Magazine of Western History. VOL. IV. JUNE, 1886. No. 2. 6 MCMASTER ON OUR EARLY MONEY. OUR American histories have not attempted to give information respecting the former money of this country. It did not come within their plan. But the special purpose of the author of the new History of the People of the United States,' is to give the history of the people-to describe their manners and customs, their dress, amusements and occupations. The subject of money and money transactions comes, therefore, directly within his plan. He does not, indeed, take it up and discuss it formally; he treats no subject in that way. But as opportunity offers he presents the subject of money, and to it he has devoted some twenty pages in his first volume, with perhaps as much more to paper money. His first introduction of money is on this wise. He is describing the schoolmaster of a hundred years ago, whose pay was small and who boarded around the district. In return he was expected to give instruction in only the rudiments of an education. A little reading, writing, spelling and arithmetic comprised the sum total of his teaching. Of arithmetic the pupil must know enough to compute interest, to keep accounts and to make change. But making change was not an easy thing. We who are accustomed to but one unit of value and purchase with dollars and cents can form but a faint conception of the difficulties which beset our ancestors in their money payments. . . In every state there were at least two units of value; the English pound and the Spanish milled dollar, which had been adopted by congress in the early years of the Revolution. But the values of these standards were by no means common ones. The pound in Georgia contained fifteen hundred and forty-seven silver grains; in Virginia it fell to twelve hundred and eighty-nine grains, which was also recognized as the pound in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Hampshire. In New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania and Maryland, it fell to ten hundred and thirty-one and a quarter grains, while in New York and North Carolina it reached the minimum of nine hundred and sixty-six. . . But the Spanish dollar was also in general circulation, and was divided into shillings, Spanish bits or pista reens, Spanish half-bits or half-pistareens, coppers or pennies. A pistareen was understood to be the tenth of a dollar, and would correspond to about twenty, and a half-pistareen to about ten cents of our money. But these again were variable in value, for the number of shillings, and consequently the number of pence to the dollar, changed with the value of the pound. In New England, six shillings, or one hundred and eight pence, made a dollar; in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland, ninety pence made a dollar; in New York and North Carolina, eight shillings or ninety-six pence; in Maryland seven shillings and six pence. In Virginia, in Jefferson's time, nothing smaller than the half-pistareen could be found in circulation. The school boy, therefore, was expected to convert, with some readiness, pounds and shillings place the two are spoken of as having to each other no relation of value. In the extract here given it is stated that in New England a dollar was equal to six shillings, or one hundred and eight pence, making eighteen pence in a shilling; and the statement is repeated more than once. In other places we find it stated that in New England, as in other states, twelve pence made a shilling. But these subsequent statements are not given by way of correction. There is nothing to show that into dollars and bits, and to know whether a pista- the author was at all conscious of any reen, New York money, was worth more or less than a pistareen New England money. This is the substance-in the words of the author-of what is said when money is first mentioned near the beginning of the first volume. It is not uncharitable to say that the extract shows great carelessness and contains divers inaccuracies. It is not correct to say that the English pound was one of the two units of value. The Spanish dollar was not divided into shillings, or Spanish bits, or pistareens, or pennies, or coppers. A Spanish bit was not equal to a pistareen. In New England a dollar was not equal to one hundrea and eight pence. A half-pistareen was not the smallest coin in circulation in Virginia in Jefferson's time. There was no pistareen New York money, and there was none New England money. Some of the statements here made are in conflict with some made in other places. A Spanish bit, for instance, is asserted here to be the equal of a pistareen; elsewhere it is said to be half the value of a pistareen; and in a third want of harmony between the statements on one page and those on another. In order to discuss understandingly his positions, that there were a hundred years ago two units of value, the English pound and the Spanish dollar, and that the values of these two standards were not common ones, it will be necessary to give a brief sketch of the money of the colonies. The first immigrants to this country brought with them to the new world the money terms and the modes of reckoning of England. Their accounts were all kept in pounds, shillings, and pence, and for a while the coins of England were those in most general circulation. Before many years had passed, the meaning of the terms. pound and shilling began to change. The words remained the same, but the values expressed by them were not the same. As early as the middle of the seventeenth century three pounds of sterling, or English, money were as good as four pounds in Massachusetts or Virginia currency. A depreciation had begun in all the colonies. In 1675 an English official, writing to the governor of New York, expressed the opinion that pieces of eight-the Spanish dollars, worth four shillings and six pence sterling-would "beare 6s. 6d.;" that is, would pass in the colony for the larger sum, which would make the currency of New York about seventenths the value of English money. Early in the eighteenth century Queen Anne issued a proclamation forbidding the piece of eight to pass for more than six shillings in any of the colonies; that is, that the pound should not be depreciated in any of the colonies more than one-fourth of the value of the pound sterling. Thus, proclamation money, or lawful money, was understood to signify six shillings to the piece of eight, or Spanish dollar. Before the Revolution it had come about in all the colonies that the terms pound and shilling represented less values than the same terms in England. It was also true that the depreciation had been greater in some colonies than in others. Calling the value of the pound sterling one hundred, that of the Georgia pound was ninety, the New England seventy-five, the Pennsylvania sixty, and the New York fifty-six and a quarter. The question is not now concerning the causes of these differences. It is certain that a depreciation had taken place, and that it began very early in colonial history. Without stopping to inquire at what time or times the different colonial currencies became fixed at their final values, it is enough to say that at the beginning of the Revolution these values had become definite. The Spanish dollar was the equivalent of four shillings and six pence sterling, of five shillings in the currency of Georgia, of six shillings in that of New England and Virginia, of seven shillings and six pence in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland, and of eight shillings in New York and North Carolina. This colonial currency was not money proper, but merely money of account. The people reckoned for the most part in pounds and shillings, and kept their accounts in these, but payments were made in specie--the coin of Spain, Portugal, France and England. The colonies had no gold or silver coinage, save the small silver coins of Massachusetts, issued for a while in the seventeenth century. The people expressed values in their local currencies, but balances were settled, actual payments were made, in real money-the coin of various countries. This fact, that the terms pound and shilling in the colonies, and afterwards in the states, constituted a money language simply, is of the first importance. It was this that discriminated it from the money terms of all other countries. The promise to pay a given sum in Spanish dollars could be literally fulfilled; so could a promise to pay a hundred pounds in sterling, gold or silver. But a hundred pounds in Pennsylvania currency could not be paid in Pennsylvania money, for there was no such money in reality. The sum could be converted into Spanish dollars or English poundsmaking two hundred and sixty-six and was fancy's child, but his own dog. The picture was so well liked that parents asked him to paint half their children with dogs. His efforts to supply a demand made him an animal painter. In 1846, Mr. Beard first visited New York, and remained a year or more. In 1863 he again came to New York and stayed two years. Returning to Cincinnati, he prosecuted his art there until 1876, when he returned to New York to remain. one dollar and a quarter per week, the late Mrs. Stetson of New York. It which included room, board, washing and mending. He boarded at private houses, in 1830, for seventy-five cents a week. He went to school to Judge Reuben Hitchcock, at Ravenna, when about eighteen. He settled in Cincinnati before he was twenty-one, where he almost literally painted the town. He painted full length portraits of Hon. William Henry Harrison and Charles Hammond, who were his intimate personal friends; of his patron Salmon P. Chase and his first wife, the beautiful Miss Garness, and also portraits of many other well-known citizens. The Harrison and Hammond portraits still hang in the Cincinnati library. He President Harrison made out the nomination of Mr. Beard for charge d'affairs to Rome, but his death prevented the nomination being sent to the senate. His first ambitious composition was the "Deluge," which hung in the old Burnet house for twenty years. The first figure-piece that attracted general attention was "North Carolina Emigrants," which was developed from a sketch of a single figure made for John Howard Payne. followed the wagons of these clay-eating emigrants far into the country, in order to paint from nature their extraordinary dress, and their clay-colored, cadaverous features. "Poor Relations," his first picture engraved, was bought and engraved by the Art Union of Cincinnati. This and "Out All Night," engraved in London, have traveled the world over. "Child and Dog," painted in 1836, now belongs to the family of The standing of the "Beard Brothers," as artists, is very high. They have no superiors as animal painters on this continent. William H. excels in portraying the grotesque, the ludicrous, and the humorous human side of animal life. James H. makes his animals command our affection and sympathy, and instructs us in the graver lessons of human existence and truth. He is a moralist, combining some of the qualities of both Æsop and Franklin, whose dumb brutes are neither dumb nor brutes, but philosophers, heroes, knights, bullies, foster-mothers, good Samaritans, murderers or thieves. The truth of this observation is made especially clear by a recent picture representing "Jerry Crowly," of Central park, puzzling his brain over 'Darwin's Descent of Man,' with a volume of 'Pythagoras' at his feet, a human skull on his right hand and a monkey's skull on his left. No language can do justice to the It's queer, isn't it? expression on, or rather in the face of the man-monkey, who seems quite as unable to solve the problem of life as Darwin himself. This and other really great works now in Mr. Beard's studio, at Thirty-fourth street and Broadway, New York, show that his powers are undiminished, although he has now reached the advanced age of seventy-five. He comes to the city and works with ceaseless industry day after day; his health and sight seem perfect; his intellect is not only clear, but most vigorous, which renders his comments and reminiscences concerning past events and historical men both instructive and delightful. Among the earliest artists of Ohio, Mr. Beard recalls Aaron Corwin, who painted creditable portraits and scenes from domestic life. Corwin is said to have died in London, about 1830. Sam Lee, who flourished in Cincinnati about 1835, was a good landscape painter, and would have been a better one had he not been cursed with a beautiful voice, which caused him to waste much of his time in society, being invited everywhere. Lee was originally a chair painter. Mr. Tuthill, a pupil of Benjamin West, who came to Ohio from Albany, New York, was a successful artist in this earliest period of the state's history. William H. Beard was born in Painesville, Ohio. Being the youngest son, and James H. the oldest, he thought himself somewhat imposed upon by his stronger brother. Tricks, impositions and practical jokes having been played upon him to the limit of human endurance, his good mother interfered, and told James H. that she would henceforth bring up her younger sons without his assistance. When his brother first re turned home from Cincinnati, where he had had success as an artist, he looked very "natty" or dressy. He thought him a great man then, but was mistaken: now he knows him to be a great artist and cannot be mistaken. William H. left Ohio when twenty-one, passed a year in New York and then settled in Buffalo, where he painted five or six years. When twenty-eight he went abroad, and upon his return established himself in the Studio building, on West Tenth street, New York, where he has remained for twenty-three years. Mr. Beard says his natural bent or tendency is toward the terrible or tragically grotesque in life and nature. But there was no demand for such ghastly and ghostly works, so he put humor into his pictures to make them sell. He has always loved animals, and thought he saw as much grotesque humor in the bear as anywhere in the animal kingdom. This modest artist seems disinclined to talk much about himself or his pictures. The Beard Brothers are incomparably the greatest animal painters that this country has produced. The " Bears on a Bender," ""Bulls and Bears of Wall Street," "The Place Hunters," and "The Consultation," are grotesque comedies on canvas, which contain more humor than could be condensed into a dozen volumes. If any artist has yet lived who can paint bears better than W. H. Beard, he has not made himself widely known. He has the head and shaggy hair of a lion; it is worn long, and this with his |