admixture of some such substance as silver or copper with gold, and of copper with silver, the precious metals could not resist the wear and tear incidental to extended circulation. The system of an alloy, therefore, has been followed in the mints generally throughout Europe. In England the gold composing our sovereigns is eleven parts to one of alloy, and a pound of silver coin contains eleven ozs. two dwts. pure metal, together with eighteen dwts. alloy. Gold is estimated according to an imaginary standard of twentyfour carats. The carat is a word of Abyssinian origin, and signifies the "kaura" or beam employed by that people for weighing gold. Jewellery seldom contains metal purer than twenty carats to four of alloy, but frequently falls far below this standard. An alloy is, of course, just as unavoidable in trinkets as in a currency.

As regards the relative value of gold and silver in a currency, that fixed in England is by no means the measure of other countries. These in some cases overrate silver in reference to gold, and make it the standard metal. Thus silver, on the other hand, with us is rendered subsidiary to gold, by the regulation that, beyond a sum of forty shillings, the only legal tender is gold. This subordinate position in the currency of silver is further secured by a regulation of the Mint, whereby a seignorage or profit, at the rate of about 6 per cent., which is not exacted in the case of gold, is charged on the coinage of silver. A pound of silver (by the Act 56, Geo. III.) is made into sixty-six shillings instead of sixty-two, which it ought to produce. The pound of gold, on the other hand, is coined into its legitimate quantity of money, namely, 44 guineas, or £46 14s. 6d. In this way the gold currency in England is very nearly at the exact market price of bullion; for the 1-12th of alloy in our sovereign, it is to be remembered, is not

reckoned as gold in point of value. If this precaution were not used, gold could not hold its place in our currency as the standard of value, because as soon as issued from the Mint it would be transferred to the melting-pot, since by being reduced to bullion it would command a better sale. This contingency is avoided in the case of silver, which, for the reason stated above, does not in bullion represent the value which it does in coin.

The Government seignorage on silver, it has been alleged, should be extended to gold. If, however, the seignorage on gold were charged, it would frustrate the evident aim of the Legislature that a single metal should constitute the currency. Theoretically, this seems not carried out in England, but practically it is so; because, as already shown, gold, being the legal tender for all large sums, becomes really the sole standard of value. And this is wisely arranged, because the risk attached to the reception of inferior coin-to say nothing of the laborious process of numeration-renders silver, and of course copper, wholly unsuitable for extended payments. But besides this, from experiments made about forty years ago at the Mint, it was discovered that gold possesses four times the durability of silver. currency, therefore, of gold, being more secure and permanent, and maintaining a greater equability in value than silver, is much more suited for the purposes of foreign trade. Therefore, to select a less durable metal would entail on Government the ruinous expense of a diminution of value in the metal consequent upon wear and tear, an evil aggravated where no seignorage was charged. In regarding money, however, as the measure of value, we must avoid the fallacy-a very pernicious one-of making gold or silver a synonym with national prosperity. Money can only be this when, by facilitating exchanges at

A

home and abroad, it developes industry and enterprise. These are the real wealth of a people. We are not to imagine that the detention of gold and silver in any country creates national prosperity. This is as absurb us to suppose that a man's domestic comforts can only be promoted by having all his kitchen utensils and household furniture in the very best order. At the same time every owner of capital must be left to use his own discretion as to whether his money will promote industry most by being employed at home or abroad. Silver and gold, when left to themselves, will, like other vendible commodities, invariably find their way to the best market. To fetter the precious metals with legal restrictions on exportation is to to destroy foreign

trade. Whatever injures foreign trade stunts the growth of home industry, because it cuts off a powerful stimulus to exertion, namely, the knowledge that the products of our labour will be easily disposed of to foreigners, or, which is the same thing, to customers at home, who will transmit the commodities to distant shores. From thence will return payments in specie or other commodities in constant demand at home, but not producible there. England now pursues this enlightened policy, having abandoned the long-cherished system of protection. People are now beginning more clearly to understand the blessings of free trade, and the blight which protection brings wherever it prevails, whether in corn, or gold, or knowledge.

THE Fables of Bidpai, or Kalila waDimna, as they are more commonly named from the principal piece in the Arabic version, are of great antiquity, and have ever been very famous in the East. This appears from the number of versions that have been made in the Oriental tongues. Their origin was undoubtedly Indian; the most remote appearance that can be traced being in an ancient Brahmanic book entitled "Pantcha-tantra." The first translation was into the old Pehlvi language, of which there is a full account given in one of the Arabic Introductions. The book had become very famous for its wisdom, and for the ingenuity and elegance of its composition. On this account Nouschirewan, sovereign of Persia, was very desirous of obtaining a copy. This, however, was very difficult, as the book was jealously guarded by the Indian monarch, and great pains taken to prevent any copy or translation of it from being carried out of the country. A secret mission, therefore, was entrusted to the physician Barzouyeh, who went to India in disguise, became familiar with its learned men, obtained the confidence of one of them, and finally, by surreptitious means, succeeded in accomplishing his object. On his return to Persia,

the only recompense he would receive was the king's promise that a special memoir of his mission should be written, and forever attached to the book. The Arabic version, in one of the introductions to which this memoir is found, was the work of Abdallah ben Al Mokaffa, a man of Persian descent, but who became a Mohammedan in the time of the first Khalifs of the House of Abbas Saffah, and Mansour. Besides these, there were translations into the Syriac, and one into the later or Talmudic Hebrew made by Rabbi Joel. A Greek version was made at Constantinople by the Byzantine writer, Simeon Seth, or Simeon, son of Seth, who lived under the Emperors, Nicephorus Botaniates and Alexis Comnenus, about the year 1080. This was made from the Arabic, and, though very defective, is of great use in determining various readings, and, sometimes, in fixing the meaning of corrupt and difficult passages. The first printed edition, under the added title of "Specimen Sapientiæ Indorum," was by Sebastian Godofr. Stark, Berolini, 1697, with a Latin translation; another has lately been printed at Athens, date, 1851. From this Greek version, and the Arabic before mentioned, there have been made entire or partial translations

into French and German, but none, to the writer's knowledge, have appeared in English.

The Arabic version, as published by de Sacy, de l'Impremerie Royale, Paris, 1816, is a beautiful specimen of typography, and has an introduction, giving all the information that could be procured respecting this curious and most ancient production.

In one of the Arabic introductions, ascribed to Bahnoud Ben Sahwan, there is given the traditional account of its first Indian origin in the reign of Dabschelim, who obtained the throne after the departure of Alexander the Great. He was a monster of a tyrant, to whom no one dared to give counsel, until the dangerous office was assumed by a Brahmanic philosopher named Bidpai. He succeeded in gaining audience of the king, and in interesting him in these ingenious fables, wherein political and moral truths are presented in the language and actions of animals. Dabschelim admires their theoretical wisdom, and, finally, becoming a practical convert, reigns virtuously and gloriously under the philosopher's guidance. Each piece commences as a conversation between the king and Bidpai--the former asking an illustration of some virtue in which he wishes to be confirmed, or of some vice to which a ruler is especially exposed, and the other replying by the narration of some one of the stories of which the book is composed.

The difference between this and all other collections of fables, ancient or modern, is very striking. There are the same leading animal characters, the lion, the eagle, the bear, &c., with the difference, that the jackal takes the place of the fox, and that there are introduced more of the smaller species. There are also the same animal traits, showing great acuteness and fixedness of zoological observation from the

earliest times; but instead of being brief apologues, with a single event, and one brief moral deduced, like the Greek fables of Æsop, or the Arabian of Lokman, they are long, continued histories, involving a great variety of events, having each their social or political aspects, forming a narration highly interesting in itself, exhibiting sometimes the most exquisite moral, and yet, with rare ingenuity, preserving the peculiar characteristics of each species. Thus, for example, in the principal story of king lion, and his friend the bull, who are set at variance by the unprincipled jackal, the lion is alarmed at hearing for the first time the bull's deep bellow, so different from his own hoarse roar; he is not afraid, not he; but then there is something mysterious about it, and prudence is a virtue. And so, again, the generous monarch resists the efforts of the crafty calumniator, by representing the difference of their habits-the one eating flesh and the other grass-as taking away all ground of rivalry in their intercourse. Sometimes, indeed, the philosopher seems to forget himself; the peculiar animal traits are lost sight of, and they are simply men talking, wisely or absurdly, in animal forms; but in general the dramatic proprieties are well observed. This, we think, will be seen in the one which we venture here to translate. The actors are taken from the least powerful of the animal tribes; and this is essential to the dramatic design, which is to show how the varied adaptation of different gifts, even of the smallest kind, builds up a secure society for the weak, inspiring mutual confidence, mutual help, even against the most powerful foes. Granting them speech, and a measure of reason adapted to their state, everything else is in accordance with their animal ways and instincts, whilst the whole presents a picture of quiet friendship, of charming constancy, of tender

and giving