recalls BELLERS' "Colledge of Industry," which PLACE unearthed for him (1817); and still more that characteristic outcome (in 1807) of the "l'esprit rectangulaire," as REYBAUD calls it, of the then unknown FOURIER, the phalanges. The villages were to carry on collective industry and to provide out of its profits, or better still its produce for the wants of the workers and of the infirm. They were to become first self-governing, then self-sufficient, and the ultimate goal was communism. [Autobiog., ii. 303. Explanation of Causes of Distress (1823), § III.] Common life was to lead to common profits, and he should have added, but did not add, common losses. Now, for the first time, he advocates the integration of industry, an advocacy which ripened in his Lanarkshire Report (1820), and Dublin Reports (1823), into opposition to division of labour. The New View appealed to "laws of nature"; now he poses as the sole experienced "economist"; in the 1820 Report he announces that he has discovered "a new science-the science of the influence of circumstances, which is the most important of all the sciences." He was in France in 1818. Macnab speaks of his views as "social in every page of pt. 1 of his report (1819); but M. Reybaud's assertion that the word "socialist" was not invented to denote these views until after Owen formed "the association of all classes of all nations" (1835), has not been refuted. The socialism embodied in these reports (1817, 1820, 1823), involved three distinct proposals.

(a) His first proposal was that 100 "philanthropists" should each invest £1000 at 5 per cent in starting a scheme. The Duke of Kent's committee, which included RICARDO, TORRENS, and others, recommended this scheme, but only £8000 having been subscribed on 1st December 1819, it was abandoned. Again, as the result of his Lanarkshire Report, operations began at Motherwell, with a capital of £50,000 advanced by the British and Foreign Philanthropic Society, but fell through from want of funds. Here the projectors expected, Peabody-fashion, to redeem the capital as well as pay interest, and then devote their profits to starting new institutions of the same character. Vandeleur's Ralahine (1831) was the outcome of Owen's Irish visit, and broke down through the bankruptcy of Vandeleur, who was patron - landlord, long before the community of tenants bought their freedom (see Co-OPERATIVE FARMING). A more important scheme was set on foot by Abram Combe and Hamilton of Dalzell, who were disciples of Owen, at Orbiston. The founders subscribed £25,000 and opened their barrack-like establishment of some 300 members in September 1826. The members soon resolved on trying communism after the founders were paid off; but long before this, Combe died (August 1827), and the business in a few months went bankrupt and the barrack was razed. But Owen had neither scot nor lot in this scheme. He was launching his scheme at New Harmony, Pennsylvania. Owen's attention had, in 1817, been called to a communistic settlement of Shakers in the New World. In 1812 John Melish printed his travels, which contained an account of a sect of "Rappites" who settled in

VOL. III.

49

1805 at Harmony. Each village of 800 or so converged to a central square, and radiated into cottages where each family lived separately, had separate gardens, poultry and hogs, but in other respects lived a common life, worked mainly on agriculture, and enjoyed the profits of their work in common. In 1824 Owen went to America, bought Harmony from the Rappites for £28,000, and advertised for settlers, 900 of whom came. On 27th April 1825 he laid down as principles for the new community that (1) each should hold his goods as part of the common stock, but might withdraw at any time; if so, his goods or their value were restored to him; (2) all should work, but as a temporary provision, Owen should value the work done by each. He left for England in June, returning on the 12th of January. On the 5th of February the New Harmonists enacted (1) that all property should be held upon trust for the community; (2) a member withdrawing was only entitled to such compensation as a general assembly awarded him for his services; (3) other than this, services, etc., were not valued. On the 8th March Owen, who had not taken part in creating the new constitution, was once more despotic manager. The February constitution had meanwhile driven out malcontents into the neighbourhood, where they formed sub-colonies. In most cases, Owen granted long leases to the subcolonists, or advanced money at 4 per cent interest for the necessary buildings and purchases; and the land so let or sold was subject to restrictive conditions against touching profits till the debt was paid off; and after that, against the division by members of profits amongst themselves, and also against spirituous liquors. And there were colonies modelled on New Harmony,-thus Miss Frances WRIGHT advanced money to found a colony in which black and white men were equal, and permanent marriage was abolished. The latter, but not the former principle was extended to New Harmony on 4th July 1826; a date signalised by the N. H. Gazette as the 51st of American and 1st of Mental Independence. In another case, a Mr. Maclure advanced money to buy land and to found schools after the manner of Pestalozzi. In all these cases some one was landlord or mortgagee, subject to options to redeem or purchase; but no redemption or purchase took place. In spring 1827 Owen declared the New Harmony experiment closed. Next Maclure's, and then (1st February 1828) Miss Wright's scheme was abandoned. A few weeks later Owen resumed the last leases of the sub-colonies on the ground that their stores competed against one another, and that their external trade was run by monopolists. After these dates, the colonists and subcolonists left, or had to support themselves. Owen, by an expenditure of £40,000, or ths of his fortune, had helped to keep his colonists going for one or two years mainly on charity-a satirical commentary on his favourite dictum that the rich deceive themselves when they think that they support the poor, since the poor support the rich. Experiments are not communistic, because workers receive subsistence in lieu of wages; communism implies the division of produce; here, so far from there being a net produce to divide, there was a

E

large net loss which fell almost entirely on one

man.

"

(b) Nearly ruined in America, Owen returned to England to find a second branch of his scheme of 1817, 1820, and 1823, blossoming and fruitful. He had urged artisans and others with £100 (the third class in his reports), to mass their capital and elect a committee of members to superintend its application to work. Interest was payable on capital. He believed that this scheme would soon pay hugely, and that those who took part in it "began their journey near their journey's end." Co-operative capitalistic industries scarcely existed in England before 1817. Owen now returned (August 1829) to find co-operative stores in full swing, with an admirable organ of their own in Dr. King's Co-operator (1st May 1828 to 1st August 1830). In setting to work to develop and federate them, he employed two characteristic methods: (i.) he tried to merge them in a wider movement, and for this purpose formed a centre of culture with lectures, a paper (The Crisis), annual co-operative congresses, social festivals, etc.; the Mechanics' Institute, Bromley's Bazaar (Gray's Inn Road), Burton Street Chapel, and 14 Charlotte Street, were the successive "Meccas" of the new movement. The burden of the lectures was usually economical, e.g. "do without the middlemen.' "If work is organised, an eight hours' day will be possible" (this idea first appeared in a letter by Owen, dated 9th August 1817). "The land belongs to the people.' "That country is happiest which has most producers and fewest distributors." "A graduated property-tax is the best form of taxation.' "International congresses should be promoted," etc. Feargus O'Connor lectured for them once, and in May 1833 the Magua Charta of social regeneration was issued partly under Owen's auspices. In 1834 a "Grand National Consolidated Trades Union," or union of all the working classes, was started. On May day 1835 the association of all classes and all nations was formed, with paid lecturers, etc. A man attended its lectures for three months, and was examined in Owen's philosophy before being elected member. It was a forestalling of university extension tacked on to co-operative and trade unionist movements. Owen's energy as a lecturer was fabulous; and in 1836, according to the New Moral World, ii. 214 (its new organ), there were 100,000 members. The new phasis was wrecked partly by Owen being called to superintend a new abortive Owenite community at East Tytherley, Hants (1839 to 1844), whose members alternately elected and deposed Owen as despotic manager, and had, as usual, to be kept going by other people's capital, partly by the socialists, as they called themselves, transferring their attention from economy to marriage and religion. Owen's ideas on these subjects are clearly indicated in the report by the Home Colonisation Society of his public discussion with Brindley at Bristol (cp. Observations on the Manufacturing Systems, 3rd ed. app. p. 42). In 1840, the bishop of Exeter and Duke of Wellington advocated, in the House of Lords, prosecutions for blasphemy; the East Tytherley community drained their funds; and the rank and file threw mud at them, which stuck

(see e.g., Socialism as it is, by Giles, 1838; The Human Eccaleobion or New Moral Warren, 1842). Finally the movement worked itself out, while political chartism, free trade, and trades unionism in its modern sense came to the fore. (ii.) A second colouring was given to the co-operative movement by Owen's currency craze. The 1820 report first puts into the forefront (1) Falla of Gateshead's rediscovery of the value of spade industry in cultivating wheat as the agricultural counterpart of Arkwright's discovery; and (2) the abolition of coined money as the counterpart in distributive economics of machinery in productive economics. As to this last nostrum, it was perhaps due to a misunderstanding of Ricardo's dictum, that labour is the measure of "real value" (as to which see MILL'S Pol. Econ. iii. xv.; M'Culloch's Pol. Econ. ii. i.), and to a belief in the superiority of paper to coin, which he shared with ATTWOOD and PEEL, whom he had aided in opposing the resumption of cash payments by the Bank of England in 1819. In 1830 (address to merchants) he reads these ideas into non-co-operative movements. "The wholesale and retail trade of the kingdom will soon be absorbed by a few great houses, which principle will continue to obtain until the whole business shall be taken up by banking bazaars." Between 16th June and 3rd September 1832 he converted his central offices into an "Equitable Bank of Exchange," which was afterwards called "The National Co-operative Trades Union and Equitable Labour Exchange," and was meant to substitute labour, which he called "intrinsic value," for money as the measure of value (see LABOUR EXCHANGE). The average hour's work "contained in commodities" was to be the unit of measurement (cp. Autobiogr. ii. 302; see Karl MARX). Say, a pair of boots contained "twenty hours' work, and a pair of trousers "forty hours'" work; the cobbler would come to the bank, deposit his boots, and receive a note for twenty hours, and return next week with a second pair and receive a second note; and then if he wished, receive a pair of trousers for his two notes. For this purpose, it was essential to equalise every one's hour's work. Pending the difficulty of getting workmen to submit to this levelling, he adopted a provisional scheme which had two features: (i.) if the boot-maker who brought boots said, "I paid five shillings for materials"; the valuer wrote him down ten hours; money value of materials was the gauge of hourcredit; (ii.) bad work was counted as "containing" fewer hours than it actually took; there was a despotic valuer at headquarters. Further complications arose when (iii.) provision merchants and farmers fought shy of the system; and (iv.) 9000 hours' value was purloined from the storea loss which Owen made good, though not legally liable.1 After this last event (27th July 1833), Owen was superseded at headquarters; and the

1 R. Owen's Rotunda in Gray's Inn Road: "I did not witness the introduction of the millennium, and I believe that soon after this time the Rotunda, with its happy auguries, came to an end. The excellent and truly philanthropic founder [R. Owen] spent three or four fortunes on his efforts to raise his fellow men, and his failures were in consequence of his implicit trust in human nature, and his conviction that any one may

central organisation broke up in 1834.

This

scheme first inflated then ruined the co-operative societies to whom it was, in the first instance, addressed. They were the principal victims. On 1st August 1829 there were 70 (King's Co-operator), on 1st February 1830 there were 172 (London Co-op. Mag.), on 30th June 1832 there were over 400 (Crisis, i. 59), on 27th October 1832 there were over 700 co-operative societies (Crisis, i. 135), between which Owen forged these paper links; three or four years later, the number had dwindled to fifteen or so. The organisation of co-operators by means of a central exchange might have been of great help; as it was, Owen's splendid follies acted as an advertisement which stimulated cooperation to an abnormal and evanescent excess.

(e) The third branch of the scheme (of 1817, 1820, and 1823) was that poor-law authorities should set these communities going. He based this plan on the "just and legal right" of the poor to relief which does not degrade, and to employment (cp. TURGOT'S Droit au Travail); and added provisions for gradually converting paupers into co-operators, and making (c) lead to (b). The government obviously seized hold of Owen's speech against the disuniting effects of churches (21st August 1817), to reject the motion made to give this scheme a trial (see speeches of Wilberforce and VANSITTART, in House of Commons, 14th December 1819). The Leeds committee rejected Owen's pauper scheme as based on a priori grounds, New Lanark being a manufacturing village, not an agricultural paradise of a parallelogram (1819). The Lanarkshire committee in 1820 approved of the scheme as the basis for starting a county Bridewell, then shelved it. It was not so overseas. Leigh Hunt's Examiner (25th April 1819), The New Moral World, 3rd July 1841; Mary Hennell's Social Systems, etc. (1844), and J. Wolber's R. Oroen (1878), attribute the institution in 1818 of farm colonies for the unemployed in North Holland, at Frederiksoord, etc., by benevolent societies quite as much to Owen's as to General Van den Bosch's initiative; and the subsequent incorporation of "beggar colonies" of paupers in this scheme (1820-1859) was clearly due to this portion of Owen's reports (see INDUSTRIAL COLONIES).

But the reorganisation of industry was the only thing he cared about. Political reform was a matter of indifference; although power he knew would ultimately shift to the productive workers (see, e.g., Crisis, iii. 114). He first addressed a manifesto to the working classes as such in April 1819, and urged a plea for vested interests. The short passage in the first three editions, and the Scotch and American editions of the New View, opposing reformers as premature, was afterwards struck out. In the Crisis, iii.. 114, 3, he indicates the supreme importance of strikes and trades unions as compared with mere political movements. He scarcely alludes to revolution in his earlier works; but deprecates that of 1830, as expressing only individualism and competition (Crisis, i. p. 49, etc.), and with

attain perfection in any line if properly educated" (Mr. de Morgan's Autobiography, p. 160).

[For illustrations of the notes in use and further details, see Art. on LABOUR EXCHANGE.]

51

absurd ignorance accuses Mazzini of fostering revolutionary tendencies of the same competitive and individualistic character (Robert Owen's Journal, 22nd November 1851). Cold rather than hostile to any political movement, he thought industrial experiments the only social factor of paramount importance, and was as confident of success for his scheme, which he said had never been tried, in his addresses to the first two Social Science Congresses (1857 and 1858), and until he was led out of the latter, leaning on Lord Brougham, home to die, as he was at the very first outset of his career of reconstruction. "Owen," said Bentham, "begins in vapour and ends in smoke." His style is vapoury, from the time when he preached the Millennium (1st January 1816) at New Lanark, until the date of his journal entitled A Journal Explanatory of the Means to Well Place (and Well Feed, Well Clothe, Well Lodge), Well Employ and Well Educate (Well Govern and Cordially Unite) the Populations of the World (1850 to 1852), or until the date of his Millennial Gazette (1856-57). But we prefer Lord Brougham's description of his good humour and childlike simplicity (see Hansard, 14th December 1819); or Torrens's allusion to his "moral grandeur (cited in Macnab's New Views Examined); or Leigh Hunt's "Yet I could at any time quit these writers, or any other, for men who in their own persons, and in a spirit at once the boldest and most loving, dared to face the most trying and awful questions of the time-the Lamennais and Robt. Owen, the Parkers, the Fosters, and Newmans."

[Robert Owen, Autobiography (1857-58) (ends 1828, and contains nearly all his writings down to 1822 in appendices, needs corroboration in his vivid dialogues and his dates).-A. J. Booth, Robert Owen, the Founder of Socialism in England (1869), critical and biographical.W. L. Sargant, Robert Owen and his Social Philosophy (1860), biographical and hostile.-Jones Loyd, The Life, Times, and Labours of Robert Owen (1889-90), biographical and friendly.-F. A. Packard, Life of Robert Owen (1st ed. anon. 1866; 2nd ed. 1868), unimportant.-Robert Dale Owen (R. Owen's son), Threading my Way: Twenty-Seven Years of Autobiography (1873).

Criticisms of Owen are contained in The Edinburgh Review (1819).-Malthus, Essay, bk. iii. (6th ed. 1826), disapproving.-A. F. Paget, Introduction à l'Etude de la Science Sociale (2nd ed. 1841).-M. R. L. Reybaud, Études sur les Réformateurs contemporains ou Socialistes modernes (3rd ed. 1842-3).-G. J. Holyoake, History of Co-operation in England (1875-9).-B. Potter, The Co-operative Movement in Great Britain (1891), pp. 12-31; as to anticipations of Rochdale Pioneers, see pp. 61, 67.-S. and B. Webb, History of Trade Unionism (1894), pp. 119, 143, 151.-R. W. Cooke Taylor, The Modern Factory System (1891), p. 209. and G. Wallas, Life of Place (1898).

As to the American experiments see The New Harmony Gazette, ed. by R. D. Owen, Frances Wright, from 1st Oct. 1825 to 3rd Oct. 1827.-The Co-operative Magazine (Jan. 1826-Jan. 1830). Both are Owenite papers and therefore communistic.-J. H. Noyes, The History of American Socialism (1870), compiled from valuable original materials collected by A. J. Macdonald, but not thorough.

As to the "Equitable Exchange" experiments see the Owenite paper The Crisis, ed. by R. Owen and R. D. Owen (19th May 1832 to 27th April 1833). It appealed mainly to co-operators. Then it was named The Crisis and National Co-operative Trades Union and Equitable Exchange Gazette (27th April 1833 to 16th August 1834), in order to appeal equally to non-co-operative trade unionists.

As to the subsequent propaganda see the Owenits paper The New Moral World (1st Nov. 1834 to 13th Nov. 1841). Its full title up to 22nd Oct. 1836 is The New Moral World conducted by R. Owen and his Disciples, or

merely By Disciples of R. Owen: after which R. Owen's name is omitted. Its full title after 13th July 1838 is The New Moral World or Gazette of the Universal Community Society of Rational Religionists enrolled under the (Friendly Societies') Acts. The U. C. S. of R. R. were the paying members of the association of all classes; they could not have been enrolled under these acts, if their payments had been made for co-operative purposes.] [See COMMUNISM; CO-OPERATION; FACTORY ACTS;

SOCIALISM.]

J. D. B.

OWLERS were smugglers of wool or sheep to the continent when the exportation from England was prohibited, between the Restoration and the beginning of the 18th century, in the interest, as was supposed, of the home manufacture of cloth. The chief export station for rough wool was Romney Marsh, but much went also from Sussex, Essex, and Hampshire, and combed wool was smuggled in considerable quantities from Canterbury. French boats well armed received the wool at night, and their captains generally succeeded in eluding the armed sloops which guarded the Channel, and

the severe penalties which were enacted against them, and of course enacted in vain as long as the owlers could make a net profit of 3d. on every pound of wool they exported. It is uncertain whether the term "owling" is a corruption of "wooling," or is derived from the smugglers' practice of carrying on their trade by night.

[John Smith, LL.B., Chronicon Rusticum Commerciale, or Memoirs of Wool, 1747, ii. 30, 206, 324, 536, 546, 561, with reference to Rapin, Continuation, p. 371.- England's Interest Asserted, 1669, and England's Interest by Trade Asserted, 1671, both by W. Carter.-Abstract of Proceedings of W. Carter, 1694.-Excidium Angliae and Anglia Restaurata, both by the Cheshire Weaver, 1727.-Bischoff's Woollen and Worsted Manufactures.-Dowell's Hist. of Taxation, iv. 433.-Rogers's First Nine Years of the Bank of England, p. 32.-Stephen's Criminal Law, iii. 228.]

E. G. P.

PACIOLI or PACIOLO, FRA LUCA (15th | century), sometimes called Luca da Borgo, from his native village in Tuscany, was a Franciscan monk and distinguished mathematician.

He published at Venice in 1484 his Summa de Arithmetica, Geometria, Proportioni e Proportionalità, republished at Toscolano 1523. This contains much information on the commercial practice of his time, especially on partnership, sales, interest, drafts, and bills. His own leanings are towards a liberal interpretation of the doctrines of the CANON LAW (q.v.) on these subjects; he also explains clearly the method of book-keeping by double entry, particularly developed in Venice, thence called alla Veneziana.

A new edition of the part of this treatise relating to book-keeping was published by Vincenzo Gitti (Fra Luca di Pacioli: Trattato di computi e scritture) Turin, 1878; according to Goldschmidt, Handbuch des Handelsrechts, Stuttgart, 1891 (p. 246, note 36), it is very defective. See also Libri, Histoire des sciences mathématiques en Italie, iii. p. 133. Jäger, Lucas Pacioli und Simon Stevin and Der Traktat des Lucas Pacioli, Stuttgart, 1878, who has in the latter followed the defective text of Vincenzo Gitti. E. Ca.

PACKMAN. A term applied to pedlars who carry their goods in a pack (see PEDLAR).

J. E. C. M.

PACOTILLE: Fr. (maritime trade). Seamen's ventures, or goods captains and crews were formerly allowed by custom to take with them in small quantities, on trading voyages, to sell on their own account. They were free of freight, and the practice was tolerated to interest seamen in the expedition. In the early days of maritime discovery, before the creation of factories or depots of merchandise in distant countries and colonies, the word pacotille was also employed to describe cargoes of various commodities taken on voyages of circum

|

navigation to barter with or sell to the natives. By extension cheap common goods carried by pedlars are called pacotille, and the word is now used in disparagement to describe any merchandise as being of inferior quality. T. L.

At

PAGANO, FRANCESCO MARIO (1748-1799). Born in Brienza (Basilicata); a distinguished jurist and a martyr for Italian liberty. twenty he began to publish his legal works. He commenced by teaching criminal law at the university of Naples. Persecuted for the ideas expressed in his writings, and exiled, he went to Rome and taught public law at the university there. He was recalled to Naples in 1799 to take part in the provisional Neapolitan government-he arranged the plan for the constitution of the republic, and presided at the legislative council. When the Neapolitan revolution was quelled he was condemned to death and executed. Pagano's memorandum on the trade in fish is of importance to economists; he follows the ideas of the PHYSIOCRATS, and demands domestic freedom of trade.

He

In this treatise, written to convince the people of the advantage of continuing the abolition of the excise on fish, which some wished to reenforce, Pagano observes that the price of goods is naturally determined by their quantity, and the demand for them, and that nature-through freedom of trade, not law-must fix the price. Price, established by law, may be wrong, and may damage both buyers and sellers. would also remove the monopoly of sale granted only to a few, and would allow the fishermen themselves to sell-this right to be accorded to others as well as to fishermen ; all crafts to thrive in freedom. Thus Pagano desired the abolition of all the corporations of arts and crafts, and of all obstacles and restrictions on the home trade.

Ragionamento sulla libertà del commercio del pesce in Napoli, Napoli, 1789.-Saggi politici dei principii, progressi e decadenza della società, Napoli, 1789.

[Foruari, Delle teorie economiche nelle provincie Napoletane, vol. ii. Milano, Hoepli, 1888.-Alberti, Le corporazioni d'arti e mestieri e la libertà del commercio interno negli antichi economisti italiani, Milan, Hoepli, 1888.]

U. R.

PAGE, FREDERIC (1769-1834), a Berkshire country gentleman, author of Principles of English Poor Laws Illustrated and Defended, Bath, 1822, 2nd ed., London, 1829, 8vo, and of Observations on the State of the Indigent Poor in Ireland, London, 1830, 8vo. In the first, he insists that, through the intervention of the State, the indigent have a right to relief from the possessors of property. He advocates the extension of select vestries under the Sturges Bourne Act 1819 (see POOR LAW), and a strict discrimination in granting relief, according to character. The pamphlet is chiefly interesting as describing the working of the old poor-law system, under the most favourable circumstances. The later pamphlet is written to advocate a poor law for Ireland.

H. E. E.

PAGET, AMÉDÉE (died about 1850), was a disciple of C. FOURIER (q.v.), and wrote:Introduction à l'étude de la science sociale (Paris, 1838 and 1841), which is considered one of the best statements of his master's doctrines.

E. Ca.

PAGNINI, GIOVANNI FRANCESCO (17151789), born at Volterra in Tuscany, held office in the financial department of the Tuscan government. He was a member of the "Società dei Georgofili" of Florence, a skilful agriculturist, and an able writer.

Well acquainted with the writers of the school of natural right and some English philosophers, he translated (published at Florence, 1751, two vols.) Locke's works: Two Treatises of Civil Government (1690); Some considerations on the lowering of Interest, etc. (1691); Further considerations concerning raising the value of Money (1698). He then reprinted parts of the Manuali pratici, which the two bankers Francesco Balducci and Giovanni da Uzzano had written in the 14th and 15th centuries for the use of merchants.

In his essay "On the right price of Commodities, etc.," he demonstrated that the Romans, who sought wealth only through war, adopted some provisions which were quite contrary to that principle which, as he says, "is able to procure its citizens or subjects the power of using advantageously the produce of its territory, as well as to protect and forward manufactures and facilitate the export of both manufactures and natural products; and as far as possible to prevent the introduction and consumption of foreign goods." And as the system of conquest was no longer possible, and by themselves the states could no longer provide for agriculture and war, Pagnini praised and suggested such measures of government as were not designed to procure the state abundance of foreign commodities and goods, but

53

He

to save it also "the expense which the consumption of the same would imply, and to enable it also to acquire the gold and silver of other nations." In his remarks on the question of value, Pagnini did not follow the doctrines of LOCKE, whom he had translated, but those of PUFENDORF. admitted the existence of an actual market value only, not that of a natural or normal value; and he maintained, though he gave it a special meaning of his, the theory of supply and demand as VERRI, ORTES, GIOJA, GALIANI, and others had done. He also maintained that the ideas of the Romans about the origin and functions of money were altogether opposed to the theories of modern economists, a thesis which was completely refuted by NERI and CARLI (see PAULUS JULIUS). In his work Della Decima (see DÉCIMES), Pagnini gives a history of that tax and the trade of the ancient Florentines, with a digression on the value of gold and silver, and on the rate of prices of commodities in the 14th and 15th centuries compared with those of the 18th century. This work is still of use in the study of prices-Saggio sopra il giusto prezzo delle cose, la giusta valuta della moneta e sopra il commercio dei Romani, inserted in Custodi's Raccolta,-Scrittori classici d' economia politica, modern part, t. ii., Milano, 1813.-Della Decima, Lisbona e Lucca, 1765, and Firenze, 175666.

A. B.

"

PAGODA, HISTORY OF. A gold coin of southern India, known also by the native names of varâha or han, the former word indicating the "Boar" avatár of Vishnu, figured on south Indian coins from the 5th century onwards, whilst han (gold) is their later Mahommedan name. From the 16th century onwards this was the Portuguese "pardao de ouro," perhaps meaning "a quarter of a gold rupee. The name pagoda is sometimes derived from Persian words meaning idol-temple, but more commonly from the Sk. bhagavat holy, for the reason given in Fra Paolino's Viaggio of 1796 that the coin bore the effigy of the goddess Bhagavadi, a name corrupted into pagoda by Europeans (cp. Linschoten's Travels of 1596):-"They are Indian and Heathenish money with the picture of a Diuell upon them and therefore are called Pagodas." The effigy in question was that of Krishna, or Swâmi, whence the "swamy-pagoda" of Madras, containing about 46 grains of fine gold. Still better known was its successor, the "star-pagoda" of Madras, which was the standard coin of south India till 1818. This coin, bearing the eponymous device of a star, contained by law 42.048 grains fine, and was therefore worth about 7s. 6d. There were also Pondicherry and Porto Novo pagodas worth about 1s. less. All these three varieties were familiar at the beginning of the last century throughout the Indian currency area, which then included not only Ceylon and Mauritius, but also the Even in New South Cape and St. Helena. Wales, in 1800, the pagoda was constituted a legal tender. By proclamation of 7th January 1818 in Madras the coinage of the gold pagoda