What Has Government Done to Our Money? The Classical Gold Standard
What Has Government Done to Our Money?
Murray N. Rothbard
IV.
The Monetary Breakdown of the West
1. Phase I:
The Classical Gold Standard, 1815-1914
We can look back upon the "classical" gold standard, the
Western world of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, as
the literal and metaphorical Golden Age. With the exception of
the troublesome problem of silver, the world was on a gold
standard, which meant that each national currency (the dollar,
pound, franc, etc.) was merely a name for a certain
definite weight of gold. The "dollar," for
example, was defined as 1/20 of a gold ounce, the pound sterling
as slightly less than 1/4 of a gold ounce, and so on. This meant
that the "exchange rates" between the various national
currencies were fixed, not because they were arbitrarily
controlled by government, but in the same way that one pound of
weight is defined as being equal to sixteen ounces.
The international gold standard meant that the benefits of having
one money medium were extended throughout the world. One of the
reasons for the growth and prosperity of the United States has
been the fact that we have enjoyed one money throughout
the large area of the country. We have had a gold or at least a
single dollar standard with the entire country, and did not have
to suffer the chaos of each city and county issuing its own money
which would then fluctuate with respect to the moneys of all the
other cities and counties. The nineteenth century saw the
benefits of one money throughout the civilized world. One money
facilitated freedom of trade, investment, and travel throughout
that trading and monetary area, with the consequent growth of
specialization and the international division of labor.
It must be emphasized that gold was not selected arbitrarily by
governments to be the monetary standard. Gold had developed for
many centuries on the free market as the best money; as the
commodity providing the most stable and desirable monetary
medium. Above all, the supply and provision of gold was subject
only to market forces, and not to the arbitrary printing press of
the government.
The international gold standard provided an automatic market
mechanism for checking the inflationary potential of government.
It also provide an automatic mechanism for keeping the balance of
payments of each country in equilibrium. As the philosopher and
economist David Hume pointed out in the mid-eighteenth century,
if one nation, say France, inflates its supply of paper francs,
its prices rise; the increasing incomes in paper francs
stimulates imports from abroad, which are also spurred by the
fact that prices of imports are now relatively cheaper than
prices at home. At the same time, the higher prices at home
discourage exports abroad; the result is a deficit in the balance
of payments, which must be paid for by foreign countries cashing
in francs for gold. The gold outflow means that France must
eventually contract its inflated paper francs in order to prevent
a loss of all of its gold. If the inflation has taken the form of
bank deposits, then the French banks have to contract their loans
and deposits in order to avoid bankruptcy as foreigners call upon
the French banks to redeem their deposits in gold. The
contraction lowers prices at home, and generates an export
surplus, thereby reversing the gold outflow, until the price
levels are equalized in France and in other countries as well.
It is true that the interventions of governments previous to the
nineteenth century weakened the speed of this market mechanism,
and allowed for a business cycle of inflation and recession
within this gold standard framework. These interventions were
particularly: the governments' monopolizing of the mint, legal
tender laws, the creation of paper money, and the development of
inflationary banking propelled by each of the governments. But
while these interventions slowed the adjustments of the market,
these adjustments were still in ultimate control of the
situation. So while the classical gold standard of the nineteenth
century was not perfect, and allowed for relatively minor booms
and busts, it still provided us with by far the best monetary
order the world has ever known, an order which worked, which kept
business cycles from getting out of hand, and which enabled the
development of free international trade, exchange, and
investment. [1]
[1]
For a recent study of the classical gold standard, and a
history of the early phases of its breakdown in the twentieth
century, see Melchior Palyi, The Twilight of Gold,
1914-1936 (Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1972).