Does this mean that Adam Smith was wrong to say in ~1776 that "In England, no duty or seignorage is paid upon the coinage, and he who carries a pound weight or an ounce weight of standard gold bullion to the mint, gets back a pound weight or an ounce weight of gold in coin, without any deduction"? Or was there genuinely no replacement with base metal in his day, and if so, how were the mint's costs paid?
Good question. Seignorage at the English mint ended in iirc 1664 and the mint began minting bullion at par, with minting costs paid by a duty on liquor. I assume, but don't know for sure, that this is the system that was still in place in the time of Smith. I have learned a bit more about the Restoration period and this later history since writing this (fairly old) post and it will be in the book. C.
Excellent article!
Does this mean that Adam Smith was wrong to say in ~1776 that "In England, no duty or seignorage is paid upon the coinage, and he who carries a pound weight or an ounce weight of standard gold bullion to the mint, gets back a pound weight or an ounce weight of gold in coin, without any deduction"? Or was there genuinely no replacement with base metal in his day, and if so, how were the mint's costs paid?
Thanks!
Good question. Seignorage at the English mint ended in iirc 1664 and the mint began minting bullion at par, with minting costs paid by a duty on liquor. I assume, but don't know for sure, that this is the system that was still in place in the time of Smith. I have learned a bit more about the Restoration period and this later history since writing this (fairly old) post and it will be in the book. C.
That's fascinating - thanks!