But our limits will not permit us to follow this splendid article in "Bartlett's Tables," through the consideration of these points. The decisions of the courts upon them, as they have come up, and the arguments offered, are all alluded to; and to this we must refer the reader, assuring him, especially if he is a member of the legal profession, he will be most amply rewarded for his pains.

The next leading point of the subject, and probably the most important and embarrassing of all, relates to interest where partial payments have been made. The decisions of the courts upon it, are very numerous, and they have presented it in different forms and under a variety of circumstances. These, however, appear to serve rather to bewilder the mind than to throw any clear and reliable light upon the subject.

With some few peculiar exceptions, the decisions arrange themselves into two classes, in which opposite rules are laid down for the calculation of interest, where partial payments have been made, or upon running accounts with mutual credits. This has given rise to what is called the legal and the mercantile method of computing interest, in such cases.

The legal method has finally assumed the form stated by Chancellor Kent, in the case of The State of Connecticut v. Jackson, in which he says: -"The rule for casting interest, when partial payments have been made, is to apply the payment, in the first place, to the discharge of the interest then due. If the payment exceeds the interest, the surplus goes toward discharging the principal, and the subsequent interest is to be computed on the balance of principal remaining due. If the payment be less than the interest, the surplus of interest must not be taken to augment the principal ; but interest continues on the former principal until the period when the payments, taken together, exceed the interest due, and then the surplus is to be applied towards discharging the principal; and interest is to be computed on the balance of principal, as aforesaid."

The mercantile method, on the other hand, which derives its name from the fact that it has, by custom, long been used amongst merchants in keeping their accounts, is this:-Cast interest on each item of debt, from the time it became due to the time of settlement, and add the principal and interest together; compute interest on the several items of credit, in like manner, and add the principal and interest together; deduct the one sum from the other, and carry the remainder to the new account; and proceed in this manner whenever the account is balanced, until the final settlement.

One essential feature of this method is, that rests are generally, once a year or oftener, made in the account, and the balance of principal and interest struck, which is carried to a new account.

In the able article before us, in "Bartlett's Tables," the several law cases are examined which relate to either method, respectively. One or two cases are there noted, in which, under peculiar circumstances, a rule different from either was adopted. The inquiry is then presented, as to how far the law upon this question can be regarded as settled by authority; and the attempt is then made, to investigate the principles by which it is governed, and the propriety of the rules that have been established.

It does not concern us here to notice more than one of these points: it is that which considers how far the law upon this question can be regarded as settled.

In looking over the decisions in reference to the legal method, it is observable, that there is not a single English case in which it has been adopted

or recognized, in the form it has assumed in this country. It will be noticed, also, that the line of separation between the two cases, relating to the two methods, is clear and well defined. Those in which the legal method is established, have, with few, if any, exceptions, arisen from transactions in which partial payments were made upon notes, bonds, &c.; and those, on the other hand, in which the mercantile method was employed, have as uniformly related to dealings with bankers, or between merchants, where there were running accounts and mutual credits.

It appears, also, that in a number of instances, the legal method has been adopted by the courts of the several states, as a rule of practice, merely, and apparently from the consideration that, as some rule must be resorted to in such cases, and as there was no principle involved which, of itself, pointed out one rule rather than another, as the only true and correct rule, they were at liberty to adopt such an one as to them seemed just and equitable. With reference to the mercantile method of computing interest, it may be considered as settled, that it is not usurious, but may be employed by merchants and bankers in making up their accounts; and that interest so charged, can be recovered where there is either an express or implied contract to pay it;-that such a contract will be implied by law, first, where accounts made up in this manner have, from time to time, been rendered and received, without objection; and secondly, where there is a well established usage of trade sanctioning such a mode of making up accounts;-that receiving and assenting to an account, in which interest is charged in this manner, will amount to an express contract to pay it, which will afterwards be enforced. And that, although in other cases it is not allowable before interest becomes due, to agree that, when due, it shall be converted into principal, and carry interest; yet, in case of running accounts, where there are mutual credits and a fluctuating balance, it is lawful to contract a priori that interest shall be computed in this manner.

Our limits will not permit us to notice that portion of this examination, in which an investigation is made of the principles by which this branch of the law is governed, and the propriety of the rules that have been established in connection therewith. We presume there is no professional man who will fail to procure the work; this article alone is worth, to such, many times its cost.

We cannot, however, pass from this subject without noticing a few suggestions which are offered, on the relative merits of the legal and mercantile methods of computing interest.

The legal method discourages prompt and rapid payment on the part of the debtor. At each payment a rest is made, and the oftener he pays, the oftener the interest will be compounded against him. Every payment, therefore, being the occasion of a new compounding of interest, it is evidently to his advantage to delay the payments as long, and make them as seldom, as possible. By the mercantile method, on the other hand, the time of compounding does not depend upon the time when the payments are made, but occurs at regular intervals, without regard to them.

The mercantile method has been uniformly employed almost from time immemorial, by that class in the community who are more interested than any other in establishing a correct rule for computing interest, where partial payments are made-who have more frequent occasion to use such a rule in practice, and therefore have better opportunities o judging of its convenience and justice. Yet, this method is not so favorable to them as the

legal method, where payments are made oftener than once a year. The latter produces a greater accumulation of interest, and would be to the advantage of a person keeping an interest account.

We cannot close this article without some more explicit reference to the great work in which our subject is discussed, and which we regard as the most important and masterly one, of the kind, ever offered to the commercial world. We have before spoken of "Bartlett's Commercial and Banking Tables," but, in that instance, we had only a proof-sheet edition before us; now it is issued complete.

It contains tables adapted to every class of commercial calculations, and all the important legal ones; not only every variety of the calculations of interest and exchange, which ever arise in practice, but discount tables, account current, time and averaging tables, income tables, annuity tables, &c., &c., adapted to all currencies of the world. For accuracy and ease in the application, they have received the unlimited approbation of eminent commercial bodies and distinguished bankers and business men.

Now, a moment's reflection must satisfy every one, that here is a standard in conformity with which all the commercial calculations of the civilized world can be made. Such a uniform standard would at once produ、 e harmony in all accounts; questions of accuracy could be solved at once; the diminution of labor among accountants would be immense; while employers would be far better served than at present.

It is this point which we regard of sufficient importance to press it upon the attention of commercial men. The work before us is amply worthy of such high distinction. It is a quarto, of nearly four hundred pages. The law of interest is only one of numerous commercial points explained in it. We say the work is worthy of this high honor, and we might quote, in proof of the correctness of our assertion, the words of some of the most eminent bankers of our country:-" The work is original in every particular, worthy of unlimited confidence, and richly m rits universal patronage." But our object is not to extol the work; we desire to awaken the interest of those who have not seen or examined it, and to assure them it is a matter highly worthy of the r investigation, and which will certainly afford them much satisfaction, if it does not in the end become a source of advantage or profit.

Art. IV. OUR METALLIC CURRENCY.

PHILADELPHIA, June 15, 1852.

FREEMAN HUNT, Esq., Conductor of the Merchants' Magazine, etc.

DEAR SIR :-Some views on the currency having been lately put forth by a writer in the National Intelligencer, of Washington, which appeared to me at once plausible and erroneous, I thought it best to answer them in that journal; but as my speculations on this subject have been frequently given to your Magazine, I wish these also to find a place there, for which purpose I now inclose you a copy, with some small corrections and additions. Whether they shall be verified or contradicted by time, I wish them to be there recorded.

The remaining numbers of your Magazine, from the tenth volume, I should be glad to get. As a work of reference on American statistics it is invaluable, and our coun try affords no substitute for it. I am, very sincerely, yours,

GEORGE TUCKER.

OUR METALLIC CURRENCY.

AMONG the speculations which have lately appeared in the public jour nals on the subject of our metallic currency, it is gratifying to find that they nearly all agree in recommending a single standard; a conclusion to which all the best reasoners on the subject of money had arrived for more than a century, though few nations have acted on it, from a mistaken apprehension that if either metal was not a legal tender it would cease to circulate as currency.

This is a great point gained in the advancement of sound theory on the complicated and much-mooted subject of money. But, supposing we adopt a single measure of value, which shall it be, silver or gold?

Though the reasoning on this question is not quite as conclusive as on that of a single or double standard, there appears to me to be a great preponderance of argument in favor of silver.

Besides that the silver dollar is the general money of account, and is the popular standard by which the value of gold and of everything else is measured, gold seems far more likely to alter in value. This metal was once thought to be less liable to fluctuation than silver, for the discovery of America had reduced its value only to one-third, while it had reduced that of silver to one-fourth; but now we have every reason to believe that it is destined to a more rapid depreciation than either metal ever before experienced.

In the early part of this century, before the Russian mines yielded much gold, the whole quantity of that metal annually produced in America and Europe was not supposed to exceed fifteen millions of dollars. Nor was the average annual product of all Spanish and Portuguese America, at any period, according to Baron Humboldt, more than twelve millions. But the Russian, Californian, and Australian mines now yield six or seven times as much as America and Europe produced thirty years ago, and bid fair to yield ten times that quantity.

There is in every civilized community a large class of contracts which endure for a long series of years, and as to these it would be desirable, for the sake of doing justice to both parties, to have an unvarying standard of value; but this, from the unceasing fluctuations of supply and demand in the precious metals, as well as everything else, is impossible; yet we should come as near to it as we can. Gold and silver have been universally preferred for this purpose, because their changes are slower and more gradual than those of other commodities; and, for the same reason that they have been thus used, we should select the one as the standard which is least likely to change.

If gold should so depreciate as to reach the proportion which it bore to silver before the discovery of America, and had held for more than two thousand years, that is, at about ten to one, then the holders of perpetual ground rents, of public debts, and of all fixed dues in money, would lose one-third of what they had contracted to receive.

Some may be disposed to doubt this depreciation of gold, since the great

quantity yielded by California has scarcely yet produced a sensible effect; but it must be recollected that the quantity, great as it is, does not yet bear a considerable proportion to the quantity that was previously in circulation; and that before these large recent accessions there was an inadequate supply of the metal, which was manifested by its gradual rise of price. But when the quantities drawn from California alone, to say nothing of the products of the Ural Mountains, Siberia, Australia, &c., shall double the quantity in the world, as it bids fair to do, the price must inevitably fall. As the amount of other commodities will remain nearly the same, or will increase in a far less ratio, either the value of gold must fall or it must cease to be used. Since this last alternative is inadmissible, since not one man in a thousand hoards away specie, we must of necessity adopt the first. Indeed, when we see that a large addition to the supply affects the price of everything else, how can it be supposed that gold alone is not obedient to this universal law?

But a writer in the Intelligencer, under the signature of "An Observer," objects to silver as the standard on two grounds:-One, that it will impair the obligation of contracts: and the other, that it will occasion too heavy a charge on the Treasury. Let us examine these objections.

The adoption of silver as the sole standard will, according to the view I have taken, so far from impairing the obligation of contracts, tend to prevent, or at least to lessen, their violation. Let us look at the source and extent of these obligations. Contracts ought to be fulfilled, because policy, justice, and honesty enjoin their fulfillment; but when their execution is inconsistent with these conditions, the obligation ceases. The law refuses to give its sanction to contracts to violate law, or that are made in bad faith, or when made with incompetent persons, &c. But a contract made to pay so much money is substantially one to pay so much value, in human labor, food, and raiment, which money is meant to represent; and this contract is essentially violated if the debtor pays his creditor but two-thirds of his debt, or anything less than the whole value he stipulated to pay. To say that the debtor has the right to pay the pieces of money he contracted to pay, however they have depreciated, is to say that he has a right to do wrong.

It is true that, under ordinary circumstances, the parties may be considered as agreeing to run the risk of those small and gradual alterations in value to which the precious metals have always been liable, but when they exceed that limit it is not honest nor just that either party should profit by the letter of his contract to violate its substance; and Legislatures, in the exercise of one of their highest attributes, will prevent such injustice, by rendering the metal that is in a course of depreciation, no longer a legal tender.

But, it is urged, when both metals were legal tenders at the time the contract was made, the debtor had the right to pay in either metal; and that this right to pay in the one that has fallen in value might have been taken into consideration by the parties when the contract was made, and the debtor, having thus paid the price for this advantage, it is not just to deprive him of it. The argument would be fair if this were the sole contingency contemplated; but there was another and a very important one on this question, which is, that it was competent for the Legislature at any time to change the law of legal tender, and, for the furtherance of public policy or justice, to alter the proportionate values of these metals, and have two standards instead of one, or one instead of two. Every nation has oc