The first thing to be noted in this arrangement is, that, with the exception of the pound, not one of the coins in which it is proposed that accounts should be kept is amongst the coins with which we are familiar; the penny and the shilling are both displaced, and the cent and florin substituted for them. Now, inasmuch as the penny and the shilling are found by experience to be coins of very convenient magnitude, they are not likely to go out of circulation; at all events, coins more or less representing them would be a matter of absolute necessity; for instance, we might keep the shilling as the half-florin, and we might have a coin representing a half-cent, which would not differ much from a penny; but then there would be an almost absolute divergence between ordinary coins and accounts; and though it would be theoretically possible to have a system in which this should be the case, it is hardly to be expected that a free people will, of their own accord, introduce it. This is a consideration which is much strengthened by observing that the inconvenience of the proposed change would fall with immensely greater weight upon the poor than upon the rich the rich man, dealing with hundreds and thousands, looks to his pounds, and practically adopts the principle of taking care of the pounds and leaving the pence to take care of themselves; but the poor man, who has been brought up upon the reverse and current form of this maxim, finds that in the course of the so-called reform his pence have vanished; there are none left for him to take care of, and the pounds are out of his reach. Take the case of the small village shop; pence and shillings, or something like them, must be the ordinary coins of exchange; but as soon as ever the shopkeeper has to make out a small bill, shillings and penee must be forgotten, and florins and cents substituted. This would be doubtless a great inconvenience, and ought not to be imposed lightly upon a large portion of the community.

The fact is, that the interests of the poorer classes have been forgotten, doubtless unintentionally, by the advocates of the pound and mil scheme. The poor man's penny has been sacrificed to the rich man's pound, and this pound has broken the back of the whole project. It is of no use to talk of theoretical advantages, especially when those advantages are coupled with the appalling thought of having to learn decimals, so long as the great practical inconveniences of ignoring the common coins of common people are involved in the scheme. Especially is it unnecessary to incur these inconveniences if the advantages of the pound and mil scheme can be secured by another which does not involve them.

Now it seems to me that there is a basis upon which the monetary system of England may be re-formed with all the advantages of the pound and mil scheme, and none of its disadvantages. The plan

which I propose is so obvious that it must almost certainly have occurred to many others besides myself, and yet it is not even alluded to in the extract from the report of the International Association which I have given above. The principle of the plan is this: Take a half-sovereign instead of a sovereign as the first coin of account; that is to say, let sums of money be counted by half-pounds instead of pounds. This would in no way affect the coinage; the sovereigns would be coined as before, and be current as before; the difference would be that a sum of money represented now by 1,000 would then be represented by 2,000, and so on. What would be the consequence of this change? The first and principal consequence would be that the shilling would be the tenth part of our first coin, and therefore we should have the decimal system without introducing the florin. But how about the pence? The penny would still be the twelfth part of a shilling, but it could be made without any very great violence to be the tenth part. If this change were made, no alteration would be required in the coinage; for as it is, the copper coins are merely tokens, and might as well represent the tenth of a shilling as the twelfth. Suppose that this were done, then the new penny would be the tenth part of twelve old pence, or we should have

New penny 1.2 old pence,
or = 1 old pence.

The result would be that common articles sold for a penny would be made one-fifth larger than before; the penny loaf, the muffin, the captain's biscuit, would all be increased in this proportion, and no inconvenience would be felt. The poor man's penny would still be the poor man's penny, but it would be a little more valuable than hitherto.

It will be seen that this scheme would leave the coinage absolutely intact, except that sixpenny pieces would have to be marked fivepence, and threepenny pieces would have to be marked twopencehalfpenny. As to the effect upon accounts, let us try it by an example. Suppose we had the following account to cast up:

The superior neatness is obvious, and if we wish to know how many pounds are represented, the process of dividing by 2 is so

simple that it need trouble no one. For example, in the above case 494 represents 247 pounds.

But it may be said, "Few people understand decimals." The fact is that most persons would understand decimals if they were not called by that name, and if the notion were not thus introduced that ordinary arithmetic is not decimal arithmetic: for instance, the addition sum given above is written as if it were what is called a decimal sum; but it might be written like a sum in ordinary compound addition, thus:

And then it may be presumed that no one would feel any difficulty in the matter; but if coins were divided as I have proposed, people would soon find out that the usual formidable array of dots was unnecessary, and that one dot, to show where the shillings begin, would be quite sufficient for all purposes. In fact, people would work decimals as the Bourgeois Gentilhomme talked prose, without knowing it. This remark leads to this further one,-namely, that the reform proposed in this paper could be introduced very easily, and so as to shock no one with the notion of unlimited innovation, and still worse with the fear of decimals. The way in which I should propose practically to carry out the reform is as follows:

Let an Act be passed to the effect that all public accounts shall be kept in half-sovereigns instead of sovereigns, and that the penny shall be the tenth part of a shilling instead of the twelfth as heretofore. Everything is included in these two simple enactments.

If the public accounts were kept as suggested, private persons would doubtless soon follow the example; there would be no need of compulsion. And with regard to the change of value in the penny, it would not be so great as to make the new penny inapplicable to the purposes for which the present penny is useful, and the relation of the new to the old would be simple and intelligible: in fact, the poor man's coin would be in no way sacrificed to gain a theoretical advantage for the wealthy; the penny would be practically as much the lowest coin of account and the poor man's standard of value as it is now.

I have said that small penny commodities would increase in magnitude; it is right to observe that in such a case as that of a penny stamp, the expense would be raised 20 per cent. without any possibility of direct compensation; but perhaps it may be fairly argued as a set-off to this inconvenience, that the revenue of the country from this source would be increased, or at all events an indirect compensation might easily be made by the lowering of some tax.

On the whole, it appears to me, after thinking a good deal upon the subject, that this is the only feasible method of reforming our English money; the reform might be effected almost imperceptibly; indeed, it would be possible (if thought desirable) to make the two steps in legislation of which I have spoken, not simultaneous, but successive. The advantage of this would be that the simplification of accounts, as between pounds and shillings, would tend to a desire for a corresponding simplification as between shillings and pence, and so prepare the way for the more violent step of decimalizing the penny.

But in order to carry out this reform there must be unanimity amongst those who seek change. As long as it is possible to say that some four or five different systems find supporters, so long it is scarcely to be expected that a Government will earnestly take the matter up; and especially as long as the pound and mil scheme is the favourite, I feel little hope of any real movement: but let it be stated that we want not a single new coin, either gold, silver, or copper, and that the only change desired is the increase of the value assigned to the penny by the amount of 20 per cent., and let all monetary reformers agree to this as their platform, and then I think that a Chancellor of the Exchequer might be persuaded to propose, and the House of Commons to adopt, the reform.

If England were the only country in the world, I think she ought to reform her money and accounts; but it is additionally necessary in the light of the important truth that she is not the only country in the world. Already, as we have seen, there is a uniform coinage, and that a very good one, through four countries on the continent of Europe; why should we be behind them in civilization? why should we appear barbarous in their eyes? and why should we not enter the monetary fraternity, to the great convenience both of them and of ourselves?

Before taking leave of the reader I will just set down the leading points of the necessary money Reform Bill; and committing the subject to his best consideration, I will ask him, if he is convinced of the feasibility of the proposed reform, to agitate for it in all constitutional ways.

I. Adjust the value of the English sovereign and French napoleon, so that one shall be to the other precisely in the proportion of 5 to 4; which involves a change in the value of a sovereign of about twopence. II. Enact that all public accounts shall be kept in half-sovereigns instead of sovereigns.

III. Enact that the penny shall be the tenth part of a shilling instead of the twelfth.

The farthings I should leave alone. De minimis non curat lex.
H. GOODWIN.

IN

an article on "Recent Nonconformist Sermons," which appeared in our July number of last year, some remarks were made upon the survival of the ordinance of preaching in the English Church. In the belief that persistent agitation of this subject must in the end bring about a much-needed reform, and that it is the duty of Churchmen to do their best to contribute to such a result, we venture to put forward a few thoughts upon the causes and effects of the existing practice, and to offer a few suggestions as to the nature of the reform which is to be desired.

We will begin by asking our readers to call to mind what is the state of affairs in the majority of our churches. The congregation includes, let us say, one-fourth of the adults of the parish; though how often would the clergyman be glad to compound for a much smaller proportion! In towns the church-going population consists almost exclusively of the middle and upper classes, with a great preponderance of women. Whether in town or country, they are persons who have been in the habit of receiving religious instruction from their childhood. It is to such an audience that the preacher delivers an address of half an hour, written apparently as a general exposition of evangelical doctrine suited to the capacity of some newly discovered savage tribe, and concluding, as in the well-known story of the candidate for orders preaching before the bishop and examining chaplain, with the division of the congregation into the two classes of con