This is a modern-English version of Fiat Money Inflation in France: How it Came, What it Brought, and How it Ended, originally written by White, Andrew Dickson. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.



FIAT MONEY INFLATION IN FRANCE

How It Came, What It Brought, and How It Ended



by Andrew Dickson White, LL.D., Ph.D., D.C.L.



Late President and Professor of History at Cornell University; Sometime United States Minister to Russia and Ambassador to Germany; Author of "A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology," etc.
Former President and Professor of History at Cornell University; Occasionally the United States Minister to Russia and Ambassador to Germany; Author of "A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology," among other works.





Contents






INTRODUCTION

As far back as just before our Civil War I made, in France and elsewhere, a large collection of documents which had appeared during the French Revolution, including newspapers, reports, speeches, pamphlets, illustrative material of every sort, and, especially, specimens of nearly all the Revolutionary issues of paper money,—from notes of ten thousand livres to those of one sou.

As early as just before our Civil War, I put together a large collection of documents from France and other places that were published during the French Revolution. This includes newspapers, reports, speeches, pamphlets, all kinds of illustrative material, and especially examples of nearly all the Revolutionary paper money—ranging from notes of ten thousand livres to those of one sou.

Upon this material, mainly, was based a course of lectures then given to my students, first at the University of Michigan and later at Cornell University, and among these lectures, one on "Paper Money Inflation in France."

Upon this material, a series of lectures was primarily based, first delivered to my students at the University of Michigan and later at Cornell University. One of these lectures was on "Paper Money Inflation in France."

This was given simply because it showed one important line of facts in that great struggle; and I recall, as if it were yesterday, my feeling of regret at being obliged to bestow so much care and labor upon a subject to all appearance so utterly devoid of practical value. I am sure that it never occurred, either to my Michigan students or to myself, that it could ever have any bearing on our own country. It certainly never entered into our minds that any such folly as that exhibited in those French documents of the eighteenth century could ever find supporters in the United States of the nineteenth.

This was given simply because it highlighted one important aspect of that great struggle; and I remember, as if it were yesterday, my regret at having to put so much effort and work into a topic that seemed completely devoid of practical value. I'm sure it never crossed the minds of my Michigan students or me that it could ever have any relevance to our own country. It certainly never occurred to us that any such nonsense as what was shown in those French documents from the eighteenth century could ever find supporters in the United States of the nineteenth.

Some years later, when there began to be demands for large issues of paper money in the United States, I wrought some of the facts thus collected into a speech in the Senate of the State of New York, showing the need of especial care in such dealings with financial necessities.

Some years later, when demands for large amounts of paper money began in the United States, I turned some of the information I had gathered into a speech in the Senate of New York, highlighting the need for special caution when addressing financial needs.

In 1876, during the "greenback craze," General Garfield and Mr. S. B. Crittenden, both members of the House of Representatives at that time, asked me to read a paper on the same general subject before an audience of Senators and Representatives of both parties in Washington. This I did, and also gave it later before an assemblage of men of business at the Union League Club in New York.

In 1876, during the "greenback craze," General Garfield and Mr. S. B. Crittenden, who were both members of the House of Representatives at the time, asked me to present a paper on the same general topic to an audience of Senators and Representatives from both parties in Washington. I did this and later presented it again to a group of business people at the Union League Club in New York.

Various editions of the paper were afterward published, among them, two or three for campaign purposes, in the hope that they might be of use in showing to what folly, cruelty, wrong and rain the passion for "fiat money" may lead.

Various editions of the paper were later published, including two or three for campaign purposes, hoping they would help illustrate the folly, cruelty, injustice, and destruction that the desire for "fiat money" can cause.

Other editions were issued at a later period, in view of the principle involved in the proposed unlimited coinage of silver in the United States, which was, at bottom, the idea which led to that fearful wreck of public and private prosperity in France.

Other editions were published later, considering the principle behind the proposed unlimited coinage of silver in the United States, which, at its core, was the idea that caused the devastating collapse of public and private prosperity in France.

For these editions there was an added reason in the fact that the utterances of sundry politicians at that time pointed clearly to issues of paper money practically unlimited. These men were logical enough to see that it would be inconsistent to stop at the unlimited issue of silver dollars which cost really something when they could issue unlimited paper dollars which virtually cost nothing.

For these editions, there was an additional reason: the statements from various politicians at the time clearly indicated issues with practically unlimited paper money. These individuals were smart enough to realize that it would be contradictory to limit the issuance of silver dollars, which actually had a cost, when they could issue unlimited paper dollars that basically cost nothing.

In thus exhibiting facts which Bishop Butler would have recognized as confirming his theory of "The Possible Insanity of States," it is but just to acknowledge that the French proposal was vastly more sane than that made in our own country. Those French issues of paper rested not merely "on the will of a free people," but on one-third of the entire landed property of France; on the very choicest of real property in city and country—the confiscated estates of the Church and of the fugitive aristocracy—and on the power to use the paper thus issued in purchasing this real property at very low prices.

In showing facts that Bishop Butler would have seen as supporting his theory of "The Possible Insanity of States," it's fair to acknowledge that the French proposal was much more reasonable than the one made in our own country. Those French paper issues were based not just "on the will of a free people," but on one-third of all the land in France; on the best properties in both cities and rural areas—the confiscated estates of the Church and the fleeing aristocracy—and on the ability to use the paper issued to buy this real estate at very low prices.

I have taken all pains to be exact, revising the whole paper in the light of the most recent publications and giving my authority for every important statement, and now leave the whole matter with my readers.

I have worked hard to be accurate, reviewing the entire paper based on the latest publications and providing my sources for every key statement, and now I leave the entire matter to my readers.

At the request of a Canadian friend, who has expressed a strong wish that this work be brought down to date, I have again restudied the subject in the light of various works which have appeared since my earlier research,—especially Levasseur's "Histoire des classes ouvrières et de l'industrie en France,"—one of the really great books of the twentieth century;—Dewarmin's superb "Cent Ans de numismatique Française" and sundry special treatises. The result has been that large additions have been made regarding some important topics, and that various other parts of my earlier work have been made more clear by better arrangement and supplementary information.

At the request of a Canadian friend, who really wants this work updated, I've revisited the topic considering various works that have come out since my earlier research—especially Levasseur's "History of the Working Classes and Industry in France," which is one of the truly great books of the twentieth century; Dewarmin's excellent "A Century of French Numismatics," and several other specific studies. As a result, I've made significant additions on some important topics, and I've clarified various other sections of my earlier work through better organization and additional information.

ANDREW D. WHITE. Cornell University, September, 1912.

ANDREW D. WHITE. Cornell University, September, 1912.










FOREWORD BY MR. JOHN MACKAY

I am greatly indebted to the generosity of Mr. Andrew D. White, the distinguished American scholar, author and diplomatist, for permission to print and to circulate privately a small edition of his exceedingly valuable account of the great currency-making experiment of the French Revolutionary Government. The work has been revised and considerably enlarged by Mr. White for the purpose of the present issue.

I am very grateful to Mr. Andrew D. White, the renowned American scholar, author, and diplomat, for allowing me to print and privately circulate a small edition of his incredibly valuable account of the significant currency experiment of the French Revolutionary Government. Mr. White has revised and significantly expanded the work for this edition.

The story of "Fiat Money Inflation in France" is one of great interest to legislators, to economic students, and to all business and thinking men. It records the most gigantic attempt ever made in the history of the world by a government to create an inconvertible paper currency, and to maintain its circulation at various levels of value. It also records what is perhaps the greatest of all governmental efforts—with the possible exception of Diocletian's—to enact and enforce a legal limit of commodity prices. Every fetter that could hinder the will or thwart the wisdom of democracy had been shattered, and in consequence every device and expedient that untrammelled power and unrepressed optimism could conceive were brought to bear. But the attempts failed. They left behind them a legacy of moral and material desolation and woe, from which one of the most intellectual and spirited races of Europe has suffered for a century and a quarter, and will continue to suffer until the end of time. There are limitations to the powers of governments and of peoples that inhere in the constitution of things, and that neither despotisms nor democracies can overcome.

The story of "Fiat Money Inflation in France" is highly relevant to lawmakers, economics students, and all thoughtful individuals. It documents the largest attempt in history by a government to create a non-convertible paper currency and to maintain its circulation at various value levels. It also highlights perhaps the greatest governmental effort—except for Diocletian's—to establish and enforce a legal limit on commodity prices. Every barrier that could obstruct the will or undermine the wisdom of democracy had been broken, and as a result, every strategy and tactic that unchecked authority and unbridled optimism could devise was utilized. However, these attempts failed. They left behind a legacy of moral and material devastation and suffering that one of the most intellectual and spirited races in Europe has endured for over 125 years and will continue to suffer indefinitely. There are limitations to the powers of governments and people that are inherent in the nature of things, which neither tyrannies nor democracies can overcome.

Legislatures are as powerless to abrogate moral and economic laws as they are to abrogate physical laws. They cannot convert wrong into right nor divorce effect from cause, either by parliamentary majorities, or by unity of supporting public opinion. The penalties of such legislative folly will always be exacted by inexorable time. While these propositions may be regarded as mere commonplaces, and while they are acknowledged in a general way, they are in effect denied by many of the legislative experiments and the tendencies of public opinion of the present day. The story, therefore, of the colossal folly of France in the closing part Of the eighteenth century and its terrible fruits, is full of instruction for all men who think upon the problems of our own time.

Legislatures are just as powerless to cancel moral and economic laws as they are to repeal physical laws. They can’t change wrong into right or separate cause from effect, whether by majority votes in parliament or by a united public opinion. The consequences of such legislative mistakes will always be enforced by the relentless passage of time. While these ideas might be seen as common knowledge and generally accepted, they are effectively denied by many current legislative actions and the prevailing trends in public opinion. Therefore, the story of France’s massive errors in the late eighteenth century and their devastating outcomes serves as an important lesson for anyone reflecting on the issues of our own time.

From among an almost infinite variety, there are four great and fundamental facts that clearly emerge, namely,—

From an almost endless variety, four key and fundamental facts stand out clearly, namely,—

(1) Notwithstanding the fact that the paper currency issued was the direct obligation of the State, that much of it was interest bearing, and that all of it was secured upon the finest real estate in France, and that penalties in the way of fines, imprisonments and death were enacted from time to time to maintain its circulation at fixed values, there was a steady depreciation in value until it reached zero point and culminated in repudiation. The aggregate of the issues amounted to no less than the enormous and unthinkable sum of $9,500,000,000, and in the middle of 1797 when public repudiation took place, there was no less than $4,200,000,000 in face value of assignats and mandats outstanding; the loss, as always, falling mostly upon the poor and the ignorant.

(1) Even though the paper money issued was a direct obligation of the State, a significant portion of it earned interest, and all of it was backed by the best real estate in France, along with penalties like fines, imprisonment, and even execution imposed periodically to keep its circulation at fixed values, there was a consistent drop in value until it reached zero, resulting in repudiation. The total amount issued was an enormous and unimaginable $9,500,000,000, and by the middle of 1797, when public repudiation occurred, there was still $4,200,000,000 in face value of assignats and mandats outstanding; as always, the loss primarily affected the poor and the uninformed.

(2) In the attempt to maintain fixed values for the paper currency the Government became involved in an equally futile attempt to maintain a tariff of legal prices for commodities. Here again penalties of fines, of imprisonments and of death were powerless to accomplish the end in view.

(2) In trying to keep a steady value for the paper currency, the Government also got caught up in a pointless effort to enforce a legal price ceiling on goods. Once again, fines, prison sentences, and even the death penalty were ineffective in achieving the desired outcome.

(3) An wholesale demoralisation of society took place under which thrift, integrity, humanity, and every principle of morality were thrown into the welter of seething chaos and cruelty.

(3) A complete breakdown of society happened, where frugality, honesty, compassion, and every moral principle were swept away in a storm of chaos and brutality.

(4) The real estate upon which the paper currency was secured represented confiscations by the State of the lands of the Church and of the Emigrant Noblemen. These lands were appraised, according to Mr. White's narrative and other authorities, at $1,000,000,000. Here was a straight addition to the State's resources of $1,000,000,000. It is ominously significant that within one hundred years under the "Peace of Frankfort" signed on the 10th May, 1871, the French nation agreed to pay a war indemnity to victorious Germany of exactly the same sum, namely, $1,000,000,000 in addition to the surrender of the province of Alsace and a considerable part of Lorraine. The great addition to the national wealth, therefore, effected by the immoral confiscation of the lands in question disappeared with compound territorial interest added under the visitation of relentless retribution.

(4) The real estate that backed the paper currency came from the government's confiscation of Church lands and those owned by Noblemen who had emigrated. According to Mr. White's account and other sources, these lands were valued at $1,000,000,000. This represented a direct boost to the government's resources of $1,000,000,000. It’s concerningly significant that within a century, under the "Peace of Frankfort" signed on May 10, 1871, France agreed to pay a war reparations of exactly the same amount, $1,000,000,000, in addition to ceding the province of Alsace and a large part of Lorraine. Thus, the substantial increase in national wealth gained through the unjust confiscation of these lands vanished under the accumulating territorial costs as a consequence of ruthless retribution.

Public opinion in our own country is so far sound on the question of currency, but signs are not lacking in some lay quarters of an inclination to sanction dangerous experiments. The doctrine of governmental regulation of prices, has, however, made its appearance in embryo. Class dissatisfaction is also on the increase. The confiscation of property rights under legal forms and processes is apt to be condoned when directed against unpopular interests and when limited to amounts that do not revolt the conscience. The wild and terrible expression given to these insidious principles in the havoc of the Revolution should be remembered by all. Nor should the fact be overlooked that, as Mr. White points out on Page 6, the National Assembly of France which originated and supported these measures contained in its membership the ablest Frenchmen of the day.

Public opinion in our country is generally solid regarding the issue of currency, but there are some signs in certain circles of a willingness to approve risky experiments. The idea of government regulation of prices has begun to take shape. Class discontent is also growing. The confiscation of property rights through legal means is often accepted when it targets unpopular interests and is limited to amounts that don’t shock the conscience. The extreme and destructive way these dangerous principles manifested during the Revolution should be a lesson for everyone. It's also important to note, as Mr. White points out on Page 6, that the National Assembly of France, which proposed and supported these measures, included some of the most capable Frenchmen of the time.

JOHN MACKAY. Toronto General Trusts Building, Toronto, 31st March, 1914.

JOHN MACKAY. Toronto General Trusts Building, Toronto, March 31, 1914.






FIAT MONEY INFLATION IN FRANCE

How It Came, What It Brought, and How It Ended 1





I.

Early in the year 1789 the French nation found itself in deep financial embarrassment: there was a heavy debt and a serious deficit.

Early in 1789, the French nation faced severe financial problems: there was a large debt and a significant deficit.

The vast reforms of that period, though a lasting blessing politically, were a temporary evil financially. There was a general want of confidence in business circles; capital had shown its proverbial timidity by retiring out of sight as far as possible; throughout the land was stagnation.

The major reforms of that time, while a lasting political blessing, were a temporary financial burden. There was a widespread lack of confidence in the business world; investors had shown their usual hesitance by withdrawing as much as possible; the entire country experienced stagnation.

Statesmanlike measures, careful watching and wise management would, doubtless, have ere long led to a return of confidence, a reappearance of money and a resumption of business; but these involved patience and self-denial, and, thus far in human history, these are the rarest products of political wisdom. Few nations have ever been able to exercise these virtues; and France was not then one of these few. 2

Statesman-like actions, careful observation, and smart management would likely have restored confidence, brought money back, and restarted business soon enough; but these required patience and self-restraint, which have proven to be some of the rarest traits of political wisdom throughout human history. Few nations have been able to demonstrate these virtues, and France was not one of those few at that time. 2

There was a general search for some short road to prosperity: ere long the idea was set afloat that the great want of the country was more of the circulating medium; and this was speedily followed by calls for an issue of paper money. The Minister of Finance at this period was Necker. In financial ability he was acknowledged as among the great bankers of Europe, but his was something more than financial ability: he had a deep feeling of patriotism and a high sense of personal honor. The difficulties in his way were great, but he steadily endeavored to keep France faithful to those principles in monetary affairs which the general experience of modern times had found the only path to national safety. As difficulties arose the National Assembly drew away from him, and soon came among the members renewed suggestions of paper money: orators in public meetings, at the clubs and in the Assembly, proclaimed it a panacea—a way of "securing resources without paying interest." Journalists caught it up and displayed its beauties, among these men, Marat, who, in his newspaper, "The Friend of the People," also joined the cries against Necker, picturing him—a man of sterling honesty, who gave up health and fortune for the sake of France—as a wretch seeking only to enrich himself from the public purse.

There was a widespread search for a quick path to prosperity: soon, the idea sprang up that what the country really needed was more money in circulation; this was quickly followed by demands for the creation of paper money. At that time, the Minister of Finance was Necker. He was recognized as one of the top bankers in Europe, but he was more than just a financial expert: he had a strong sense of patriotism and a high standard of personal integrity. The challenges he faced were significant, but he consistently tried to keep France committed to the monetary principles that modern experience had shown to be the only way to ensure national safety. As difficulties arose, the National Assembly distanced itself from him, and soon there were renewed suggestions for paper money among its members: speakers at public meetings, in clubs, and in the Assembly touted it as a solution—a means of "securing resources without paying interest." Journalists picked up on this and highlighted its advantages, including Marat, who, in his newspaper "The Friend of the People," also joined the criticisms of Necker, portraying him—a man of genuine honesty who sacrificed his health and wealth for France—as a villain only interested in lining his own pockets from taxpayer money.

Against this tendency toward the issue of irredeemable paper Necker contended as best he might. He knew well to what it always had led, even when surrounded by the most skillful guarantees. Among those who struggled to support ideas similar to his was Bergasse, a deputy from Lyons, whose pamphlets, then and later, against such issues exerted a wider influence, perhaps, than any others: parts of them seem fairly inspired. Any one to-day reading his prophecies of the evils sure to follow such a currency would certainly ascribe to him a miraculous foresight, were it not so clear that his prophetic power was due simply to a knowledge of natural laws revealed by history. But this current in favor of paper money became so strong that an effort was made to breast it by a compromise: and during the last months of 1789 and the first months of 1790 came discussions in the National Assembly looking to issues of notes based upon the landed property of the Church,—which was to be confiscated for that purpose. But care was to be taken; the issue was to be largely in the shape of notes of 1,000, 300 and 200 livres, too large to be used as ordinary currency, but of convenient size to be used in purchasing the Church lands; besides this, they were to bear interest and this would tempt holders to hoard them. The Assembly thus held back from issuing smaller obligations.

Against the trend toward issuing worthless paper, Necker fought back as best as he could. He was well aware of the problems it had always caused, even when backed by the most skilled guarantees. Among those who tried to support ideas similar to his was Bergasse, a deputy from Lyons, whose pamphlets, both then and later, against such issues had a wider impact than any others; parts of them seem quite inspired. Anyone reading his predictions of the dangers that would come from such a currency today would likely say he had miraculous foresight, if it weren't so clear that his prophetic ability was simply due to an understanding of natural laws revealed by history. However, this movement in favor of paper money grew so strong that an attempt was made to counter it with a compromise: during the last months of 1789 and the first months of 1790, there were discussions in the National Assembly about issuing notes based on the confiscated landed property of the Church. Care was to be taken; the notes were to be issued mainly in amounts of 1,000, 300, and 200 livres, which were too large to be used as everyday currency, but suitable for purchasing Church lands. Additionally, they would earn interest, which would encourage holders to hoard them. The Assembly thus refrained from issuing smaller obligations.

Remembrances of the ruin which had come from the great issues of smaller currency at an earlier day were still vivid. Yet the pressure toward a popular currency for universal use grew stronger and stronger. The finance committee of the Assembly reported that "the people demand a new circulating medium"; that "the circulation of paper money is the best of operations"; that "it is the most free because it reposes on the will of the people"; that "it will bind the interest of the citizens to the public good."

Memories of the downfall caused by the major problems of smaller currency in the past were still fresh. However, the push for a popular currency for everyone to use became increasingly intense. The finance committee of the Assembly reported that "the people want a new circulating medium"; that "the circulation of paper money is the best option"; that "it’s the most democratic because it relies on the will of the people"; and that "it will connect the interests of citizens to the public good."

The report appealed to the patriotism of the French people with the following exhortation: "Let us show to Europe that we understand our own resources; let us immediately take the broad road to our liberation instead of dragging ourselves along the tortuous and obscure paths of fragmentary loans." It concluded by recommending an issue of paper money carefully guarded, to the full amount of four hundred million livres, and the argument was pursued until the objection to smaller notes faded from view. Typical in the debate on the whole subject, in its various phases, were the declarations of M. Matrineau. He was loud and long for paper money, his only fear being that the Committee had not authorized enough of it; he declared that business was stagnant, and that the sole cause was a want of more of the circulating medium; that paper money ought to be made a legal tender; that the Assembly should rise above prejudices which the failures of John Law's paper money had caused, several decades before. Like every supporter of irredeemable paper money then or since, he seemed to think that the laws of Nature had changed since previous disastrous issues. He said: "Paper money under a despotism is dangerous; it favors corruption; but in a nation constitutionally governed, which itself takes care in the emission of its notes, which determines their number and use, that danger no longer exists." He insisted that John Law's notes at first restored prosperity, but that the wretchedness and ruin they caused resulted from their overissue, and that such an overissue is possible only under a despotism. 3

The report appealed to the patriotism of the French people with the following message: "Let’s show Europe that we understand our own resources; let’s take the bold path to our freedom instead of dragging ourselves along the twisted and unclear routes of piecemeal loans." It concluded by recommending the issuance of carefully regulated paper money, totaling four hundred million livres, and the discussion continued until the concerns about smaller notes faded away. Throughout the debate on the entire topic, in its various stages, M. Matrineau's statements were typical. He was loud and persistent in his support for paper money, his only worry being that the Committee hadn’t authorized enough of it. He stated that business was stagnant and the only reason was a lack of more circulating currency; that paper money should be made a legal tender; that the Assembly should rise above the biases caused by the failures of John Law’s paper money decades earlier. Like every advocate of irredeemable paper money then or now, he seemed to believe that the laws of Nature had changed since those previous disastrous issues. He said: "Paper money under a despotism is risky; it encourages corruption; but in a nation with a constitutional government that manages the issuance of its notes and determines their quantity and use, that risk no longer exists." He argued that John Law's notes initially restored prosperity, but the misery and ruin they later caused came from their overissue, which he claimed is only possible under a despotism. 3

M. de la Rochefoucauld gave his opinion that "the assignats will draw specie out of the coffers where it is now hoarded. 4

M. de la Rochefoucauld believed that "the assignats will pull cash out of the vaults where it is currently being stored." 4

On the other hand Cazalès and Maury showed that the result could only be disastrous. Never, perhaps, did a political prophecy meet with more exact fulfillment in every line than the terrible picture drawn in one of Cazalès' speeches in this debate. Still the current ran stronger and stronger; Petion made a brilliant oration in favor of the report, and Necker's influence and experience were gradually worn away.

On the other hand, Cazalès and Maury demonstrated that the outcome could only be disastrous. Never, perhaps, did a political prediction come true more accurately in every detail than the awful picture painted in one of Cazalès' speeches during this debate. Still, the momentum grew stronger; Petion delivered a powerful speech supporting the report, and Necker's influence and experience gradually faded.

Mingled with the financial argument was a strong political plea. The National Assembly had determined to confiscate the vast real property of the French Church,—the pious accumulations of fifteen hundred years. There were princely estates in the country, bishops' palaces and conventual buildings in the towns; these formed between one-fourth and one-third of the entire real property of France, and amounted in value to at least two thousand million livres. By a few sweeping strokes all this became the property of the nation. Never, apparently, did a government secure a more solid basis for a great financial future. 5

Wrapped up in the financial argument was a strong political appeal. The National Assembly had decided to seize the extensive properties of the French Church—centuries of faithful donations accumulated over fifteen hundred years. There were grand estates in the countryside, bishops' residences, and convent buildings in the cities; these accounted for between one-fourth and one-third of all the real estate in France and had a value of at least two billion livres. With a few bold moves, all of this became national property. Apparently, no government had ever established a more solid foundation for a prosperous financial future. 5

There were two special reasons why French statesmen desired speedily to sell these lands. First, a financial reason,—to obtain money to relieve the government. Secondly, a political reason,—to get this land distributed among the thrifty middle-classes, and so commit them to the Revolution and to the government which gave their title.

There were two main reasons why French leaders wanted to quickly sell these lands. First, a financial reason—to raise money to support the government. Second, a political reason—to distribute this land among the hardworking middle class, thus binding them to the Revolution and to the government that granted them their property.

It was urged, then, that the issue of four hundred millions of paper, (not in the shape of interest-bearing bonds, as had at first been proposed, but in notes small as well as large), would give the treasury something to pay out immediately, and relieve the national necessities; that, having been put into circulation, this paper money would stimulate business; that it would give to all capitalists, large or small, the means for buying from the nation the ecclesiastical real estate, and that from the proceeds of this real estate the nation would pay its debts and also obtain new funds for new necessities: never was theory more seductive both to financiers and statesmen.

It was suggested, then, that issuing four hundred million in paper money (not in the form of interest-bearing bonds, as had originally been proposed, but in both small and large notes) would provide the treasury with immediate funds to address the nation's urgent needs; that, once put into circulation, this paper money would encourage business activity; that it would enable all investors, big and small, to purchase the church-owned real estate from the government, and that the revenue from this real estate would allow the nation to pay off its debts and also secure additional funds for new needs: never was a theory more appealing to both financiers and politicians.

It would be a great mistake to suppose that the statesmen of France, or the French people, were ignorant of the dangers in issuing irredeemable paper money. No matter how skillfully the bright side of such a currency was exhibited, all thoughtful men in France remembered its dark side. They knew too well, from that ruinous experience, seventy years before, in John Law's time, the difficulties and dangers of a currency not well based and controlled. They had then learned how easy it is to issue it; how difficult it is to check its overissue; how seductively it leads to the absorption of the means of the workingmen and men of small fortunes; how heavily it falls on all those living on fixed incomes, salaries or wages; how securely it creates on the ruins of the prosperity of all men of meagre means a class of debauched speculators, the most injurious class that a nation can harbor,—more injurious, indeed, than professional criminals whom the law recognizes and can throttle; how it stimulates overproduction at first and leaves every industry flaccid afterward; how it breaks down thrift and develops political and social immorality. All this France had been thoroughly taught by experience. Many then living had felt the result of such an experiment—the issues of paper money under John Law, a man who to this day is acknowledged one of the most ingenious financiers the world has ever known; and there were then sitting in the National Assembly of France many who owed the poverty of their families to those issues of paper. Hardly a man in the country who had not heard those who issued it cursed as the authors of the most frightful catastrophe France had then experienced. 6

It would be a big mistake to think that the leaders of France, or the French people, were unaware of the risks of issuing paper money that wasn't backed by anything. No matter how skillfully the benefits of such currency were presented, all serious thinkers in France remembered its downsides. They knew all too well, from the disastrous experience seventy years earlier during John Law’s time, the problems and dangers of a currency that isn't properly based and managed. They had learned how easy it is to issue it; how tough it is to control its excess; how misleadingly it can lead to the exploitation of working-class people and those with small savings; how hard it hits those living on fixed incomes, salaries, or wages; how reliably it creates a class of corrupt speculators on the ruins of the financial well-being of those with limited means—a class more damaging to a nation than professional criminals whom the law can recognize and contain; how it initially encourages overproduction but ultimately leaves every industry weak; how it erodes savings and fosters political and social immorality. France had thoroughly learned all this from experience. Many people still alive had felt the consequences of such an experiment—the issuance of paper money under John Law, who is still regarded as one of the most clever financiers the world has ever seen; and at that time, in the National Assembly of France, there were many who blamed the paper money for their family poverty. Hardly anyone in the country hadn’t heard those responsible for issuing it condemned as the creators of one of the most terrible disasters France had ever faced. 6

It was no mere attempt at theatrical display, but a natural impulse, which led a thoughtful statesman, during the debate, to hold up a piece of that old paper money and to declare that it was stained with the blood and tears of their fathers.

It wasn't just some theatrical stunt; it was a genuine impulse that caused a thoughtful politician, during the debate, to lift up a piece of that old paper money and say that it was stained with the blood and tears of their ancestors.

And it would also be a mistake to suppose that the National Assembly, which discussed this matter, was composed of mere wild revolutionists; no inference could be more wide of the fact. Whatever may have been the character of the men who legislated for France afterward, no thoughtful student of history can deny, despite all the arguments and sneers of reactionary statesmen and historians, that few more keen-sighted legislative bodies have ever met than this first French Constitutional Assembly. In it were such men as Sieyès, Bailly, Necker, Mirabeau, Talleyrand, DuPont de Nemours and a multitude of others who, in various sciences and in the political world, had already shown and were destined afterward to show themselves among the strongest and shrewdest men that Europe has yet seen.

And it would also be a mistake to think that the National Assembly, which discussed this issue, was made up of just wild revolutionaries; no conclusion could be further from the truth. Whatever the character of the men who later made laws for France, no serious student of history can deny, despite all the arguments and mockery of conservative politicians and historians, that few legislative bodies have ever been as insightful as this first French Constitutional Assembly. It included figures like Sieyès, Bailly, Necker, Mirabeau, Talleyrand, DuPont de Nemours, and many others who, in various fields and in politics, had already proven themselves and were destined to be among the strongest and smartest individuals Europe has ever seen.

But the current toward paper money had become irresistible. It was constantly urged, and with a great show of force, that if any nation could safely issue it, France was now that nation; that she was fully warned by her severe experience under John Law; that she was now a constitutional government, controlled by an enlightened, patriotic people,—not, as in the days of the former issues of paper money, an absolute monarchy controlled by politicians and adventurers; that she was able to secure every livre of her paper money by a virtual mortgage on a landed domain vastly greater in value than the entire issue; that, with men like Bailly, Mirabeau and Necker at her head, she could not commit the financial mistakes and crimes from which France had suffered under John Law, the Regent Duke of Orleans and Cardinal Dubois.

But the push for paper money had become impossible to resist. It was constantly promoted, and with a lot of authority, that if any nation could safely issue it, France was that nation; that she had learned from her harsh experience under John Law; that she was now a constitutional government, led by an informed, patriotic populace—not, as in the days of past paper money issues, an absolute monarchy controlled by politicians and opportunists; that she could back every livre of her paper money with a sort of mortgage on a landholding far more valuable than the total issue; that, with leaders like Bailly, Mirabeau, and Necker at the helm, she could avoid the financial mistakes and crimes that had plagued France under John Law, the Regent Duke of Orleans, and Cardinal Dubois.

Oratory prevailed over science and experience. In April, 1790, came the final decree to issue four hundred millions of livres in paper money, based upon confiscated property of the Church for its security. The deliberations on this first decree and on the bill carrying it into effect were most interesting; prominent in the debate being Necker, Du Pont de Nemours, Maury, Cazalès, Petion, Bailly and many others hardly inferior. The discussions were certainly very able; no person can read them at length in the "Moniteur," nor even in the summaries of the parliamentary history, without feeling that various modern historians have done wretched injustice to those men who were then endeavoring to stand between France and ruin.

Oratory triumphed over science and experience. In April 1790, the final decree was issued to print four hundred million livres in paper money, secured by confiscated Church property. The discussions surrounding this first decree and the bill to implement it were quite engaging; key figures in the debate included Necker, Du Pont de Nemours, Maury, Cazalès, Petion, Bailly, and many others who were equally significant. The debates were undoubtedly very skilled; anyone who reads them in detail in the "Moniteur," or even the summaries of parliamentary history, cannot help but feel that various modern historians have unfairly misrepresented those men who were trying to save France from disaster.

This sum—four hundred millions, so vast in those days, was issued in assignats, which were notes secured by a pledge of productive real estate and bearing interest to the holder at three per cent. No irredeemable currency has ever claimed a more scientific and practical guarantee for its goodness and for its proper action on public finances. On the one hand, it had what the world recognized as a most practical security,—a mortgage an productive real estate of vastly greater value than the issue. On the other hand, as the notes bore interest, there seemed cogent reason for their being withdrawn from circulation whenever they became redundant. 7

This amount—four hundred million, which was enormous back then—was issued in assignats, which were notes backed by a pledge of productive real estate and paid three percent interest to the holder. No irredeemable currency has ever had a more effective and practical guarantee for its value and for its impact on public finances. On one side, it had what the world recognized as a highly practical security—a mortgage on productive real estate that was worth much more than what was issued. On the other side, since the notes paid interest, there was a strong reason to take them out of circulation whenever there were too many in circulation. 7

As speedily as possible the notes were put into circulation. Unlike those issued in John Law's time, they were engraved in the best style of the art. To stimulate loyalty, the portrait of the king was placed in the center; to arouse public spirit, patriotic legends and emblems surrounded it; to stimulate public cupidity, the amount of interest which the note would yield each day to the holder was printed in the margin; and the whole was duly garnished with stamps and signatures to show that it was carefully registered and controlled. 8

As quickly as possible, the notes were circulated. Unlike those issued in John Law's era, they were designed with the highest quality of engraving. To encourage loyalty, the king's portrait was placed in the center; to inspire patriotism, there were patriotic sayings and symbols around it; to spark public greed, the daily interest amount the holder would earn was printed in the margin; and everything was properly adorned with stamps and signatures to indicate it was carefully registered and regulated. 8

To crown its work the National Assembly, to explain the advantages of this new currency, issued an address to the French people. In this address it spoke of the nation as "delivered by this grand means from all uncertainty and from all ruinous results of the credit system." It foretold that this issue "would bring back into the public treasury, into commerce and into all branches of industry strength, abundance and prosperity." 9

To wrap up its work, the National Assembly issued a statement to the French people explaining the benefits of this new currency. In this statement, it referred to the nation as "liberated by this great means from all uncertainty and from the destructive consequences of the credit system." It predicted that this issuance "would restore strength, abundance, and prosperity to the public treasury, to commerce, and to all sectors of industry." 9

Some of the arguments in this address are worth recalling, and, among them, the following:—"Paper money is without inherent value unless it represents some special property. Without representing some special property it is inadmissible in trade to compete with a metallic currency, which has a value real and independent of the public action; therefore it is that the paper money which has only the public authority as its basis has always caused ruin where it has been established; that is the reason why the bank notes of 1720, issued by John Law, after having caused terrible evils, have left only frightful memories. Therefore it is that the National Assembly has not wished to expose you to this danger, but has given this new paper money not only a value derived from the national authority but a value real and immutable, a value which permits it to sustain advantageously a competition with the precious metals themselves." 10

Some of the points made in this speech are worth remembering, including the following:—"Paper money has no real value unless it represents something specific. If it doesn't represent something special, it can't compete with metal currency, which has a tangible and independent value not influenced by the public. This is why paper money that relies solely on government backing has led to disaster wherever it has been used; that’s what happened with the bank notes of 1720 issued by John Law, which caused terrible problems and are now only remembered for their horror. This is why the National Assembly decided not to expose you to that risk, but instead provided this new paper money not only with a value based on national authority but also a true and unchanging value, one that allows it to effectively compete with precious metals." 10

But the final declaration was, perhaps, the most interesting. It was as follows:—

But the final declaration was probably the most interesting. It was as follows:—

"These assignats, bearing interest as they do, will soon be considered better than the coin now hoarded, and will bring it out again into circulation." The king was also induced to issue a proclamation recommending that his people receive this new money without objection.

"These assignats, which earn interest, will soon be seen as better than the coins currently being hoarded, and will encourage people to spend them again." The king was also persuaded to issue a proclamation urging his people to accept this new money without complaint.

All this caused great joy. Among the various utterances of this feeling was the letter of M. Sarot, directed to the editor of the Journal of the National Assembly, and scattered through France. M. Sarot is hardly able to contain himself as he anticipates the prosperity and glory that this issue of paper is to bring to his country. One thing only vexes him, and that is the pamphlet of M. Bergasse against the assignats; therefore it is after a long series of arguments and protestations, in order to give a final proof of his confidence in the paper money and his entire skepticism as to the evils predicted by Bergasse and others, M. Sarot solemnly lays his house, garden and furniture upon the altar of his country and offers to sell them for paper money alone.

All of this brought immense joy. Among the many expressions of this feeling was a letter from M. Sarot, addressed to the editor of the Journal of the National Assembly, which circulated throughout France. M. Sarot can barely contain his excitement as he looks forward to the prosperity and glory that this issuance of paper money will bring to his country. However, one thing bothers him—the pamphlet by M. Bergasse against the assignats; thus, after a long series of arguments and statements, to provide a final demonstration of his faith in paper money and his complete doubt regarding the negative outcomes predicted by Bergasse and others, M. Sarot solemnly places his house, garden, and furniture on the altar of his country and offers to sell them for paper money only.

There were, indeed, some gainsayers. These especially appeared among the clergy, who, naturally, abhorred the confiscation of Church property. Various ecclesiastics made speeches, some of them full of pithy and weighty arguments, against the proposed issue of paper, and there is preserved a sermon from one priest threatening all persons handling the new money with eternal damnation. But the great majority of the French people, who had suffered ecclesiastical oppression so long, regarded these utterances as the wriggling of a fish on the hook, and enjoyed the sport all the better. 11

There were, of course, some opponents. They were especially found among the clergy, who understandably hated the takeover of Church property. Various church leaders gave speeches, some of which were packed with strong and serious arguments against the proposed issuance of paper money. There’s even a recorded sermon from one priest threatening anyone who dealt with the new currency with eternal damnation. However, the vast majority of the French people, who had endured so much oppression from the Church for so long, saw these comments as the desperate flailing of a fish on a hook, and they found the whole situation even more entertaining. 11

The first result of this issue was apparently all that the most sanguine could desire: the treasury was at once greatly relieved; a portion of the public debt was paid; creditors were encouraged; credit revived; ordinary expenses were met, and, a considerable part of this paper money having thus been passed from the government into the hands of the people, trade increased and all difficulties seemed to vanish. The anxieties of Necker, the prophecies of Maury and Cazalès seemed proven utterly futile. And, indeed, it is quite possible that, if the national authorities had stopped with this issue, few of the financial evils which afterwards arose would have been severely felt; the four hundred millions of paper money then issued would have simply discharged the function of a similar amount of specie. But soon there came another result: times grew less easy; by the end of September, within five months after the issue of the four hundred millions in assignats, the government had spent them and was again in distress. 12

The first outcome of this issue was seemingly everything that the most optimistic could hope for: the treasury was significantly relieved; part of the public debt was paid off; creditors felt encouraged; credit was restored; regular expenses were covered, and a large portion of this paper money was transferred from the government to the people, boosting trade and making all challenges seem to disappear. The worries of Necker and the predictions of Maury and Cazalès appeared completely pointless. In fact, it's likely that if the national authorities had stopped with this issue, very few of the financial problems that later emerged would have been seriously felt; the four hundred million in paper money issued would have simply functioned like a similar amount of gold or silver. But soon, another situation developed: times became tougher; by the end of September, just five months after issuing the four hundred million in assignats, the government had spent them and was once again in trouble. 12

The old remedy immediately and naturally recurred to the minds of men. Throughout the country began a cry for another issue of paper; thoughtful men then began to recall what their fathers had told them about the seductive path of paper-money issues in John Law's time, and to remember the prophecies that they themselves had heard in the debate on the first issue of assignats less than six months before.

The old remedy quickly and naturally came to people's minds. Across the country, there was a call for another round of paper money; thoughtful individuals started to recall what their parents had warned them about the tempting but dangerous route of paper currency during John Law's era, and to remember the predictions they had heard during the discussions about the first issue of assignats just six months earlier.

At that time the opponents of paper had prophesied that, once on the downward path of inflation, the nation could not be restrained and that more issues would follow. The supporters of the first issue had asserted that this was a calumny; that the people were now in control and that they could and would check these issues whenever they desired.

At that time, those against paper money predicted that once inflation started, the country wouldn't be able to stop it and that more money would be printed. The advocates of the initial issue claimed this was a lie; that the people were now in charge and they could and would manage these issues whenever they wanted.

The condition of opinion in the Assembly was, therefore, chaotic: a few schemers and dreamers were loud and outspoken for paper money; many of the more shallow and easy-going were inclined to yield; the more thoughtful endeavored to breast the current.

The situation regarding opinions in the Assembly was, therefore, chaotic: a few schemers and dreamers were vocal and passionate about paper money; many of the more easy-going and casual individuals were inclined to go along with it; the more thoughtful ones tried to stand against the tide.

One man there was who could have withstood the pressure: Mirabeau. He was the popular idol,—the great orator of the Assembly and much more than a great orator,—he had carried the nation through some of its worst dangers by a boldness almost godlike; in the various conflicts he had shown not only oratorical boldness, but amazing foresight. As to his real opinion on an irredeemable currency there can be no doubt. It was the opinion which all true statesmen have held, before his time and since,—in his own country, in England, in America, in every modern civilized nation. In his letter to Cerutti, written in January, 1789, hardly six months before, he had spoken of paper money as "A nursery of tyranny, corruption and delusion; a veritable debauch of authority in delirium." In one of his early speeches in the National Assembly he had called such money, when Anson covertly suggested its issue, "a loan to an armed robber," and said of it: "that infamous word, paper money, ought to be banished from our language." In his private letters written at this very time, which were revealed at a later period, he showed that he was fully aware of the dangers of inflation. But he yielded to the pressure: partly because he thought it important to sell the government lands rapidly to the people, and so develop speedily a large class of small landholders pledged to stand by the government which gave them their titles; partly, doubtless, from a love of immediate rather than of remote applause; and, generally, in a vague hope that the severe, inexorable laws of finance which had brought heavy punishments upon governments emitting an irredeemable currency in other lands, at other times, might in some way at this time, be warded off from France. 13

One man who could have handled the pressure was Mirabeau. He was the people's favorite—the great speaker of the Assembly and so much more than just that—he had guided the nation through some of its toughest challenges with a near-divine boldness; in various disputes, he demonstrated not just speaking courage, but incredible foresight. There is no doubt about his true stance on an irredeemable currency. It was the view held by all genuine statesmen, both before him and after, in his country, in England, in America, and in every modern civilized nation. In his letter to Cerutti, written in January 1789, less than six months prior, he described paper money as "A nursery of tyranny, corruption, and delusion; a true debauch of authority in delirium." In one of his early speeches in the National Assembly, when Anson quietly suggested issuing it, he labeled such currency "a loan to an armed robber," and declared: "that infamous term, paper money, should be banished from our language." In his private letters from this very time, which were revealed later, he made it clear that he understood the dangers of inflation. However, he gave in to the pressure: partly because he believed it was crucial to quickly sell government lands to the people, thereby creating a substantial class of small landholders committed to supporting the government that granted them their titles; partly, undoubtedly, due to a desire for immediate rather than distant praise; and, in general, out of a vague hope that the harsh, unavoidable financial laws that had previously caused serious consequences for governments introducing an irredeemable currency in other countries and at other times might somehow be avoided in France at this time. 13

The question was brought up by Montesquieu's report on the 27th of August, 1790. This report favored, with evident reluctance, an additional issue of paper. It went on to declare that the original issue of four hundred millions, though opposed at the beginning, had proved successful; that assignats were economical, though they had dangers; and, as a climax, came the declaration: "We must save the country." 14

The question was raised in Montesquieu's report on August 27, 1790. This report reluctantly supported an additional release of paper money. It stated that the initial issuance of four hundred million, despite being met with resistance early on, had been successful; that assignats were cost-effective, even though they posed risks; and finally, it concluded with the declaration: "We must save the country." 14

Upon this report Mirabeau then made one of his most powerful speeches. He confessed that he had at first feared the issue of assignats, but that he now dared urge it; that experience had shown the issue of paper money most serviceable; that the report proved the first issue of assignats a success; that public affairs had come out of distress; that ruin had been averted and credit established. He then argued that there was a difference between paper money of the recent issue and that from which the nation had suffered so much in John Law's time; he declared that the French nation had now become enlightened and he added, "Deceptive subtleties can no longer mislead patriots and men of sense in this matter." He then went on to say: "We must accomplish that which we have begun," and declared that there must be one more large issue of paper, guaranteed by the national lands and by the good faith of the French nation. To show how practical the system was he insisted that just as soon as paper money should become too abundant it would be absorbed in rapid purchases of national lands; and he made a very striking comparison between this self-adjusting, self-converting system and the rains descending in showers upon the earth, then in swelling rivers discharged into the sea, then drawn up in vapor and finally scattered over the earth again in rapidly fertilizing showers. He predicted that the members would be surprised at the astonishing success of this paper money and that there would be none too much of it.

Upon this report, Mirabeau then delivered one of his most powerful speeches. He admitted that he initially feared the outcome of assignats, but now he confidently advocated for it; experience had shown that issuing paper money was very useful; the report demonstrated that the first issue of assignats was a success; public affairs had recovered from distress; ruin had been avoided, and credit had been established. He argued that there was a difference between the newly issued paper money and that which had caused the nation so much suffering during John Law's time; he asserted that the French nation had become enlightened and added, "Deceptive subtleties can no longer mislead patriots and sensible people in this matter." He continued by saying, "We must accomplish what we have started," and declared that another large issue of paper was necessary, backed by national lands and the good faith of the French nation. To illustrate the practicality of the system, he insisted that as soon as paper money became too abundant, it would be absorbed through quick purchases of national lands; he made a striking comparison between this self-adjusting, self-converting system and rain falling in showers onto the earth, then flowing in rivers to the sea, evaporating, and finally returning to the earth as quickly fertilizing showers. He predicted that the members would be surprised by the remarkable success of this paper money and that there would be just enough of it.

His theory grew by what it fed upon,—as the paper-money theory has generally done. Toward the close, in a burst of eloquence, he suggested that assignats be created to an amount sufficient to cover the national debt, and that all the national lands be exposed for sale immediately, predicting that thus prosperity would return to the nation and that an classes would find this additional issue of paper money a blessing. 15

His theory developed based on what it relied on—as the paper money theory usually does. Toward the end, in a passionate speech, he proposed that assignats be created in an amount large enough to cover the national debt, and that all national lands be put up for sale right away, predicting that this would bring prosperity back to the nation and that all classes would see this extra issuance of paper money as a benefit. 15

This speech was frequently interrupted by applause; a unanimous vote ordered it printed, and copies were spread throughout France. The impulse given by it permeated all subsequent discussion; Gouy arose and proposed to liquidate the national debt of twenty-four hundred millions,—to use his own words—"by one single operation, grand, simple, magnificent." 16 This "operation" was to be the emission of twenty-four hundred millions in legal tender notes, and a law that specie should not be accepted in purchasing national lands. His demagogy bloomed forth magnificently. He advocated an appeal to the people, who, to use his flattering expression, "ought alone to give the law in a matter so interesting." The newspapers of the period, in reporting his speech, noted it with the very significant remark, "This discourse was loudly applauded."

This speech was frequently interrupted by applause; a unanimous vote called for it to be printed, and copies were distributed throughout France. The momentum it created influenced all the discussions that followed; Gouy stood up and suggested addressing the national debt of twenty-four hundred million—using his own words—"in one grand, simple, magnificent move." 16 This "move" was to issue twenty-four hundred million in legal tender notes, along with a law stating that cash could not be used to buy national land. His populism thrived brilliantly. He pushed for an appeal to the people, who, as he flattering put it, "should solely decide in such an important matter." The newspapers of the day, in covering his speech, noted it with the significant comment, "This discourse received loud applause."

To him replied Brillat-Savarin. He called attention to the depreciation of assignats already felt. He tried to make the Assembly see that natural laws work as inexorably in France as elsewhere; he predicted that if this new issue were made there would come a depreciation of thirty per cent. Singular, that the man who so fearlessly stood against this tide of unreason has left to the world simply a reputation as the most brilliant cook that ever existed! He was followed by the Abbe Goutes, who declared,—what seems grotesque to those who have read the history of an irredeemable paper currency in any country—that new issues of paper money "will supply a circulating medium which will protect public morals from corruption." 17

Brillat-Savarin replied to him. He pointed out the decline in the value of assignats that was already being felt. He tried to make the Assembly understand that natural laws operate just as relentlessly in France as they do anywhere else; he predicted that if this new issue was made, there would be a depreciation of thirty percent. It's odd that the man who so bravely opposed this wave of irrationality has left the world with merely a reputation as the greatest chef to have ever lived! He was followed by Abbe Goutes, who stated—what seems ridiculous to anyone who has read about the history of an irredeemable paper currency in any country—that new issues of paper money "will create a circulating medium that will protect public morals from corruption." 17

Into this debate was brought a report by Necker. He was not, indeed, the great statesman whom France especially needed at this time, of all times. He did not recognize the fact that the nation was entering a great revolution, but he could and did see that, come what might, there were simple principles of finance which must be adhered to. Most earnestly, therefore, he endeavored to dissuade the Assembly from the proposed issue; suggesting that other means could be found for accomplishing the result, and he predicted terrible evils. But the current was running too fast. The only result was that Necker was spurned as a man of the past; he sent in his resignation and left France forever. 18 The paper-money demagogues shouted for joy at his departure; their chorus rang through the journalism of the time. No words could express their contempt for a man who was unable to see the advantages of filling the treasury with the issues of a printing press. Marat, Hébert, Camille Desmoulins and the whole mass of demagogues so soon to follow them to the guillotine were especially jubilant. 19

Into this debate came a report from Necker. He wasn't the great statesman that France desperately needed at that moment. He failed to realize that the nation was on the brink of a major revolution, but he did recognize that, regardless of the situation, there were basic financial principles that had to be followed. With great urgency, he tried to persuade the Assembly to reconsider their proposal, suggesting that other methods could achieve the same goals, and he warned of dire consequences. But the tide was too strong. The only outcome was that Necker was dismissed as outdated; he submitted his resignation and left France for good. 18 The advocates for paper money celebrated his exit; their voices filled the media of the time. No words could capture their disdain for a man who couldn't appreciate the benefits of boosting the treasury through printed currency. Marat, Hébert, Camille Desmoulins, and the entire crowd of demagogues who would soon meet the guillotine were particularly pleased. 19

Continuing the debate, Rewbell attacked Necker, saying that the assignats were not at par because there were not yet enough of them; he insisted that payments for public lands be received in assignats alone; and suggested that the church bells of the kingdom be melted down into small money. Le Brun attacked the whole scheme in the Assembly, as he had done in the Committee, declaring that the proposal, instead of relieving the nation, would wreck it. The papers of the time very significantly say that at this there arose many murmurs. Chabroud came to the rescue. He said that the issue of assignats would relieve the distress of the people and he presented very neatly the new theory of paper money and its basis in the following words: "The earth is the source of value; you cannot distribute the earth in a circulating value, but this paper becomes representative of that value and it is evident that the creditors of the nation will not be injured by taking it." On the other hand, appeared in the leading paper, the "Moniteur," a very thoughtful article against paper money, which sums up all by saying, "It is, then, evident that all paper which cannot, at the will of the bearer, be converted into specie cannot discharge the functions of money." This article goes on to cite Mirabeau's former opinion in his letter to Cerutti, published in 1789,—the famous opinion of paper money as "a nursery of tyranny, corruption and delusion; a veritable debauch of authority in delirium." Lablache, in the Assembly, quoted a saying that "paper money is the emetic of great states." 20

Continuing the debate, Rewbell criticized Necker, claiming that the assignats were not at par because there weren’t enough of them yet; he insisted that payments for public lands should only be made in assignats; and he suggested that the kingdom's church bells be melted down for small coins. Le Brun opposed the entire scheme in the Assembly, just as he had in the Committee, stating that the proposal would not help the nation but rather destroy it. The newspapers of the time notably reported that this caused many murmurs. Chabroud came to the rescue, arguing that issuing assignats would alleviate the people's suffering, and he clearly presented the new theory of paper money and its basis with these words: "The earth is the source of value; you cannot distribute the earth as a circulating value, but this paper represents that value, and it is clear that the creditors of the nation will not be harmed by accepting it." Conversely, a thoughtful article appeared in the leading paper, the "Moniteur," arguing against paper money, concluding with, "It is clear that any paper that cannot be converted into coin at the bearer’s will cannot fulfill the functions of money." This article also referenced Mirabeau's earlier opinion in his letter to Cerutti, published in 1789—the famous view of paper money as "a breeding ground for tyranny, corruption, and deception; a true indulgence of authority in delirium." Lablache, in the Assembly, cited a saying that "paper money is the emetic of great states." 20

Boutidoux, resorting to phrasemaking, called the assignats "un papier terre," or "land converted into paper." Boislandry answered vigorously and foretold evil results. Pamphlets continued to be issued,—among them, one so pungent that it was brought into the Assembly and read there,—the truth which it presented with great clearness being simply that doubling the quantity of money or substitutes for money in a nation simply increases prices, disturbs values, alarms capital, diminishes legitimate enterprise, and so decreases the demand both for products and for labor; that the only persons to be helped by it are the rich who have large debts to pay. This pamphlet was signed "A Friend of the People," and was received with great applause by the thoughtful minority in the Assembly. Du Pont de Nemours, who had stood by Necker in the debate on the first issue of assignats, arose, avowed the pamphlet to be his, and said sturdily that he had always voted against the emission of irredeemable paper and always would. 21

Boutidoux, using clever language, referred to the assignats as "un papier terre," or "land turned into paper." Boislandry responded forcefully and predicted negative consequences. Pamphlets kept coming out—among them, one so pointed that it was brought into the Assembly and read aloud. The main idea it clearly conveyed was that doubling the amount of money or money substitutes in a country only drives up prices, disrupts values, scares off investors, reduces legitimate business opportunities, and ultimately lowers the demand for both goods and labor; the only people who benefit from it are the wealthy who have significant debts to pay. This pamphlet was signed "A Friend of the People" and was met with great applause from the thoughtful minority in the Assembly. Du Pont de Nemours, who had supported Necker in the debate over the initial issuance of assignats, stood up, acknowledged the pamphlet as his, and firmly stated that he had always voted against the issuance of non-redeemable paper and would continue to do so. 21

Far more important than any other argument against inflation was the speech of Talleyrand. He had been among the boldest and most radical French statesmen. He it was,—a former bishop,—who, more than any other, had carried the extreme measure of taking into the possession of the nation the great landed estates of the Church, and he had supported the first issue of four hundred millions. But he now adopted a judicial tone—attempted to show to the Assembly the very simple truth that the effect of a second issue of assignats may be different from that of the first; that the first was evidently needed; that the second may be as injurious as the first was useful. He exhibited various weak points in the inflation fallacies and presented forcibly the trite truth that no laws and no decrees can keep large issues of irredeemable paper at par with specie.

Far more important than any other argument against inflation was Talleyrand's speech. He had been one of the boldest and most radical French politicians. It was he—a former bishop—who had most championed the extreme measure of seizing the Church’s vast landholdings for the nation, and he had backed the initial issuance of four hundred million. But now he took on a judicial tone—trying to illustrate to the Assembly the simple truth that the impact of a second issuance of assignats might differ from that of the first; that the first was clearly necessary; that the second could be as harmful as the first was beneficial. He pointed out various weaknesses in the inflation arguments and forcefully reiterated the well-known fact that no laws or decrees can maintain large amounts of worthless paper money at the same value as actual currency.

In his speech occur these words: "You can, indeed, arrange it so that the people shall be forced to take a thousand livres in paper for a thousand livres in specie; but you can never arrange it so that a man shall be obliged to give a thousand livres in specie for a thousand livres in paper,—in that fact is embedded the entire question; and on account of that fact the whole system fails." 22

In his speech, he said: "You can definitely set it up so that people have to accept a thousand livres in paper for a thousand livres in gold; but you can never make it so that someone has to give a thousand livres in gold for a thousand livres in paper—this is where the entire issue lies; and because of this, the whole system collapses." 22

The nation at large now began to take part in the debate; thoughtful men saw that here was the turning Point between good and evil, that the nation stood at the parting of the ways. Most of the great commercial cities bestirred themselves and sent up remonstrances against the new emission,—twenty-five being opposed and seven in favor of it.

The country as a whole started to join the conversation; serious thinkers recognized that this was a crucial moment between right and wrong, and that the nation was at a crossroads. Most of the major commercial cities got active and issued protests against the new release—twenty-five were against it and seven were in favor.

But eloquent theorists arose to glorify paper and among these, Royer, who on September 14, 1790, put forth a pamphlet entitled "Reflections of a patriotic Citizen on the issue of Assignats," in which he gave many specious reasons of the why the assignats could not be depressed, and spoke of the argument against them as "vile clamors of people bribed to affect public opinion." He said to the National Assembly, "If it is necessary to create five thousand millions, and more, of the paper, decree such a creation gladly." He, too, predicted, as many others had done, a time when gold was to lose all its value, since all exchanges would be made with this admirable, guaranteed paper, and therefore that coin would come out from the places where it was hoarded. He foretold prosperous times to France in case these great issues of paper were continued and declared these "the only means to insure happiness, glory and liberty to the French nation." Speeches like this gave courage to a new swarm of theorists,—it began to be especially noted that men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large.

But articulate theorists emerged to celebrate paper, among them Royer, who on September 14, 1790, published a pamphlet titled "Reflections of a Patriotic Citizen on the Issue of Assignats." In it, he presented numerous misleading reasons why the assignats couldn’t lose value and referred to arguments against them as "despicable outcries from people bribed to sway public opinion." He told the National Assembly, "If we need to create five thousand million or more in paper, approve it with enthusiasm." He also predicted, as many others had, a future where gold would lose all its worth since all transactions would be conducted with this remarkable, guaranteed paper, leading to hoarded coins being released back into circulation. He envisioned a prosperous future for France if these large issues of paper continued and claimed they were "the only means to ensure happiness, glory, and liberty for the French nation." Speeches like this encouraged a new wave of theorists—it became particularly noticeable that individuals who had never demonstrated the ability to create or grow their own wealth were full of brilliant ideas for generating and increasing wealth for the nation as a whole.

Greatest force of all, on September 27, 1790, came Mirabeau's final speech. The most sober and conservative of his modern opponents speaks of its eloquence as "prodigious." In this the great orator dwelt first on the political necessity involved, declaring that the most pressing need was to get the government lands into the hands of the people, and so to commit to the nation and against the old privileged classes the class of landholders thus created.

Greatest force of all, on September 27, 1790, came Mirabeau's final speech. The most serious and conservative of his modern opponents describes its eloquence as "incredible." In this speech, the great orator focused initially on the political necessity, stating that the most urgent need was to transfer the government lands to the people, thereby involving the nation against the old privileged classes with this new class of landholders.

Through the whole course of his arguments there is one leading point enforced with all his eloquence and ingenuity—the excellence of the proposed currency, its stability and its security. He declares that, being based on the pledge of public lands and convertible into them, the notes are better secured than if redeemable in specie; that the precious metals are only employed in the secondary arts, while the French paper money represents the first and most real of all property, the source of all production, the land; that while other nations have been obliged to emit paper money, none have ever been so fortunate as the French nation, for the reason that none had ever before been able to give this landed security; that whoever takes French paper money has practically a mortgage to secure it,—and on landed property which can easily be sold to satisfy his claims, while other nations have been able only to give a vague claim on the entire nation. "And," he ones, "I would rather have a mortgage on a garden than on a kingdom!"

Through the entire course of his arguments, there’s one main point stressed with all his eloquence and cleverness—the superiority of the proposed currency, its stability, and its security. He states that, since it’s backed by public land and can be exchanged for it, the notes are better secured than if they were redeemable in gold or silver; that precious metals are only used in secondary trades, while the French paper money represents the most essential and real property, which is the source of all production: the land. He claims that while other nations have had to issue paper money, none have been as lucky as France because none have been able to provide this land-backed security. He asserts that anyone holding French paper money essentially has a mortgage backing it—and on land that can be easily sold to settle their claims—while other nations can only offer a vague claim on the whole country. "And," he adds, "I would rather have a mortgage on a garden than on a kingdom!"

Other arguments of his are more demagogical. He declares that the only interests affected will be those of bankers and capitalists, but that manufacturers will see prosperity restored to them. Some of his arguments seem almost puerile, as when he says, "If gold has been hoarded through timidity or malignity, the issue of paper will show that gold is not necessary, and it will then come forth." But, as a whole, the speech was brilliant; it was often interrupted by applause; it settled the question. People did not stop to consider that it was the dashing speech of an orator and not the matured judgment of a financial expert; they did not see that calling Mirabeau or Talleyrand to advise upon a monetary policy, because they had shown boldness in danger and strength in conflict, was like summoning a prize-fighter to mend a watch.

Other arguments he makes are more about stirring people up. He claims that the only interests affected will be those of bankers and wealthy investors, but that manufacturers will see a return to prosperity. Some of his points seem almost childish, like when he says, "If gold has been hoarded due to fear or malice, issuing paper will prove that gold isn't necessary, and it will then come out." Overall, though, the speech was impressive; it was frequently interrupted by applause and resolved the issue. People didn’t stop to think that it was the flashy speech of a performer and not the well-considered opinion of a financial expert; they didn’t realize that calling on Mirabeau or Talleyrand to advise on monetary policy because they had shown courage in times of danger and strength in conflict was like getting a boxer to fix a watch.

In vain did Maury show that, while the first issues of John Law's paper had brought prosperity, those that followed brought misery; in vain did he quote from a book published in John Law's time, showing that Law was at first considered a patriot and friend of humanity; in vain did he hold up to the Assembly one of Law's bills and appeal to their memories of the wretchedness brought upon France by them; in vain did Du Pont present a simple and really wise plan of substituting notes in the payment of the floating debt which should not form a part of the ordinary circulating medium; nothing could resist the eloquence of Mirabeau. Barnave, following, insisted that "Law's paper was based upon the phantoms of the Mississippi; ours, upon the solid basis of ecclesiastical lands," and he proved that the assignats could not depreciate further. Prudhomme's newspaper poured contempt over gold as security for the currency, extolled real estate as the only true basis and was fervent in praise of the convertibility and self-adjusting features of the proposed scheme. In spite of all this plausibility and eloquence, a large minority stood firm to their earlier principles; but on the 29th of September, 1790, by a vote of 508 to 423, the deed was done; a bill was passed authorizing the issue of eight hundred millions of new assignats, but solemnly declaring that in no case should the entire amount put in circulation exceed twelve hundred millions. To make assurance doubly sure, it also provided that as fast as the assignats were paid into the treasury for land they should be burned, and thus a healthful contraction be constantly maintained. Unlike the first issue, these new notes were to bear no interest. 23

In vain did Maury try to show that, while the first issues of John Law's paper had brought prosperity, the subsequent ones brought misery; in vain did he quote from a book published during John Law's time, demonstrating that Law was initially seen as a patriot and friend of humanity; in vain did he present one of Law's bills to the Assembly and call upon their memories of the suffering brought upon France by them; in vain did Du Pont propose a straightforward and genuinely wise plan to replace notes in the payment of the floating debt, ensuring they wouldn't be part of the regular circulating medium; nothing could withstand Mirabeau's persuasive speech. Barnave, following him, insisted that "Law's paper was based on the illusions of the Mississippi; ours is grounded in the solid foundation of church lands," and he proved that the assignats couldn't depreciate any further. Prudhomme's newspaper ridiculed gold as collateral for the currency, praised real estate as the only true foundation, and enthusiastically supported the convertibility and self-regulating features of the proposed scheme. Despite all this convincing rhetoric, a significant minority remained loyal to their previous principles; however, on September 29, 1790, by a vote of 508 to 423, the decision was made; a bill was passed authorizing the issuance of eight hundred million new assignats, while solemnly declaring that the total amount in circulation would never exceed twelve hundred million. To ensure further security, it also mandated that as soon as the assignats were paid into the treasury for land, they would be burned, keeping a healthy contraction in place. Unlike the first issue, these new notes would carry no interest. 23

Great were the plaudits of the nation at this relief. Among the multitudes of pamphlets expressing this joy which have come down to us the "Friend of the Revolution" is the most interesting. It begins as follows: "Citizens, the deed is done. The assignats are the keystone of the arch. It has just been happily put in position. Now I can announce to you that the Revolution is finished and there only remain one or two important questions. All the rest is but a matter of detail which cannot deprive us any longer of the pleasure of admiring this important work in its entirety. The provinces and the commercial cities which were at first alarmed at the proposal to issue so much paper money now send expressions of their thanks; specie is coming out to be joined with paper money. Foreigners come to us from all parts of Europe to seek their happiness under laws which they admire; and soon France, enriched by her new property and by the national industry which is preparing for fruitfulness, will demand still another creation of paper money."

The nation was filled with applause for this relief. Among the many pamphlets celebrating this joy that have survived, the "Friend of the Revolution" is the most captivating. It starts with: "Citizens, the deed is done. The assignats are the keystone of the arch. It has just been successfully positioned. Now I can tell you that the Revolution is complete, and only one or two important questions remain. Everything else is just a matter of detail that can no longer take away our pleasure in admiring this significant work as a whole. The provinces and commercial cities that were initially worried about the proposal to issue so much paper money are now sending their thanks; gold and silver are coming out to be combined with paper money. People from all over Europe are coming to us to find their happiness under laws they admire, and soon France, enriched by her new property and the national industry getting ready to thrive, will ask for another round of paper money creation."

France was now fully committed to a policy of inflation; and, if there had been any question of this before, all doubts were removed now by various acts very significant as showing the exceeding difficulty of stopping a nation once in the full tide of a depreciating currency. The National Assembly had from the first shown an amazing liberality to all sorts of enterprises, wise or foolish, which were urged "for the good of the people." As a result of these and other largesses the old cry of the "lack of a circulating medium" broke forth again; and especially loud were the clamors for more small bills. The cheaper currency had largely driven out the dearer; paper had caused small silver and copper money mainly to disappear; all sorts of notes of hand, circulating under the name of "confidence bills," flooded France—sixty-three kinds in Paris alone. This unguaranteed currency caused endless confusion and fraud. Different districts of France began to issue their own assignats in small denominations, and this action stirred the National Assembly to evade the solemn pledge that the circulation should not go above twelve hundred millions and that all assignats returned to the treasury for lands should immediately be burned. 24 Within a short time there had been received into the treasury for lands one hundred and sixty million livres in paper. By the terms of the previous acts this amount of paper ought to have been retired. Instead of this, under the plea of necessity, the greater part of it was reissued in the form of small notes.

France was now fully committed to an inflation policy; and if there had been any questions about this before, all doubts were cleared up by various actions that highlighted how hard it is to stop a nation once it’s caught up in a depreciating currency. The National Assembly had shown incredible generosity towards all kinds of projects, whether sensible or not, that were promoted "for the good of the people." As a result of these and other giveaways, the old demand for a "circulating medium" resurfaced, with particularly loud calls for more small bills. The cheaper currency had largely pushed out the more valuable one; paper money had caused small silver and copper coins to mostly disappear; all sorts of promissory notes, known as "confidence bills," flooded France—sixty-three types in Paris alone. This unbacked currency led to endless confusion and fraud. Different regions of France started issuing their own assignats in small denominations, prompting the National Assembly to break its promise that the total circulation wouldn’t exceed twelve hundred million and that all assignats returned to the treasury for land should be immediately destroyed. 24 In a short time, the treasury had received one hundred and sixty million livres in paper for land. According to previous laws, this amount of paper should have been withdrawn. Instead, under the pretext of necessity, most of it was reissued as small notes.

There was, indeed, much excuse for new issues of small notes, for, under the theory that an issue of smaller notes would drive silver out of circulation, the smallest authorized assignat was for fifty livres. To supply silver and copper and hold it in circulation everything was tried. Citizens had been spurred on by law to send their silverware and jewels to the mint. Even the king sent his silver and gold plate, and the churches and convents were required by law to send to the government melting pot all silver and gold vessels not absolutely necessary for public worship. For copper money the church bells were melted down. But silver and even copper continued to become more and more scarce. In the midst of all this, various juggleries were tried, and in November, 1790, the Assembly decreed a single standard of coinage, the chosen metal being silver, and the ratio between the two precious metals was changed from 15 1/2 to 1, to 14 1/2 to 1—but all in vain. It was found necessary to issue the dreaded small paper, and a beginning was made by issuing one hundred millions in notes of five francs, and, ere long, obedient to the universal clamor, there were issued parchment notes for various small amounts down to a single sou. 25

There was indeed a strong reason for issuing new small notes because, according to the idea that smaller notes would push silver out of circulation, the smallest approved assignat was for fifty livres. To provide silver and copper and keep them in circulation, every effort was made. Citizens were legally urged to send their silverware and jewelry to the mint. Even the king contributed his silver and gold dishes, and churches and monasteries were mandated by law to send all silver and gold items not absolutely essential for public worship to the government’s melting pot. For copper money, church bells were melted down. Yet, silver and even copper continued to grow increasingly scarce. Amid this crisis, various tricks were attempted, and in November 1790, the Assembly declared a single standard of coinage, selecting silver as the metal, while changing the ratio between the two precious metals from 15.5 to 1, to 14.5 to 1—but it was all in vain. It became necessary to issue the dreaded small paper notes, starting with one hundred million notes of five francs, and soon, in response to widespread demand, parchment notes for various small amounts were issued down to a single sou. 25

Yet each of these issues, great or small, was but as a drop of cold water to a parched throat. Although there was already a rise in prices which showed that the amount needed for circulation had been exceeded, the cry for "more circulating medium" was continued. The pressure for new issues became stronger and stronger. The Parisian populace and the Jacobin Club were especially loud in their demands for them; and, a few months later, on June 19, 1791, with few speeches, in a silence very ominous, a new issue was made of six hundred millions more;—less than nine months after the former great issue, with its solemn pledges to keep down the amount in circulation. With the exception of a few thoughtful men, the whole nation again sang paeans. 26

Yet each of these issues, big or small, was like a drop of cold water to a dry throat. Even though prices were already rising, indicating that the needed amount for circulation had been surpassed, the demand for "more circulating medium" continued. The push for new issues grew stronger and stronger. The people of Paris and the Jacobin Club were especially vocal about their demands; and just a few months later, on June 19, 1791, with hardly any speeches and a very foreboding silence, a new issue of six hundred million was released—less than nine months after the previous major issue, which had come with serious promises to limit the amount in circulation. Except for a few thoughtful individuals, the whole nation once again celebrated. 26

In this comparative ease of new issues is seen the action of a law in finance as certain as the working of a similar law in natural philosophy. If a material body fall from a height its velocity is accelerated, by a well-known law, in a constantly increasing ratio: so in issues of irredeemable currency, in obedience to the theories of a legislative body or of the people at large, there is a natural law of rapidly increasing emission and depreciation. The first inflation bills were passed with great difficulty, after very sturdy resistance and by a majority of a few score out of nearly a thousand votes; but we observe now that new inflation measures were passed more and more easily and we shall have occasion to see the working of this same law in a more striking degree as this history develops itself.

In the easy introduction of new issues, we can see a financial law in action that's as certain as a similar law in natural science. When a material object falls from a height, its speed increases at a steadily growing rate; similarly, when it comes to issuing irredeemable currency, following the ideas of lawmakers or the general public, there's a natural law of rapidly increasing issuance and devaluation. The first inflation bills were passed with significant difficulty, facing strong opposition and winning by just a small margin out of nearly a thousand votes; however, we now notice that new inflation measures are being approved with much less resistance, and we'll see this same law at work even more dramatically as this history unfolds.

During the various stages of this debate there cropped up a doctrine old and ominous. It was the same which appeared toward the end of the nineteenth century in the United States during what became known as the "greenback craze" and the free "silver craze." In France it had been refuted, a generation before the Revolution, by Turgot, just as brilliantly as it was met a hundred years later in the United States by James A. Garfield and his compeers. This was the doctrine that all currency, whether gold, paper, leather or any other material, derives its efficiency from the official stamp it bears, and that, this being the case, a government may relieve itself of its debts and make itself rich and prosperous simply by means of a printing press:—fundamentally the theory which underlay the later American doctrine of "fiat money."

During the different stages of this debate, a troubling old idea came up. It was the same one that emerged in the late nineteenth century in the United States during what became known as the "greenback craze" and the free "silver craze." In France, it had been refuted a generation before the Revolution by Turgot, just as effectively as it was addressed a hundred years later in the United States by James A. Garfield and others. This was the idea that all currency, whether gold, paper, leather, or any other material, gets its value from the official stamp it carries, and because of this, a government can free itself from its debts and become rich and prosperous simply by using a printing press—essentially the theory that later formed the basis for the American idea of "fiat money."

There came mutterings and finally speeches in the Jacobin Club, in the Assembly and in newspaper articles and pamphlets throughout the country, taking this doctrine for granted. These could hardly affect thinking men who bore in mind the calamities brought upon the whole people, and especially upon the poorer classes, by this same theory as put in practice by John Law, or as refuted by Turgot, but it served to swell the popular chorus in favor of the issue of more assignats and plenty of them. 27

There were murmurs and eventually speeches in the Jacobin Club, in the Assembly, and in newspaper articles and pamphlets all over the country, accepting this idea as a given. These could hardly influence thoughtful people who remembered the disasters this same theory caused for everyone, especially the poorer classes, when it was implemented by John Law, or as Turgot had argued against it, but it helped to increase the public demand for more assignats and lots of them. 27

The great majority of Frenchmen now became desperate optimists, declaring that inflation is prosperity. Throughout France there came temporary good feeling. The nation was becoming inebriated with paper money. The good feeling was that of a drunkard just after his draught; and it is to be noted as a simple historical fact, corresponding to a physiological fact, that, as draughts of paper money came faster the successive periods of good feeling grew shorter.

The vast majority of French people had turned into desperate optimists, claiming that inflation meant prosperity. A temporary sense of euphoria spread across France. The country was buzzing with paper money. This good feeling resembled that of a drunk person right after a drink; and it's worth noting, as a straightforward historical fact aligned with a physiological truth, that as the influx of paper money increased, the duration of this good feeling became shorter.

Various bad signs began to appear. Immediately after each new issue came a marked depreciation; curious it is to note the general reluctance to assign the right reason. The decline in the purchasing power of paper money was in obedience to the simplest laws in economics, but France had now gone beyond her thoughtful statesmen and taken refuge in unwavering optimism, giving any explanation of the new difficulties rather than the right one. A leading member of the Assembly insisted, in an elaborate speech, that the cause of depreciation was simply the want of knowledge and of confidence among the rural population and he suggested means of enlightening them. La Rochefoucauld proposed to issue an address to the people showing the goodness of the currency and the absurdity of preferring coin. The address was unanimously voted. As well might they have attempted to show that a beverage made by mixing a quart of wine and two quarts of water would possess all the exhilarating quality of the original, undiluted liquid.

Various bad signs started to show up. Right after each new issue, there was a noticeable drop in value; it's interesting to see the widespread reluctance to identify the real cause. The decrease in the purchasing power of paper money was simply in line with basic economic principles, but France had now gone beyond its careful leaders and sought refuge in unshakeable optimism, offering any explanation for the new problems instead of the correct one. A prominent member of the Assembly claimed, in a detailed speech, that the reason for the depreciation was simply the lack of knowledge and confidence among the rural population and he suggested ways to educate them. La Rochefoucauld proposed to release a message to the people highlighting the quality of the currency and the ridiculousness of preferring coins. The message was unanimously approved. They might as well have tried to convince people that a drink made by mixing a quart of wine with two quarts of water would have all the uplifting qualities of the original, undiluted drink.

Attention was aroused by another menacing fact;—specie disappeared more and more. The explanations of this fact also displayed wonderful ingenuity in finding false reasons and in evading the true one. A very common explanation was indicated in Prudhomme's newspaper, "Les Révolutions de Paris," of January 17, 1791, which declared that coin "will keep rising until the people shall have hanged a broker." Another popular theory was that the Bourbon family were, in some mysterious way, drawing off all solid money to the chief centers of their intrigues in Germany. Comic and, at the same time, pathetic, were evidences of the wide-spread idea that if only a goodly number of people engaged in trade were hanged, the par value of the assignats would be restored.

Another alarming fact caught people's attention: coins were disappearing more and more. The explanations for this phenomenon showed remarkable creativity in inventing false reasons and avoiding the real issue. A common explanation was highlighted in Prudhomme's newspaper, "Les Révolutions de Paris," from January 17, 1791, which stated that currency "will keep rising until the people hang a broker." Another popular theory suggested that the Bourbon family was somehow siphoning off all the solid money to their main centers of scheming in Germany. There were both comical and sad signs of the widespread belief that if enough traders were hanged, the value of the assignats would return to normal.

Still another favorite idea was that British emissaries were in the midst of the people, instilling notions hostile to paper. Great efforts were made to find these emissaries and more than one innocent person experienced the popular wrath under the supposition that he was engaged in raising gold and depressing paper. Even Talleyrand, shrewd as he was, insisted that the cause was simply that the imports were too great and the exports too little. 28 As well might he explain that fact that, when oil is mingled with water, water sinks to the bottom, by saying that this is because the oil rises to the top. This disappearance of specie was the result of a natural law as simple and as sure in its action as gravitation; the superior currency had been withdrawn because an inferior currency could be used. 29 Some efforts were made to remedy this. In the municipality of Quilleboeuf a considerable amount in specie having been found in the possession of a citizen, the money was seized and sent to the Assembly. The people of that town treated this hoarded gold as the result of unpatriotic wickedness or madness, instead of seeing that it was but the sure result of a law working in every land and time, when certain causes are present. Marat followed out this theory by asserting that death was the proper penalty for persons who thus hid their money.

Another popular idea was that British agents were among the people, spreading anti-paper sentiments. There were major efforts to track down these agents, and more than one innocent person faced public anger under the assumption that they were hoarding gold and undermining paper currency. Even Talleyrand, clever as he was, argued that the problem stemmed from excessive imports and insufficient exports. 28 It’s as sensible as trying to explain that when oil mixes with water, water sinks because the oil rises to the top. The disappearance of species was due to a natural law as straightforward and predictable as gravity; the more valuable currency had vanished because the less valuable currency was accepted. 29 Some attempts were made to address this. In the town of Quilleboeuf, a significant amount of gold was found in a citizen's possession, so the money was seized and sent to the Assembly. The residents of that town viewed this hoarded gold as a sign of unpatriotic evil or madness, failing to see that it was simply the inevitable outcome of a principle active in every country and era when certain conditions arise. Marat expanded on this idea by claiming that death was the appropriate punishment for those who concealed their money.

Still another troublesome fact began now to appear. Though paper money had increased in amount, prosperity had steadily diminished. In spite of all the paper issues, commercial activity grew more and more spasmodic. Enterprise was chilled and business became more and more stagnant. Mirabeau, in his speech which decided the second great issue of paper, had insisted that, though bankers might suffer, this issue would be of great service to manufacturers and restore prosperity to them and their workmen. The latter were for a time deluded, but were at last rudely awakened from this delusion. The plenty of currency had at first stimulated production and created a great activity in manufactures, but soon the markets were glutted and the demand was diminished. In spite of the wretched financial policy of years gone by, and especially in spite of the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, by which religious bigotry had driven out of the kingdom thousands of its most skillful Protestant workmen, the manufactures of France had before the Revolution come into full bloom. In the finer woolen goods, in silk and satin fabrics of all sorts, in choice pottery and porcelain, in manufactures of iron, steel, and copper, they had again taken their old leading place upon the Continent. All the previous changes had, at the worst, done no more than to inflict a momentary check on this highly developed system of manufactures. But what the bigotry of Louis XIV and the shiftlessness of Louis XV could not do in nearly a century, was accomplished by this tampering with the currency in a few months. One manufactory after another stopped. At one town, Lodève, five thousand workmen were discharged from the cloth manufactories. Every cause except the right one was assigned for this. Heavy duties were put upon foreign goods; everything that tariffs and custom-houses could do was done. Still the great manufactories of Normandy were closed, those of the rest of the kingdom speedily followed, and vast numbers of workmen in all parts of the country were thrown out of employment. 30 Nor was this the case with the home demand alone. The foreign demand, which at first had been stimulated, soon fell off. In no way can this be better stated than by one of the most thoughtful historians of modern times, who says, "It is true that at first the assignats gave the same impulse to business in the city as in the country, but the apparent improvement had no firm foundation, even in the towns. Whenever a great quantity of paper money is suddenly issued we invariably see a rapid increase of trade. The great quantity of the circulating medium sets in motion all the energies of commerce and manufactures; capital for investment is more easily found than usual and trade perpetually receives fresh nutriment. If this paper represents real credit, founded upon order and legal security, from which it can derive a firm and lasting value, such a movement may be the starting point of a great and widely-extended prosperity, as, for instance, a splendid improvement in English agriculture was undoubtedly owing to the emancipation of the country bankers. If on the contrary, the new paper is of precarious value, as was clearly seen to be the case with the French assignats as early as February, 1791, it can confer no lasting benefits. For the moment, perhaps, business receives an impulse, all the more violent because every one endeavors to invest his doubtful paper in buildings, machines and goods, which, under all circumstances, retain some intrinsic value. Such a movement was witnessed in France in 1791, and from every quarter there came satisfactory reports of the activity of manufactures."

Another troubling fact started to emerge. Even though the amount of paper money had increased, prosperity continued to decline. Despite all the paper currency issued, commercial activity became increasingly erratic. Business was stifled, and stagnation grew. Mirabeau, during his speech that influenced the second major paper issue, argued that while bankers might face hardships, this new issuance would greatly benefit manufacturers and restore prosperity for them and their workers. The workers were initially misled, but eventually faced a harsh reality check. The surge in currency had temporarily boosted production and sparked significant activity in manufacturing, but soon the markets were oversaturated and demand dropped. Despite the disastrous financial policies of previous years, particularly the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, which had forced thousands of skilled Protestant workers out of the kingdom due to religious intolerance, French manufacturing had thrived before the Revolution. In high-quality woolen goods, various silk and satin fabrics, fine pottery, and metal products, they had regained their prestigious position in Europe. Prior disruptions had, at worst, only caused brief setbacks to this advanced manufacturing system. However, what the bigotry of Louis XIV and the negligence of Louis XV couldn’t achieve over nearly a century was undone in just a few months by messing with the currency. Factory after factory shut down. In one town, Lodève, five thousand workers were laid off from cloth manufacturing. Every possible explanation except the correct one was given for this collapse. Heavy tariffs were imposed on foreign goods; everything possible through tariffs and customs was attempted. Still, the major factories in Normandy closed, and those in the rest of the country quickly followed, leaving countless workers jobless across the nation. 30 This situation affected not just the domestic demand. The initially stimulated foreign demand also rapidly declined. As one of the most insightful modern historians noted, "It's true that at first the assignats energized business both in cities and in the countryside, but the visible improvement lacked a solid foundation, even in urban areas. Whenever a large amount of paper money is suddenly issued, we typically see a swift rise in trade. The increased circulating medium activates all the energies of commerce and manufacturing; capital for investment becomes easier to find, and trade receives constant fresh input. If this paper represents real credit supported by order and legal guarantee, from which it can gain solid and enduring value, such an influx may lead to significant and widespread prosperity, as seen with the remarkable improvements in British agriculture due to the liberation of country bankers. Conversely, if the new paper lacks stable value, as was clear with the French assignats by February 1791, it cannot bring lasting benefits. Initially, business may get a boost, especially since everyone attempts to invest their unreliable paper in buildings, machinery, and goods that maintain some intrinsic value. Such activity was observed in France in 1791, accompanied by promising reports about manufacturing operations from all directions."

"But, for the moment, the French manufacturers derived great advantage from this state of things. As their products could be so cheaply paid for, orders poured in from foreign countries to such a degree that it was often difficult for the manufacturers to satisfy their customers. It is easy to see that prosperity of this kind must very soon find its limit.... When a further fall in the assignats took place this prosperity would necessarily collapse, and be succeeded by a crisis all the more destructive the more deeply men had engaged in speculation under the influence of the first favorable prospects." 31

"But for now, the French manufacturers were benefiting greatly from this situation. Since their products were so affordable, orders flooded in from other countries to the point where it often became difficult for the manufacturers to meet demand. It’s clear that this kind of success would soon hit a limit.... When the value of the assignats dropped further, this prosperity would inevitably collapse, leading to a crisis that would be even more devastating the more people had invested in speculation driven by the initial positive outlook." 31

Thus came a collapse in manufacturing and commerce, just as it had come previously in France: just as it came at various periods in Austria, Russia, America, and in all countries where men have tried to build up prosperity on irredeemable paper. 32

Thus came a collapse in manufacturing and commerce, just as it had happened before in France: just as it occurred at various times in Austria, Russia, America, and in all countries where people have tried to create prosperity using worthless paper. 32

All this breaking down of the manufactures and commerce of the nation made fearful inroads on the greater fortunes; but upon the lesser, and upon the little properties of the masses of the nation who relied upon their labor, it pressed with intense severity. The capitalist could put his surplus paper money into the government lands and await results; but the men who needed their money from day to day suffered the worst of the misery. Still another difficulty appeared. There had come a complete uncertainty as to the future. Long before the close of 1791 no one knew whether a piece of paper money representing a hundred livres would, a month later, have a purchasing power of ninety or eighty or sixty livres. The result was that capitalists feared to embark their means in business. Enterprise received a mortal blow. Demand for labor was still further diminished; and here came a new cause of calamity: for this uncertainty withered all far-reaching undertakings. The business of France dwindled into a mere living from hand to mouth. This state of things, too, while it bore heavily upon the moneyed classes, was still more ruinous to those in moderate and, most of all, to those in straitened circumstances. With the masses of the people, the purchase of every article of supply became a speculation—a speculation in which the professional speculator had an immense advantage over the ordinary buyer. Says the most brilliant of apologists for French revolutionary statesmanship, "Commerce was dead; betting took its place." 33

All this breakdown of the country's manufacturing and commerce severely impacted the wealthier classes, but for the poorer and for the small properties of the masses who depended on their labor, it was incredibly harsh. The capitalists could invest their excess paper money into government land and wait for the outcomes, but those who needed their money daily faced the worst suffering. Another problem emerged: there was complete uncertainty about the future. Long before the end of 1791, no one was sure if a piece of paper money worth a hundred livres would be worth ninety, eighty, or even sixty livres a month later. This led to capitalists being too afraid to invest their funds in businesses. Ventures took a big hit. The demand for labor decreased even further, and another challenge arose: this uncertainty stifled all ambitious projects. France's economy shrank to a bare subsistence. This situation was difficult for the wealthy but even more devastating for those with moderate means and especially for those in dire straits. For the masses, buying even basic supplies turned into a gamble—a gamble where professional speculators had a huge upper hand over regular buyers. The most insightful supporter of French revolutionary leadership notes, "Commerce was dead; betting took its place." 33

Nor was there any compensating advantage to the mercantile classes. The merchant was forced to add to his ordinary profit a sum sufficient to cover probable or possible fluctuations in value, and while prices of products thus went higher, the wages of labor, owing to the number of workmen who were thrown out of employment, went lower.

Nor was there any compensating advantage for the merchant class. The merchant had to increase his usual profit by an amount enough to cover likely or potential fluctuations in value, and while the prices of goods rose, the wages for workers dropped due to the number of laborers who were left unemployed.

But these evils, though great, were small compared to those far more deep-seated signs of disease which now showed themselves throughout the country. One of these was the obliteration of thrift from the minds of the French people. The French are naturally thrifty; but, with such masses of money and with such uncertainty as to its future value, the ordinary motives for saving and care diminished, And a loose luxury spread throughout the country. A still worse outgrowth was the increase of speculation and gambling. With the plethora of paper currency in 1791 appeared the first evidences of that cancerous disease which always follows large issues of irredeemable currency,—a disease more permanently injurious to a nation than war, pestilence or famine. For at the great metropolitan centers grew a luxurious, speculative, stock-gambling body, which, like a malignant tumor, absorbed into itself the strength of the nation and sent out its cancerous fibres to the remotest hamlets. At these city centers abundant wealth seemed to be piled up: in the country at, large there grew a dislike of steady labor and a contempt for moderate gains and simple living. In a pamphlet published in May, 1791, we see how, in regard to this also, public opinion was blinded. The author calls attention to the increase of gambling in values of all sorts in these words: "What shall I say of the stock-jobbing, as frightful as it is scandalous, which goes on in Paris under the very eyes of our legislators,—a most terrible evil, yet, under the present circumstances,—necessary?" The author also speaks of these stock-gamblers as using the most insidious means to influence public opinion in favor of their measures; and then proposes, seriously, a change in various matters of detail, thinking that this would prove a sufficient remedy for an evil which had its roots far down in the whole system of irredeemable currency. As well might a physician prescribe a pimple wash for a diseased liver. 34

But these problems, although significant, were small compared to the much deeper signs of illness that were now visible throughout the country. One major issue was the loss of thrift among the French people. The French are naturally good savers; however, with so much money in circulation and uncertainty about its future value, the usual reasons for saving and being frugal faded away, leading to a rise in extravagant living across the nation. An even worse consequence was the increase in speculation and gambling. With the surplus of paper currency in 1791, the first signs of that destructive disease emerged, which always follows the issuance of unbacked currency—a disease that harms a nation more permanently than war, plague, or famine. In the main urban centers, a lavish, speculative stock-gambling culture took root, which, like a harmful tumor, drained the nation’s vitality and spread its toxic influence to the farthest villages. In these city centers, great wealth seemed to accumulate, while in the countryside, people began to disdain steady work and looked down on moderate incomes and simple lifestyles. A pamphlet published in May 1791 highlighted how public opinion was misled on this issue. The author pointed out the rise of gambling in the value of all kinds with the words: "What can I say about the stock speculation, as alarming as it is scandalous, occurring in Paris right under the noses of our legislators—it's a terrible evil, yet, given the current situation—necessary?" The author also noted how stock traders used sly tactics to sway public opinion in favor of their actions; then he seriously suggested various minor reforms, believing they would effectively solve a problem deeply rooted in the entire system of unbacked currency. It would be as effective as a doctor prescribing a pimple cream for a diseased liver. 34

Now began to be seen more plainly some of the many ways in which an inflation policy robs the working class. As these knots of plotting schemers at the city centers were becoming bloated with sudden wealth, the producing classes of the country, though having in their possession more and more currency, grew lean. In the schemes and speculations put forth by stock-jobbers and stimulated by the printing of more currency, multitudes of small fortunes were absorbed and lost while a few swollen fortunes were rapidly aggregated in the larger cities. This crippled a large class in the country districts, which had employed a great number of workmen.

Now it became clearer how an inflation policy is hurting the working class. While groups of schemers in the city were getting rich quickly, the producing classes in the country were becoming thinner, even though they had more and more money. In the plans and speculations driven by stock traders and fueled by the increased printing of money, many small fortunes were wiped out while a few large fortunes were quickly amassed in the bigger cities. This hurt many people in rural areas who had employed a lot of workers.

In the leading French cities now arose a luxury and license which was a greater evil even than the plundering which ministered to it. In the country the gambling spirit spread more and more. Says the same thoughtful historian whom I have already quoted: "What a prospect for a country when its rural population was changed into a great band of gamblers!" 35

In the main French cities, a culture of excess and indulgence emerged that was an even bigger problem than the theft that fueled it. In the countryside, the desire to gamble continued to grow. The same insightful historian I quoted before said: "What a future for a country when its rural population becomes a large group of gamblers!" 35

Nor was this reckless and corrupt spirit confined to business men; it began to break out in official circles, and public men who, a few years before, had been thought above all possibility of taint, became luxurious, reckless, cynical and finally corrupt. Mirabeau, himself, who, not many months previous, had risked imprisonment and even death to establish constitutional government, was now—at this very time—secretly receiving heavy bribes. When, at the downfall of the monarchy a few years later, the famous iron chest of the Tuileries was opened, there were found evidences that, in this carnival of inflation and corruption, he had been a regularly paid servant of the Royal court. 36 The artful plundering of the people at large was bad enough, but worse still was this growing corruption in official and legislative circles. Out of the speculating and gambling of the inflation period grew luxury, and, out of this, corruption. It grew as naturally as a fungus on a muck heap. It was first felt in business operations, but soon began to be seen in the legislative body and in journalism. Mirabeau was, by no means, the only example. Such members of the legislative body as Jullien of Toulouse, Delaunay of Angers, Fabre d'Eglantine and their disciples, were among the most noxious of those conspiring by legislative action to raise and depress securities for stock-jobbing purposes. Bribery of legislators followed as a matter of course, Delaunay, Jullien and Chabot accepted a bribe of five hundred thousand livres for aiding legislation calculated to promote the purposes of certain stock-jobbers. It is some comfort to know that nearly all concerned were guillotined for it. 37

Nor was this reckless and corrupt mindset limited to business people; it started to emerge in official circles, and public figures who, a few years earlier, had seemed beyond suspicion turned luxurious, reckless, cynical, and ultimately corrupt. Mirabeau, who just months before had risked imprisonment and even death to establish constitutional government, was now—at this very moment—secretly taking significant bribes. When, after the monarchy fell a few years later, the notorious iron chest of the Tuileries was opened, evidence showed that, during this climate of inflation and corruption, he had been a regularly paid agent of the Royal court. 36 The clever exploitation of the general public was bad enough, but even worse was the rising corruption in official and legislative spheres. From the speculation and gambling of the inflation period came luxury, and from that, corruption. It spread as naturally as mold on a pile of garbage. It was first noticed in business dealings, but soon became evident in the legislative body and journalism. Mirabeau was far from the only example. Members of the legislative body like Jullien of Toulouse, Delaunay of Angers, Fabre d'Eglantine, and their followers were some of the most harmful conspirators manipulating legislation to manipulate stock prices for profit. Bribery of legislators became routine; Delaunay, Jullien, and Chabot accepted a bribe of five hundred thousand livres to support legislation intended to benefit certain stock speculators. It's somewhat reassuring to know that nearly all those involved were guillotined for it. 37

It is true that the number of these corrupt legislators was small, far less than alarmists led the nation to suppose, but there were enough to cause wide-spread distrust, cynicism and want of faith in any patriotism or any virtue.

It’s true that the number of these corrupt lawmakers was small, much smaller than what alarmists made the country believe, but there were enough to create widespread distrust, cynicism, and a lack of faith in any patriotism or virtue.





II.

Even worse than this was the breaking down of the morals of the country at large, resulting from the sudden building up of ostentatious wealth in a few large cities, and from the gambling, speculative spirit spreading from these to the small towns and rural districts. From this was developed an even more disgraceful result,—the decay of a true sense of national good faith. The patriotism which the fear of the absolute monarchy, the machinations of the court party, the menaces of the army and the threats of all monarchical Europe had been unable to shake was gradually disintegrated by this same speculative, stock-jobbing habit fostered by the superabundant currency. At the outset, in the discussions preliminary to the first issue of paper money, Mirabeau and others who had favored it had insisted that patriotism as well as an enlightened self-interest, would lead the people to keep up the value of paper money. The very opposite of this was now revealed, for there appeared, as another outgrowth of this disease, what has always been seen under similar circumstances. It is a result of previous, and a cause of future evils. This outgrowth was a vast debtor class in the nation, directly interested in the depreciation of the currency in which they were to pay their debts. The nucleus of this class was formed by those who had purchased the church lands from the government. Only small payments down had been required and the remainder was to be paid in deferred installments: an indebtedness of a multitude of people had thus been created to the amount of hundreds of millions. This body of debtors soon saw, of course, that their interest was to depreciate the currency in which their debts were to be paid; and these were speedily joined by a far more influential class;—by that class whose speculative tendencies had been stimulated by the abundance of paper money, and who had gone largely into debt, looking for a rise in nominal values. Soon demagogues of the viler sort in the political clubs began to pander to it; a little later important persons in this debtor class were to be found intriguing in the Assembly—first in its seats and later in more conspicuous places of public trust. Before long, the debtor class became a powerful body extending through all ranks of society. From the stock-gambler who sat in the Assembly to the small land speculator in the rural districts; from the sleek inventor of canards on the Paris Exchange to the lying stock-jobber in the market town, all pressed vigorously for new issues of paper; all were apparently able to demonstrate to the people that in new issues of paper lay the only chance for national prosperity.

Even worse than this was the breakdown of the country's morals overall, caused by the sudden rise of flashy wealth in a few big cities, and the gambling, speculative mindset spreading from these cities to small towns and rural areas. This led to an even more disgraceful outcome—the decline of a genuine sense of national integrity. The patriotism that had been unshaken by the fear of absolute monarchy, the schemes of the court party, the threats of the army, and the intimidations from all monarchical Europe was gradually eroded by this same speculative, stock-trading mentality fostered by the excessive money supply. Initially, in the discussions leading up to the first issuance of paper money, Mirabeau and others who supported it insisted that both patriotism and enlightened self-interest would motivate people to maintain the value of paper money. The complete opposite of this soon became evident, as another consequence of this issue surfaced, which has always been observed in similar situations. It's a result of past problems and a cause of future ones. This consequence was a large class of debtors in the nation, directly benefiting from the depreciation of the currency in which they would pay their debts. The core of this class was made up of those who had bought church lands from the government. Only small down payments were required, and the rest was to be paid in later installments: this created a debt for a multitude of people totaling hundreds of millions. This group of debtors quickly realized that it was in their interest to devalue the currency in which their debts were due; they were soon joined by a much more influential group—those whose speculative tendencies had been encouraged by the abundance of paper money and who had gone deeply into debt, hoping for a rise in nominal values. Before long, unscrupulous demagogues in the political clubs began to cater to them; shortly after, significant members of this debtor class were found maneuvering in the Assembly—first in its seats and then in more prominent positions of public trust. Before long, the debtor class became a powerful faction spread across all levels of society. From the stock gambler in the Assembly to the small land speculator in rural areas; from the smooth inventor of scams on the Paris Exchange to the deceitful stock trader in the market town, all vigorously pushed for new issues of paper; all seemed able to convince the public that new issues of paper were the only chance for national prosperity.

This great debtor class, relying on the multitude who could be approached by superficial arguments, soon gained control. Strange as it might seem to those who have not watched the same causes at work at a previous period in France and at various times in other countries, while every issue of paper money really made matters worse, a superstition gained ground among the people at large that, if only enough paper money were issued and were more cunningly handled the poor would be made rich. Henceforth, all opposition was futile. In December, 1791, a report was made in the Legislative Assembly in favor of yet another great issue of three hundred millions more of paper money. In regard to this report Cambon said that more money was needed but asked, "Will you, in a moment when stock-jobbing is carried on with such fury, give it new power by adding so much more to the circulation?" But such high considerations were now little regarded. Dorisy declared, "There is not enough money yet in circulation; if there were more the sales of national lands would be more rapid." And the official report of his speech states that these words were applauded.

This large group of debtors, taking advantage of the many people who could be swayed by shallow arguments, quickly gained control. It may seem strange to those who haven't observed similar situations in France before or at different times in other countries, but despite the fact that every release of paper money actually made things worse, a belief took hold among the general public that if only enough paper money were printed and managed more cleverly, the poor would become wealthy. From that point on, any dissent was pointless. In December 1791, a report was presented in the Legislative Assembly advocating for yet another massive issuance of three hundred million more in paper money. In response to this report, Cambon acknowledged that more money was needed but questioned, "Will you, at a time when stock trading is happening so wildly, empower it even further by adding so much more to the circulation?" However, such significant concerns were no longer taken seriously. Dorisy claimed, "There isn’t enough money in circulation yet; if there were more, the sale of national lands would be faster." The official report of his speech notes that these words were met with applause.

Dorisy then went on to insist that the government lands were worth at least thirty-five hundred million livres and said: "Why should members ascend the tribunal and disquiet France? Fear nothing; your currency reposes upon a sound mortgage." Then followed a glorification of the patriotism of the French people, which, he asserted, would carry the nation through all its difficulties.

Dorisy then insisted that the government lands were worth at least three thousand five hundred million livres and said: "Why should members take the stand and disturb France? Don’t worry; your currency is backed by a solid mortgage." He then praised the patriotism of the French people, claiming it would help the nation overcome all its challenges.

Becquet, speaking next, declared that "The circulation is becoming more rare every day."

Becquet, speaking next, said, "The circulation is getting rarer every day."

On December 17, 1791, a new issue was ordered, making in all twenty-one hundred millions authorized. Coupled with this was the declaration that the total amount in actual circulation should never reach more than sixteen hundred millions. Before this issue the value of the 100 livres note had fallen at Paris to about 80 livres; 38 immediately afterward it fell to about 68 livres. What limitations of the currency were worth may be judged from the fact that not only had the declaration made hardly a year before, limiting the amount in circulation to twelve hundred millions, been violated, but the declaration, made hardly a month previous, in which the Assembly had as solemnly limited the amount of circulation to fourteen hundred millions, had also been repudiated.

On December 17, 1791, a new issue was authorized, bringing the total to two billion. Along with this, it was declared that the total amount in actual circulation would never exceed one billion six hundred million. Before this issue, the value of the 100 livres note had fallen in Paris to about 80 livres; 38 immediately afterward it dropped to around 68 livres. The limitations on the currency's value can be seen from the fact that not only was the declaration made less than a year before, limiting the amount in circulation to twelve hundred million, violated, but also the declaration made less than a month prior, in which the Assembly had as solemnly limited the amount in circulation to fourteen hundred million, had been disregarded.

The evils which we have already seen arising from the earlier issues were now aggravated; but the most curious thing evolved out of all this chaos was a new system of political economy. In speeches, newspapers and pamphlets about this time, we begin to find it declared that, after all, a depreciated currency is a blessing; that gold and silver form an unsatisfactory standard for measuring values: that it is a good thing to have a currency that will not go out of the kingdom and which separates France from other nations: that thus shall manufacturers be encouraged; that commerce with other nations may be a curse, and hindrance thereto may be a blessing; that the laws of political economy however applicable in other times, are not applicable to this particular period, and, however operative in other nations, are not now so in France; that the ordinary rules of political economy are perhaps suited to the minions of despotism but not to the free and enlightened inhabitants of France at the close of the eighteenth century; that the whole state of present things, so far from being an evil is a blessing. All these ideas, and others quite as striking, were brought to the surface in the debates on the various new issues. 39

The problems we’ve already seen from earlier issues have gotten worse; but the most interesting thing that came out of all this chaos was a new system of political economy. Around this time, we started hearing in speeches, newspapers, and pamphlets that, after all, a depreciated currency is actually a good thing; that gold and silver aren’t a reliable way to measure value; that having a currency that stays within the country and sets France apart from other nations is beneficial; that this will encourage manufacturers; that trading with other nations could be a curse, and restrictions on that trade might be a good thing; that the principles of political economy that worked in the past don’t apply to this specific moment, and while they might work in other countries, they don’t in France right now; that the usual rules of political economy may suit the lackeys of tyranny but not the free and enlightened people of France at the end of the eighteenth century; that the overall state of affairs is not a problem but a blessing. All these ideas, along with many others just as striking, were brought to light during the discussions about the various new issues. 39

Within four months came another report to the Assembly as ingenious as those preceding. It declared: "Your committee are thoroughly persuaded that the amount of the circulating medium before the Revolution was greater than that of the assignats today: but at that time the money circulated slowly and now it passes rapidly so that one thousand million assignats do the work of two thousand millions of specie." The report foretells further increase in prices, but by some curious jugglery reaches a conclusion favorable to further inflation. Despite these encouragements the assignats nominally worth 100 livres had fallen, at the beginning of February, 1792, to about 60 livres, and during that month fell to 53 livres. 40

Within four months, another report was presented to the Assembly, as clever as the ones before it. It stated: "Your committee is fully convinced that the amount of circulating money before the Revolution was greater than the amount of the assignats today: however, back then money circulated slowly, whereas now it moves quickly, so one thousand million assignats do the work of two thousand million in gold and silver." The report predicts a further rise in prices but, through some odd reasoning, comes to a conclusion that supports more inflation. Despite this encouragement, the assignats that were nominally worth 100 livres had dropped, by early February 1792, to about 60 livres, and by the end of that month fell to 53 livres. 40

In March, Clavière became minister of finance. He was especially proud of his share in the invention and advocacy of the assignats, and now pressed their creation more vigorously than ever, and on April 30th, of the same year, came the fifth great issue of paper money, amounting to three hundred millions: at about the same time Cambon sneered ominously at public creditors as "rich people, old financiers and bankers." Soon payment was suspended on dues to public creditors for all amounts exceeding ten thousand francs.

In March, Clavière became the finance minister. He was particularly proud of his role in creating and promoting the assignats, and he now pushed for their creation more forcefully than ever. On April 30th of the same year, the fifth major issue of paper money was released, totaling three hundred million. Around that time, Cambon mockingly referred to public creditors as "wealthy individuals, seasoned financiers, and bankers." Soon, payments to public creditors for any amounts over ten thousand francs were put on hold.

This was hailed by many as a measure in the interests of the poorer classes of people, but the result was that it injured them most of all. Henceforward, until the end of this history, capital was quietly taken from labor and locked up in all the ways that financial ingenuity could devise. All that saved thousands of laborers in France from starvation was that they were drafted off into the army and sent to be killed on foreign battlefields.

This was praised by many as a policy that would help the poorer classes, but in reality, it hurt them the most. From then on, until the end of this story, money was quietly taken from workers and secured in every way that financial creativity could come up with. The only thing that kept thousands of workers in France from starving was that they were recruited into the army and sent to die on foreign battlefields.

On the last day of July, 1792, came another brilliant report from Fouquet, showing that the total amount of currency already issued was about twenty-four hundred millions, but claiming that the national lands were worth a little more than this sum. A decree was now passed issuing three hundred millions more. By this the prices of everything were again enhanced save one thing, and that one thing was labor. Strange as it may at first appear, while the depreciation of the currency had raised all products enormously in price, the stoppage of so many manufactories and the withdrawal of capital caused wages in the summer of 1792, after all the inflation, to be as small as they had been four years before—viz., fifteen sous per day. No more striking example can be seen of the truth uttered by Daniel Webster, that "of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effective than that which deludes them with paper-money." 41

On the last day of July, 1792, another impressive report came from Fouquet, stating that the total amount of currency issued was about twenty-four hundred million, but claiming that the national lands were worth slightly more than that. A decree was then passed to issue three hundred million more. As a result, the prices of everything increased again, except for one thing: labor. Surprisingly, even though the depreciation of the currency had driven up the prices of all products, the shutdown of many factories and the withdrawal of capital caused wages in the summer of 1792 to remain as low as they were four years earlier—specifically, fifteen sous per day. There’s no clearer example of the truth expressed by Daniel Webster, that "of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effective than that which deludes them with paper money." 41

Issue after issue followed at intervals of a few months, until, on December 14, 1792, we have an official statement to the effect that thirty-five hundred millions had been put forth, of which six hundred millions had been burned, leaving in circulation twenty-eight hundred millions.

Issue after issue came out every few months, until, on December 14, 1792, we received an official statement saying that thirty-five hundred million had been issued, of which six hundred million had been burned, leaving twenty-eight hundred million in circulation.

When it is remembered that there was little business to do and that the purchasing power of the livre or franc, when judged by the staple products of the country, was equal to about half the present purchasing power of our own dollar, it will be seen into what evils France had drifted. As the mania for paper money ran its course, even the sous, obtained by melting down the church bells, were more and more driven out of circulation and more and more parchment notes from twenty four to five were issued, and at last pieces of one sou, of half a sou and even of one-quarter of a sou were put in circulation. 42

When you consider that there wasn't much business happening and that the buying power of the livre or franc, when evaluated against the main products of the country, was roughly equal to about half the current buying power of our dollar, you can see the kind of troubles France had fallen into. As the obsession with paper money peaked, even the sous, which were obtained by melting down church bells, were increasingly pushed out of circulation. More and more parchment notes ranging from twenty four to five were issued, and eventually, pieces worth one sou, half a sou, and even one-quarter of a sou were released into circulation. 42

But now another source of wealth was opened to the nation. There came a confiscation of the large estates of landed proprietors who had fled the country. An estimate in 1793 made the value of these estates three billions of francs. As a consequence, the issues of paper money were continued in increased amounts, on the old theory that they were guaranteed by the solemn pledge of these lands belonging to the state. Under the Legislative Assembly through the year 1792 new issues were made virtually every month, so that at the end of January, 1793, it was more and more realized that the paper money actually in circulation amounted close upon three thousand millions of francs. All this had been issued publicly, in open sessions of the National and Legislative Assemblies; but now under the National Convention, the two Committees of Public Safety and of Finance began to decree new issues privately, in secret session.

But now another source of wealth opened up for the nation. The large estates of landowners who had fled the country were confiscated. An estimate in 1793 valued these estates at three billion francs. As a result, the issuance of paper money continued in larger amounts, based on the old belief that it was backed by the state's claim to these lands. Under the Legislative Assembly throughout 1792, new issues were made nearly every month, so that by the end of January 1793, it became increasingly clear that the paper money in circulation totaled nearly three billion francs. All this had been issued publicly, in open sessions of the National and Legislative Assemblies; but now, under the National Convention, the two Committees of Public Safety and Finance began to authorize new issues privately, in closed sessions.

As a result, the issues became larger still, and four hundred workmen were added to those previously engaged in furnishing this paper money, and these were so pressed with work from six o'clock in the morning until eight in the evening that they struck for higher wages and were successful. 43

As a result, the problems grew even bigger, and four hundred more workers were brought on to help produce this paper money. They were so overwhelmed with work from six in the morning until eight at night that they went on strike for better pay and won. 43

The consequences of these overissues now began to be more painfully evident to the people at large. Articles of common consumption became enormously dear and prices were constantly rising. Orators in the Legislative Assembly, clubs, local meetings and elsewhere now endeavored to enlighten people by assigning every reason for this depreciation save the true one. They declaimed against the corruption of the ministry, the want of patriotism among the Moderates, the intrigues of the emigrant nobles, the hard-heartedness of the rich, the monopolizing spirit of the merchants, the perversity of the shopkeepers,—-each and all of these as causes of the difficulty. 44

The effects of these overissues started to become painfully clear to the general public. Everyday items became extremely expensive, and prices were continuously going up. Speakers in the Legislative Assembly, clubs, local meetings, and other venues tried to inform people by pointing out every possible reason for this decline in value except the real one. They complained about government corruption, the lack of patriotism among the Moderates, the schemes of the exiled nobles, the callousness of the wealthy, the monopolistic behavior of merchants, and the unreasonableness of shopkeepers—all of these as causes of the problem. 44

This decline in the government paper was at first somewhat masked by fluctuations. For at various times the value of the currency rose. The victory of Jemappes and the general success of the French army against the invaders, with the additional security offered by new confiscations of land, caused, in November, 1792, an appreciation in the value of the currency; the franc had stood at 57 and it rose to about 69; but the downward tendency was soon resumed and in September, 1793, the assignats had sunk below 30. Then sundry new victories and coruscations of oratory gave momentary confidence so that in December, 1793, they rose above 50. But despite these fluctuations the downward tendency soon became more rapid than ever. 45

This decline in government bonds was initially somewhat hidden by changes in value. At different times, the currency's value went up. The victory at Jemappes and the overall success of the French army against the invaders, along with the added security from new land confiscations, led to an increase in the currency's value in November 1792; the franc initially stood at 57 but rose to about 69. However, the downward trend quickly returned, and by September 1793, the assignats had dropped below 30. Then, various new victories and passionate speeches provided a brief boost in confidence, causing them to rise above 50 in December 1793. But despite these fluctuations, the downward trend became even more rapid than before. 45

The washerwomen of Paris, finding soap so dear that they could hardly purchase it, insisted that all the merchants who were endeavoring to save something of their little property by refusing to sell their goods for the wretched currency with which France was flooded, should be punished with death; the women of the markets and the hangers-on of the Jacobin Club called loudly for a law "to equalize the value of paper money and silver coin." It was also demanded that a tax be laid especially on the rich, to the amount of four hundred million francs, to buy bread. Marat declared loudly that the people, by hanging shopkeepers and plundering stores, could easily remove the trouble. The result was that on the 28th of February, 1793, at eight o'clock in the evening, a mob of men and women in disguise began plundering the stores and shops of Paris. At first they demanded only bread; soon they insisted on coffee and rice and sugar; at last they seized everything on which they could lay their hands—cloth, clothing, groceries and luxuries of every kind. Two hundred such places were plundered. This was endured for six hours and finally order was restored only by a grant of seven million francs to buy off the mob. The new political economy was beginning to bear, its fruits luxuriantly. A gaudy growth of it appeared at the City Hall of Paris when, in response to the complaints of the plundered merchants, Roux declared, in the midst of great applause, that "shopkeepers were only giving back to the people what they had hitherto robbed them of."

The washerwomen of Paris, finding soap so expensive that they could barely buy it, demanded that all the merchants trying to hold on to their meager possessions by refusing to sell their goods for the worthless currency flooding France should be punished with death. The market women and the supporters of the Jacobin Club loudly called for a law "to equalize the value of paper money and silver coins." They also demanded a tax specifically on the wealthy, amounting to four hundred million francs, to buy bread. Marat proclaimed that the people, by hanging shopkeepers and looting stores, could easily solve the problem. As a result, on February 28, 1793, at eight o'clock in the evening, a mob of men and women disguised began raiding the stores and shops of Paris. At first, they only demanded bread; soon they insisted on coffee, rice, and sugar; eventually, they seized everything they could find—cloth, clothing, groceries, and luxuries of all kinds. Two hundred such places were looted. This went on for six hours, and order was finally restored only after a payout of seven million francs to disperse the mob. The new political economy was starting to show its results abundantly. A flashy display of it appeared at the City Hall of Paris when, in response to the complaints of the looted merchants, Roux stated, amid great applause, that "shopkeepers were just returning to the people what they had previously stolen from them."

The mob having thus been bought off by concessions and appeased by oratory, the government gained time to think, and now came a series of amazing expedients,—and yet all perfectly logical.

The mob, having been placated by concessions and smooth talking, bought the government some time to consider their options, which led to a series of surprising yet completely reasonable strategies.

Three of these have gained in French history an evil pre-eminence, and first of the three was the Forced Loan.

Three of these have gained a notorious place in French history, and the first of the three was the Forced Loan.

In view of the fact that the well-to-do citizens were thought to be lukewarm in their support of the politicians controlling the country, various demagogues in the National Convention, which had now succeeded the National, Constituent and Legislative Assemblies, found ample matter for denunciations long and loud. The result outside the Convention was increased activity of the guillotine; the results inside were new measures against all who had money, and on June 22, 1793, the Convention determined that there should be a Forced Loan, secured on the confiscated lands of the emigrants and levied upon all married men with incomes of ten thousand francs, and upon all unmarried men with incomes of six thousand francs. It was calculated that these would bring into the treasury a thousand millions of francs. But a difficulty was found. So many of the rich had lied or had concealed their wealth that only a fifth of the sum required could be raised, and therefore a law was soon passed which levied forced loans upon incomes as low as one thousand, francs,—or, say, two hundred dollars of American money. This tax was made progressive. On the smaller proprietors it was fixed at one-tenth and on the larger, that is, on all incomes above nine thousand francs, it was made one-half of the entire income. Little if any provision was made for the repayment of this loan but the certificates might be used for purchasing the confiscated real estate of the church and of the nobility. 46

Since wealthy citizens were seen as indifferent in their support of the politicians in charge, various demagogues in the National Convention, which had now replaced the National, Constituent, and Legislative Assemblies, found plenty of opportunities for loud and lengthy denunciations. The outcome outside the Convention was a rise in the use of the guillotine; internally, new measures were introduced against anyone with money. On June 22, 1793, the Convention decided to implement a Forced Loan, secured against the confiscated lands of emigrants and imposed on all married men with incomes of ten thousand francs and on all unmarried men with incomes of six thousand francs. It was estimated that this would raise a thousand million francs. However, a problem arose. Many wealthy individuals had lied or hidden their wealth, so only a fifth of the needed amount could be collected. Consequently, a law was quickly passed that imposed forced loans on incomes as low as one thousand francs—or about two hundred dollars in American currency. This tax was structured progressively. For smaller property owners, it was set at one-tenth, while for larger incomes, specifically those above nine thousand francs, it was set at half of the total income. Little to no arrangements were made for the repayment of this loan, but the certificates could be used to purchase confiscated real estate belonging to the church and the nobility. 46

But if this first expedient shows how naturally a "fiat" money system runs into despotism, the next is no less instructive in showing how easily it becomes repudiation and dishonor.

But if this first solution demonstrates how easily a "fiat" money system can lead to tyranny, the next example is equally informative in showing how quickly it can result in rejection and disgrace.

As we have seen, the first issue of the assignats,—made by the National Assembly, bore a portrait of the king; but on the various issues after the establishment of a republic this emblem had been discarded. This change led to a difference in value between the earlier and the later paper money. The wild follies of fanatics and demagogues had led to an increasing belief that the existing state of things could not last; that the Bourbons must ere long return; that in such case, while a new monarch would repudiate all the vast mass of the later paper issued by the Republic, he would recognize that first issue bearing the face and therefore the guarantee of the king. So it was that this first issue came to bear a higher value than those of later date. To meet this condition of things it was now proposed to repudiate an that earlier issue. In vain did sundry more thoughtful members of the Convention plead that this paper money, amounting to five hundred and fifty-eight millions of francs, bore the solemn guarantee of the nation, as well as of the king; the current was irresistible. All that Cambon, the great leader of finance at that time, could secure was a clause claiming to protect the poor, to the effect that this demonetization should not extend to notes below a hundred francs in value; and it was also agreed that any of the notes, large or small, might be received in payment of taxes and for the confiscated property of the clergy and nobility. To all the arguments advanced against this breach of the national faith Danton, then at the height of his power, simply declared that only aristocrats could favor notes bearing the royal portrait, and gave forth his famous utterance: "Imitate Nature, which watches over the preservation of the race but has no regard for individuals." The decree was passed on the 31st of July, 1793, yet its futility was apparent in less than two months, when the Convention decreed that there should be issued two thousand millions of francs more in assignats between the values of ten sous and four hundred francs, and when, before the end of the year, five hundred millions more were authorized. 47

As we've seen, the first issue of the assignats, created by the National Assembly, featured a portrait of the king. However, in the subsequent issues after the establishment of the republic, this symbol was removed. This change resulted in a disparity in value between the earlier and later paper money. The reckless actions of fanatics and demagogues fueled a growing belief that the current situation couldn't last; that the Bourbons would eventually return; and if that happened, a new monarch would likely reject all the later paper issued by the Republic but would acknowledge the first issue with the king's image and guarantee. As a result, the first issue held a higher value than the later ones. To address this situation, it was proposed to reject the earlier issue entirely. Despite appeals from some more thoughtful members of the Convention, who argued that this paper money, totaling five hundred and fifty-eight million francs, had the solemn guarantee of both the nation and the king, the momentum was too strong. All that Cambon, the prominent finance leader at that time, could manage was a clause aimed at protecting the poor, stating that this demonetization would not include notes valued below one hundred francs. It was also agreed that any notes, large or small, could be used for tax payments and for the confiscated property of the clergy and nobility. In response to all arguments against this breach of national trust, Danton, who was then at the peak of his power, simply asserted that only aristocrats would support notes featuring the royal portrait and famously stated: "Imitate Nature, which cares for the preservation of the species but has no concern for individuals." The decree was passed on July 31, 1793, but its ineffectiveness became clear in less than two months when the Convention decided to issue two billion more francs in assignats in amounts ranging from ten sous to four hundred francs, and by the end of the year, another five hundred million was authorized. 47

The third outgrowth of the vast issue of fiat money was the Maximum. As far back as November, 1792, the Terrorist associate of Robespierre, St. Just, in view of the steady rise in prices of the necessaries of life, had proposed a scheme by which these prices should be established by law, at a rate proportionate to the wages of the working classes. This plan lingered in men's minds, taking shape in various resolutions and decrees until the whole culminated on September 29, 1793, in the Law of the Maximum.

The third outcome of the widespread issue of fiat money was the Maximum. As early as November 1792, the radical ally of Robespierre, St. Just, proposed a plan to address the ongoing increase in the prices of essential goods by setting these prices through legislation, based on a rate that corresponded to the wages of the working class. This idea stayed in people's thoughts, evolving through different resolutions and decrees until it ultimately resulted in the Law of the Maximum on September 29, 1793.

While all this legislation was high-handed, it was not careless. Even statesmen of the greatest strength, having once been drawn into this flood, were borne on into excesses which, a little earlier, would have appalled them. Committees of experts were appointed to study the whole subject of prices, and at last there were adopted the great "four rules" which seemed to statesmen of that time a masterly solution of the whole difficulty. 48

While all this legislation was heavy-handed, it was not thoughtless. Even the strongest politicians, once caught up in this tide, were swept into extremes that would have shocked them just a short time earlier. Committees of experts were set up to examine the entire issue of prices, and eventually, the great "four rules" were adopted, which seemed to the politicians of that time like a brilliant solution to the entire problem. 48

First, the price of each article of necessity was to be fixed at one and one-third its price in 1790. Secondly, all transportation was to be added at a fixed rate per league. Thirdly, five per cent was to be added for the profit of the wholesaler. Fourthly, ten per cent was to be added for the profit of the retailer. Nothing could look more reasonable. Great was the jubilation. The report was presented and supported by Barrère,—"the tiger monkey,"—then in all the glory of his great orations: now best known from his portrait by Macaulay. Nothing could withstand Barrère's eloquence. He insisted that France had been suffering from a "Monarchical commerce which only sought wealth," while what she needed and what she was now to receive was a "Republican commerce—a commerce of moderate profits and virtuous." He exulted in the fact that "France alone enjoys such a commerce,—that it exists in no other nation." He poured contempt over political economy as "that science which quacks have corrupted, which pedants have obscured and which academicians have depreciated." France, he said, has something better, and he declared in conclusion, "The needs of the people will no longer be spied upon in order that the commercial classes may arbitrarily take advantage." 49

First, the price of each essential item was set at one and one-third times its price in 1790. Secondly, all transportation costs were to be added at a fixed rate per league. Thirdly, a five percent increase was included for the wholesaler's profit. Fourthly, a ten percent increase was included for the retailer's profit. It all seemed very reasonable. There was great celebration. The report was presented and backed by Barrère—“the tiger monkey”—who was then in the full glory of his powerful speeches: now best known from his portrait by Macaulay. Nothing could resist Barrère's persuasive speaking. He argued that France had been suffering from a "Monarchical commerce that only sought wealth," while what she truly needed and what she was now going to have was a "Republican commerce—one with moderate profits and virtuous." He took pride in the fact that "France alone enjoys such a commerce—none exists in any other nation." He ridiculed political economy as "that science which quacks have corrupted, which pedants have obscured, and which academicians have devalued." France, he claimed, has something better, and he concluded with, "The needs of the people will no longer be pried into so that the commercial classes can exploit them at will." 49

The first result of the Maximum was that every means was taken to evade the fixed price imposed, and the farmers brought in as little produce as they possibly could. This increased the scarcity, and the people of the large cities were put on an allowance. Tickets were issued authorizing the bearer to obtain at the official prices a certain amount of bread or sugar or soap or wood or coal to cover immediate necessities. 50

The first result of the Maximum was that everyone tried to avoid the set prices, and the farmers delivered as little produce as they could. This led to more scarcity, causing people in the big cities to be placed on rations. Tickets were given to allow the holder to purchase a certain amount of bread, sugar, soap, wood, or coal at official prices to meet immediate needs. 50

But it was found that the Maximum, with its divinely revealed four rules, could not be made to work well—even by the shrewdest devices. In the greater part of France it could not be enforced. As to merchandise of foreign origin or merchandise into which any foreign product entered, the war had raised it far above the price allowed under the first rule, namely, the price of 1790, with an addition of one-third. Shopkeepers therefore could not sell such goods without ruin. The result was that very many went out of business and the remainder forced buyers to pay enormous charges under the very natural excuse that the seller risked his life in trading at all. That this excuse was valid is easily seen by the daily lists of those condemned to the guillotine, in which not infrequently figure the names of men charged with violating the Maximum laws. Manufactures were very generally crippled and frequently destroyed, and agriculture was fearfully depressed. To detect goods concealed by farmers and shopkeepers, a spy system was established with a reward to the informer of one-third of the value of the goods discovered. To spread terror, the Criminal Tribunal at Strassburg was ordered to destroy the dwelling of any one found guilty of selling goods above the price set by law. The farmer often found that he could not raise his products at anything like the price required by the new law, and when he tried to hold back his crops or cattle, alleging that he could not afford to sell them at the prices fixed by law, they were frequently taken from him by force and he was fortunate if paid even in the depreciated fiat money—fortunate, indeed, if he finally escaped with his life. 51

But it turned out that the Maximum, with its four rules revealed by divine guidance, just couldn't work properly—even with the smartest strategies. In most of France, it couldn't be enforced. For foreign goods or goods that contained any foreign products, the war had driven prices well above what was allowed under the first rule, which was based on 1790 prices plus a third. So, shopkeepers couldn’t sell these goods without going bankrupt. As a result, many went out of business, while the ones that survived forced customers to pay exorbitant prices, using the excuse that they were risking their lives by trading at all. This excuse was clearly valid, given the daily lists of people condemned to the guillotine, which often included those charged with breaking the Maximum laws. Manufacturing was generally crippled and often destroyed, and agriculture suffered greatly. To uncover goods hidden by farmers and shopkeepers, a spy system was set up, offering informers one-third of the value of any goods discovered. To instill fear, the Criminal Tribunal in Strassburg was ordered to demolish the homes of anyone found guilty of selling goods above the legally set prices. Farmers frequently found they couldn’t sell their products for anything close to the prices mandated by the new law, and when they tried to withhold their crops or livestock, saying they couldn't afford to sell at the legal prices, they were often forcibly taken from them. They were fortunate if they were even paid in the devalued currency—lucky, indeed, if they managed to escape with their lives. 51

Involved in all these perplexities, the Convention tried to cut the Gordian knot. It decreed that any person selling gold or silver coin, or making any difference in any transaction between paper and specie, should be imprisoned in irons for six years:—that any one who refused to accept a payment in assignats, or accepted assignats at a discount, should pay a fine of three thousand francs; and that any one committing this crime a second time should pay a fine of six thousand francs and suffer imprisonment twenty years in irons. Later, on the 8th of September, 1793, the penalty for such offences was made death, with confiscation of the criminal's property, and so reward was offered to any person informing the authorities regarding any such criminal transaction. To reach the climax of ferocity, the Convention decreed, in May, 1794, that the death penalty should be inflicted on any person convicted of "having asked, before a bargain was concluded, in what money payment was to be made." Nor was this all. The great finance minister, Cambon, soon saw that the worst enemies of his policy were gold and silver. Therefore it was that, under his lead, the Convention closed the Exchange and finally, on November 13, 1793, under terrifying penalties, suppressed all commerce in the precious metals. About a year later came the abolition of the Maximum itself. 52

Caught up in all these complications, the Convention tried to untangle the situation. It ruled that anyone selling gold or silver coins, or making any distinctions between paper money and real currency, should be imprisoned in chains for six years. Anyone who refused to accept a payment in assignats, or accepted assignats at a discount, would be fined three thousand francs; and anyone committing this offense a second time would face a fine of six thousand francs and twenty years of imprisonment in chains. Later, on September 8, 1793, the punishment for such offenses was raised to death, along with the confiscation of the criminal's property, and a reward was offered to anyone who informed the authorities about such illegal transactions. To reach the peak of cruelty, in May 1794, the Convention declared that the death penalty should be imposed on anyone found guilty of "asking, before a deal was made, what kind of currency the payment would be." And that wasn’t all. The finance minister, Cambon, quickly realized that the biggest threats to his policy were gold and silver. So, under his guidance, the Convention shut down the Exchange and finally, on November 13, 1793, imposed severe penalties to ban all trade in precious metals. About a year later, the Maximum itself was abolished. 52

It is easily seen that these Maximum laws were perfectly logical. Whenever any nation intrusts to its legislators the issue of a currency not based on the idea of redemption in standard coin recognized in the commerce of civilized nations, it intrusts to them the power to raise or depress the value of every article in the possession of every citizen. Louis XIV had claimed that all property in Prance was his own, and that what private persons held was as much his as if it were in his coffers. But even this assumption is exceeded by the confiscating power exercised in a country, where, instead of leaving values to be measured by a standard common to the whole world, they are left to be depressed or raised at the whim, caprice or interest of a body of legislators. When this power is given, the power of prices is inevitably included in it. 53

It is clear that these Maximum laws were entirely logical. Whenever a nation gives its lawmakers the authority to issue currency not based on the concept of redemption in standard coins recognized in the trade of civilized nations, it essentially hands them the ability to increase or decrease the value of every item owned by every citizen. Louis XIV claimed that all property in France belonged to him, and that whatever private individuals had was just as much his as if it were in his own vaults. However, this assumption is dwarfed by the confiscatory power exercised in a country where, instead of allowing values to be measured by a globally accepted standard, they can be manipulated by the whims, fancies, or interests of a group of lawmakers. When this power is granted, the authority over prices is inevitably included as well. 53

It may be said that these measures were made necessary by the war then going on. Nothing could be more baseless than such an objection. In this war the French soon became generally successful. It was quickly pushed mainly upon foreign soil. Numerous contributions were levied upon the subjugated countries to support the French armies. The war was one of those in which the loss, falling apparently on future generations, first stimulates, in a sad way, trade and production. The main cause of these evils was tampering with the circulating medium of an entire nation; keeping all values in fluctuation; discouraging enterprise; paralyzing energy; undermining sobriety; obliterating thrift; promoting extravagance and exciting riot by the issue of an irredeemable currency. The true business way of meeting the enormous demands on France during the first years of the Revolution had been stated by a true statesman and sound financier, Du Pont de Nemours, at the very beginning. He had shown that using the same paper as a circulating medium and as a means for selling the national real estate was like using the same implement for an oyster knife and a razor. 54

It could be argued that these actions were necessary due to the ongoing war. However, that claim is completely unfounded. The French quickly enjoyed significant success in this war, which was soon fought mostly on foreign land. Many contributions were imposed on the conquered nations to support the French armies. This conflict was one where the burden seemed to fall on future generations, which, sadly, ended up boosting trade and production. The primary cause of these issues was meddling with the money supply of an entire nation; causing constant fluctuations in value; discouraging initiative; stifling energy; undermining sobriety; wiping out savings; encouraging extravagance and inciting chaos through the issuance of an irredeemable currency. A genuine statesman and sound financier, Du Pont de Nemours, pointed out early on the best way to handle France’s massive needs during the first years of the Revolution. He explained that using the same paper as both a circulating medium and a way to sell national real estate was like trying to use the same tool for an oyster knife and a razor. 54

It has been argued that the assignats sank in value because they were not well secured,—that securing them on government real estate was as futile as if the United States had, in the financial troubles of its early days, secured notes on its real estate. This objection is utterly fallacious. The government lands of our country were remote from the centers of capital and difficult to examine; the French national real estate was near these centers—even in them—and easy to examine. Our national real estate was unimproved and unproductive; theirs was improved and productive—its average productiveness in market in ordinary times being from four to five per cent. 55

It has been said that the assignats lost value because they weren't securely backed—that backing them with government real estate was as pointless as if the United States had used its real estate to secure notes during its early financial troubles. This argument is completely flawed. The government lands in our country were far from the financial hubs and hard to assess; the French national real estate was close to these centers—even right in them—and easy to evaluate. Our national real estate was undeveloped and unproductive; theirs was developed and productive—its average profitability in the market during normal times being between four to five percent. 55

It has also been objected that the attempt to secure the assignats on government real estate failed because of the general want of confidence in the title derived by the purchasers from the new government. Every thorough student of that period must know that this is a misleading statement. Everything shows that the vast majority of the French people had a fanatical confidence in the stability of the new government during the greater part of the Revolution. There were disbelievers in the security of the assignats just as there were disbelievers in the paper money of the United States throughout our Civil War; but they were usually a small minority. Even granting that there was a doubt as to investment in French lands, the French people certainly had as much confidence in the secure possession of government lands as any people can ever have in large issues of government bonds: indeed, it is certain that they had far more confidence in their lands as a security than modern nations can usually have in large issues of bonds obtained by payments of irredeemable paper. One simple fact, as stated by John Stuart Mill, which made assignats difficult to convert into real estate was that the vast majority of people could not afford to make investments outside their business; and this fact is no less fatal to any attempt to contract large issues of irredeemable paper—save, perhaps, a bold, statesmanlike attempt, which seizes the best time and presses every advantage, eschewing all juggling devices and sacrificing everything to maintain a sound currency based on standards common to the entire financial world.

It has also been argued that the attempt to secure the assignats on government real estate failed due to a general lack of confidence in the title that buyers received from the new government. Anyone who thoroughly studies that period knows this claim is misleading. Evidence shows that the vast majority of the French population had a strong belief in the stability of the new government for most of the Revolution. There were skeptics about the security of the assignats, just as there were skeptics about the paper money in the United States during our Civil War, but they were usually a small minority. Even if there was some doubt about investing in French lands, the French people certainly had as much confidence in the secure possession of government lands as any people can typically have in large government bond issues; in fact, they likely had far more confidence in their lands as security than modern nations typically have in large bond issues obtained through irredeemable paper. One simple fact, as John Stuart Mill pointed out, made assignats difficult to convert into real estate: the vast majority of people could not afford to make investments outside their businesses. This fact is equally damaging to any attempt to issue large amounts of irredeemable paper—unless, perhaps, a bold and visionary initiative is taken that seizes the best moment and leverages every advantage, avoiding any tricks and sacrificing everything to maintain a sound currency based on standards accepted by the entire financial world.

And now was seen, taking possession of the nation, that idea which developed so easily out of the fiat money system;—the idea that the ordinary needs of government may be legitimately met wholly by the means of paper currency;—that taxes may be dispensed with. As a result, it was found that the assignat printing press was the one resource left to the government, and the increase in the volume of paper money became every day more appalling.

And now, the idea that emerged from the fiat money system was taking over the nation—that the government could completely meet its ordinary needs with just paper currency, and that taxes could be eliminated. Consequently, it became clear that the printing press for assignats was the last resource the government had, and the rising amount of paper money became increasingly alarming every day.

It will doubtless surprise many to learn that, in spite of these evident results of too much currency, the old cry of a "scarcity of circulating medium" was not stilled; it appeared not long after each issue, no matter how large.

It will probably surprise many to know that, despite the clear effects of too much money, the old complaint about a "lack of circulating currency" didn't go away; it surfaced soon after each issuance, regardless of how large it was.

But every thoughtful student of financial history knows that this cry always comes after such issues—nay, that it must come,—because in obedience to a natural law, the former scarcity, or rather insufficiency of currency recurs just as soon as prices become adjusted to the new volume, and there comes some little revival of business with the usual increase of credit. 56

But every thoughtful student of financial history knows that this complaint always arises after such events—actually, it has to arise—because according to a natural law, the previous lack, or more accurately, shortage of currency reappears as soon as prices adjust to the new supply, and there is a slight recovery in business along with the usual increase in credit. 56

In August, 1793, appeared a new report by Cambon. No one can read it without being struck by its mingled ability and folly. His final plan of dealing with the public debt has outlasted all revolutions since, but his disposition of the inflated currency came to a wretched failure. Against Du Pont, who showed conclusively that the wild increase of paper money was leading straight to, ruin, Cambon carried the majority in the great assemblies and clubs by sheer audacity—the audacity of desperation. Zeal in supporting the assignats became his religion. The National Convention which succeeded the Legislative Assembly, issued in 1793 over three thousand millions of assignats, and, of these, over twelve hundred millions were poured into the circulation. And yet Cambon steadily insisted that the security for the assignat currency was perfect. The climax of his zeal was reached when he counted as assets in the national treasury the indemnities which, he declared, France was sure to receive after future victories over the allied nations with which she was then waging a desperate war. As patriotism, it was sublime; as finance it was deadly. 57

In August 1793, a new report by Cambon was released. No one can read it without being struck by its mix of talent and foolishness. His final plan for managing the public debt has survived all subsequent revolutions, but his handling of the inflated currency ended in complete failure. Against Du Pont, who clearly demonstrated that the reckless increase of paper money was leading to disaster, Cambon won support in the major assemblies and clubs through sheer boldness—the boldness of desperation. His fervor for supporting the assignats became almost like a religion. The National Convention, which followed the Legislative Assembly, issued over three thousand million assignats in 1793, with more than twelve hundred million flowing into circulation. Yet Cambon consistently insisted that the security for the assignat currency was flawless. The peak of his zeal was when he counted as assets in the national treasury the indemnities he claimed France was certain to receive after future victories over the allied nations in a desperate war. As an act of patriotism, it was noble; as a financial strategy, it was disastrous. 57

Everything was tried. Very elaborately he devised a funding scheme which, taken in connection with his system of issues, was in effect what in these days would be called an "interconvertibility scheme" By various degrees of persuasion or force,—the guillotine looming up in the background,—holders of assignats were urged to convert them into evidence of national debt, bearing interest at five per cent, with the understanding that if more paper were afterward needed more would be issued. All in vain. The official tables of depreciation show that the assignats continued to fall. A forced loan, calling in a billion of these, checked this fall, but only for a moment. The "interconvertibility scheme" between currency and bonds failed as dismally as the "interconvertibility scheme" between currency and land had failed. 58

Everything was tried. He came up with a complicated funding plan that, in today's terms, would be called an "interconvertibility scheme". Through various tactics of persuasion or intimidation—the guillotine waiting in the wings—holders of assignats were pressured to swap them for government bonds, which paid five percent interest, with the promise that if more paper money was needed in the future, it would be issued. It was all pointless. official depreciation tables show that the assignats kept losing value. A forced loan, pulling in a billion of these, temporarily halted the decline, but only for a moment. The "interconvertibility scheme" between currency and bonds failed just as miserably as the "interconvertibility scheme" between currency and land had failed. 58

A more effective expedient was a law confiscating the property of all Frenchmen who left France after July 14, 1789, and who had not returned. This gave new land to be mortgaged for the security of paper money.

A more effective solution was a law seizing the property of all French citizens who left France after July 14, 1789, and had not come back. This provided new land that could be mortgaged to back up paper money.

All this vast chapter in financial folly is sometimes referred to as if it resulted from the direct action of men utterly unskilled in finance. This is a grave error. That wild schemers and dreamers took a leading part in setting the fiat money system going is true; that speculation and interested financiers made it worse is also true: but the men who had charge of French finance during the Reign of Terror and who made these experiments, which seem to us so monstrous, in order to rescue themselves and their country from the flood which was sweeping everything to financial ruin were universally recognized as among the most skillful and honest financiers in Europe. Cambon, especially, ranked then and ranks now as among the most expert in any period. The disastrous results of all his courage and ability in the attempt to stand against the deluge of paper money show how powerless are the most skillful masters of finance to stem the tide of fiat money calamity when once it is fairly under headway; and how useless are all enactments which they can devise against the underlying laws of nature.

All this extensive chapter in financial mistakes is sometimes talked about as if it happened because of people who were completely unskilled in finance. This is a serious mistake. It’s true that reckless dreamers and schemers played a big role in starting the fiat money system; it’s also true that speculation and self-interested financiers made it worse. However, the individuals in charge of French finance during the Reign of Terror, who conducted these experiments that now seem so outrageous to us, were widely recognized as some of the most skilled and honest financiers in Europe. Cambon, in particular, was considered one of the most expert in any time period. The disastrous outcomes of all his courage and skill in trying to fight against the flood of paper money highlight how helpless even the most talented finance experts can be in stopping the surge of fiat money disaster once it gains momentum; and how ineffective all their laws are against the fundamental laws of nature.

Month after month, year after year new issues went on. Meanwhile everything possible was done to keep up the value of paper. The city authorities of Metz took a solemn oath that the assignats should bear the same price whether in paper or specie,—and whether in buying or selling, and various other official bodies throughout the nation followed this example. In obedience to those who believed with the market women of Paris, as stated in their famous petition, that "laws should be passed making paper money as good as gold," Couthon, in August, 1793, had proposed and carried a law punishing any person who should sell assignats at less than their nominal value with imprisonment for twenty years in chains, and later carried a law making investments in foreign countries by Frenchmen punishable with death. 59

Month after month, year after year, new issues kept coming up. Meanwhile, everything possible was done to maintain the value of paper money. The city officials of Metz took a serious oath that the assignats would have the same value whether in paper or coin—both when buying and selling. Various other official bodies across the country followed this example. In response to those who, like the market women of Paris in their famous petition, believed that "laws should be passed to make paper money as good as gold," Couthon, in August 1793, proposed and passed a law that punished anyone who sold assignats for less than their face value with twenty years of hard labor in chains. He later pushed through a law that made it punishable by death for French citizens to invest in foreign countries. 59

But to the surprise of the great majority of the French people, the value of the assignats was found, after the momentary spasm of fear had passed, not to have been permanently increased by these measures: on the contrary, this "fiat" paper persisted in obeying the natural laws of finance and, as new issues increased, their value decreased. Nor did the most lavish aid of nature avail. The paper money of the nation seemed to possess a magic power to transmute prosperity into adversity and plenty into famine. The year 1794 was exceptionally fruitful: and yet with the autumn came scarcity of provisions and with the winter came distress. The reason is perfectly simple. The sequences in that whole history are absolutely logical. First, the Assembly had inflated the currency and raised prices enormously. Next, it had been forced to establish an arbitrary maximum price for produce. But this price, large as it seemed, soon fell below the real value of produce; many of the farmers, therefore, raised less produce or refrained from bringing what they had to market. 60 But, as is usual in such cases, the trouble was ascribed to everything rather than the real cause, and the most severe measures were established in all parts of the country to force farmers to bring produce to market, millers to grind and shopkeepers to sell it. 61 The issues of paper money continued. Toward the end of 1794 seven thousand millions in assignats were in circulation. 62 By the end of May, 1795, the circulation was increased to ten thousand millions, at the end of July, to fourteen thousand millions; and the value of one hundred francs in paper fell steadily, first to four francs in gold, then to three, then to two and one-half. 63 But, curiously enough, while this depreciation was rapidly going on, as at various other periods when depreciation was rapid, there came an apparent revival of business. The hopes of many were revived by the fact that in spite of the decline of paper there was an exceedingly brisk trade in all kinds of permanent property. Whatever articles of permanent value certain needy people were willing to sell certain cunning people were willing to buy and to pay good prices for in assignats. At this, hope revived for a time in certain quarters. But ere long it was discovered that this was one of the most distressing results of a natural law which is sure to come into play under such circumstances. It was simply a feverish activity caused by the intense desire of a large number of the shrewder class to convert their paper money into anything and everything which they could hold and hoard until the collapse which they foresaw should take place. This very activity in business simply indicated the disease. It was simply legal robbery of the more enthusiastic and trusting by the more cold-hearted and keen. It was, the "unloading" of the assignats upon the mass of the people. 64

But to the surprise of most French people, the value of the assignats was found, after the initial panic had passed, not to have been permanently boosted by these actions: on the contrary, this "fiat" money continued to follow the natural laws of finance and, as new issues increased, its value decreased. Even the most generous support from nature couldn’t help. The country's paper money seemed to have a strange ability to turn prosperity into hardship and abundance into scarcity. The year 1794 was particularly fruitful, yet with autumn came a shortage of food and with winter came hardship. The reason is quite simple. The sequence of events in that whole situation is completely logical. First, the Assembly inflated the currency and raised prices significantly. Then, it was forced to set an arbitrary maximum price for goods. But this price, as high as it seemed, soon fell below the actual value of the goods; many farmers, therefore, produced less or chose not to bring what they had to market. 60 But, as is usually the case in such situations, the blame was placed on everything except the real cause, and harsh measures were put in place across the country to force farmers to sell their goods, millers to grind, and shopkeepers to sell. 61 The issuance of paper money continued. By the end of 1794, seven billion assignats were in circulation. 62 By the end of May 1795, circulation increased to ten billion, and by the end of July, to fourteen billion; the value of one hundred francs in paper steadily dropped, first to four francs in gold, then to three, and then to two and a half. 63 But, interestingly, while this depreciation was happening quickly, as it did during other periods of rapid depreciation, there seemed to be a resurgence of business. The hopes of many were lifted by the fact that despite the decline of paper money, there was a very active trade in all kinds of valuable property. Whatever permanent valuables certain desperate people were willing to sell, certain crafty people were eager to buy, paying good prices in assignats. This briefly brought hope back to some. But soon it became clear that this was one of the most troubling outcomes of a natural law that always comes into play under such conditions. It was merely a frantic rush driven by the intense desire of many of the shrewder individuals to turn their paper money into anything they could grab and stockpile until the anticipated collapse occurred. This surge in business activity was simply a sign of the problem. It was essentially a legal theft of the more naïve and trusting by the more calculating and shrewd. It was the "unloading" of the assignats onto the general populace. 64

Interesting is it to note in the midst of all this the steady action of another simple law in finance. Prisons, guillotines, enactments inflicting twenty years' imprisonment in chains upon persons twice convicted of buying or selling paper money at less than its nominal value, and death upon investors in foreign securities, were powerless. The National Convention, fighting a world in arms and with an armed revolt on its own soil, showed titanic power, but in its struggle to circumvent one simple law of nature its weakness was pitiable. The louis d'or stood in the market as a monitor, noting each day, with unerring fidelity, the decline in value of the assignat; a monitor not to be bribed, not to be scared. As well might the National Convention try to bribe or scare away the polarity of the mariner's compass. On August 1, 1795, this gold louis of 25 francs was worth in paper, 920 francs; on September 1st, 1,200 francs; on November 1st, 2,600 francs; on December 1st, 3,050 francs. In February, 1796, it was worth 7,200 francs or one franc in gold was worth 288 francs in paper. Prices of all commodities went up nearly in proportion. 65 The writings of this period give curious details. Thibaudeau, in his Memoirs, speaks of sugar as 500 francs a pound, soap, 230 francs, candles, 140 francs. Mercier, in his lifelike pictures of the French metropolis at that period, mentions 600 francs as carriage hire for a single drive, and 6,000 for an entire day. Examples from other sources are such as the following:—a measure of flour advanced from two francs in 1790, to 225 francs in 1795; a pair of shoes, from five francs to 200; a hat, from 14 francs to 500; butter, to, 560 francs a pound; a turkey, to 900 francs. 66 Everything was enormously inflated in price except the wages of labor. As manufacturers had closed, wages had fallen, until all that kept them up seemed to be the fact that so many laborers were drafted off into the army. From this state of things came grievous wrong and gross fraud. Men who had foreseen these results and had gone into debt were of course jubilant. He who in 1790 had borrowed 10,000 francs could pay his debts in 1796 for about 35 francs. Laws were made to meet these abuses. As far back as 1794 a plan was devised for publishing official "tables of depreciation" to be used in making equitable settlements of debts, but all such machinery proved futile. On the 18th of May, 1796, a young man complained to the National Convention that his elder brother, who had been acting as administrator of his deceased father's estate, had paid the heirs in assignats, and that he had received scarcely one three-hundredth part of the real value of his share. 67 To meet cases like this, a law was passed establishing a "scale of proportion." Taking as a standard the value of the assignat when there were two billions in circulation, this law declared that, in payment of debts, one-quarter should be added to the amount originally borrowed for every five hundred millions added to the circulation. In obedience to this law a man who borrowed two thousand francs when there were two billions in circulation would have to pay his creditors twenty-five hundred francs when half a billion more were added to the currency, and over thirty-five thousand francs before the emissions of paper reached their final amount. This brought new evils, worse, if possible, than the old. 68

It's interesting to observe amidst all this the consistent influence of another simple financial law. Prisons, executions, and laws imposing twenty years' hard labor on people who bought or sold paper money for less than its face value, and death sentences for investors in foreign securities, were ineffective. The National Convention, battling a world at war and facing an armed rebellion on its own territory, displayed remarkable strength, but in its attempt to bypass one basic law of nature, it revealed a pitiful vulnerability. The louis d'or acted as a constant reminder, faithfully tracking the daily decline in the value of the assignat. It couldn’t be bribed or intimidated. It was just as futile for the National Convention to try to bribe or intimidate the compass's magnetic pole. On August 1, 1795, this gold louis worth 25 francs was valued at 920 francs in paper; by September 1st, it was 1,200 francs; by November 1st, it reached 2,600 francs; and by December 1st, 3,050 francs. By February 1796, it was worth 7,200 francs, meaning one gold franc equated to 288 francs in paper. The prices of all goods rose nearly in proportion. 65 Writings from this era offer fascinating details. Thibaudeau, in his Memoirs, mentions that sugar cost 500 francs per pound, soap 230 francs, and candles 140 francs. Mercier, in his vivid portrayals of Paris at the time, notes that hiring a carriage was 600 francs for a single ride and 6,000 for an entire day. Other sources provide examples like these: the price of flour surged from two francs in 1790 to 225 francs in 1795; shoes increased from five francs to 200; hats from 14 francs to 500; butter reached 560 francs per pound; and a turkey went up to 900 francs. 66 Everything was massively inflated in price except for labor wages. As factories shut down, wages plummeted, sustained mainly by the fact that many workers were conscripted into the army. This situation led to significant injustices and blatant fraud. Those who had anticipated these outcomes and incurred debts were, of course, ecstatic. Someone who borrowed 10,000 francs in 1790 could settle their debts in 1796 for roughly 35 francs. Laws were enacted to address these abuses. As early as 1794, a plan was proposed to publish official "depreciation tables" to facilitate fair debt settlements, but all such efforts turned out to be pointless. On May 18, 1796, a young man voiced to the National Convention that his older brother, responsible for managing their deceased father's estate, had compensated the heirs with assignats, resulting in him receiving barely one three-hundredth of the true value of his portion. 67 To address situations like this, a law was established to create a "scale of proportion." Using the value of the assignat when two billion were in circulation as a benchmark, this law declared that for each additional five hundred million in circulation, one-quarter should be added to the original amount borrowed. Therefore, if a man borrowed two thousand francs when two billion were in circulation, he would owe his creditors twenty-five hundred francs when another half billion was added to the currency, and over thirty-five thousand francs as the total amount of paper emissions reached its peak. This gave rise to new problems, potentially worse than the previous ones. 68

The question will naturally be asked, On whom did this vast depreciation mainly fall at last? When this currency had sunk to about one three-hundredth part of its nominal value and, after that, to nothing, in whose hands was the bulk of it? The answer is simple. I shall give it in the exact words of that thoughtful historian from whom I have already quoted: "Before the end of the year 1795 the paper money was almost exclusively in the hands of the working classes, employees and men of small means, whose property was not large enough to invest in stores of goods or national lands. 69 Financiers and men of large means were shrewd enough to put as much of their property as possible into objects of permanent value. The working classes had no such foresight or skill or means. On them finally came the great crushing weight of the loss. After the first collapse came up the cries of the starving. Roads and bridges were neglected; many manufactures were given up in utter helplessness." To continue, in the words of the historian already cited: "None felt any confidence in the future in any respect; few dared to make a business investment for any length of time and it was accounted a folly to curtail the pleasures of the moment, to accumulate or save for so uncertain a future." 70

The question will naturally be asked, Who was most affected by this huge decline? When this currency dropped to about one three-hundredth of its face value and then to nothing, who had most of it? The answer is straightforward. I’ll provide it in the exact words of that insightful historian I've referenced before: "By the end of 1795, the paper money was almost exclusively in the hands of the working classes, employees, and people with limited resources, whose assets weren’t enough to invest in goods or land. 69 Wealthy financiers were smart enough to convert as much of their wealth as possible into assets of lasting value. The working classes lacked that foresight, skill, or resources. Ultimately, they bore the heavy burden of the loss. After the initial crash, cries from the starving were heard. Roads and bridges were neglected; many industries were abandoned in complete despair." Continuing with the words of the previously mentioned historian: "No one felt confident about the future in any way; few dared to make long-term business investments, and it was seen as foolish to cut back on immediate pleasures in order to save for such an uncertain future." 70

This system in finance was accompanied by a system in politics no less startling, and each system tended to aggravate the other. The wild radicals, having sent to the guillotine first all the Royalists and next all the leading Republicans they could entrap, the various factions began sending each other to the same destination:—Hébertists, Dantonists, with various other factions and groups, and, finally, the Robespierrists, followed each other in rapid succession. After these declaimers and phrase-mongers had thus disappeared there came to power, in October, 1795, a new government,—mainly a survival of the more scoundrelly,—the Directory. It found the country utterly impoverished and its only resource at first was to print more paper and to issue even while wet from the press. These new issues were made at last by the two great committees, with or without warrant of law, and in greater sums than ever. Complaints were made that the array of engravers and printers at the mint could not meet the demand for assignats—that they could produce only from sixty to seventy millions per day and that the government was spending daily from eighty to ninety millions. Four thousand millions of francs were issued during one month, a little later three thousand millions, a little later four thousand millions, until there had been put forth over thirty-five thousand millions. The purchasing power of this paper having now become almost nothing, it was decreed, on the 22nd of December, 1795, that the whole amount issued should be limited to forty thousand millions, including all that had previously been put forth and that when this had been done the copper plates should be broken. Even in spite of this, additional issues were made amounting to about ten thousand millions. But on the 18th of February, 1796, at nine o'clock in the morning, in the presence of a great crowd, the machinery, plates and paper for printing assignats were brought to the Place Vendome and there, on the spot where the Napoleon Column now stands, these were solemnly broken and burned.

This financial system was paired with a political system that was equally shocking, and both systems tended to make each other worse. The radical extremists, after sending all the Royalists to the guillotine, then targeted all the leading Republicans they could catch. Various factions began sending each other to the same fate: Hébertists, Dantonists, among other groups, and finally the Robespierrists, all followed one after the other in quick succession. After these speakers and wordsmiths had vanished, a new government emerged in October 1795—largely a remnant of the more corrupt ones—called the Directory. It found the country completely broke, and its only immediate solution was to print more paper money, even while it was still wet from the press. These new issues were eventually produced by the two major committees, with or without legal authority, and in larger amounts than ever before. There were complaints that the engravers and printers at the mint couldn't keep up with the demand for assignats; they could only produce about sixty to seventy million per day, while the government was spending between eighty to ninety million daily. Four thousand million francs were issued in one month, then three thousand million, followed by another four thousand million, until over thirty-five thousand million had been circulated. The purchasing power of this paper had now dropped to nearly nothing, so it was decided, on December 22, 1795, to limit the total issued amount to forty thousand million, including everything previously released, and to destroy the copper plates used for printing. Despite this, more issues totaling around ten thousand million were still made. Then, on February 18, 1796, at nine in the morning, in front of a large crowd, the machinery, plates, and paper for printing assignats were brought to Place Vendôme, where, at the location where the Napoleon Column now stands, they were ceremonially broken and burned.

Shortly afterward a report by Camus was made to the Assembly that the entire amount of paper money issued in less than six years by the Revolutionary Government of France had been over forty-five thousand millions of francs—that over six thousand millions had been annulled and burned and that at the final catastrophe there were in circulation close upon forty thousand millions. It will be readily seen that it was fully time to put an end to the system, for the gold "louis" of twenty-five francs in specie had, in February, 1796, as we have seen, become worth 7,200 francs, and, at the latest quotation of all, no less than 15,000 francs in paper money—that is, one franc in gold was nominally worth 600 francs in paper.

Shortly after, Camus reported to the Assembly that the total amount of paper money issued in less than six years by the Revolutionary Government of France had exceeded forty-five billion francs. He noted that over six billion had been canceled and destroyed, and at the final disaster, nearly forty billion were still in circulation. It was clear that it was time to end the system, as the gold "louis" of twenty-five francs in real currency had, in February 1796, as we have seen, become worth 7,200 francs, and at the most recent quote, no less than 15,000 francs in paper money—that is, one franc in gold was nominally worth 600 francs in paper.

Such were the results of allowing dreamers, schemers, phrase-mongers, declaimers and strong men subservient to these to control a government. 71

Such were the consequences of letting dreamers, schemers, wordsmiths, speakers, and the strong who serve them run a government. 71





III.

The first new expedient of the Directory was to secure a forced loan of six hundred million francs from the wealthier classes; but this was found fruitless. Ominous it was when persons compelled to take this loan found for an assignat of one hundred francs only one franc was allowed. Next a National Bank was proposed; but capitalists were loath to embark in banking while the howls of the mob against all who had anything especially to do with money resounded in every city. At last the Directory bethought themselves of another expedient. This was by no means new. It had been fully tried on our continent twice before that time: and once, since—first, in our colonial period; next, during our Confederation; lastly, by the "Southern Confederacy" and here, as elsewhere, always in vain. But experience yielded to theory—plain business sense to financial metaphysics. It was determined to issue a new paper which should be "fully secured" and "as good as gold."

The first new tactic of the Directory was to secure a forced loan of six hundred million francs from the wealthier classes, but this turned out to be ineffective. It was concerning when those forced to take this loan found that for an assignat of one hundred francs, they were only given one franc. Next, a National Bank was suggested; however, investors were hesitant to get into banking while the mob's cries against anyone associated with money echoed in every city. Eventually, the Directory came up with another plan. This was not new. It had been tried on our continent twice before: first, during our colonial period; next, during our Confederation; and finally, by the "Southern Confederacy," always unsuccessfully. But practical experience gave way to theory—common sense to financial speculation. They decided to issue new paper that would be "fully secured" and "as good as gold."

Pursuant to this decision it was decreed that a new paper money "fully secured and as good as gold" be issued under the name of "mandats." In order that these new notes should be "fully secured," choice public real estate was set apart to an amount fully equal to the nominal value of the issue, and any one offering any amount of the mandats could at once take possession of government lands; the price of the lands to be determined by two experts, one named by the government and one by the buyer, and without the formalities and delays previously established in regard to the purchase of lands with assignats.

According to this decision, it was ordered that a new form of paper money, "completely secured and as reliable as gold," be issued under the name of "mandats." To ensure that these new notes were "completely secured," selected public real estate was set aside to match the total value of the issue. Anyone presenting any amount of the mandats could immediately take possession of government land; the price of the land would be determined by two experts—one appointed by the government and one by the buyer—without the formalities and delays that used to apply to purchasing land with assignats.

Perhaps the most whimsical thing in the whole situation was the fact that the government, pressed as it was by demands of all sorts, continued to issue the old assignats at the same time that it was discrediting them by issuing the new mandats. And yet in order to make the mandats "as good as gold" it was planned by forced loans and other means to reduce the quantity of assignats in circulation, so that the value of each assignat should be raised to one-thirtieth of the value of gold, then to make mandats legal tender and to substitute them for assignats at the rate of one for thirty. Never were great expectations more cruelly disappointed. Even before the mandats could be issued from the press they fell to thirty-five per cent of their nominal value; from this they speedily fell to fifteen, and soon after to five per cent, and finally, in August, 1796, six months from their first issue, to three per cent. This plan failed—just as it failed in New England in 1737; just as it failed under our own Confederation in 1781; just as it failed under the Southern Confederacy during our Civil War. 72

Maybe the most bizarre part of the whole situation was that the government, overwhelmed by all sorts of demands, kept issuing the old assignats while simultaneously undermining them by introducing the new mandats. To make the mandats "as good as gold," they intended to use forced loans and other tactics to decrease the number of assignats in circulation so that each assignat would be valued at one-thirtieth of the value of gold. The plan was then to make mandats legal tender and replace them for assignats at a rate of one for thirty. Never have high hopes been so brutally shattered. Even before the mandats could be printed, their value plummeted to thirty-five percent of their nominal worth; it quickly dropped to fifteen, then to five percent, and finally, in August 1796, just six months after their initial issue, to three percent. This plan failed—just as it did in New England in 1737; just as it did in our own Confederation in 1781; just as it did under the Southern Confederacy during our Civil War. 72

To sustain this new currency the government resorted to every method that ingenuity could devise. Pamphlets suited to people of every capacity were published explaining its advantages. Never was there more skillful puffing. A pamphlet signed "Marchant" and dedicated to "People of Good Faith" was widely circulated, in which Marchant took pains to show the great advantage of the mandats as compared with assignats,—how land could be more easily acquired with them; how their security was better than with assignats; how they could not, by any possibility, sink in values as the assignats had done. But even before the pamphlet was dry from the press the depreciation of the mandats had refuted his entire argument. 73

To support this new currency, the government used every clever tactic it could think of. Pamphlets tailored for people of all levels were published to explain its benefits. There had never been such skillful promotion. A pamphlet signed "Marchant" and addressed to "People of Good Faith" was widely distributed, where Marchant made a point to highlight the significant advantages of the mandats compared to assignats—how land could be acquired more easily with them, how their security was greater than that of assignats, and how they couldn’t possibly lose value like the assignats had. But even before the pamphlet finished printing, the drop in value of the mandats had disproven his entire argument. 73

The old plan of penal measures was again pressed. Monot led off by proposing penalties against those who shall speak publicly against the mandats; Talot thought the penalties ought to be made especially severe; and finally it was enacted that any persons "who by their discourse or writing shall decry the mandats shall be condemned to a fine of not less than one thousand francs or more than ten thousand; and in case of a repetition of the offence, to four years in irons." It was also decreed that those who refused to receive the mandats should be fined,—the first time, the exact sum which they refuse; the second time, ten times as much; and the third time, punished with two years in prison. But here, too, came in the action of those natural laws which are alike inexorable in all countries. This attempt proved futile in France just as it had proved futile less than twenty years before in America. No enactments could stop the downward tendency of this new paper "fully secured," "as good as gold"; the laws that finally govern finance are not made in conventions or congresses. 74

The old plan for punishments was brought up again. Monot started by suggesting penalties for anyone who publicly criticized the mandats; Talot argued that the penalties should be particularly harsh; and ultimately it was decided that anyone "who disparages the mandats through speech or writing will be fined no less than one thousand francs and no more than ten thousand; and if they repeat the offense, they will face four years in chains." It was also mandated that those who refused to accept the mandats would be fined—the first time, the exact amount they refuse; the second time, ten times that amount; and the third time, they would be punished with two years in prison. But here, too, the relentless natural laws that apply in all countries came into play. This effort was just as ineffective in France as it had been less than twenty years earlier in America. No laws could reverse the decline of this new paper "fully secured," "as good as gold"; the financial laws that ultimately prevail aren’t made in conventions or congresses. 74

From time to time various new financial juggles were tried, some of them ingenious, most of them drastic. It was decreed that all assignats above the value of one hundred francs should cease to circulate after the beginning of June, 1796. But this only served to destroy the last vestige of, confidence in government notes of any kind. Another expedient was seen in the decree that paper money should be made to accord with a natural and immutable standard of value and that one franc in paper should thenceforth be worth ten pounds of wheat. This also failed. On July 16th another decree seemed to show that the authorities despaired of regulating the existing currency and it was decreed that all paper, whether mandats or assignats, should be taken at its real value, and that bargains might be made in whatever currency people chose. The real value of the mandats speedily sank to about two per cent of their nominal value and the only effect of this legislation seemed to be that both assignats and mandats went still lower. Then from February 4 to February 14, 1797, came decrees and orders that the engraving apparatus for the mandats should be destroyed as that for the assignats had been, that neither assignats nor mandats should longer be a legal tender and that old debts to the state might be paid for a time with government paper at the rate of one per cent of their face value. 75 Then, less than three months later, it was decreed that the twenty-one billions of assignats still in circulation should be annulled. Finally, on September 30, 1797, as the culmination of these and various other experiments and expedients, came an order of the Directory that the national debts should be paid two-thirds in bonds which might be used in purchasing confiscated real estate, and the remaining "Consolidated Third," as it was called, was to be placed on the "Great Book" of the national debt to be paid thenceforth as the government should think best.

From time to time, various new financial tricks were attempted, some clever, most extreme. It was decided that all assignats worth more than one hundred francs should stop circulating after June 1, 1796. But this only wiped out the last bit of confidence in government notes of any kind. Another solution involved a decree establishing that paper money should align with a natural and unchangeable standard of value, stating that one franc in paper would henceforth equal ten pounds of wheat. This effort also failed. On July 16, another decree indicated that the authorities had given up on trying to manage the existing currency; the decree stated that all paper, whether mandats or assignats, should be accepted at its actual value, allowing people to make deals in whatever currency they wanted. The real value of the mandats quickly dropped to about two percent of their nominal value, and the only outcome of this legislation appeared to be a further decline in both assignats and mandats. Then, from February 4 to February 14, 1797, new decrees ordered that the engraving tools for the mandats should be destroyed, just like those for the assignats, that neither assignats nor mandats would continue to be legal tender, and that old debts to the state could temporarily be paid with government paper at a rate of one percent of their original value. 75 Less than three months later, it was decreed that the twenty-one billion assignats still in circulation would be canceled. Finally, on September 30, 1797, as the peak of these and various other trials and solutions, there came an order from the Directory that the national debts should be paid two-thirds in bonds that could be used to buy confiscated properties, and the remaining "Consolidated Third," as it was called, was to be entered into the "Great Book" of the national debt, to be paid when the government deemed appropriate.

As to the bonds which the creditors of the nation were thus forced to take, they sank rapidly, as the assignats and mandats had done, even to three per cent of their value. As to the "Consolidated Third," that was largely paid, until the coming of Bonaparte, in paper money which sank gradually to about six per cent of its face value. Since May, 1797, both assignats and mandats had been virtually worth nothing.

As for the bonds that the nation’s creditors had to take, they quickly lost value, just like the assignats and mandats, dropping to just three percent of their value. The "Consolidated Third" was mostly paid in paper money, which gradually fell to about six percent of its face value until Bonaparte came along. Since May 1797, both assignats and mandats had been practically worthless.

So ended the reign of paper money in France. The twenty-five hundred millions of mandats went into the common heap of refuse with the previous forty-five thousand millions of assignats: the nation in general, rich and poor alike, was plunged into financial ruin from one end to the other.

So ended the reign of paper money in France. The two and a half billion mandats joined the pile of waste with the previous forty-five billion assignats: the entire nation, rich and poor alike, was thrown into financial ruin from one end to the other.

On the prices charged for articles of ordinary use light is thrown by extracts from a table published in 1795, reduced to American coinage.

On the prices charged for everyday items, insight can be gained from extracts of a table published in 1795, converted to American currency.

                                1790            1795
     For a bushel of flour    40 cents      45     dollars
     For a bushel of oats     18 cents      10     dollars
     For a cartload of wood    4 dollars   500     dollars
     For a bushel of coal      7 cents       2     dollars
     For a pound of sugar     18 cents      12 1/2 dollars
     For a pound of soap      18 cents       8     dollars
     For a pound of candles   18 cents       8     dollars
     For one cabbage           8 cents       5 1/2 dollars
     For a pair of shoes       1 dollar     40     dollars
     For twenty-five eggs     24 cents       5     dollars
                                1790            1795
     For a bushel of flour    40 cents      45     dollars
     For a bushel of oats     18 cents      10     dollars
     For a cartload of wood    4 dollars   500     dollars
     For a bushel of coal      7 cents       2     dollars
     For a pound of sugar     18 cents      12.5 dollars
     For a pound of soap      18 cents       8     dollars
     For a pound of candles   18 cents       8     dollars
     For one cabbage           8 cents       5.5 dollars
     For a pair of shoes       1 dollar     40     dollars
     For twenty-five eggs     24 cents       5     dollars

But these prices about the middle of 1795 were moderate compared with those which were reached before the close of that year and during the year following. Perfectly authentic examples were such as the following:

But these prices around mid-1795 were reasonable compared to those that were reached by the end of that year and during the following year. Truly authentic examples were as follows:

     A pound of bread        9 dollars
     A bushel of potatoes   40 dollars
     A pound of candles     40 dollars
     A cartload of wood    250 dollars
     A pound of bread        $9
     A bushel of potatoes   $40
     A pound of candles     $40
     A cartload of wood    $250

So much for the poorer people. Typical of those esteemed wealthy may be mentioned a manufacturer of hardware who, having retired from business in 1790 with 321,000 livres, found his property in 1796 worth 14,000 francs. 76

So much for the less fortunate. An example of the wealthy is a hardware manufacturer who, after retiring in 1790 with 321,000 livres, saw his property drop to a value of 14,000 francs by 1796. 76

For this general distress arising from the development and collapse of "fiat" money in France, there was, indeed, one exception. In Paris and a few of the other great cities, men like Tallien, of the heartless, debauched, luxurious, speculator, contractor and stock-gambler class, had risen above the ruins of the multitudes of smaller fortunes. Tallien, one of the worst demagogue "reformers," and a certain number of men like him, had been skillful enough to become millionaires, while their dupes, who had clamored for issues of paper money, had become paupers.

For the general suffering caused by the rise and fall of "fiat" money in France, there was actually one exception. In Paris and a few other major cities, men like Tallien, from the ruthless, debauched, extravagant, speculating, contracting, and stock-trading elite, had managed to rise above the wreckage of countless smaller fortunes. Tallien, one of the worst demagogue "reformers," along with a few others like him, had been clever enough to become millionaires, while their followers, who had demanded the release of paper money, had been left impoverished.

The luxury and extravagance of the currency gamblers and their families form one of the most significant features in any picture of the social condition of that period. 77

The wealth and lavish lifestyles of the currency gamblers and their families are one of the most important aspects of the social landscape during that time. 77

A few years before this the leading women in French society showed a nobility of character and a simplicity in dress worthy of Roman matrons. Of these were Madame Boland and Madame Desmoulins; but now all was changed. At the head of society stood Madame Tallien and others like her, wild in extravagance, daily seeking new refinements in luxury, and demanding of their husbands and lovers vast sums to array them and to feed their whims. If such sums could not be obtained honestly they must be had dishonestly. The more closely one examines that period, the more clearly he sees that the pictures, given by Thibaudeau and Challamel and De Goncourt are not at all exaggerated. 78

A few years before this, the top women in French society displayed a nobility of character and a simplicity in their clothing that was worthy of Roman matrons. Among them were Madame Boland and Madame Desmoulins; but now everything had changed. At the forefront of society were Madame Tallien and others like her, indulging in extravagance, constantly seeking new ways to enjoy luxury, and demanding large sums from their husbands and lovers to support their extravagant lifestyles and fulfill their whims. If those sums couldn't be obtained honestly, they had to be acquired dishonestly. The more one looks into that period, the clearer it becomes that the portrayals by Thibaudeau, Challamel, and De Goncourt are not exaggerated at all. 78

The contrast between these gay creatures of the Directory period and the people at large was striking. Indeed much as the vast majority of the wealthy classes suffered from impoverishment, the laboring classes, salaried employees of all sorts, and people of fixed income and of small means, especially in the cities, underwent yet greater distress. These were found, as a rule, to subsist mainly on daily government rations of bread at the rate of one pound per person. This was frequently unfit for food and was distributed to long lines of people, men, women and children, who were at times obliged to wait their turn even from dawn to dusk. The very rich could, by various means, especially by bribery, obtain better bread, but only at enormous cost. In May, 1796, the market price of good bread was, in paper, 80 francs (16 dollars) per pound and a little later provisions could not be bought for paper money at any price. 79

The difference between the cheerful people of the Directory period and the general population was striking. While the vast majority of wealthy individuals faced financial struggles, the working class, various salaried employees, and those with fixed or limited incomes, especially in urban areas, were experiencing even greater hardship. Typically, they survived mainly on daily government rations of one pound of bread per person. This bread was often inedible and was distributed to long lines of men, women, and children, who sometimes had to wait from dawn until dusk for their turn. The very wealthy could, through various means like bribery, get better bread, but it came at a huge cost. In May 1796, the market price for good bread was 80 francs (16 dollars) per pound, and shortly after, food could not be purchased with paper money at any price. 79

And here it may be worth mentioning that there was another financial trouble especially vexatious. While, as we have seen, such enormous sums, rising from twenty to forty thousand millions of francs in paper, were put in circulation by the successive governments of the Revolution, enormous sums had been set afloat in counterfeits by criminals and by the enemies of France. These came not only from various parts of the French Republic but from nearly all the surrounding nations, the main source being London. Thence it was that Count Joseph de Puisaye sent off cargoes of false paper, excellently engraved and printed, through ports in Brittany and other disaffected parts of France. One seizure by General Hoche was declared by him to exceed in nominal value ten thousand millions of francs. With the exception of a few of these issues, detection was exceedingly difficult, even for experts; for the vast majority of the people it was impossible.

And it's worth mentioning that there was another financial issue that was particularly frustrating. While, as we’ve seen, such huge amounts, ranging from twenty to forty thousand million francs in paper currency, were circulated by the various governments of the Revolution, criminals and France's enemies had also flooded the market with counterfeit money. This came not just from different parts of the French Republic but from almost all the neighboring countries, with London being the main source. From there, Count Joseph de Puisaye shipped cargoes of fake currency, expertly engraved and printed, through ports in Brittany and other rebellious areas of France. One raid by General Hoche was reported to have seized counterfeit bills worth more than ten thousand million francs in nominal value. Except for a few of these counterfeits, they were extremely hard to detect, even for experts; for the vast majority of the public, it was impossible.

Nor was this all. At various times the insurgent royalists in La Vendee and elsewhere put their presses also in operation, issuing notes bearing the Bourbon arms,—the fleur-de-lis, the portrait of the Dauphin (as Louis XVII) with the magic legend "De Par le Roi," and large bodies of the population in the insurgent districts were forced to take these. Even as late as 1799 these notes continued to appear. 80

Nor was that all. At different times, the insurgent royalists in La Vendee and other places started their own printing presses, producing notes featuring the Bourbon coat of arms—the fleur-de-lis, the portrait of the Dauphin (as Louis XVII) with the motto "De Par le Roi," and many people in the rebel areas were forced to accept these. Even as late as 1799, these notes were still being issued. 80

The financial agony was prolonged somewhat by attempts to secure funds by still another "forced loan," and other discredited measures, but when all was over with paper money, specie began to reappear—first in sufficient sums to do the small amount of business which remained after the collapse. Then as the business demand increased, the amount of specie flowed in from the world at large to meet it and the nation gradually recovered from that long paper-money debauch.

The financial struggle was dragged out a bit by efforts to raise money through yet another "forced loan" and other unpopular methods, but once everything was settled with paper currency, real money started to come back—first in enough amounts to handle the limited business that was left after the crash. As demand for business grew, more real money started coming in from around the world to meet that demand, and the country slowly bounced back from that long stretch of paper money issues.

Thibaudeau, a very thoughtful observer, tells us in his Memoirs that great fears were felt as to a want of circulating medium between the time when paper should go out and coin should come in; but that no such want was severely felt—that coin came in gradually as it was wanted. 81

Thibaudeau, a keen observer, shares in his Memoirs that there were significant concerns about a lack of currency between the moment when paper money would be removed and when coins would be introduced. However, this shortage was not seriously experienced—as coins arrived gradually as needed. 81

Nothing could better exemplify the saying of one of the most shrewd of modern statesmen that "There will always be money." 82

Nothing could better illustrate the saying of one of the smartest modern politicians that "There will always be money." 82

But though there soon came a degree of prosperity—as compared with the distress during the paper-money orgy, convalescence was slow. The acute suffering from the wreck and rain brought by assignats, mandats and other paper currency in process of repudiation lasted nearly ten years, but the period of recovery lasted longer than the generation which followed. It required fully forty years to bring capital, industry, commerce and credit up to their condition when the Revolution began, and demanded a "man on horseback," who established monarchy on the ruins of the Republic and thew away millions of lives for the Empire, to be added to the millions which had been sacrificed by the Revolution. 83

But although there was soon some prosperity—compared to the hardships during the paper money frenzy, recovery took a long time. The intense suffering caused by the destruction and chaos brought by assignats, mandats, and other paper currency that was being rejected lasted nearly ten years, but the recovery period lasted longer than the generation that followed. It took about forty years to restore capital, industry, commerce, and credit to their pre-Revolution state, and it required a "man on horseback," who established a monarchy on the ruins of the Republic and wasted millions of lives for the Empire, adding to the millions already lost during the Revolution. 83

Such, briefly sketched in its leading features, is the history of the most skillful, vigorous and persistent attempt ever made to substitute for natural laws in finance the ability of legislative bodies, and, for a standard of value recognized throughout the world, a national standard devised by theorists and manipulated by schemers. Every other attempt of the same kind in human history, under whatever circumstances, has reached similar results in kind if not in degree; all of them show the existence of financial laws as real in their operation as those which hold the planets in their courses. 84

Such, briefly outlining its main features, is the history of the most skillful, vigorous, and persistent effort ever made to replace natural laws in finance with the decisions of legislative bodies, and instead of a globally recognized standard of value, a national standard created by theorists and manipulated by schemers. Every other similar attempt in human history, regardless of the circumstances, has led to comparable outcomes in nature, if not in extent; all of them demonstrate the presence of financial laws that operate as truly as those that keep the planets in their orbits. 84

I have now presented this history in its chronological order—the order of events: let me, in conclusion, sum it up, briefly, in its logical order,—the order of cause and effect.

I have now presented this history in chronological order—the order of events: let me, in conclusion, briefly summarize it in its logical order—the order of cause and effect.

And, first, in the economic department. From the early reluctant and careful issues of paper we saw, as an immediate result, improvement and activity in business. Then arose the clamor for more paper money. At first, new issues were made with great difficulty; but, the dyke once broken, the current of irredeemable currency poured through; and, the breach thus enlarging, this currency was soon swollen beyond control. It was urged on by speculators for a rise in values; by demagogues who persuaded the mob that a nation, by its simple fiat, could stamp real value to any amount upon valueless objects. As a natural consequence a great debtor class grew rapidly, and this class gave its influence to depreciate more and more the currency in which its debts were to be paid. 85

And first, in the economic area. From the early hesitant and cautious introduction of paper money, we saw immediate improvements and increased activity in business. Then there was a loud demand for more paper money. At first, creating new issues was very difficult; however, once the barrier was broken, the flow of worthless currency came rushing in, and as this gap widened, the currency quickly became uncontrollable. This was driven by speculators hoping for a rise in values and by demagogues convincing the masses that a nation could magically assign real value to worthless objects just by declaring it. As a result, a large debtor class emerged rapidly, and this class pushed to further devalue the currency needed to pay off their debts. 85

The government now began, and continued by spasms to grind out still more paper; commerce was at first stimulated by the difference in exchange; but this cause soon ceased to operate, and commerce, having been stimulated unhealthfully, wasted away.

The government started—and continued in fits and starts—to produce even more money; at first, trade was boosted by the exchange rate differences, but this effect quickly faded, and trade, having been unnaturally stimulated, declined.

Manufactures at first received a great impulse; but, ere long, this overproduction and overstimulus proved as fatal to them as to commerce. From time to time there was a revival of hope caused by an apparent revival of business; but this revival of business was at last seen to be caused more and more by the desire of far-seeing and cunning men of affairs to exchange paper money for objects of permanent value. As to the people at large, the classes living on fixed incomes and small salaries felt the pressure first, as soon as the purchasing power of their fixed incomes was reduced. Soon the great class living on wages felt it even more sadly.

Manufacturers initially experienced a significant boost; however, before long, this overproduction and excessive stimulation became just as detrimental to them as it was to commerce. Occasionally, there were moments of renewed hope driven by a seeming revival of business; but ultimately, this revival was increasingly seen as a strategy by shrewd and far-sighted businesspeople to trade paper money for items of lasting value. As for the general population, those relying on fixed incomes and low salaries felt the strain first, as soon as their purchasing power diminished. Soon, the larger group living on wages suffered from it even more severely.

Prices of the necessities of life increased: merchants were obliged to increase them, not only to cover depreciation of their merchandise, but also to cover their risk of loss from fluctuation; and, while the prices of products thus rose, wages, which had at first gone up, under the general stimulus, lagged behind. Under the universal doubt and discouragement, commerce and manufactures were checked or destroyed. As a consequence the demand for labor was diminished; laboring men were thrown out of employment, and, under the operation of the simplest law of supply and demand, the price of labor—the daily wages of the laboring class—went down until, at a time when prices of food, clothing and various articles of consumption were enormous, wages were nearly as low as at the time preceding the first issue of irredeemable currency.

Prices for basic necessities went up: retailers had to raise them, not only to account for the devaluation of their stock but also to manage the risk of losses from market fluctuations. While product prices increased, wages, which had initially risen with the overall demand, started to fall behind. Amid widespread uncertainty and discouragement, trade and manufacturing slowed or fell apart. As a result, the demand for workers decreased; laborers lost their jobs, and, following the basic principle of supply and demand, the cost of labor—the daily pay for workers—dropped until, even when prices for food, clothing, and various consumer goods were sky-high, wages were nearly as low as they were before the introduction of unstable currency.

The mercantile classes at first thought themselves exempt from the general misfortune. They were delighted at the apparent advance in the value of the goods upon their shelves. But they soon found that, as they increased prices to cover the inflation of currency and the risk from fluctuation and uncertainty, purchases became less in amount and payments less sure; a feeling of insecurity spread throughout the country; enterprise was deadened and stagnation followed.

The business class initially believed they were unaffected by the overall crisis. They were pleased with the apparent increase in the value of the goods on their shelves. However, they soon realized that as they raised prices to account for inflation and the risks of fluctuations and uncertainty, purchases decreased and payments became less reliable; a sense of insecurity spread across the country, dampening entrepreneurship and leading to stagnation.

New issues of paper were then clamored for as more drams are demanded by a drunkard. New issues only increased the evil; capitalists were all the more reluctant to embark their money on such a sea of doubt. Workmen of all sorts were more and more thrown out of employment. Issue after issue of currency came; but no relief resulted save a momentary stimulus, which aggravated the disease. The most ingenious evasions of natural laws in finance which the most subtle theorists could contrive were tried—all in vain; the most brilliant substitutes for those laws were tried; "self-regulating" schemes, "interconverting" schemes—all equally vain. 86 All thoughtful men had lost confidence. All men were waiting; stagnation became worse and worse. At last came the collapse and then a return, by a fearful shock, to a state of things which presented something like certainty of remuneration to capital and labor. Then, and not till then, came the beginning of a new era of prosperity.

New issues of currency were demanded like a drunkard demands more drinks. The new issues only worsened the situation; investors were even more hesitant to risk their money in such uncertainty. Workers of all kinds were increasingly unable to find jobs. More and more currency was issued, but it only provided temporary relief, making the problem worse. The most clever attempts to sidestep the natural laws of finance, devised by the most sophisticated theorists, were all in vain; all the flashy alternatives to those laws failed; “self-regulating” plans, “interconverting” plans—all equally useless. 86 All thoughtful people had lost faith. Everyone was waiting; stagnation grew worse and worse. Finally, there was a collapse, followed by a jarring return to a situation that offered some certainty for both capital and labor. Only then did the new era of prosperity begin.

Just as dependent on the law of cause and effect was the moral development. Out of the inflation of prices grew a speculating class; and, in the complete uncertainty as to the future, all business became a game of chance, and all business men, gamblers. In city centers came a quick growth of stock-jobbers and speculators; and these set a debasing fashion in business which spread to the remotest parts of the country. Instead of satisfaction with legitimate profits, came a passion for inordinate gains. Then, too, as values became more and more uncertain, there was no longer any motive for care or economy, but every motive for immediate expenditure and present enjoyment. So came upon the nation the obliteration of thrift. In this mania for yielding to present enjoyment rather than providing for future comfort were the seeds of new growths of wretchedness: luxury, senseless and extravagant, set in: this, too, spread as a fashion. To feed it, there came cheatery in the nation at large and corruption among officials and persons holding trusts. While men set such fashions in private and official business, women set fashions of extravagance in dress and living that added to the incentives to corruption. Faith in moral considerations, or even in good impulses, yielded to general distrust. National honor was thought a fiction cherished only by hypocrites. Patriotism was eaten out by cynicism.

Just as dependent on the law of cause and effect was the moral development. The rise in prices created a class of speculators; and with the complete uncertainty about the future, all business became a gamble, and all business people became gamblers. In city centers, there was rapid growth of stock traders and speculators; these people set a corrupt trend in business that spread to the farthest corners of the country. Instead of being satisfied with legitimate profits, there arose a desire for excessive gains. As values became increasingly uncertain, there was no longer any motivation for care or saving, but every motivation for immediate spending and enjoying the present. Thus came the obliteration of thrift. This obsession with seeking present pleasure over planning for future comfort sowed the seeds for new forms of misery: luxury, irrational and extravagant, emerged; and this too became a trend. To support it, dishonesty became widespread throughout the nation, along with corruption among officials and individuals in positions of trust. While men established such trends in private and official business, women created trends of extravagance in fashion and lifestyle that further encouraged corruption. Trust in moral values, or even in good intentions, gave way to widespread skepticism. National honor was perceived as a fiction maintained only by hypocrites. Patriotism was eroded by cynicism.

Thus was the history of France logically developed in obedience to natural laws; such has, to a greater or less degree, always been the result of irredeemable paper, created according to the whim or interest of legislative assemblies rather than based upon standards of value permanent in their nature and agreed upon throughout the entire world. Such, we may fairly expect, will always be the result of them until the fiat of the Almighty shall evolve laws in the universe radically different from those which at present obtain. 87

Thus, the history of France has logically unfolded in accordance with natural laws; this has, to varying degrees, always been the outcome of worthless paper money, created based on the whims or interests of legislative bodies instead of relying on universally accepted value standards that are stable in nature. We can reasonably expect that this will always be the case until divine authority establishes laws in the universe that are fundamentally different from those that currently exist. 87

And, finally, as to the general development of the theory and practice which all this history records: my subject has been Fiat Money in France; How it came; What it brought; and How it ended.

And finally, regarding the overall development of the theory and practice recorded in this history: my topic has been Fiat Money in France; How it originated; What it brought about; and How it concluded.

It came by seeking a remedy for a comparatively small evil in an evil infinitely more dangerous. To cure a disease temporary in its character, a corrosive poison was administered, which ate out the vitals of French prosperity.

It came by looking for a solution to a relatively minor problem and ended up in a situation that's infinitely more dangerous. To treat a temporary illness, a harmful poison was given, which destroyed the heart of French prosperity.

It progressed according to a law in social physics which we may call the "law of accelerating issue and depreciation." It was comparatively easy to refrain from the first issue; it was exceedingly difficult to refrain from the second; to refrain from the third and those following was practically impossible.

It moved forward according to a principle in social physics that we can refer to as the "law of accelerating issue and depreciation." It was relatively easy to hold back from the first issue; it was really hard to hold back from the second; and holding back from the third and the ones that came after was nearly impossible.

It brought, as we have seen, commerce and manufactures, the mercantile interest, the agricultural interest, to ruin. It brought on these the same destruction which would come to a Hollander opening the dykes of the sea to irrigate his garden in a dry summer.

It caused, as we've seen, the downfall of commerce and manufacturing, the business sector, and agriculture. It brought about the same devastation that a Dutch person would face when opening the dikes to water their garden during a dry summer.

It ended in the complete financial, moral and political prostration of France-a prostration from which only a Napoleon could raise it.

It resulted in the complete financial, moral, and political collapse of France—an aftermath from which only a Napoleon could revive it.

But this history would be incomplete without a brief sequel, showing how that great genius profited by all his experience. When Bonaparte took the consulship the condition of fiscal affairs was appalling. The government was bankrupt; an immense debt was unpaid. The further collection of taxes seemed impossible; the assessments were in hopeless confusion. War was going on in the East, on the Rhine, and in Italy, and civil war, in La Vendée. All the armies had long been unpaid, and the largest loan that could for the moment be effected was for a sum hardly meeting the expenses of the government for a single day. At the first cabinet council Bonaparte was asked what he intended to do. He replied, "I will pay cash or pay nothing." From this time he conducted all his operations on this basis. He arranged the assessments, funded the debt, and made payments in cash; and from this time—during all the campaigns of Marengo, Austerlitz, Jena, Eylau, Friedland, down to the Peace of Tilsit in 1807—there was but one suspension of specie payment, and this only for a few days. When the first great European coalition was formed against the Empire, Napoleon was hard pressed financially, and it was proposed to resort to paper money; but he wrote to his minister, "While I live I will never resort to irredeemable paper." He never did, and France, under this determination, commanded all the gold she needed. When Waterloo came, with the invasion of the Allies, with war on her own soil, with a change of dynasty, and with heavy expenses for war and indemnities, France, on a specie basis, experienced no severe financial distress.

But this story wouldn't be complete without a quick follow-up, showing how that great genius used all his experience. When Bonaparte became consul, the state of finances was terrible. The government was bankrupt, and there was a huge unpaid debt. Collecting more taxes seemed impossible; the assessments were chaotic. Wars were happening in the East, on the Rhine, and in Italy, along with a civil war in La Vendée. All the armies hadn't been paid for a long time, and the biggest loan that could be arranged at that moment was barely enough to cover government expenses for a single day. At the first cabinet meeting, Bonaparte was asked what he planned to do. He replied, "I will pay cash or pay nothing." From then on, he based all his actions on this principle. He organized the assessments, funded the debt, and made cash payments; and from that point—through all the campaigns of Marengo, Austerlitz, Jena, Eylau, Friedland, up to the Peace of Tilsit in 1807—there was only one pause in cash payments, and that lasted just a few days. When the first major European coalition rallied against the Empire, Napoleon faced severe financial pressure and was suggested to use paper money; but he wrote to his minister, "As long as I live, I will never use irredeemable paper." He never did, and France, driven by this resolve, had all the gold it needed. When Waterloo came, along with the Allies' invasion, war on its own soil, a change in dynasty, and significant war expenses and indemnities, France, operating on a cash basis, faced no serious financial hardship.

If we glance at the financial history of France during the Franco-Prussian War and the Communist struggle, in which a far more serious pressure was brought upon French finances than our own recent Civil War put upon American finance, and yet with no national stagnation or distress, but with a steady progress in prosperity, we shall see still more clearly the advantage of meeting a financial crisis in an honest and straightforward way, and by methods sanctioned by the world's most costly experience, rather than by yielding to dreamers, theorists, phrase-mongers, declaimers, schemers, speculators or to that sort of, "Reform" which is "the last refuge of a scoundrel." 88

If we take a look at France's financial history during the Franco-Prussian War and the Communist struggle, when the pressure on French finances was much greater than what the recent Civil War placed on American finances, we still see that there was no national stagnation or distress. Instead, there was a continuous progress in prosperity. This clearly shows the benefit of addressing a financial crisis in an honest and straightforward manner, using methods proven by the world's most costly experiences, rather than giving in to dreamers, theorists, jargon-speakers, declaimers, schemers, speculators, or that kind of "Reform" which is "the last refuge of a scoundrel." 88

There is a lesson in all this which it behooves every thinking man to ponder.

There’s a lesson in all of this that every thoughtful person should reflect on.





NOTES

Note: The White Collection at the Cornell University library mentioned in many of the following notes is described here:

Note: The White Collection at the Cornell University library referenced in many of the following notes is described here:

http://rmc.library.cornell.edu/collections/subjects/frrev.html

http://rmc.library.cornell.edu/collections/subjects/frrev.html

THE BANK OF NEW YORK, established in 1784, was the only Bank in existence in the city of New York at the time of the French experiment with fiat money.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK, founded in 1784, was the only bank operating in the city of New York during the French experiment with fiat money.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK AND TRUST COMPANY, which celebrates its one-hundred and fiftieth anniversary in March, 1934, considers it a privilege to be able to distribute some copies of this scholarly article of the late Andrew D. White. The article emphasizes the fact that the use of fiat money in France was in its beginning a sincere effort on the part of intelligent members of the National Assembly to stem the tide of misery and wretchedness which had brought about the Revolution in 1789. But the article also shows clearly that once started on a small scale, it became utterly impossible to control the currency inflation and that after some slight indications of improvement in conditions, the situation went from bad to worse. In the long run, those most injured were the people whom it was most desired to help—the laborer, the wage earner and those whose incomes from previous savings were smallest.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK AND TRUST COMPANY, which is celebrating its 150th anniversary in March 1934, considers it a privilege to distribute some copies of this scholarly article by the late Andrew D. White. The article highlights that the initial use of fiat money in France was a genuine attempt by thoughtful members of the National Assembly to combat the wave of suffering and hardship that led to the Revolution in 1789. However, the article also clearly demonstrates that once this began on a small scale, it became completely unmanageable to control currency inflation, and after some minor signs of improvement in conditions, the situation deteriorated further. Ultimately, those most harmed were the very individuals they aimed to assist—the laborers, hourly workers, and those with the least savings from their previous earnings.

ANDREW D. WHITE had a long and distinguished career as educator, historian, economist and diplomat; his description of the events in France that followed the experiment with fiat money is intensely interesting and well Worth the attention of every thinking person in the United States of 1933.

ANDREW D. WHITE had a long and impressive career as an educator, historian, economist, and diplomat; his account of the events in France that followed the experiment with fiat money is fascinating and deserves the attention of every thoughtful person in the United States in 1933.





FOOTNOTES:

1 (return)
[ A paper read before a meeting of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives of both political parties, at Washington, April 12th, and before the Union League Club, at New York, April 13th, 1876, and now (1914) revised and extended.]

1 (return)
[ A presentation given at a meeting of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives from both political parties in Washington on April 12, and before the Union League Club in New York on April 13, 1876, which has now (in 1914) been updated and expanded.]

2 (return)
[ For proof that the financial situation of France at that time was by no means hopeless, see Storch, "Economie Politique," vol. iv, p. 159.]

2 (return)
[ For evidence that France's financial situation at that time was definitely not hopeless, refer to Storch, "Economie Politique," vol. iv, p. 159.]

3 (return)
[ See Moniteur, sitting of April 10, 1790.]

3 (return)
[ See Moniteur, session of April 10, 1790.]

4 (return)
[ Ibid., sitting of April 15, 1790.]

4 (return)
[ Same source, meeting on April 15, 1790.]

5 (return)
[ For details of this struggle, see Buchez and Roux, "Histoire Parlementaire de la Révolution Française," vol. iii, pp. 364, 365, 404. For the wild utterances of Marat throughout this whole history, see the full set of his "L'ami du peuple" in the President White Collection of the Cornell University. For Bergasse's pamphlet and a mass of similar publications, see the same collection. For the effect produced by them, see Challamel, "Les Français sous la Révolution"; also De Goncourt, "La Société Française pendant la Révolution," &c.]

5 (return)
[ For more information on this struggle, check Buchez and Roux, "Histoire Parlementaire de la Révolution Française," vol. iii, pp. 364, 365, 404. For Marat's extreme statements throughout this entire history, refer to the complete collection of his "L'ami du peuple" in the President White Collection at Cornell University. For Bergasse's pamphlet and many other similar publications, see the same collection. To understand their impact, see Challamel, "Les Français sous la Révolution"; also De Goncourt, "La Société Française pendant la Révolution," etc.]

For the Report referred to, see Levasseur, "Histoire des classes ouvriès et de l'industrie en France de 1789 à 1870," Paris, 1903, vol. i., chap. 6. Levasseur (vol. 1, p. 120), a very strong conservative in such estimates, sets the total value of church property at two thousand millions; other authorities put it as high as twice that sum. See especially Taine, liv. ii, ch. I., who gives the valuation as "about four milliards." Sybel, "Gesch. der Revolutionszeit," gives it as two milliards and Briand, "La séparation" &c., agrees with him. See also De Nerve, "Finances Françaises," vol. ii, pp. 236-240; also Alison, "History of Europe," vol. i.]

For the report mentioned, see Levasseur, "History of the Working Classes and Industry in France from 1789 to 1870," Paris, 1903, vol. i., chap. 6. Levasseur (vol. 1, p. 120), a staunch conservative in these estimates, places the total value of church property at two billion; other sources estimate it could be as high as four billion. See especially Taine, liv. ii, ch. I., who gives the valuation as "around four billion." Sybel, "History of the Revolutionary Era," states it as two billion, and Briand, "The Separation," agrees with him. Also see De Nerve, "French Finances," vol. ii, pp. 236-240; and Alison, "History of Europe," vol. i.

6 (return)
[ For striking pictures of this feeling among the younger generation of Frenchmen, see Challamel, "Sur la Révolution," p. 305. For general history of John Law's paper money, see Henri Martin, "Histoire de France"; also Blanqui, "Histoire de l'économie politique," vol. ii, pp. 65-87; also Senior on "Paper Money," sec. iii, Pt. I, also Thiers, "Histoire de Law"; also Levasseur, op. cit. Liv. i., chap. VI. Several specimens of John Law's paper currency are to be found in the White Collection in the Library of Cornell University,—some, numbered with enormous figures.]

6 (return)
[For vivid examples of this sentiment among the younger generation of Frenchmen, see Challamel, "Sur la Révolution," p. 305. For a general history of John Law's paper money, check out Henri Martin, "Histoire de France"; also Blanqui, "Histoire de l'économie politique," vol. ii, pp. 65-87; Senior on "Paper Money," sec. iii, Pt. I; Thiers, "Histoire de Law"; and Levasseur, op. cit. Liv. i., chap. VI. Several examples of John Law's paper currency can be found in the White Collection at the Library of Cornell University—some with very large denominations.]

7 (return)
[ See Buchez and Roux, "Histoire Parlementaire," vol. v, p. 321, et seq. For an argument to prove that the assignats were, after all, not so well secured as John Law's money, see Storch, "Economie Politique," vol. iv, p. 160.]

7 (return)
[See Buchez and Roux, "Histoire Parlementaire," vol. v, p. 321, and following. For an argument suggesting that the assignats were ultimately not as securely backed as John Law's money, refer to Storch, "Economie Politique," vol. iv, p. 160.]

8 (return)
[ For specimens of this first issue and of nearly every other issue during the French Revolution, see the extensive collection of originals in the Cornell University Library. For a virtually complete collection of photographic copies, see Dewamin, "Cent ans de numismatique française," vol. i, passim.]

8 (return)
[ For examples of this first issue and almost every other issue during the French Revolution, check out the extensive collection of originals at Cornell University Library. For a nearly complete collection of photographic copies, refer to Dewamin, "Cent ans de numismatique française," vol. i, passim.]

9 (return)
[ See "Addresse de l'Assemblée nationals sur lea emissions d'assignats monnaies," p. 5.]

9 (return)
[ See "Address to the National Assembly on the Issuance of Assignats," p. 5.]

10 (return)
[ Ibid., p. 10.]

10 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[Same source, p. 10.]

11 (return)
[ For Sarot, see "Lettre de M. Sarot," Paris, April 19, 1790. As to the sermon referred to see Levasseur as above, vol. i, p. 136.]

11 (return)
[ For Sarot, see "Letter from Mr. Sarot," Paris, April 19, 1790. For the sermon mentioned, refer to Levasseur as noted above, vol. i, p. 136.]

12 (return)
[ Von Sybel, "History of the French Revolution," vol. i, p. 252; also Levasseur, as above, pp. 137 and following.]

12 (return)
[ Von Sybel, "History of the French Revolution," vol. i, p. 252; also Levasseur, as mentioned above, pp. 137 and following.]

13 (return)
[ For Mirabeau's real opinion on irredeemable paper, see his letter to Cerutti, in a leading article of the "Moniteur"; also "Mèmoires do Mirabeau," vol. vii, pp. 23, 24 and elsewhere. For his pungent remarks above quoted, see Levasseur, ibid., vol. i, p. 118.]

13 (return)
[ For Mirabeau's true views on worthless paper, check out his letter to Cerutti in a major article in the "Moniteur"; also refer to "Mémoires de Mirabeau," vol. vii, pp. 23, 24 and other sections. For his sharp comments mentioned above, see Levasseur, ibid., vol. i, p. 118.]

14 (return)
[ See "Moniteur," August 27, 1790.]

14 (return)
[ See "Moniteur," August 27, 1790.]

15 (return)
[ "Moniteur," August 28, 1790; also Levasseur, as above, pp. 139 et seq.]

15 (return)
[ "Moniteur," August 28, 1790; also Levasseur, as above, pp. 139 and following.]

16 (return)
[ "Par une seule opération, grande, simple, magnifique." See "Moniteur." The whole sounds curiously like the proposals of the "Greenbackers," regarding the American debt, some years since.]

16 (return)
[ "With one single action, big, simple, and magnificent." See "Moniteur." The whole thing oddly resembles the proposals of the "Greenbackers" about the American debt from a few years ago.]

17 (return)
[ "Moniteur," August 29, 1790.]

17 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ "Monitor," August 29, 1790.]

18 (return)
[ See Lacretelle, "18me Siécle," vol. viii, pp. 84-87; also Thiers and Mignet.]

18 (return)
[ See Lacretelle, "18th Century," vol. viii, pp. 84-87; also Thiers and Mignet.]

19 (return)
[ See Hatin, Histoire de la Presse en France, vols. v and vi.]

19 (return)
[ See Hatin, History of the Press in France, vols. v and vi.]

20 (return)
[ See "Moniteur," Sept. 5, 6 and 20, 1790.]

20 (return)
[ See "Moniteur," Sept. 5, 6, and 20, 1790.]

21 (return)
[ See Levasseur, vol. i, p. 142.]

21 (return)
[ See Levasseur, vol. i, p. 142.]

22 (return)
[ See speech in "Moniteur"; also in Appendix to Thiers' "History of the French Revolution."]

22 (return)
[ See speech in "Moniteur"; also in Appendix to Thiers' "History of the French Revolution."]

23 (return)
[ See Levassear, "Classes ouvrières," etc., vol. i, p. 149.]

23 (return)
[ See Levassear, "Working Classes," etc., vol. i, p. 149.]

24 (return)
[ See Levasseur, pp. 151 et seq. Various examples of these "confidence bills" are to be seen in the Library of Cornell University.]

24 (return)
[ See Levasseur, pp. 151 and following. You can find various examples of these "confidence bills" in the Cornell University Library.]

25 (return)
[ See Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 155-156.]

25 (return)
[ See Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 155-156.]

26 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, "History of the Revolution," vol. i, p. 265; also Levasseur, as above, vol. i, pp. 152-160.]

26 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, "History of the Revolution," vol. i, p. 265; also Levasseur, as above, vol. i, pp. 152-160.]

27 (return)
[ For Turgot's argument against "fiat money" theory, see A. D. White, "Seven Great Statesmen in the Warfare of Humanity with Unreason," article on Turgot, pp. 169, et seq.]

27 (return)
[ For Turgot's argument against "fiat money" theory, see A. D. White, "Seven Great Statesmen in the Warfare of Humanity with Unreason," article on Turgot, pp. 169, et seq.]

28 (return)
[ See De Goncourt, "Société française," for other explanations; "Les Révolutions de Paris," vol. ii, p. 216; Challamel, "Les Français sous la Révolution"; Senior, "On Some Effects of Paper Money," p. 82; Buchez and Roux, "Histoire Parlementaire," etc., vol. x, p. 216; Aulard, "Paris pendant la Révolution thermidorienne," passim, and especially "Rapport du bureau de surveillance," vol. ii, pp. 562, et seq. (Dec. 4-24, 1795.)]

28 (return)
[See De Goncourt, "French Society," for other explanations; "The Revolutions of Paris," vol. ii, p. 216; Challamel, "The French During the Revolution"; Senior, "On Some Effects of Paper Money," p. 82; Buchez and Roux, "Parliamentary History," etc., vol. x, p. 216; Aulard, "Paris During the Thermidorian Revolution," passim, and especially "Report of the Surveillance Bureau," vol. ii, pp. 562, et seq. (Dec. 4-24, 1795.)]

29 (return)
[ For statements and illustration of the general action of this law, see Sumner, "History of American Currency," pp. 157, 158; also Jevons, on "Money," p. 80.]

29 (return)
[ For examples and explanations of how this law generally works, see Sumner, "History of American Currency," pp. 157, 158; also Jevons, on "Money," p. 80.]

30 (return)
[ See De Goncourt, "Société Française," p. 214.]

30 (return)
[ See De Goncourt, "Société Française," p. 214.]

31 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, History of the French Revolution, vol. 1, pp. 281, 283.]

31 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, History of the French Revolution, vol. 1, pp. 281, 283.]

32 (return)
[ For proofs that issues of irredeemable paper at first stimulated manufactures and commerce in Austria and afterward ruined them, see Storch's "Economie politique," vol. iv, p. 223, note; and for the same effect produced by the same causes in Russia, see ibid., end of vol. iv. For the same effects in America, see Sumner's "History of American Currency." For general statement of effect of inconvertible issues on foreign exchanges see McLeod on "Banking," p. 186.]

32 (return)
[ For evidence that the issuance of non-redeemable paper initially boosted industries and trade in Austria and later led to their decline, refer to Storch's "Economie politique," vol. iv, p. 223, note; and for a similar impact caused by the same factors in Russia, see ibid., end of vol. iv. For the equivalent effects in America, consult Sumner's "History of American Currency." For a general overview of the effects of non-convertible currency on international exchanges, see McLeod on "Banking," p. 186.]

33 (return)
[ See Louis Blanc, "Histoire de la Révolution," tome xii, p. 113.]

33 (return)
[ See Louis Blanc, "History of the Revolution," volume xii, p. 113.]

34 (return)
[ See "Extrait du registre des délibérations de la section de la bibliothèque," May 3, 1791, pp. 4, 5.]

34 (return)
[ See "Excerpt from the minutes of the library section," May 3, 1791, pp. 4, 5.]

35 (return)
[ Von Sybel, vol. i, p. 273.]

35 (return)
[ Von Sybel, vol. i, p. 273.]

36 (return)
[ For general account, see Thiers' "Révolution," chap. xiv; also Lacretelle, vol. viii, p. 109; also "Memoirs of Mallet du Pan." For a good account of the intrigues between the court and Mirabeau and of the prices paid him, see Reeve, "Democracy and Monarchy in France," vol. i, pp. 213-220. For a very striking caricature published after the iron chest in the Tuileries was opened and the evidences of bribery of Mirabeau fully revealed, see Challamel, "Musée," etc. Vol. i, p. 341, is represented as a skeleton sitting on a pile of letters, holding the French crown in one hand and a purse of gold in the other.]

36 (return)
[ For a general overview, see Thiers' "Révolution," chapter 14; also Lacretelle, volume 8, page 109; as well as "Memoirs of Mallet du Pan." For a solid account of the scheming between the court and Mirabeau, along with the payments made to him, refer to Reeve, "Democracy and Monarchy in France," volume 1, pages 213-220. For a striking caricature published after the iron chest in the Tuileries was opened, revealing the evidence of bribery concerning Mirabeau, see Challamel, "Musée," etc. Volume 1, page 341, shows a skeleton sitting on a pile of letters, holding the French crown in one hand and a pouch of gold in the other.]

37 (return)
[ Thiers, chap. ix.]

37 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ Thiers, chap. 9.]

38 (return)
[ For this and other evidences of steady decline in the purchasing power of the assignats, see Caron, "Tableaux de Dépréciation du papier-monnaie," Paris, 1909, p. 386.]

38 (return)
[ For this and other evidence of the ongoing decrease in the purchasing power of the assignats, see Caron, "Tableaux de Dépréciation du papier-monnaie," Paris, 1909, p. 386.]

39 (return)
[ See especially "Discours de Fabre d'Eglantine," in "Moniteur" for August 11, 1793; also debate in "Moniteur" of September 15, 1793; also Prudhomme's "Révolutions de Paris." For arguments of much the same tenor, see vast numbers of pamphlets, newspaper articles and speeches during the "Greenback Craze,"—and the craze for unlimited coinage of silver,—in the United States.]

39 (return)
[ Check out "Discours de Fabre d'Eglantine," in "Moniteur" from August 11, 1793; also the debate in "Moniteur" on September 15, 1793; and Prudhomme's "Révolutions de Paris." For similar arguments, see the many pamphlets, newspaper articles, and speeches from the "Greenback Craze," as well as the push for unlimited silver coinage, in the United States.]

40 (return)
[ See Caron, "Tableaux de Dépréciation," as above, p. 386.]

40 (return)
[ See Caron, "Tableaux de Dépréciation," as above, p. 386.]

41 (return)
[ Von Sybel, vol. i, pp. 509, 510, 515; also Villeneuve Bargemont, "Histoire de l'Economie Politique," vol. ii, p. 213.]

41 (return)
[ Von Sybel, vol. i, pp. 509, 510, 515; also Villeneuve Bargemont, "History of Political Economy," vol. ii, p. 213.]

42 (return)
[ As to the purchasing power of money at that time, see Arthur Young, "Travels in France during the Years 1787, 1788 and 1789." For notices of the small currency with examples of satirical verses written regarding it, see Challamel, "Les français sous la Révolution," pp. 307, 308. See also Mercier, "Le Nouveau Paris," edition of 1800, chapter ccv., entitled "Parchemin Monnaie." A series of these petty notes will be found in the White collection of the Cornell University Library. They are very dirty and much worn, but being printed on parchment, remain perfectly legible. For issue of quarter-"sou" pieces see Levasseur, p. 180.]

42 (return)
[ For information about the buying power of money at that time, refer to Arthur Young, "Travels in France during the Years 1787, 1788 and 1789." For mentions of the small currency with examples of satirical verses written about it, see Challamel, "Les français sous la Révolution," pp. 307, 308. Also check out Mercier, "Le Nouveau Paris," edition of 1800, chapter ccv., titled "Parchemin Monnaie." A collection of these small notes can be found in the White collection at the Cornell University Library. They are quite dirty and worn, but since they're printed on parchment, they're still completely readable. For information on the quarter-"sou" pieces, see Levasseur, p. 180.]

43 (return)
[ See Levasseur, vol. i, p. 176.]

43 (return)
[ See Levasseur, vol. i, p. 176.]

44 (return)
[ For Chaumette's brilliant display of fictitious reasons for the decline see Thiers, Shoberl's translation, published by Bentley, vol. iii, p. 248.]

44 (return)
[ For Chaumette's impressive presentation of made-up reasons for the decline, see Thiers, Shoberl's translation, published by Bentley, vol. iii, p. 248.]

45 (return)
[ For these fluctuations, see Caron, as above, p. 387.]

45 (return)
[ For these changes, see Caron, as mentioned above, p. 387.]

46 (return)
[ One of the Forced Loan certificates will be found in the White Collection in the Library of Cornell University.]

46 (return)
[ You can find one of the Forced Loan certificates in the White Collection at the Cornell University Library.]

47 (return)
[ For details of these transactions, see Levasseur, as above, vol. i, chap. 6, pp. 181, et seq. Original specimens of these notes, bearing the portrait of Louis XVI will be found in the Cornell University Library (White Collection) and for the whole series perfectly photographed in the same collection, Dewarmin, "Cent ans de numismatique française," vol. i, pp. 143-165.]

47 (return)
[ For details of these transactions, see Levasseur, as mentioned above, vol. i, chap. 6, pp. 181 and following. Original examples of these notes, featuring the portrait of Louis XVI, can be found in the Cornell University Library (White Collection), and the complete series is thoroughly photographed in the same collection, Dewarmin, "Cent ans de numismatique française," vol. i, pp. 143-165.]

48 (return)
[ For statements showing the distress and disorder that forced the Convention to establish the "Maximum" see Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 188-193.]

48 (return)
[ For statements illustrating the chaos and struggle that compelled the Convention to create the "Maximum", see Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 188-193.]

49 (return)
[ See Levasseur, as above, vol. i, pp. 195-225.]

49 (return)
[ See Levasseur, as mentioned earlier, vol. i, pp. 195-225.]

50 (return)
[ See specimens of these tickets in the White Collection in the Cornell Library.]

50 (return)
[ Check out examples of these tickets in the White Collection at the Cornell Library.]

51 (return)
[ For these condemnations to the guillotine see the officially published trials and also the lists of the condemned, in the White Collection, also the lists given daily in the "Moniteur." For the spy system, see Levasseur, vol. i, p. 194.]

51 (return)
[ For these sentences to the guillotine, refer to the officially published trials and the lists of those condemned in the White Collection, as well as the daily lists provided in the "Moniteur." For information on the spy system, see Levasseur, vol. i, p. 194.]

52 (return)
[ See Levasseur, as above, vol. i, p. 186. For an argument to show that the Convention was led into this Draconian legislation, not by necessity, but by its despotic tendencies, see Von Sybel's "History of the French Revolution," vol. iii, pp. 11, 12. For general statements of theories underlying the "Maximum," see Thiers; for a very interesting picture, by an eye-witness, of the absurdities and miseries it caused, see Mercier, "Nouveau Paris," edition of 1800, chapter XLIV.]

52 (return)
[ See Levasseur, as above, vol. i, p. 186. For an argument suggesting that the Convention was driven into this harsh legislation, not out of necessity, but by its authoritarian tendencies, see Von Sybel's "History of the French Revolution," vol. iii, pp. 11, 12. For general explanations of the theories behind the "Maximum," see Thiers; for a very interesting account from an eye-witness of the absurdities and suffering it caused, see Mercier, "Nouveau Paris," edition of 1800, chapter XLIV.]

53 (return)
[ For a summary of the report of the Committee, with list of articles embraced under it, and for various interesting details, see Villeneuve Bargemont, "Histoire de l'Economie Politique," vol. ii, pp. 213-239; also Levasseur, as above. For curious examples of severe penalties for very slight infringements on the law on the subject, see Louis Blanc, "Histoire de la Révolution française," tome x, p. 144. For Louis XIVth's claim see "Memoirs of Louis XIV for the Instruction of the Dauphin."]

53 (return)
[ For a summary of the Committee's report, including a list of the articles covered and various interesting details, refer to Villeneuve Bargemont, "Histoire de l'Economie Politique," vol. ii, pp. 213-239; also Levasseur, as mentioned above. For curious examples of harsh penalties for minor violations of the law on this topic, see Louis Blanc, "Histoire de la Révolution française," tome x, p. 144. For Louis XIV's claims, see "Memoirs of Louis XIV for the Instruction of the Dauphin."]

For a simple exposition of the way in which the exercise of this power became simply confiscation of all private property in France, see Mallet Du Pan's "Memoirs," London, 1852, vol. ii, p. 14.]

For a straightforward explanation of how this power turned into the outright seizure of all private property in France, refer to Mallet Du Pan's "Memoirs," London, 1852, vol. ii, p. 14.]

54 (return)
[ See Du Pont's arguments, as given by Levasseur.]

54 (return)
[ See Du Pont's arguments as presented by Levasseur.]

55 (return)
[ Louis Blanc calls attention to this very fact in showing the superiority of the French assignats to the old American Continental currency, See his "Histoire de la Révolution française," tome xii, p. 98.]

55 (return)
[ Louis Blanc highlights this point when comparing the advantages of the French assignats over the former American Continental currency. See his "Histoire de la Révolution française," tome xii, p. 98.]

56 (return)
[ See Sumner, as above, p. 220.]

56 (return)
[ See Sumner, as mentioned above, p. 220.]

57 (return)
[ See Levasseur, as above, vol. i, p. 178.]

57 (return)
[ See Levasseur, as mentioned earlier, vol. i, p. 178.]

58 (return)
[ See Cambon's "Report," Aug. 15, 1793, pp. 49-60; also, "Decree of Aug. 24, 1793," sec. 31, chapters XCVI-CIII. Also, "Tableaux de la dépréciation de papier monnaie dans le department de la Seine."]

58 (return)
[ See Cambon's "Report," Aug. 15, 1793, pp. 49-60; also, "Decree of Aug. 24, 1793," sec. 31, chapters XCVI-CIII. Also, "Tableaux de la dépréciation de papier monnaie dans le department de la Seine."]

59 (return)
[ For the example of Metz and other authorities, see Levasseur, as above, vol. i, p. 180.]

59 (return)
[ For the example of Metz and other experts, see Levasseur, as above, vol. i, p. 180.]

60 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, vol. iii, p. 173.]

60 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, vol. iii, p. 173.]

61 (return)
[ See Thiers; also, for curious details of measures taken to compel farmers and merchants, see Senior, Lectures on "Results of Paper Money," pp. 86, 87.]

61 (return)
[ See Thiers; also, for interesting details on steps taken to force farmers and merchants, see Senior, Lectures on "Results of Paper Money," pp. 86, 87.]

62 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, vol. iv, p. 231.]

62 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, vol. iv, p. 231.]

63 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, vol. iv, p. 330; also tables of depreciation in "Moniteur"; also official reports in the White Collection; also Caron's "Tables," etc.]

63 (return)
[See Von Sybel, vol. iv, p. 330; also tables of depreciation in "Moniteur"; also official reports in the White Collection; also Caron's "Tables," etc.]

64 (return)
[ For a lifelike sketch of the way in which these exchanges of assignats for valuable property went on at periods of the rapid depreciation of paper, see Challamel, "Les français sous la Révolution," p. 309; also Say, "Economic Politique."]

64 (return)
[ For a realistic depiction of how these swaps of assignats for valuable assets occurred during times of rapid paper depreciation, see Challamel, "Les français sous la Révolution," p. 309; also Say, "Economic Politique."]

65 (return)
[ For a very complete table of the depreciation from day to day, see "Supplement to the Moniteur" of October 2, 1797; also Caron, as above. For the market prices of the louis d'or at the first of every month, as the collapse approached, see Montgaillard. See also "Official Lists" in the White Collection. For a table showing the steady rise of the franc in gold during a single week, from 251 to 280 francs, see Dewarmin, as above, vol. i, p. 136.]

65 (return)
[ For a detailed daily table of depreciation, check the "Supplement to the Moniteur" from October 2, 1797; also refer to Caron, mentioned earlier. For the market prices of the louis d'or at the beginning of each month as the collapse neared, see Montgaillard. Additionally, look at the "Official Lists" in the White Collection. For a table showing the consistent increase of the franc in gold over a single week, rising from 251 to 280 francs, see Dewarmin, previously referenced, vol. i, p. 136.]

66 (return)
[ See "Mèmoires de Thibaudeau," vol. ii, p. 26, also Mercier, "Lo Nouveau Paris," vol. ii, p. 90; for curious example of the scales of depreciation see the White Collection. See also extended table of comparative values in 1790 and 1795. See Levasseur, as above, vol. i, pp. 223-4.]

66 (return)
[ See "Memoirs of Thibaudeau," vol. ii, p. 26, also Mercier, "The New Paris," vol. ii, p. 90; for an interesting example of depreciation scales, see the White Collection. Also, check the extended table of comparative values in 1790 and 1795. See Levasseur, as above, vol. i, pp. 223-4.]

67 (return)
[ For a striking similar case in our own country, see Sumner, "History of American Currency," p. 47.]

67 (return)
[ For a similar example in our country, see Sumner, "History of American Currency," p. 47.]

68 (return)
[ See Villeneuve Bargemont, "Histoire de l'économie politique," vol. ii, p. 229.]

68 (return)
[ See Villeneuve Bargemont, "History of Political Economy," vol. ii, p. 229.]

69 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, vol. iv, pp. 337, 338. See also for confirmation Challamel, "Histoire Musée," vol. ii, p. 179. For a thoughtful statement of the reasons why such paper was not invested in lands by men of moderate means, and workingmen, see Mill, "Political Economy," vol. ii, pp. 81, 82.]

69 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, vol. iv, pp. 337, 338. Also, for confirmation, refer to Challamel, "Histoire Musée," vol. ii, p. 179. For a thoughtful explanation of why men with moderate means and working-class individuals didn't invest in land, see Mill, "Political Economy," vol. ii, pp. 81, 82.]

70 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, vol. iv, p. 222.]

70 (return)
[ See Von Sybel, vol. iv, p. 222.]

71 (return)
[ See especially Levasseur, "Histoire des classes ouvrières," etc. vol. i, pp. 219, 230 and elsewhere; also De Nervo, "Finance française," p. 280; also Stourm, as already cited. The exact amount of assignats in circulation at the final suppression is given by Dowarmin, (vol. i, p. 189), as 39,999,945,428 livres or francs.]

71 (return)
[See especially Levasseur, "History of the Working Classes," etc. vol. i, pp. 219, 230 and elsewhere; also De Nervo, "French Finance," p. 280; also Stourm, as previously cited. The exact amount of assignats in circulation at the final suppression is given by Dowarmin, (vol. i, p. 189), as 39,999,945,428 livres or francs.]

72 (return)
[ For details of the mandat system very thoroughly given, see Thiers' "History of the French Revolution," Bentley's edition, vol. iv, pp. 410-412. For the issue of assignats and mandats at the same time, see Dewarmin, vol. i, p. 136; also Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 230-257. For an account of "new tenor bills" in America and their failure in 1737, see Summer, pp. 27-31; for their failure in 1781, see Morse, "Life of Alexander Hamilton," vol. i, pp. 86, 87. For similar failure in Austria, see Summer, p. 314.]

72 (return)
[ For detailed information about the mandat system, thoroughly explained in Thiers' "History of the French Revolution," Bentley's edition, vol. iv, pp. 410-412. For the simultaneous issuance of assignats and mandats, refer to Dewarmin, vol. i, p. 136; also Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 230-257. For an account of "new tenor bills" in America and their failure in 1737, see Summer, pp. 27-31; for their failure in 1781, see Morse, "Life of Alexander Hamilton," vol. i, pp. 86, 87. For a similar failure in Austria, see Summer, p. 314.]

73 (return)
[ See Marchant, "Lettre aux gens de bonne foi."]

73 (return)
[ See Marchant, "Letter to the Honest People."]

74 (return)
[ See Summer, p. 44; also De Nervo, "Finances françaises," p. 282.]

74 (return)
[ See Summer, p. 44; also De Nervo, "French Finances," p. 282.]

75 (return)
[ See De Nervo, "Finances françaises," p. 282; also Levasseur, vol. i, p. 236 et seq.]

75 (return)
[ See De Nervo, "French Finances," p. 282; also Levasseur, vol. i, p. 236 and following.]

76 (return)
[ See Table from "Gazette de France" and extracts from other sources in Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 223-4.]

76 (return)
[ See Table from "Gazette de France" and excerpts from other sources in Levasseur, vol. i, pp. 223-4.]

77 (return)
[ Among the many striking accounts of the debasing effects of "inflation" upon France under the Directory perhaps the best is that of Lacretelle, vol. xiii, pp. 32-36. For similar effect, produced by the same cause in our own country in 1819, see statement from Niles' "Register," in Sumner, p. 80. For the jumble of families reduced to beggary with families lifted into sudden wealth and for the mass of folly and misery thus mingled, see Levassour, vol. i, p. 237.]

77 (return)
[ Among the many striking accounts of the degrading effects of "inflation" on France during the Directory, perhaps the most notable is by Lacretelle, vol. xiii, pp. 32-36. For a similar effect caused by the same issue in our own country in 1819, see the statement from Niles' "Register" in Sumner, p. 80. For the mix of families left in poverty alongside those suddenly gaining wealth, and the resulting chaos of foolishness and suffering, see Levassour, vol. i, p. 237.]

78 (return)
[ For Madame Tallien and luxury of the stock-gambler classes, see Challamel, "Les français sous la Révolution," pp. 30, 33; also De Goncourt, "Les français sous le Directoire." Regarding the outburst of vice in Paris and the demoralization of the police, see Levasseur, as above.]

78 (return)
[ For Madame Tallien and the luxury of the stock-gambler classes, see Challamel, "Les français sous la Révolution," pp. 30, 33; also De Goncourt, "Les français sous le Directoire." For more on the rise of vice in Paris and the demoralization of the police, see Levasseur, as mentioned above.]

79 (return)
[ See Levasseur, Vol. i, p. 237, et seq.]

79 (return)
[ See Levasseur, Vol. i, p. 237, et seq.]

80 (return)
[ For specimens of counterfeit assignats, see the White Collection in the Cornell University Library, but for the great series of various issues of them in fac-simile, also for detective warnings and attempted descriptions of many varieties of them, and for the history of their Issue, see especially Dewarmin, vol. i, pp. 152-161. For photographic copies of Royalist assignats, etc., see also Dewarmin, ibid., pp. 192-197, etc. For a photograph of probably the last of the Royalist notes ever issued, bearing the words "Pro Deo, pro Rege, pro Patria" and "Armée Catholique et Royale" with the date 1799, and for the sum of 100 livres, see Dewarmin, vol. i, p. 204.]

80 (return)
[ For examples of fake assignats, check out the White Collection in the Cornell University Library. For a comprehensive series of various issues in facsimile, along with detective warnings and attempted descriptions of many types, and the history of their issuance, see especially Dewarmin, vol. i, pp. 152-161. For photographic copies of Royalist assignats, etc., refer to Dewarmin, ibid., pp. 192-197, etc. For a photo of what is likely the last Royalist notes ever issued, featuring the phrases "Pro Deo, pro Rege, pro Patria" and "Armée Catholique et Royale" with the date 1799, and for the amount of 100 livres, see Dewarmin, vol. i, p. 204.]

81 (return)
[ For similar expectation of a "shock," which did not occur, at the resumption of specie payments in Massachusetts, see Sumner, "History of American Currency," p. 34.]

81 (return)
[ For a similar expectation of a "shock," which did not happen, at the restart of cash payments in Massachusetts, see Sumner, "History of American Currency," p. 34.]

82 (return)
[ See Thiers.]

82 (__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__)
[ See Thiers.]

83 (return)
[ See Levasseur, vol. i, p. 246.]

83 (return)
[ See Levasseur, vol. i, p. 246.]

84 (return)
[ For examples of similar effects in Russia, Austria and Denmark, see Storch, "Economie Politique," vol. iv; for similar effects in the United States, see Gouge, "Paper Money and Banking in the United States," also Summer, "History of American Currency." For working out of the same principles in England, depicted in a masterly way, see Macaulay, "History of England," chap. xxi; and for curious exhibition of the same causes producing same results in ancient Greece, see a curious quotation by Macaulay in same chapter.]

84 (return)
[ For examples of similar effects in Russia, Austria, and Denmark, see Storch, "Political Economy," vol. iv; for similar effects in the United States, see Gouge, "Paper Money and Banking in the United States," also Summer, "History of American Currency." For a detailed exploration of the same principles in England, presented expertly, see Macaulay, "History of England," chapter xxi; and for an interesting illustration of how the same causes produced similar outcomes in ancient Greece, see an intriguing quote by Macaulay in the same chapter.]

85 (return)
[ For parallel cases in the early history of our own country, see Sumner, p. 21, and elsewhere.]

85 (return)
[ For similar cases in the early history of our country, see Sumner, p. 21, and other sections.]

86 (return)
[ For a review of some of these attempts, with eloquent statement of their evil results, see "Mémoires de Durand de Maillane," pp. 166-169.]

86 (return)
[ For a look into some of these efforts, along with a powerful account of their harmful outcomes, check out "Mémoires de Durand de Maillane," pp. 166-169.]

87 (return)
[ For similar effect of inflated currency in enervating and undermining trade, husbandry, manufactures and morals in our own country, see Daniel Webster, cited in Sumner, pp. 45-50. For similar effects in other countries, see Senior, Storch, Macaulay and others already cited.]

87 (return)
[ For a similar effect of inflated currency in weakening and damaging trade, agriculture, manufacturing, and ethics in our own country, see Daniel Webster, cited in Sumner, pp. 45-50. For similar consequences in other countries, see Senior, Storch, Macaulay, and others already mentioned.]

88 (return)
[ For facts regarding French finance under Napoleon I am indebted to Hon. David A. Wells. For more recent triumphs of financial commonsense in France, see Bonnet's articles, translated by the late George Walker, Esq. For general subject, see Levasseur.]

88 (return)
[ For information about French finance under Napoleon, I owe thanks to Hon. David A. Wells. For more recent successes in practical finance in France, check out Bonnet's articles, translated by the late George Walker, Esq. For the overall topic, refer to Levasseur.]







Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!