of 1880.[pg 633](3.)Silk.—Manufacture since 1860, see“Silk Association Reports”; Wyckoff,“Silk Manufacture in the United States”(1883) for recent history, pp. 42-51. Wyckoff,“The Silk Goods of America”(1880), on methods of manufacture, chaps. ii, iv, vi.(4.)Sugar Duties.—D. A. Wells,“Princeton Review,”vi (November, 1880), pp. 319-335; and“The Sugar Industry of the United States and the Tariff”(1878).VII.Present Tariff.—Heyl's“United States Duties on Imports”(1881) contains all acts in force to date of publication, and gives all acts since the year 1861 in full. It is used by the United States officials.“Imports Duties from 1867 to 1883 inclusive”(House of Representatives, Miscellaneous Documents, No. 49, Forty-eighth Congress, first session) gives duties on each article by years, and reduces specific toad valoremrates.“The Existing Tariff on Imports into the United States,”1884 (Senate Document, Report, No. 12, Forty-eighth Congress, first session).A Brief Bibliography Of Bimetallism.“The Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878”(p. 754), contains an extended bibliography on money, by S. Dana Horton. Chevalier's third volume of his“Cours d'Économie politique,”entitled“Monnaie,”also gives a bibliography.I.Standard of Value.—See Jevons,“Money and the Mechanism of Exchange,”chaps iii, xxv; S. Dana Horton,“Gold and Silver,”chap. iv, p. 36; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”pp. 363-368,“Money, Trade, and Industry,”pp. 56-77; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”pp. 7, 22, 207; Mill,“Principles of Political Economy,”book iii, chap. xv; Walras,“Journal des Économistes,”October, 1882, pp. 5-13.II.Bimetallic Theory.—Horton,“Gold and Silver,”p. 29; F. A. Walker,“Money, Trade, and Industry,”p. 157,“Political Economy,”p. 408; Giffen,“Fortnightly Review,”vol. xxxii (1879), p. 279; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”p. 35; Jevons, ibid., chap, xii; A. J. Wilson,“Reciprocity, Bimetallism, and Land Reform,”p. 107; S. Bourne,“Trade, Population, and Food,”p. 227; Seyd,“The Decline of Prosperity,”and the various pamphlets of Cernuschi.III.Operation of Gresham's Law.—Macaulay, chap. xxi for clipped coin of 1695; Jevons, ibid., pp. 80-85, also gives an example taken from the Japanese currency; for the case of France, see“Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Depreciation of Silver, 1876,”p. xlii, and Appendix, pp. 86, 148; for the United States, seesupra,book iii, chap. vii, § 3. See, also, Lord Liverpool's“Treatise on the Coins of the Realm,”chap. xii, for changes in the coin of England.[pg 634]IV.Compensatory Effect of Two Standards.—Jevons, ibid., pp. 139, 140; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”pp. 411-416; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”p. 28; Mannequin,“Journal des Économistes,”August, 1878, p. 202.V.Effect of a League of States, or Law, on the Relative Value of Gold and Silver.—Giffen,“Fortnightly Review,”vol. xxxii (1879), pp. 285-290; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”pp. 23, 24, 31; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”p. 410,“Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878,”p. 74; Sumner,“Princeton Review,”vol. iv, p. 563; S. Dana Horton,“Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878,”p. 741; Bourne,“Trade, Population, and Food,”pp. 228, 230; Jevons,“Contemporary Review,”vol. xxxix (1881), p. 750; S. Newcomb,“International Review”(1879), p. 314.VI.Production of Gold and Silver; Relative Value of the Two Metals.—Ad. Soetbeer, Petermann's“Mittheilungen,”No. 57;“House of Commons Report on Depreciation of Silver,”1876, Appendix, pp. 11, 12, 24; Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 409, gives Sir H. Hay's figures corrected by him to 1878; Spofford's“American Almanac,”1878, gives tables from the“Journal des Économistes”; the figures of Seyd, Hay, Jacob, and Tooke and Newmarch are in the“House of Commons Report,”above. Also see,supra,book iii, chap. vi, for references.The relative values of gold and silver since 1834, as given in Pixley and Abell's (London) tables, are trustworthy. Previous to 1834 there is much uncertainty. Soetbeer, ibid., gives Hamburg quotations since 1687. Another table, probably incorrect in places, is that of White, see“Report of the International Monetary Conference,”1878, p. 647.VII.Demonetization of Silver by Germany.—For copy of laws of 1871 and 1873, see“Report of Directors of the United States Mint, 1873,”p. 82;“House of Commons Report on Depreciation of Silver,”1876, p. 18;“Conférence Monétaire Internationale,”1881, index, p. 215 for“Allemagne.”VIII.Latin Union.—For treaty, see“Journal des Économistes,”May, 1866;“House of Commons Report,”ibid, xxxviii, Appendix, pp. 92, 98, 106-109, 116;“Report of Monetary Conference,”1878, pp. 779-787.IX.Flow of Silver to the East.—The figures of Sir Hector Hay after 1851,“House of Commons Report,”ibid., App., p. 24, are fullest, and should be combined with Pixley and Abell's figures for years before 1851, ibid., Appendix, p. 21. See also Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”1879, p. 422; Waterfield,“House of Commons Report,”ibid., Appendix, pp. 171, 172, 174; Quetteville, ibid., p. 184;“Conférence Monétaire Internationale,”1881, p. 197; London“Economist,”February 24, 1883, Supplement, p. 7;“Parliamentary Documents,”1881, vol.[pg 635]xciii;“Report of the Director of the United States Mint,”1880 (in the Finance Report, 1880, p. 194); J. B. Robertson,“Westminster Review,”vol. cxv, p. 200.X.Depreciation of Silver, 1876.—Causes, Bourne, ibid., pp. 206, 212, 222, 233; Wilson, ibid., p. 128;“House of Commons Report,”ibid.; Sumner,“Princeton Review,”vol. iv., p. 570; S. Newcomb,“International Review,”vol. vi (1879), p. 326; Cochut,“Revue des Deux Mondes,”i, December, 1883, p. 514; Cairnes,“Essays”; F. Bowen,“Minority Report of the United States Silver Commission,”1878.Supposed cause of panic of 1873, see Williamson,“Contemporary Review,”April 1879; Seyd,“Decline of Prosperity”; Bourne, ibid., pp. 226, 227.XI.Appreciation of Gold.—Giffen,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 36, started the theory for the period 1873-1879. Also see Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 406; S. Newcomb,“International Review,”1879, p. 329; Wolowski, ibid., pp. 29, 30; Goschen,“Journal of the Institute of Bankers”(London), vol. iv, part vi, May, 1883; Patterson,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xliii, p. 1; for table of prices see London“Economist”(e.g., December 28, 1878).XII.Bimetallism in the United States.—Seesupra,book iii, chap. vii; for a vast array of materials, see“Report of the International Monetary Conference,”1878; Linderman's“Money and Legal Tender”; the Finance Reports of the United States; and Congressional Documents. For the coinage laws of 1792, 1834, 1853, 1873, 1878, see pamphlet,“Extracts from the Laws of the United States relating to Currency and Finance,”by C. F. Dunbar. For detailed account of passage of Act of 1873, see“Report of the Comptroller of the Currency,”1876, p. 170. Present situation,“Atlantic Monthly,”May, 1884,“The Silver Danger.”A Brief Bibliography Of American Shipping.I.English Navigation Acts.—Macpherson's“Annals,”ii, pp. 442, 484; Scobell,“Collection of Acts,”p. 176; Ruffhead,“Statutes at Large,”iii, p. 182; Roger Coke,“Treatise on Trade”(1671), p. 36; Sir Josiah Child,“New Discourse on Trade”(1671); Sir Matthew Decker,“Essay on the Causes of the Decline of Foreign Trade”(1744); Joshua Gee,“Trade and Navigation of Great Britain”(1730); Lindsay,“History of Merchant Shipping and Ancient Commerce”; McCulloch,“Dictionary of Commerce”(new edition), articles“Navigation”and“Colonial Trade”; ibid., edition of Adam Smith, note xii, p. 534; Huskisson, speeches, iii, 13, 351; Levi,“History of British Commerce,”p. 158.[pg 636]II.Navigation Laws of the United States.—“United States Statutes at Large,”i, 27, 287, 305; Act of 1817, Statutes, iii, 351; Revised Statutes (1878),“Commerce and Navigation,”p. 795; Lord Sheffield,“Observations on the Commerce of the United States”; Pitkin,“Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States,”chap, i; D. A. Wells,“Our Merchant Marine,”chap. v; Seybert's“Statistical Annals”; Macgregor,“Commercial Statistics of America.”III.Growth of American Shipping.—Rapid growth, 1840-1856. Levi,“History of British Commerce,”p. 582; Bigelow,“Tariff Question,”Appendix No. 57;“Harper's Magazine,”January, 1884, p. 217; Lindsay,“History of Merchant Shipping,”iii, p. 187; for ship-building, see Report of the United States Bureau of Statistics,“Commerce and Navigation,”1881, p. 927; for tonnage, ibid., pp. 928-930; also, see“United States Statistical Abstract”; Dingley's Report to House of Representatives, December 15, 1882, No. 1,827, Forty-seventh Congress, second session, pp. 5, 8, 254.IV.Steam and Iron Ships.—Preble,“History of Steam Navigation”; Colden,“Life of Fulton”; Porter,“Progress of the Nation,”section 3, chap. iv; Nimmo,“Report to the Secretary of the Treasury in Relation to the Foreign Commerce of the United States and the Decadence of American Shipping”(1870); Dingley's Report, pp. 4, 23; Kelley,“The Question of Ships,”Appendix ii, p. 208.V.Decline of American Shipping.—“Report on Commerce and Navigation”(1881), pp. 927, 928; Lindsay, ibid., iii, pp. 83, 187, 593, 645; ibid., iv, pp. 163-180, 292, 316, 376;“North American Review,”October, 1864, p. 489;“Report on Commerce and Navigation,”1881, lxv, pp. 915, 916, 922, 934; Lynch, Report to House of Representatives on“Causes of the Reduction of American Tonnage,”February 17, 1878, pp. ix, 80, 176, 195-213; remission of duties, Revised Statutes of the United States (edition of 1878), section 2,513; Report on“Commerce and Navigation,”xi, 83, 210; Dingley's Report; Nimmo,“Decadence of American Shipping”(which gives several charts), p. 17,“The Practical Workings of our Relations of Maritime Reciprocity”(1871); Kelley, ibid.; Reports of the New York Chamber of Commerce; Sumner,“Shall Americans own Ships?”in“North American Review,”June, 1880; Codman,“Free Ships”; for high-rate profit in the United States, Dingley's Report, p. 4.VI.Burdens on Ship-Owners.—Tonnage duties, Wells, p. 179; sailors' wages, Revised Statutes, sections 4,561, 4,578, 4,580-4,584, 4,600; consular fees, Dingley's Report, p. 9; pilotage, taxation, Wells, p. 172,et seq.; see also Act of 1884, abolishing many of these burdens.[pg 637]

Appendix I. Bibliographies.A Brief Bibliography Of The Tariffs Of The United States.I.General Works.—Young's“Special Report on the Customs-Tariff Legislation of the United States”contains useful extracts from debates of Congress, and also valuable tables of duties; in the Index, p. cciii, under“Tariff Act,”will be found references to, and dates of, all acts to 1870. See, also, Sumner's“History of American Currency,”and his“Lectures on Protection in the United States”; A. L. Perry's“Political Economy,”chap. xiii; Grosvenor's“Does Protection Protect?”A valuable study is E. J. James's“Studien über den Amerikanischen Zoll tariff.”For different views, see Carey's“Social Science”; Bolles's“Financial History of the United States,”vol. ii, Bk. i, chap. v, Bk. iii, chaps. iii to x; and Stebbins's“American Protectionists' Manual.”II.Earlier Periods.—H. C. Adams's“Taxation in the United States, 1789-1816”; F. W. Taussig's“Protection to Young Industries”; the works of Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, Webster, and Clay;“The Statesman's Manual”; and of course the Debates in Congress, etc. See, also, Bristed's“Resources of the United States”; Pitkin's“Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States”; Seybert's“Statistical Annals”(1818); and the“American Almanac.”III.Noteworthy Documents.—Hamilton's Reports:“Report on Manufactures,”Works, ii, pp. 192-284, or American State Papers, Finance, i, 123-144. Dallas, Treasury Report of 1816, American State Papers, Finance, iii, 87-91.A report which is of the greatest importance and weight is Albert Gallatin's“Memorial in Favor of Tariff Reform”(1832). Printed separately. Unfortunately, not in his collected works.Walker's Report, see Finance Report, December 3, 1845.J. Q. Adams's Report of 1832, Congressional Documents, 1831-1832, H. R. No. 481.D. A. Wells's“Reports as Special Commissioner of the Revenue,”1866, Senate Documents, second session, Thirty-ninth Congress, vol. i, No. 2; 1868, House Executive Documents, second session, Fortieth Congress,[pg 632]vol. ix, No. 81; 1869, House Executive Documents, third session, Fortieth Congress, vol. vii, No. 16; 1869, House Executive Documents, second session, Forty-first Congress, vol. v, No. 27; and his paper in the Cobden Club Essays (second series).W. D. Kelley's“Speeches, Addresses, and Letters.”“Report of the Tariff Commission,”1882 (two vols). H. R. Miscellaneous Documents, No. 6, Part I, Forty-seventh Congress, second session.IV.Pauper-Labor Argument.—See Taussig,“Protection to Young Industries,”p. 69, note 1; Calhoun's speech, Works, iv, pp. 201-212; Greeley's speech of 1843; Cooper's“Politics,”pp. 99-109; Webster's Works, v, pp. 161-235; Cairnes,“Leading Principles,”pp. 382-388. Fifteenth Annual Report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics (1884), by Carroll D. Wright. D. A. Wells,“Princeton Review,”November, 1883, p. 261; Schoenhof,“Wages and Trade.”V.View of Early Manufactures.—Bishop,“History of American Manufactures”; Batchelder's“Introduction and Early Progress of the Cotton Manufacture in the United States”; N. Appleton,“Origin of Lowell”; G. S. White,“Memoir of Samuel Slater”; B. F. French,“History of the Rise and Progress of the Iron Trade of the United States for 1621-1857”; H. Scrivenor,“History of the Iron Trade”;“Bulletin of the National Association of Woolen Manufactures,”ii, pp. 479-488. Tench Coxe,“Statement of the Arts and Manufactures of the United States for 1810”(1814).VI.Later View of Manufactures:(1.)The Iron Manufacture.—See Swank's“Reports of Iron and Steel Association,”1882; ibid.,“Census Report,”1880; ibid.,“Iron Trade,”1876; J. S. Newberry, for an excellent article in“International Review,”i, pp. 768-780.For Bessemer steel, Swank,“Census Report,”1880, pp. 149-153; and Schoenhof,“Destructive Influences of the Tariff,”chap. vii. A. S. Hewett, Speech in Congress, May 16, 1882. Separately printed.(2.)Wool, Woolens, and Cottons.—Production and importation of wool, see“United States Statistical Abstract”;“Tariff Commission Report,”i, pp. 1782-1785; ii, p. 2432.Production and importation of woolens, see“Bulletin of Woolen Manufacturers,”vii, p. 359;“Commerce and Navigation Reports.”Prosperity of woolen manufacturers after 1867, see Wells,“Wool and the Tariff”(a letter to the“New York Tribune,”March 20, 1873); R. W. Robinson, article of December, 1872, in“Bulletin of Woolen Manufacturers,”iii, p. 354. Edward Harris,“Memorial of the Manufacturers of Woolen Goods to the Committee of Ways and Means,”Washington, 1872. John L. Hayes,“The Fleece and the Loom.”Production and importation of cottons, see“Commerce and Navigation Reports”; Census Report of 1880.[pg 633](3.)Silk.—Manufacture since 1860, see“Silk Association Reports”; Wyckoff,“Silk Manufacture in the United States”(1883) for recent history, pp. 42-51. Wyckoff,“The Silk Goods of America”(1880), on methods of manufacture, chaps. ii, iv, vi.(4.)Sugar Duties.—D. A. Wells,“Princeton Review,”vi (November, 1880), pp. 319-335; and“The Sugar Industry of the United States and the Tariff”(1878).VII.Present Tariff.—Heyl's“United States Duties on Imports”(1881) contains all acts in force to date of publication, and gives all acts since the year 1861 in full. It is used by the United States officials.“Imports Duties from 1867 to 1883 inclusive”(House of Representatives, Miscellaneous Documents, No. 49, Forty-eighth Congress, first session) gives duties on each article by years, and reduces specific toad valoremrates.“The Existing Tariff on Imports into the United States,”1884 (Senate Document, Report, No. 12, Forty-eighth Congress, first session).A Brief Bibliography Of Bimetallism.“The Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878”(p. 754), contains an extended bibliography on money, by S. Dana Horton. Chevalier's third volume of his“Cours d'Économie politique,”entitled“Monnaie,”also gives a bibliography.I.Standard of Value.—See Jevons,“Money and the Mechanism of Exchange,”chaps iii, xxv; S. Dana Horton,“Gold and Silver,”chap. iv, p. 36; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”pp. 363-368,“Money, Trade, and Industry,”pp. 56-77; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”pp. 7, 22, 207; Mill,“Principles of Political Economy,”book iii, chap. xv; Walras,“Journal des Économistes,”October, 1882, pp. 5-13.II.Bimetallic Theory.—Horton,“Gold and Silver,”p. 29; F. A. Walker,“Money, Trade, and Industry,”p. 157,“Political Economy,”p. 408; Giffen,“Fortnightly Review,”vol. xxxii (1879), p. 279; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”p. 35; Jevons, ibid., chap, xii; A. J. Wilson,“Reciprocity, Bimetallism, and Land Reform,”p. 107; S. Bourne,“Trade, Population, and Food,”p. 227; Seyd,“The Decline of Prosperity,”and the various pamphlets of Cernuschi.III.Operation of Gresham's Law.—Macaulay, chap. xxi for clipped coin of 1695; Jevons, ibid., pp. 80-85, also gives an example taken from the Japanese currency; for the case of France, see“Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Depreciation of Silver, 1876,”p. xlii, and Appendix, pp. 86, 148; for the United States, seesupra,book iii, chap. vii, § 3. See, also, Lord Liverpool's“Treatise on the Coins of the Realm,”chap. xii, for changes in the coin of England.[pg 634]IV.Compensatory Effect of Two Standards.—Jevons, ibid., pp. 139, 140; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”pp. 411-416; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”p. 28; Mannequin,“Journal des Économistes,”August, 1878, p. 202.V.Effect of a League of States, or Law, on the Relative Value of Gold and Silver.—Giffen,“Fortnightly Review,”vol. xxxii (1879), pp. 285-290; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”pp. 23, 24, 31; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”p. 410,“Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878,”p. 74; Sumner,“Princeton Review,”vol. iv, p. 563; S. Dana Horton,“Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878,”p. 741; Bourne,“Trade, Population, and Food,”pp. 228, 230; Jevons,“Contemporary Review,”vol. xxxix (1881), p. 750; S. Newcomb,“International Review”(1879), p. 314.VI.Production of Gold and Silver; Relative Value of the Two Metals.—Ad. Soetbeer, Petermann's“Mittheilungen,”No. 57;“House of Commons Report on Depreciation of Silver,”1876, Appendix, pp. 11, 12, 24; Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 409, gives Sir H. Hay's figures corrected by him to 1878; Spofford's“American Almanac,”1878, gives tables from the“Journal des Économistes”; the figures of Seyd, Hay, Jacob, and Tooke and Newmarch are in the“House of Commons Report,”above. Also see,supra,book iii, chap. vi, for references.The relative values of gold and silver since 1834, as given in Pixley and Abell's (London) tables, are trustworthy. Previous to 1834 there is much uncertainty. Soetbeer, ibid., gives Hamburg quotations since 1687. Another table, probably incorrect in places, is that of White, see“Report of the International Monetary Conference,”1878, p. 647.VII.Demonetization of Silver by Germany.—For copy of laws of 1871 and 1873, see“Report of Directors of the United States Mint, 1873,”p. 82;“House of Commons Report on Depreciation of Silver,”1876, p. 18;“Conférence Monétaire Internationale,”1881, index, p. 215 for“Allemagne.”VIII.Latin Union.—For treaty, see“Journal des Économistes,”May, 1866;“House of Commons Report,”ibid, xxxviii, Appendix, pp. 92, 98, 106-109, 116;“Report of Monetary Conference,”1878, pp. 779-787.IX.Flow of Silver to the East.—The figures of Sir Hector Hay after 1851,“House of Commons Report,”ibid., App., p. 24, are fullest, and should be combined with Pixley and Abell's figures for years before 1851, ibid., Appendix, p. 21. See also Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”1879, p. 422; Waterfield,“House of Commons Report,”ibid., Appendix, pp. 171, 172, 174; Quetteville, ibid., p. 184;“Conférence Monétaire Internationale,”1881, p. 197; London“Economist,”February 24, 1883, Supplement, p. 7;“Parliamentary Documents,”1881, vol.[pg 635]xciii;“Report of the Director of the United States Mint,”1880 (in the Finance Report, 1880, p. 194); J. B. Robertson,“Westminster Review,”vol. cxv, p. 200.X.Depreciation of Silver, 1876.—Causes, Bourne, ibid., pp. 206, 212, 222, 233; Wilson, ibid., p. 128;“House of Commons Report,”ibid.; Sumner,“Princeton Review,”vol. iv., p. 570; S. Newcomb,“International Review,”vol. vi (1879), p. 326; Cochut,“Revue des Deux Mondes,”i, December, 1883, p. 514; Cairnes,“Essays”; F. Bowen,“Minority Report of the United States Silver Commission,”1878.Supposed cause of panic of 1873, see Williamson,“Contemporary Review,”April 1879; Seyd,“Decline of Prosperity”; Bourne, ibid., pp. 226, 227.XI.Appreciation of Gold.—Giffen,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 36, started the theory for the period 1873-1879. Also see Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 406; S. Newcomb,“International Review,”1879, p. 329; Wolowski, ibid., pp. 29, 30; Goschen,“Journal of the Institute of Bankers”(London), vol. iv, part vi, May, 1883; Patterson,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xliii, p. 1; for table of prices see London“Economist”(e.g., December 28, 1878).XII.Bimetallism in the United States.—Seesupra,book iii, chap. vii; for a vast array of materials, see“Report of the International Monetary Conference,”1878; Linderman's“Money and Legal Tender”; the Finance Reports of the United States; and Congressional Documents. For the coinage laws of 1792, 1834, 1853, 1873, 1878, see pamphlet,“Extracts from the Laws of the United States relating to Currency and Finance,”by C. F. Dunbar. For detailed account of passage of Act of 1873, see“Report of the Comptroller of the Currency,”1876, p. 170. Present situation,“Atlantic Monthly,”May, 1884,“The Silver Danger.”A Brief Bibliography Of American Shipping.I.English Navigation Acts.—Macpherson's“Annals,”ii, pp. 442, 484; Scobell,“Collection of Acts,”p. 176; Ruffhead,“Statutes at Large,”iii, p. 182; Roger Coke,“Treatise on Trade”(1671), p. 36; Sir Josiah Child,“New Discourse on Trade”(1671); Sir Matthew Decker,“Essay on the Causes of the Decline of Foreign Trade”(1744); Joshua Gee,“Trade and Navigation of Great Britain”(1730); Lindsay,“History of Merchant Shipping and Ancient Commerce”; McCulloch,“Dictionary of Commerce”(new edition), articles“Navigation”and“Colonial Trade”; ibid., edition of Adam Smith, note xii, p. 534; Huskisson, speeches, iii, 13, 351; Levi,“History of British Commerce,”p. 158.[pg 636]II.Navigation Laws of the United States.—“United States Statutes at Large,”i, 27, 287, 305; Act of 1817, Statutes, iii, 351; Revised Statutes (1878),“Commerce and Navigation,”p. 795; Lord Sheffield,“Observations on the Commerce of the United States”; Pitkin,“Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States,”chap, i; D. A. Wells,“Our Merchant Marine,”chap. v; Seybert's“Statistical Annals”; Macgregor,“Commercial Statistics of America.”III.Growth of American Shipping.—Rapid growth, 1840-1856. Levi,“History of British Commerce,”p. 582; Bigelow,“Tariff Question,”Appendix No. 57;“Harper's Magazine,”January, 1884, p. 217; Lindsay,“History of Merchant Shipping,”iii, p. 187; for ship-building, see Report of the United States Bureau of Statistics,“Commerce and Navigation,”1881, p. 927; for tonnage, ibid., pp. 928-930; also, see“United States Statistical Abstract”; Dingley's Report to House of Representatives, December 15, 1882, No. 1,827, Forty-seventh Congress, second session, pp. 5, 8, 254.IV.Steam and Iron Ships.—Preble,“History of Steam Navigation”; Colden,“Life of Fulton”; Porter,“Progress of the Nation,”section 3, chap. iv; Nimmo,“Report to the Secretary of the Treasury in Relation to the Foreign Commerce of the United States and the Decadence of American Shipping”(1870); Dingley's Report, pp. 4, 23; Kelley,“The Question of Ships,”Appendix ii, p. 208.V.Decline of American Shipping.—“Report on Commerce and Navigation”(1881), pp. 927, 928; Lindsay, ibid., iii, pp. 83, 187, 593, 645; ibid., iv, pp. 163-180, 292, 316, 376;“North American Review,”October, 1864, p. 489;“Report on Commerce and Navigation,”1881, lxv, pp. 915, 916, 922, 934; Lynch, Report to House of Representatives on“Causes of the Reduction of American Tonnage,”February 17, 1878, pp. ix, 80, 176, 195-213; remission of duties, Revised Statutes of the United States (edition of 1878), section 2,513; Report on“Commerce and Navigation,”xi, 83, 210; Dingley's Report; Nimmo,“Decadence of American Shipping”(which gives several charts), p. 17,“The Practical Workings of our Relations of Maritime Reciprocity”(1871); Kelley, ibid.; Reports of the New York Chamber of Commerce; Sumner,“Shall Americans own Ships?”in“North American Review,”June, 1880; Codman,“Free Ships”; for high-rate profit in the United States, Dingley's Report, p. 4.VI.Burdens on Ship-Owners.—Tonnage duties, Wells, p. 179; sailors' wages, Revised Statutes, sections 4,561, 4,578, 4,580-4,584, 4,600; consular fees, Dingley's Report, p. 9; pilotage, taxation, Wells, p. 172,et seq.; see also Act of 1884, abolishing many of these burdens.

A Brief Bibliography Of The Tariffs Of The United States.I.General Works.—Young's“Special Report on the Customs-Tariff Legislation of the United States”contains useful extracts from debates of Congress, and also valuable tables of duties; in the Index, p. cciii, under“Tariff Act,”will be found references to, and dates of, all acts to 1870. See, also, Sumner's“History of American Currency,”and his“Lectures on Protection in the United States”; A. L. Perry's“Political Economy,”chap. xiii; Grosvenor's“Does Protection Protect?”A valuable study is E. J. James's“Studien über den Amerikanischen Zoll tariff.”For different views, see Carey's“Social Science”; Bolles's“Financial History of the United States,”vol. ii, Bk. i, chap. v, Bk. iii, chaps. iii to x; and Stebbins's“American Protectionists' Manual.”II.Earlier Periods.—H. C. Adams's“Taxation in the United States, 1789-1816”; F. W. Taussig's“Protection to Young Industries”; the works of Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, Webster, and Clay;“The Statesman's Manual”; and of course the Debates in Congress, etc. See, also, Bristed's“Resources of the United States”; Pitkin's“Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States”; Seybert's“Statistical Annals”(1818); and the“American Almanac.”III.Noteworthy Documents.—Hamilton's Reports:“Report on Manufactures,”Works, ii, pp. 192-284, or American State Papers, Finance, i, 123-144. Dallas, Treasury Report of 1816, American State Papers, Finance, iii, 87-91.A report which is of the greatest importance and weight is Albert Gallatin's“Memorial in Favor of Tariff Reform”(1832). Printed separately. Unfortunately, not in his collected works.Walker's Report, see Finance Report, December 3, 1845.J. Q. Adams's Report of 1832, Congressional Documents, 1831-1832, H. R. No. 481.D. A. Wells's“Reports as Special Commissioner of the Revenue,”1866, Senate Documents, second session, Thirty-ninth Congress, vol. i, No. 2; 1868, House Executive Documents, second session, Fortieth Congress,[pg 632]vol. ix, No. 81; 1869, House Executive Documents, third session, Fortieth Congress, vol. vii, No. 16; 1869, House Executive Documents, second session, Forty-first Congress, vol. v, No. 27; and his paper in the Cobden Club Essays (second series).W. D. Kelley's“Speeches, Addresses, and Letters.”“Report of the Tariff Commission,”1882 (two vols). H. R. Miscellaneous Documents, No. 6, Part I, Forty-seventh Congress, second session.IV.Pauper-Labor Argument.—See Taussig,“Protection to Young Industries,”p. 69, note 1; Calhoun's speech, Works, iv, pp. 201-212; Greeley's speech of 1843; Cooper's“Politics,”pp. 99-109; Webster's Works, v, pp. 161-235; Cairnes,“Leading Principles,”pp. 382-388. Fifteenth Annual Report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics (1884), by Carroll D. Wright. D. A. Wells,“Princeton Review,”November, 1883, p. 261; Schoenhof,“Wages and Trade.”V.View of Early Manufactures.—Bishop,“History of American Manufactures”; Batchelder's“Introduction and Early Progress of the Cotton Manufacture in the United States”; N. Appleton,“Origin of Lowell”; G. S. White,“Memoir of Samuel Slater”; B. F. French,“History of the Rise and Progress of the Iron Trade of the United States for 1621-1857”; H. Scrivenor,“History of the Iron Trade”;“Bulletin of the National Association of Woolen Manufactures,”ii, pp. 479-488. Tench Coxe,“Statement of the Arts and Manufactures of the United States for 1810”(1814).VI.Later View of Manufactures:(1.)The Iron Manufacture.—See Swank's“Reports of Iron and Steel Association,”1882; ibid.,“Census Report,”1880; ibid.,“Iron Trade,”1876; J. S. Newberry, for an excellent article in“International Review,”i, pp. 768-780.For Bessemer steel, Swank,“Census Report,”1880, pp. 149-153; and Schoenhof,“Destructive Influences of the Tariff,”chap. vii. A. S. Hewett, Speech in Congress, May 16, 1882. Separately printed.(2.)Wool, Woolens, and Cottons.—Production and importation of wool, see“United States Statistical Abstract”;“Tariff Commission Report,”i, pp. 1782-1785; ii, p. 2432.Production and importation of woolens, see“Bulletin of Woolen Manufacturers,”vii, p. 359;“Commerce and Navigation Reports.”Prosperity of woolen manufacturers after 1867, see Wells,“Wool and the Tariff”(a letter to the“New York Tribune,”March 20, 1873); R. W. Robinson, article of December, 1872, in“Bulletin of Woolen Manufacturers,”iii, p. 354. Edward Harris,“Memorial of the Manufacturers of Woolen Goods to the Committee of Ways and Means,”Washington, 1872. John L. Hayes,“The Fleece and the Loom.”Production and importation of cottons, see“Commerce and Navigation Reports”; Census Report of 1880.[pg 633](3.)Silk.—Manufacture since 1860, see“Silk Association Reports”; Wyckoff,“Silk Manufacture in the United States”(1883) for recent history, pp. 42-51. Wyckoff,“The Silk Goods of America”(1880), on methods of manufacture, chaps. ii, iv, vi.(4.)Sugar Duties.—D. A. Wells,“Princeton Review,”vi (November, 1880), pp. 319-335; and“The Sugar Industry of the United States and the Tariff”(1878).VII.Present Tariff.—Heyl's“United States Duties on Imports”(1881) contains all acts in force to date of publication, and gives all acts since the year 1861 in full. It is used by the United States officials.“Imports Duties from 1867 to 1883 inclusive”(House of Representatives, Miscellaneous Documents, No. 49, Forty-eighth Congress, first session) gives duties on each article by years, and reduces specific toad valoremrates.“The Existing Tariff on Imports into the United States,”1884 (Senate Document, Report, No. 12, Forty-eighth Congress, first session).

I.General Works.—Young's“Special Report on the Customs-Tariff Legislation of the United States”contains useful extracts from debates of Congress, and also valuable tables of duties; in the Index, p. cciii, under“Tariff Act,”will be found references to, and dates of, all acts to 1870. See, also, Sumner's“History of American Currency,”and his“Lectures on Protection in the United States”; A. L. Perry's“Political Economy,”chap. xiii; Grosvenor's“Does Protection Protect?”A valuable study is E. J. James's“Studien über den Amerikanischen Zoll tariff.”For different views, see Carey's“Social Science”; Bolles's“Financial History of the United States,”vol. ii, Bk. i, chap. v, Bk. iii, chaps. iii to x; and Stebbins's“American Protectionists' Manual.”

II.Earlier Periods.—H. C. Adams's“Taxation in the United States, 1789-1816”; F. W. Taussig's“Protection to Young Industries”; the works of Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, Webster, and Clay;“The Statesman's Manual”; and of course the Debates in Congress, etc. See, also, Bristed's“Resources of the United States”; Pitkin's“Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States”; Seybert's“Statistical Annals”(1818); and the“American Almanac.”

III.Noteworthy Documents.—Hamilton's Reports:“Report on Manufactures,”Works, ii, pp. 192-284, or American State Papers, Finance, i, 123-144. Dallas, Treasury Report of 1816, American State Papers, Finance, iii, 87-91.

A report which is of the greatest importance and weight is Albert Gallatin's“Memorial in Favor of Tariff Reform”(1832). Printed separately. Unfortunately, not in his collected works.

Walker's Report, see Finance Report, December 3, 1845.

J. Q. Adams's Report of 1832, Congressional Documents, 1831-1832, H. R. No. 481.

D. A. Wells's“Reports as Special Commissioner of the Revenue,”1866, Senate Documents, second session, Thirty-ninth Congress, vol. i, No. 2; 1868, House Executive Documents, second session, Fortieth Congress,[pg 632]vol. ix, No. 81; 1869, House Executive Documents, third session, Fortieth Congress, vol. vii, No. 16; 1869, House Executive Documents, second session, Forty-first Congress, vol. v, No. 27; and his paper in the Cobden Club Essays (second series).

W. D. Kelley's“Speeches, Addresses, and Letters.”

“Report of the Tariff Commission,”1882 (two vols). H. R. Miscellaneous Documents, No. 6, Part I, Forty-seventh Congress, second session.

IV.Pauper-Labor Argument.—See Taussig,“Protection to Young Industries,”p. 69, note 1; Calhoun's speech, Works, iv, pp. 201-212; Greeley's speech of 1843; Cooper's“Politics,”pp. 99-109; Webster's Works, v, pp. 161-235; Cairnes,“Leading Principles,”pp. 382-388. Fifteenth Annual Report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics (1884), by Carroll D. Wright. D. A. Wells,“Princeton Review,”November, 1883, p. 261; Schoenhof,“Wages and Trade.”

V.View of Early Manufactures.—Bishop,“History of American Manufactures”; Batchelder's“Introduction and Early Progress of the Cotton Manufacture in the United States”; N. Appleton,“Origin of Lowell”; G. S. White,“Memoir of Samuel Slater”; B. F. French,“History of the Rise and Progress of the Iron Trade of the United States for 1621-1857”; H. Scrivenor,“History of the Iron Trade”;“Bulletin of the National Association of Woolen Manufactures,”ii, pp. 479-488. Tench Coxe,“Statement of the Arts and Manufactures of the United States for 1810”(1814).

VI.Later View of Manufactures:

(1.)The Iron Manufacture.—See Swank's“Reports of Iron and Steel Association,”1882; ibid.,“Census Report,”1880; ibid.,“Iron Trade,”1876; J. S. Newberry, for an excellent article in“International Review,”i, pp. 768-780.

For Bessemer steel, Swank,“Census Report,”1880, pp. 149-153; and Schoenhof,“Destructive Influences of the Tariff,”chap. vii. A. S. Hewett, Speech in Congress, May 16, 1882. Separately printed.

(2.)Wool, Woolens, and Cottons.—Production and importation of wool, see“United States Statistical Abstract”;“Tariff Commission Report,”i, pp. 1782-1785; ii, p. 2432.

Production and importation of woolens, see“Bulletin of Woolen Manufacturers,”vii, p. 359;“Commerce and Navigation Reports.”

Prosperity of woolen manufacturers after 1867, see Wells,“Wool and the Tariff”(a letter to the“New York Tribune,”March 20, 1873); R. W. Robinson, article of December, 1872, in“Bulletin of Woolen Manufacturers,”iii, p. 354. Edward Harris,“Memorial of the Manufacturers of Woolen Goods to the Committee of Ways and Means,”Washington, 1872. John L. Hayes,“The Fleece and the Loom.”

Production and importation of cottons, see“Commerce and Navigation Reports”; Census Report of 1880.

(3.)Silk.—Manufacture since 1860, see“Silk Association Reports”; Wyckoff,“Silk Manufacture in the United States”(1883) for recent history, pp. 42-51. Wyckoff,“The Silk Goods of America”(1880), on methods of manufacture, chaps. ii, iv, vi.

(4.)Sugar Duties.—D. A. Wells,“Princeton Review,”vi (November, 1880), pp. 319-335; and“The Sugar Industry of the United States and the Tariff”(1878).

VII.Present Tariff.—Heyl's“United States Duties on Imports”(1881) contains all acts in force to date of publication, and gives all acts since the year 1861 in full. It is used by the United States officials.

“Imports Duties from 1867 to 1883 inclusive”(House of Representatives, Miscellaneous Documents, No. 49, Forty-eighth Congress, first session) gives duties on each article by years, and reduces specific toad valoremrates.

“The Existing Tariff on Imports into the United States,”1884 (Senate Document, Report, No. 12, Forty-eighth Congress, first session).

A Brief Bibliography Of Bimetallism.“The Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878”(p. 754), contains an extended bibliography on money, by S. Dana Horton. Chevalier's third volume of his“Cours d'Économie politique,”entitled“Monnaie,”also gives a bibliography.I.Standard of Value.—See Jevons,“Money and the Mechanism of Exchange,”chaps iii, xxv; S. Dana Horton,“Gold and Silver,”chap. iv, p. 36; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”pp. 363-368,“Money, Trade, and Industry,”pp. 56-77; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”pp. 7, 22, 207; Mill,“Principles of Political Economy,”book iii, chap. xv; Walras,“Journal des Économistes,”October, 1882, pp. 5-13.II.Bimetallic Theory.—Horton,“Gold and Silver,”p. 29; F. A. Walker,“Money, Trade, and Industry,”p. 157,“Political Economy,”p. 408; Giffen,“Fortnightly Review,”vol. xxxii (1879), p. 279; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”p. 35; Jevons, ibid., chap, xii; A. J. Wilson,“Reciprocity, Bimetallism, and Land Reform,”p. 107; S. Bourne,“Trade, Population, and Food,”p. 227; Seyd,“The Decline of Prosperity,”and the various pamphlets of Cernuschi.III.Operation of Gresham's Law.—Macaulay, chap. xxi for clipped coin of 1695; Jevons, ibid., pp. 80-85, also gives an example taken from the Japanese currency; for the case of France, see“Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Depreciation of Silver, 1876,”p. xlii, and Appendix, pp. 86, 148; for the United States, seesupra,book iii, chap. vii, § 3. See, also, Lord Liverpool's“Treatise on the Coins of the Realm,”chap. xii, for changes in the coin of England.[pg 634]IV.Compensatory Effect of Two Standards.—Jevons, ibid., pp. 139, 140; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”pp. 411-416; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”p. 28; Mannequin,“Journal des Économistes,”August, 1878, p. 202.V.Effect of a League of States, or Law, on the Relative Value of Gold and Silver.—Giffen,“Fortnightly Review,”vol. xxxii (1879), pp. 285-290; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”pp. 23, 24, 31; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”p. 410,“Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878,”p. 74; Sumner,“Princeton Review,”vol. iv, p. 563; S. Dana Horton,“Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878,”p. 741; Bourne,“Trade, Population, and Food,”pp. 228, 230; Jevons,“Contemporary Review,”vol. xxxix (1881), p. 750; S. Newcomb,“International Review”(1879), p. 314.VI.Production of Gold and Silver; Relative Value of the Two Metals.—Ad. Soetbeer, Petermann's“Mittheilungen,”No. 57;“House of Commons Report on Depreciation of Silver,”1876, Appendix, pp. 11, 12, 24; Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 409, gives Sir H. Hay's figures corrected by him to 1878; Spofford's“American Almanac,”1878, gives tables from the“Journal des Économistes”; the figures of Seyd, Hay, Jacob, and Tooke and Newmarch are in the“House of Commons Report,”above. Also see,supra,book iii, chap. vi, for references.The relative values of gold and silver since 1834, as given in Pixley and Abell's (London) tables, are trustworthy. Previous to 1834 there is much uncertainty. Soetbeer, ibid., gives Hamburg quotations since 1687. Another table, probably incorrect in places, is that of White, see“Report of the International Monetary Conference,”1878, p. 647.VII.Demonetization of Silver by Germany.—For copy of laws of 1871 and 1873, see“Report of Directors of the United States Mint, 1873,”p. 82;“House of Commons Report on Depreciation of Silver,”1876, p. 18;“Conférence Monétaire Internationale,”1881, index, p. 215 for“Allemagne.”VIII.Latin Union.—For treaty, see“Journal des Économistes,”May, 1866;“House of Commons Report,”ibid, xxxviii, Appendix, pp. 92, 98, 106-109, 116;“Report of Monetary Conference,”1878, pp. 779-787.IX.Flow of Silver to the East.—The figures of Sir Hector Hay after 1851,“House of Commons Report,”ibid., App., p. 24, are fullest, and should be combined with Pixley and Abell's figures for years before 1851, ibid., Appendix, p. 21. See also Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”1879, p. 422; Waterfield,“House of Commons Report,”ibid., Appendix, pp. 171, 172, 174; Quetteville, ibid., p. 184;“Conférence Monétaire Internationale,”1881, p. 197; London“Economist,”February 24, 1883, Supplement, p. 7;“Parliamentary Documents,”1881, vol.[pg 635]xciii;“Report of the Director of the United States Mint,”1880 (in the Finance Report, 1880, p. 194); J. B. Robertson,“Westminster Review,”vol. cxv, p. 200.X.Depreciation of Silver, 1876.—Causes, Bourne, ibid., pp. 206, 212, 222, 233; Wilson, ibid., p. 128;“House of Commons Report,”ibid.; Sumner,“Princeton Review,”vol. iv., p. 570; S. Newcomb,“International Review,”vol. vi (1879), p. 326; Cochut,“Revue des Deux Mondes,”i, December, 1883, p. 514; Cairnes,“Essays”; F. Bowen,“Minority Report of the United States Silver Commission,”1878.Supposed cause of panic of 1873, see Williamson,“Contemporary Review,”April 1879; Seyd,“Decline of Prosperity”; Bourne, ibid., pp. 226, 227.XI.Appreciation of Gold.—Giffen,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 36, started the theory for the period 1873-1879. Also see Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 406; S. Newcomb,“International Review,”1879, p. 329; Wolowski, ibid., pp. 29, 30; Goschen,“Journal of the Institute of Bankers”(London), vol. iv, part vi, May, 1883; Patterson,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xliii, p. 1; for table of prices see London“Economist”(e.g., December 28, 1878).XII.Bimetallism in the United States.—Seesupra,book iii, chap. vii; for a vast array of materials, see“Report of the International Monetary Conference,”1878; Linderman's“Money and Legal Tender”; the Finance Reports of the United States; and Congressional Documents. For the coinage laws of 1792, 1834, 1853, 1873, 1878, see pamphlet,“Extracts from the Laws of the United States relating to Currency and Finance,”by C. F. Dunbar. For detailed account of passage of Act of 1873, see“Report of the Comptroller of the Currency,”1876, p. 170. Present situation,“Atlantic Monthly,”May, 1884,“The Silver Danger.”

“The Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878”(p. 754), contains an extended bibliography on money, by S. Dana Horton. Chevalier's third volume of his“Cours d'Économie politique,”entitled“Monnaie,”also gives a bibliography.

I.Standard of Value.—See Jevons,“Money and the Mechanism of Exchange,”chaps iii, xxv; S. Dana Horton,“Gold and Silver,”chap. iv, p. 36; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”pp. 363-368,“Money, Trade, and Industry,”pp. 56-77; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”pp. 7, 22, 207; Mill,“Principles of Political Economy,”book iii, chap. xv; Walras,“Journal des Économistes,”October, 1882, pp. 5-13.

II.Bimetallic Theory.—Horton,“Gold and Silver,”p. 29; F. A. Walker,“Money, Trade, and Industry,”p. 157,“Political Economy,”p. 408; Giffen,“Fortnightly Review,”vol. xxxii (1879), p. 279; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”p. 35; Jevons, ibid., chap, xii; A. J. Wilson,“Reciprocity, Bimetallism, and Land Reform,”p. 107; S. Bourne,“Trade, Population, and Food,”p. 227; Seyd,“The Decline of Prosperity,”and the various pamphlets of Cernuschi.

III.Operation of Gresham's Law.—Macaulay, chap. xxi for clipped coin of 1695; Jevons, ibid., pp. 80-85, also gives an example taken from the Japanese currency; for the case of France, see“Report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Depreciation of Silver, 1876,”p. xlii, and Appendix, pp. 86, 148; for the United States, seesupra,book iii, chap. vii, § 3. See, also, Lord Liverpool's“Treatise on the Coins of the Realm,”chap. xii, for changes in the coin of England.

IV.Compensatory Effect of Two Standards.—Jevons, ibid., pp. 139, 140; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”pp. 411-416; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”p. 28; Mannequin,“Journal des Économistes,”August, 1878, p. 202.

V.Effect of a League of States, or Law, on the Relative Value of Gold and Silver.—Giffen,“Fortnightly Review,”vol. xxxii (1879), pp. 285-290; Wolowski,“L'Or et l'Argent,”pp. 23, 24, 31; F. A. Walker,“Political Economy,”p. 410,“Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878,”p. 74; Sumner,“Princeton Review,”vol. iv, p. 563; S. Dana Horton,“Report of the International Monetary Conference, 1878,”p. 741; Bourne,“Trade, Population, and Food,”pp. 228, 230; Jevons,“Contemporary Review,”vol. xxxix (1881), p. 750; S. Newcomb,“International Review”(1879), p. 314.

VI.Production of Gold and Silver; Relative Value of the Two Metals.—Ad. Soetbeer, Petermann's“Mittheilungen,”No. 57;“House of Commons Report on Depreciation of Silver,”1876, Appendix, pp. 11, 12, 24; Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 409, gives Sir H. Hay's figures corrected by him to 1878; Spofford's“American Almanac,”1878, gives tables from the“Journal des Économistes”; the figures of Seyd, Hay, Jacob, and Tooke and Newmarch are in the“House of Commons Report,”above. Also see,supra,book iii, chap. vi, for references.

The relative values of gold and silver since 1834, as given in Pixley and Abell's (London) tables, are trustworthy. Previous to 1834 there is much uncertainty. Soetbeer, ibid., gives Hamburg quotations since 1687. Another table, probably incorrect in places, is that of White, see“Report of the International Monetary Conference,”1878, p. 647.

VII.Demonetization of Silver by Germany.—For copy of laws of 1871 and 1873, see“Report of Directors of the United States Mint, 1873,”p. 82;“House of Commons Report on Depreciation of Silver,”1876, p. 18;“Conférence Monétaire Internationale,”1881, index, p. 215 for“Allemagne.”

VIII.Latin Union.—For treaty, see“Journal des Économistes,”May, 1866;“House of Commons Report,”ibid, xxxviii, Appendix, pp. 92, 98, 106-109, 116;“Report of Monetary Conference,”1878, pp. 779-787.

IX.Flow of Silver to the East.—The figures of Sir Hector Hay after 1851,“House of Commons Report,”ibid., App., p. 24, are fullest, and should be combined with Pixley and Abell's figures for years before 1851, ibid., Appendix, p. 21. See also Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”1879, p. 422; Waterfield,“House of Commons Report,”ibid., Appendix, pp. 171, 172, 174; Quetteville, ibid., p. 184;“Conférence Monétaire Internationale,”1881, p. 197; London“Economist,”February 24, 1883, Supplement, p. 7;“Parliamentary Documents,”1881, vol.[pg 635]xciii;“Report of the Director of the United States Mint,”1880 (in the Finance Report, 1880, p. 194); J. B. Robertson,“Westminster Review,”vol. cxv, p. 200.

X.Depreciation of Silver, 1876.—Causes, Bourne, ibid., pp. 206, 212, 222, 233; Wilson, ibid., p. 128;“House of Commons Report,”ibid.; Sumner,“Princeton Review,”vol. iv., p. 570; S. Newcomb,“International Review,”vol. vi (1879), p. 326; Cochut,“Revue des Deux Mondes,”i, December, 1883, p. 514; Cairnes,“Essays”; F. Bowen,“Minority Report of the United States Silver Commission,”1878.

Supposed cause of panic of 1873, see Williamson,“Contemporary Review,”April 1879; Seyd,“Decline of Prosperity”; Bourne, ibid., pp. 226, 227.

XI.Appreciation of Gold.—Giffen,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 36, started the theory for the period 1873-1879. Also see Bourne,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xlii, p. 406; S. Newcomb,“International Review,”1879, p. 329; Wolowski, ibid., pp. 29, 30; Goschen,“Journal of the Institute of Bankers”(London), vol. iv, part vi, May, 1883; Patterson,“Statistical Journal,”vol. xliii, p. 1; for table of prices see London“Economist”(e.g., December 28, 1878).

XII.Bimetallism in the United States.—Seesupra,book iii, chap. vii; for a vast array of materials, see“Report of the International Monetary Conference,”1878; Linderman's“Money and Legal Tender”; the Finance Reports of the United States; and Congressional Documents. For the coinage laws of 1792, 1834, 1853, 1873, 1878, see pamphlet,“Extracts from the Laws of the United States relating to Currency and Finance,”by C. F. Dunbar. For detailed account of passage of Act of 1873, see“Report of the Comptroller of the Currency,”1876, p. 170. Present situation,“Atlantic Monthly,”May, 1884,“The Silver Danger.”

A Brief Bibliography Of American Shipping.I.English Navigation Acts.—Macpherson's“Annals,”ii, pp. 442, 484; Scobell,“Collection of Acts,”p. 176; Ruffhead,“Statutes at Large,”iii, p. 182; Roger Coke,“Treatise on Trade”(1671), p. 36; Sir Josiah Child,“New Discourse on Trade”(1671); Sir Matthew Decker,“Essay on the Causes of the Decline of Foreign Trade”(1744); Joshua Gee,“Trade and Navigation of Great Britain”(1730); Lindsay,“History of Merchant Shipping and Ancient Commerce”; McCulloch,“Dictionary of Commerce”(new edition), articles“Navigation”and“Colonial Trade”; ibid., edition of Adam Smith, note xii, p. 534; Huskisson, speeches, iii, 13, 351; Levi,“History of British Commerce,”p. 158.[pg 636]II.Navigation Laws of the United States.—“United States Statutes at Large,”i, 27, 287, 305; Act of 1817, Statutes, iii, 351; Revised Statutes (1878),“Commerce and Navigation,”p. 795; Lord Sheffield,“Observations on the Commerce of the United States”; Pitkin,“Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States,”chap, i; D. A. Wells,“Our Merchant Marine,”chap. v; Seybert's“Statistical Annals”; Macgregor,“Commercial Statistics of America.”III.Growth of American Shipping.—Rapid growth, 1840-1856. Levi,“History of British Commerce,”p. 582; Bigelow,“Tariff Question,”Appendix No. 57;“Harper's Magazine,”January, 1884, p. 217; Lindsay,“History of Merchant Shipping,”iii, p. 187; for ship-building, see Report of the United States Bureau of Statistics,“Commerce and Navigation,”1881, p. 927; for tonnage, ibid., pp. 928-930; also, see“United States Statistical Abstract”; Dingley's Report to House of Representatives, December 15, 1882, No. 1,827, Forty-seventh Congress, second session, pp. 5, 8, 254.IV.Steam and Iron Ships.—Preble,“History of Steam Navigation”; Colden,“Life of Fulton”; Porter,“Progress of the Nation,”section 3, chap. iv; Nimmo,“Report to the Secretary of the Treasury in Relation to the Foreign Commerce of the United States and the Decadence of American Shipping”(1870); Dingley's Report, pp. 4, 23; Kelley,“The Question of Ships,”Appendix ii, p. 208.V.Decline of American Shipping.—“Report on Commerce and Navigation”(1881), pp. 927, 928; Lindsay, ibid., iii, pp. 83, 187, 593, 645; ibid., iv, pp. 163-180, 292, 316, 376;“North American Review,”October, 1864, p. 489;“Report on Commerce and Navigation,”1881, lxv, pp. 915, 916, 922, 934; Lynch, Report to House of Representatives on“Causes of the Reduction of American Tonnage,”February 17, 1878, pp. ix, 80, 176, 195-213; remission of duties, Revised Statutes of the United States (edition of 1878), section 2,513; Report on“Commerce and Navigation,”xi, 83, 210; Dingley's Report; Nimmo,“Decadence of American Shipping”(which gives several charts), p. 17,“The Practical Workings of our Relations of Maritime Reciprocity”(1871); Kelley, ibid.; Reports of the New York Chamber of Commerce; Sumner,“Shall Americans own Ships?”in“North American Review,”June, 1880; Codman,“Free Ships”; for high-rate profit in the United States, Dingley's Report, p. 4.VI.Burdens on Ship-Owners.—Tonnage duties, Wells, p. 179; sailors' wages, Revised Statutes, sections 4,561, 4,578, 4,580-4,584, 4,600; consular fees, Dingley's Report, p. 9; pilotage, taxation, Wells, p. 172,et seq.; see also Act of 1884, abolishing many of these burdens.

I.English Navigation Acts.—Macpherson's“Annals,”ii, pp. 442, 484; Scobell,“Collection of Acts,”p. 176; Ruffhead,“Statutes at Large,”iii, p. 182; Roger Coke,“Treatise on Trade”(1671), p. 36; Sir Josiah Child,“New Discourse on Trade”(1671); Sir Matthew Decker,“Essay on the Causes of the Decline of Foreign Trade”(1744); Joshua Gee,“Trade and Navigation of Great Britain”(1730); Lindsay,“History of Merchant Shipping and Ancient Commerce”; McCulloch,“Dictionary of Commerce”(new edition), articles“Navigation”and“Colonial Trade”; ibid., edition of Adam Smith, note xii, p. 534; Huskisson, speeches, iii, 13, 351; Levi,“History of British Commerce,”p. 158.

II.Navigation Laws of the United States.—“United States Statutes at Large,”i, 27, 287, 305; Act of 1817, Statutes, iii, 351; Revised Statutes (1878),“Commerce and Navigation,”p. 795; Lord Sheffield,“Observations on the Commerce of the United States”; Pitkin,“Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States,”chap, i; D. A. Wells,“Our Merchant Marine,”chap. v; Seybert's“Statistical Annals”; Macgregor,“Commercial Statistics of America.”

III.Growth of American Shipping.—Rapid growth, 1840-1856. Levi,“History of British Commerce,”p. 582; Bigelow,“Tariff Question,”Appendix No. 57;“Harper's Magazine,”January, 1884, p. 217; Lindsay,“History of Merchant Shipping,”iii, p. 187; for ship-building, see Report of the United States Bureau of Statistics,“Commerce and Navigation,”1881, p. 927; for tonnage, ibid., pp. 928-930; also, see“United States Statistical Abstract”; Dingley's Report to House of Representatives, December 15, 1882, No. 1,827, Forty-seventh Congress, second session, pp. 5, 8, 254.

IV.Steam and Iron Ships.—Preble,“History of Steam Navigation”; Colden,“Life of Fulton”; Porter,“Progress of the Nation,”section 3, chap. iv; Nimmo,“Report to the Secretary of the Treasury in Relation to the Foreign Commerce of the United States and the Decadence of American Shipping”(1870); Dingley's Report, pp. 4, 23; Kelley,“The Question of Ships,”Appendix ii, p. 208.

V.Decline of American Shipping.—“Report on Commerce and Navigation”(1881), pp. 927, 928; Lindsay, ibid., iii, pp. 83, 187, 593, 645; ibid., iv, pp. 163-180, 292, 316, 376;“North American Review,”October, 1864, p. 489;“Report on Commerce and Navigation,”1881, lxv, pp. 915, 916, 922, 934; Lynch, Report to House of Representatives on“Causes of the Reduction of American Tonnage,”February 17, 1878, pp. ix, 80, 176, 195-213; remission of duties, Revised Statutes of the United States (edition of 1878), section 2,513; Report on“Commerce and Navigation,”xi, 83, 210; Dingley's Report; Nimmo,“Decadence of American Shipping”(which gives several charts), p. 17,“The Practical Workings of our Relations of Maritime Reciprocity”(1871); Kelley, ibid.; Reports of the New York Chamber of Commerce; Sumner,“Shall Americans own Ships?”in“North American Review,”June, 1880; Codman,“Free Ships”; for high-rate profit in the United States, Dingley's Report, p. 4.

VI.Burdens on Ship-Owners.—Tonnage duties, Wells, p. 179; sailors' wages, Revised Statutes, sections 4,561, 4,578, 4,580-4,584, 4,600; consular fees, Dingley's Report, p. 9; pilotage, taxation, Wells, p. 172,et seq.; see also Act of 1884, abolishing many of these burdens.

Back to Index Next