Excerpt from The Indian Silver Currency, An Historical and Economic Study In the discussion about standards, to no country is more attention drawn than to India; and rightly, since the fate of silver is to be decided, above all, in India. But, on this point, there exists in the Indian question considerable confusion, as in so many parts of the currency question. Many try to veil their lack of clearness under dogmatism; and talk about axioms and elementary propositions of economics, which need no proof.
In the discussion about standards, to no country is more attention drawn than to India; and rightly, since the fate of silver is to be decided, above all, in India. But, on this point, there exists in the Indian question considerable confusion, — as in so many parts of the currency question. The author have tried to base his conclusions principally upon the official documents which have been published at the initiative of both the English and Indian authorities.The author determine to investigate in this work the events only up to that point of time—to June 26, 1893—when the Indian Government closed its mints to the free coinage of silver. Should this investigation contribute somewhat to a clearer understanding of Indian affairs, He shall have accomplished his purpose. About The Translator : James Laurence Laughlin (April 2, 1850–November 28, 1933) was an American economist and Professor at Cornell University, Harvard University, and the University of Chicago, who helped to found the Federal Reserve System and was "one of the most ardent defenders of the gold standard." Laughlin was born in Deerfield, Ohio on April 2, 1850.He received a Ph.D. from Harvard University in history. His thesis regarded "Anglo-Saxon Legal Procedure" and was supervised by Henry Adams. The other members of his program were Henry Cabot Lodge and Ernest Young. Professor Laughlin's indubitable success as a teacher puzzled many who did not pass through his classroom. He was not an original thinker of great power. He did not enrich economics. He did not even keep abreast of current developments in economic theory. He had a prim and tidy mind, which he kept in perfect order by admitting nothing that did not harmonize with the furnishings installed in the 1880. Yet he held that a teacher's aim should be "the acquisition of independent power and methods of work, rather than specific beliefs. Laughlin's attack on the quantity theory had much in common with recent cost-push or structural or supply-shock theories of inflation, in emphasizing the role of factors affecting specific goods and services rather than general monetary influences. Then, as now, such theories ran against the major stream of monetary analysis as exemplified in Laughlin's time by the work of Irving Fisher. As a result, his writings on theory have had no lasting influence on economic thought.A conservative, he generally subscribed to the economic theories of John Stuart Mill and opposed bimetallism.
