<SPAN name="toc214" id="toc214"></SPAN>
<SPAN name="pdf215" id="pdf215"></SPAN>
<h2><span>Chapter XVI. Of The Foreign Exchanges.</span></h2>
<SPAN name="toc216" id="toc216"></SPAN>
<h3><span>§ 1. Money passes from country to country as a Medium of Exchange, through the Exchanges.</span></h3>
<p>
We have thus far considered the precious metals as
a commodity, imported like other commodities in the common
course of trade, and have examined what are the circumstances
which would in that case determine their value.
But those metals are also imported in another character, that
which belongs to them as a medium of exchange; not as an
article of commerce, to be sold for money, but as themselves
money, to pay a debt, or effect a transfer of property.</p>
<p>
Money is sent from one country to another for various
purposes: the most usual purpose, however, is that of payment
for goods. To show in what circumstances money
actually passes from country to country for this or any of
the other purposes mentioned, it is necessary briefly to state
the nature of the mechanism by which international trade is
carried on, when it takes place not by barter but through the
medium of money.</p>
<p>
In practice, the exports and imports of a country not
only are not exchanged directly against each other, but often
do not even pass through the same hands. Each is separately
bought and paid for with money. We have seen, however,
that, even in the same country, money does not actually pass
from hand to hand each time that purchases are made with
it, and still less does this happen between different countries.
The habitual mode of paying and receiving payment for
commodities, between country and country, is by bills of
exchange.</p>
<p>
A merchant in the United States, A, has exported American
commodities, consigning them to his correspondent, B, in
England. Another merchant in England, C, has exported
English commodities, suppose of equivalent value, to a merchant,
D, in the United States. It is evidently unnecessary
that B in England should send money to A in the United
States, and that D in the United States should send an equal
sum of money to C in England. The one debt may be applied
to the payment of
the other, and the double
cost and risk of carriage
be thus saved. A draws
a bill on B for the amount
which B owes to him: D,
having an equal amount to pay in England, buys this bill from
A, and sends it to C, who, at the expiration of the number of
days which the bill has to run, presents it to B for payment.
Thus the debt due from England to the United States, and
the debt due from the United States to England, are both
paid without sending an ounce of gold or silver from one
country to the other.<SPAN id="noteref_274" name="noteref_274" href="#note_274"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">274</span></span></SPAN></p>
<p></p>
<ANTIMG src="images/foreign-exchange.png" width-obs="620" height-obs="282" alt="Illustration." />
<p>
This implies (if we exclude for the present any other
international payments than those occurring in the course
of commerce) that the exports and imports exactly pay for
one another, or, in other words, that the equation of international
demand is established. When such is the fact, the
international transactions are liquidated without the passage
of any money from one country to the other. But, if there
is a greater sum due from the United States to England
than is due from England to the United States, or <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">vice versa</span></span>,
the debts can not be simply written off against one another.
After the one has been applied, as far as it will go, toward
covering the other, the balance must be transmitted in the
precious metals. In point of fact, the merchant who has the
amount to pay will even then pay for it by a bill. When a
person has a remittance to make to a foreign country, he does
not himself search for some one who has money to receive
from that country, and ask him for a bill of exchange. In
this, as in other branches of business, there is a class of middle-men
or brokers, who bring buyers and sellers together,
or stand between them, buying bills from those who have
money to receive, and selling bills to those who have money
to pay. When a customer comes to a broker for a bill on
Paris or Amsterdam, the broker sells to him perhaps the
bill he may himself have bought that morning from a merchant,
perhaps a bill on his own correspondent in the foreign
city; and, to enable his correspondent to pay, when due, all
the bills he has granted, he remits to him all those which he
has bought and has not resold. In this manner these brokers
take upon themselves the whole settlement of the pecuniary
transactions between distant places, being remunerated by a
small commission or percentage on the amount of each bill
which they either sell or buy. Now, if the brokers find that
they are asked for bills, on the one part, to a greater amount
than bills are offered to them on the other, they do not on
this account refuse to give them; but since, in that case,
they have no means of enabling the correspondents on whom
their bills are drawn to pay them when due, except by transmitting
part of the amount in gold or silver, they require
from those to whom they sell bills an additional price, sufficient
to cover the freight and insurance of the gold and
silver, with a profit sufficient to compensate them for their
trouble and for the temporary occupation of a portion of
their capital. This premium (as it is called) the buyers are
willing to pay, because they must otherwise go to the expense
of remitting the precious metals themselves, and it is
done cheaper by those who make doing it a part of their
especial business. But, though only some of those who have
a debt to pay would have actually to remit money, all will
be obliged, by each other's competition, to pay the premium;
and the brokers are for the same reason obliged to pay it to
those whose bills they buy. The reverse of all this happens,
if, on the comparison of exports and imports, the country,
instead of having a balance to pay, has a balance to receive.
The brokers find more bills offered to them than are sufficient
to cover those which they are required to grant. Bills
on foreign countries consequently fall to a discount; and the
competition among the brokers, which is exceedingly active,
prevents them from retaining this discount as a profit for
themselves, and obliges them to give the benefit of it to
those who buy the bills for purposes of remittance.</p>
<p>
When the United States had the same number of dollars
to pay to England which England had to pay to her, one set
of merchants in the United States would want bills, and
another set would have bills to dispose of, for the very same
number of dollars; and consequently a bill on England for
$1,000 would sell for exactly $1,000, or, in the phraseology
of merchants, the exchange would be at par. As England
also, on this supposition, would have an equal number of
dollars to pay and to receive, bills on the United States would
be at par in England, whenever bills on England were at par
in the United States.</p>
<p>
If, however, the United States had a larger sum to pay to
England than to receive from her, there would be persons
requiring bills on England for a greater number of dollars
than there were bills drawn by persons to whom money was
due. A bill on England for $1,000 would then sell for more
than $1,000, and bills would be said to be at a premium.
The premium, however, could not exceed the cost and risk
of making the remittance in gold, together with a trifling
profit; because, if it did, the debtor would send the gold
itself, in preference to buying the bill.</p>
<p>
If, on the contrary, the United States had more money
to receive from England than to pay, there would be bills
offered for a greater number of dollars than were wanted for
remittance, and the price of bills would fall below par: a
bill for $1,000 might be bought for somewhat less than
$1,000, and bills would be said to be at a discount.</p>
<p>
When the United States has more to pay than to receive,
England has more to receive than to pay, and <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">vice versa</span></span>.
When, therefore, in the United States, bills on England bear
a premium, then, in England, bills on the United States are
at a discount; and, when bills on England are at a discount
in the United States, bills on the United States are at a premium
in England. If they are at par in either country, they
are so, as we have already seen, in both.<SPAN id="noteref_275" name="noteref_275" href="#note_275"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style="font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">275</span></span></SPAN></p>
<p>
Thus do matters stand between countries, or places which
have the same currency. So much of barbarism, however,
still remains in the transactions of the most civilized nations,
that almost all independent countries choose to assert their
nationality by having, to their own inconvenience and that
of their neighbors, a peculiar currency of their own. To our
present purpose this makes no other difference than that,
instead of speaking of <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">equal</span></em> sums of money, we have to
speak of <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">equivalent</span></em> sums. By equivalent sums, when both
currencies are composed of the same metal, are meant sums
which contain exactly the same quantity of the metal, in
weight and fineness.</p>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 0.90em"><span style="font-size: 90%">
The quantity of gold in the English pound is equivalent to
$4.8666+ of our gold coins. If the bills offered are about equal
to those wanted, a claim to a pound in England will sell for $4.86.
If many are wanted, and but few to be had, their price will go
up, of course; but it can not go more than a small fraction beyond
$4.90, since about 3-¼ cents is sufficient to cover the brokerage,
insurance, and freight per pound sterling in a shipment
of gold to London. Therefore, in order to get money to a
creditor in London, no one will pay more for a pound in the
form of a bill than he will be obliged to pay for sending it across
in the form of bullion. Bills of exchange, then, can not rise in
price beyond the point ($4.90 +) since, rather than pay a higher
sum for a bill, gold will be sent. This point is called the </span><span class="tei tei-q"><span style="font-size: 90%">“</span><span style="font-size: 90%">shipping-point</span><span style="font-size: 90%">”</span></span><span style="font-size: 90%">
of gold. When the exchanges are at $4.90, it will
be found that gold is going abroad. On the other hand, when
the supply of bills is greater than the demand, their price will
fall. A man having a bill on London to sell—i.e., a claim to a
pound in London—will not sell it at a price here lower than
$4.86, by more than the expense of bringing the gold itself
across. Since this expense is about 3-¼ cents, bills can not fall
below about $4.83. When exchange is at that price, it will be
</span><span style="font-size: 90%">
found that gold is coming to the United States from England.
This price is the </span><span class="tei tei-q"><span style="font-size: 90%">“</span><span style="font-size: 90%">shipping-point</span><span style="font-size: 90%">”</span></span><span style="font-size: 90%"> for imports of gold. This,
of course, applies to sight-bills only.
</span></p>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 0.90em"><span style="font-size: 90%">
Formerly, we computed exchange on a scale of percentages,
the real par being about 109. This was given up after the war.
</span></p>
<p>
When bills on foreign countries are at a premium, it is
customary to say that the exchanges are against the country,
or unfavorable to it. In order to understand these phrases,
we must take notice of what <span class="tei tei-q">“the exchange,”</span> in the language
of merchants, really means. It means the power which the
money of the country has of purchasing the money of other
countries. Supposing $4.86 to be the exact par of exchange,
then when it requires more than $1,000 to buy a bill of £205,
$1,000 of American money are worth less than their real
equivalent of English money: and this is called an exchange
unfavorable to the United States. The only persons in the
United States, however, to whom it is really unfavorable are
those who have money to pay in England, for they come into
the bill market as buyers, and have to pay a premium; but
to those who have money to receive in England the same
state of things is favorable; for they come as sellers and receive
the premium. The premium, however, indicates that
a balance is due by the United States, which must be eventually
liquidated in the precious metals; and since, according
to the old theory, the benefit of a trade consisted in bringing
money into the country, this prejudice introduced the practice
of calling the exchange favorable when it indicated a
balance to receive, and unfavorable when it indicated one to
pay; and the phrases in turn tended to maintain the prejudice.</p>
<SPAN name="toc217" id="toc217"></SPAN>
<h3><span>§ 2. Distinction between Variations in the Exchanges which are self-adjusting and those which can only be rectified through Prices.</span></h3>
<p>
It might be supposed at first sight that when the
exchange is unfavorable, or, in other words, when bills are
at a premium, the premium must always amount to a full
equivalent for the cost of transmitting money. But a small
excess of imports above exports, or any other small amount
of debt to be paid to foreign countries, does not usually
affect the exchanges to the full extent of the cost and risk of
transporting bullion. The length of credit allowed generally
permits, on the part of some of the debtors, a postponement
of payment, and in the mean time the balance may turn the
other way, and restore the equality of debts and credits without
any actual transmission of the metals. And this is the
more likely to happen, as there is a self-adjusting power in
the variations of the exchange itself. Bills are at a premium
because a greater money value has been imported than exported.
But the premium is itself an extra profit to those
who export. Besides the price they obtain for their goods,
they draw for the amount and gain the premium. It is, on
the other hand, a diminution of profit to those who import.
Besides the price of the goods, they have to pay a premium
for remittance. So that what is called an unfavorable exchange
is an encouragement to export, and a discouragement
to import. And if the balance due is of small amount, and
is the consequence of some merely casual disturbance in the
ordinary course of trade, it is soon liquidated in commodities,
and the account adjusted by means of bills, without the
transmission of any bullion. Not so, however, when the
excess of imports above exports, which has made the exchange
unfavorable, arises from a permanent cause. In that
case, what disturbed the equilibrium must have been the
state of prices, and it can only be restored by acting on
prices. It is impossible that prices should be such as to invite
to an excess of imports, and yet that the exports should
be kept permanently up to the imports by the extra profit on
exportation derived from the premium on bills; for, if the
exports were kept up to the imports, bills would not be at a
premium, and the extra profit would not exist. It is through
the prices of commodities that the correction must be administered.</p>
<p>
Disturbances, therefore, of the equilibrium of imports
and exports, and consequent disturbances of the exchange,
may be considered as of two classes: the one casual or accidental,
which, if not on too large a scale, correct themselves
through the premium on bills, without any transmission of
the precious metals; the other arising from the general state
of prices, which can not be corrected without the subtraction
of actual money from the circulation of one of the countries,
or an annihilation of credit equivalent to it.</p>
<p>
It remains to observe that the exchanges do not depend
on the balance of debts and credits with each country separately,
but with all countries taken together. The United
States may owe a balance of payments to England; but it
does not follow that the exchange with England will be
against the United States, and that bills on England will be
at a premium; because a balance may be due to the United
States from Holland or Hamburg, and she may pay her debts
to England with bills on those places; which is technically
called arbitration of exchange. There is some little additional
expense, partly commission and partly loss of interest
in settling debts in this circuitous manner, and to the extent
of that small difference the exchange with one country may
vary apart from that with others.</p>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 0.90em"><span style="font-size: 90%">
A common use of bills of exchange is that by which, when
three countries are concerned, two of them may strike a balance
through the third, if both countries
have dealings with that third
country. New York merchants may
buy of China, but China may not be
buying of New York, although both
may have dealings with London.
</span></p>
<p class="tei tei-p" style="text-align: center; margin-bottom: 0.90em"></p>
<ANTIMG src="images/balance-of-debts.png" width-obs="430" height-obs="695" alt="Illustration." />
<p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 0.90em"><span style="font-size: 90%">
A, we will suppose, is a buyer of
£1,000 worth of tea from F, in Hong-Kong;
B is an exporter of wheat
(£1,000) to C in London; D has sent
£1,000 worth of cotton goods to E
in Hong-Kong. A can now pay F
through London without the transmission
of coin. A buys B's claim
on C for £1,000, and sends it to F.
E wishes to pay D in London for
the cotton goods he bought of him;
therefore, he buys from F for £1,000
the claim he now holds (i.e., a bill of exchange on London)
against C for £1,000. E sends it to D, and, when D collects it
from C, the whole circle of exchanges is completed without the
transmission of the precious metals.
</span></p>
<hr class="page" />
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />