2. German Protestantism and the Right of Private Judg- ment in the Interpretation of Holy Scripture: a brief History of German Theology from the Reformation to the Present Time. In a Series of Letters to a Layman. By Edward Dewar, M.A., late of Exeter College, Ox- ford, Chaplain to the British Residents at Hamburgh 297 II. Poems. By Elizabeth Barrett Barrett IV. The Sacraments: an Inquiry into the Nature of the Sym- bolic Institutions of the Christian Religion, usually called Sacraments. By Robert Halley, D.D. V. The Seeress of Prevorst, being Revelations concerning the Inner-life of Man, and the Inter-diffusion of a World of Spirits in the one we inhabit. Communi- cated by Justinus Kerner, Chief Physician at Weins- berg. From the German, by Mrs. Crowe VI. 1. The True Law of Population shown to be connected with the Food of the People. Second Edition, with a Postscript. By Thomas Doubleday, Esq. 2. On Certain Tests of a Thriving Population. Four Lectures, delivered before the University of Oxford, in Lent Term, 1845. By Travers Twiss, D.C.L., VII. 1. First, Second, and Third Reports of the Commissioners 2. Reports to the Government School of Design. By H. J. Townsend, Esq., and Mrs. M'Ian. VIII. Ωριγενους τα Ευρισκόμενα Παντα. Origenis opera omnia quæ Græce vel Latine tantum exstant et ejus nomine circumferuntur, ex variis Editionibus, et Codicibus mana exaratis, Gallicanis, Italicis, Germanicis, et Anglicis collecta, recensita, Latine versa, atque anno- tationibus illustrata, cum copiosis indicibus, vita Auctoris, et multis dissertationibus. Opera et Studio Domni Caroli Delarue, Presbyteri et Monachi Bene- dictini e Congregatione. THE BRITISH QUARTERLY REVIEW. AUGUST 1, 1845. ART. I. (1.) The Currency Question, (reprinted from the Portfolio.) By WM. CARGILL, Esq. John Ollivier, London. (2.) An Essay on Money. Its Origin and Use. By JOHN TAYLOR. S. Clarke, London. (3.) A Catechism of the Currency. By JOHN TAYLOR. Hatchard and Son, London. We think it was Dr. Johnson who, on hearing a concerto played which he was informed was very difficult,' replied, he wished, with all his heart, it had been impossible!' Probably nineteen men out of every twenty, nay, ninety-nine out of every hundred, when they happen to hear anything said about the question of 'the Currency,' feel a sentiment not very dissimilar. Nor are we at all prepared to say that this is unnatural: we only say that it is unlucky; that it is a feeling to be striven against, to be argued against, and to be declaimed against. Were the subject one of much more intricacy, and of much less certainty, than really belong to it, yet its national importance is so great and paramount, that it becomes the duty of all men who really desire to understand and to take any rational part in the affairs of their country, to have clear ideas upon this vital matter, as far as such ideas can be acquired. As to this there needs be no doubt, no hesitation. The question of currency is, in fact, mixed, more or less intimately, with some of the bearings of almost every political question of great importance which can come before us. There is hardly one upon which it does not either proximately or remotely bear. Whether it be a question of taxation, or of commerce, or of agricultural position, or of peace or war, or of the laws respecting corn and other provisions, or of tithes, or of payments of any kind, national or individual, this ubiquitous question of currency has relation to them all. To persons who have not made themselves acquainted with this particular branch of knowledge, it may sound paradoxically; but we do not hesitate to say, that no man, whatever may be his intellectual resources and acquirements in other respects, can really understand the history of his country for the last century and a half, who is unacquainted with this question. We say, the last century and a half, because it was not until about the period of the Revolution of 1688, that financial exigencies became prominent in the regulation of the political movements of civilized nations. Before that period, the springs of action lay nearer the surface, and the modes of national movements were more simple. The feudal system, up to a late period, provided by its machinery the men and the means of warfare, when war became inevitable or eligible. When the feudal services were at length abrogated, still the supplies were, in all cases, raised within the year, or nearly so; and hence finance was a matter not intricate in itself, and not complicated with other national questions. Neither had mankind before that period begun to treat money matters theoretically. Their ideas of the nature and uses of money were simple and practical. They were imperfect, no doubt; but be they what they might, men were agreed upon them. The nature and use of a circulating medium, or current money, had not then been erected into a science. The money in use in civilized countries was as it was, because nations were all agreed upon it, and looked no further. But the eighteenth century changed all this. Those simple ideas of money, its uses and its value, which had hitherto sufficed, were gradually sapped and mined, and at last confused and all but destroyed. The financial systems of nations, which had hitherto been intelligible and plain, became complex and dark. Statesmen learned the art of smoothing their own immediate difficulties by anticipating national resources. This in its turn laid the foundation of a permanently, though slowly, increasing taxation. This again impelled human ingenuity into the discovery of devices for abridging and economizing the uses of coin, by means of symbolic money. Hence arose the system of bills of exchange, of banks, of cheques upon banks, and, lastly, of paper credit, or symbolical money, in the shape of bank notes, issued for greater or less sums, through the medium of these institutions. From this period finance became a complex thing, and circulation a thing to be disputed about. Problems, before undreamed of, arose out of circumstances which had not been till then contemplated. These problems could not be got rid of: they were to be solved. The attempts at solution were made the foundation of a new science, which, arising from a narrow foundation at first, soon enlarged that foundation, and embraced within its scope not only the money matters of nations, but various other matters before that time deemed private and individual, rather than of general or national interest. This science assumed the dread name of Political Economy,' and under that title has ever since continued to alarm, tease, harass, and torment the imaginative, the unreflecting, the easy, the common-place, and the simple, amongst mankind. Such is the rapid sketch of the mode and manner by which the science of money, or monetary theory, became as a branch of political economy, a branch of study for all men who interest themselves at all in general or national affairs. Since the period to which we have carried the reader back, these money considerations have become so intimately blended with all the transactions of the country, that it is, we repeat, literally impossible for any one ignorant of them to arrive at a real understanding of its history since that time. We beg our readers to whom this assertion may appear paradoxical or new, not to be startled. To marry history and economy after this fashion, may to some, on a first view, appear to be advocating a bad match. We cannot help it. The parties have gone together without any will of ours. It is beyond our privilege to forbid the bans;' and the next best thing we can do is to try to reconcile all concerned to an arrangement which we would fain hope may be found less objectionable, ultimately, than may at first be supposed. 6 It is our decided opinion that vast numbers of inquiring and, in other directions of research, diligent and earnest persons, permit themselves very causelessly to be drawn into a notion that this particular branch of political economy which treats of currency,' is, in its own nature, essentially, extremely intricate, extremely uncertain, and extremely dry. Against this notion we take leave to enter our most decided protest. It is our firm belief that the science of money, its nature, its uses, its abuses, and the phenomena thence arising, are quite within the reach of human intellect. We are confident that by a course of study, judiciously directed, an intellect of no remarkable strength or capacity may come fully to understand this vexata questio in all its bearings. As a department of human knowledge, we distinctly assert that it embodies in it more of absolute and satisfactory certainty than many others which are deemed much more easy of cultivation, and much more certain in return of fruits. We admit, whilst we say this, that the topic is one very suscep |