Ed. 1 reads “It was once a fifth, as in silver, but it was found the work could not bear it.” ↩
“It is more rare to see a gold miner rich than a silver miner or of any other metal.” —Frezier, Voyage, p. 108. There seems nothing in either Frezier or Ulloa to indicate that they took the gloomy view of the prospects of the gold and silver miner which is ascribed to them in the text. From this and the curious way in which they are coupled together, here and above (here and here), and also the fact that no mention is made of the title of either of their books, it seems probable that Smith is quoting from memory or from notes which had become mixed. It is possible that he confused Frezier with Ulloa’s collaborator, Don George Juan, but Ulloa is quoted without Frezier above, here, and below, here. ↩
The Six Voyages of John Baptista Tavernier, a Noble Man of France Now Living, Through Turkey Into Persia and the East Indies, translated by J. P., 1678, does not appear to contain any such statement. Possibly it is merely founded on Tavernier’s remark that “there was a mine discovered between Coulour and Raolconda, which the King caused to be shut up again by reason of some cheats that were used there; for they found therein that sort of stones which had this green outside, fair and transparent, and which appeared more fair than the others, but when they came to the mill they crumbled to pieces” (pt. ii, p. 138). In Eds. 4 and 5 “yielded” is misprinted “yield.” ↩
Ed. 1 reads “seems.” ↩
The evidence for this statement, which does not agree with the figures in the table at the end of the chapter, is given in the next eleven paragraphs. ↩
It speaks of the Act of 1349, which ordered a continuance of wages at the level of 20 Edward III, and five or six years before (1347 or 1348 to 1353), as having been passed “against the malice of servants which were idle and not willing to serve after the pestilence without taking excessive wages,” and gives as the reason for new provisions “forasmuch as it is given the King to understand in this present Parliament by the petition of the commonalty that the said servants having no regard to the said ordinance, but to their ease and singular covetise, do withdraw themselves to serve great men and other, unless they have livery and wages to the double or treble of that they were wont to take the said twentieth year and before, to the great damage of the great men and impoverishing of all the said commonalty, whereof the said commonalty prayeth remedy.” ↩
I.e., four years before the twentieth year. ↩
This and the other reductions of ancient money to the eighteenth century standard are probably founded on the table in Martin Folkes, Table of English Silver Coins, 1745, p. 142. ↩
E.g., Fleetwood’s prices in the table at the end of the chapter. ↩
Fleetwood, Chronicon Preciosum, 1707, pp. 83–85. ↩
The date 1262 is wrong, as 51 Hen. III ran from October 28, 1266, to October 27, 1267. But the editions of the statutes which ascribe the statute to 51 Hen. III appear to have no good authority for doing so; see Statutes of the Realm, vol. i, p. 199, notes. The statute has already been quoted above, here, and is quoted again below, here. ↩
Ed. 1 reads “very far wrong.” ↩
The Regulations and Establishment of the Houshold of Henry Algernon Percy, the Fifth Earl of Northumberland, at His Castles of Wresill and Lekinfield in Yorkshire, Begun Anno Domini MDXII, 1770, pp. 2, 4, but there are not really two estimations. It seems clear that “vs. viijd.” on p. 4 is merely a misprint or mistake for “vis. viijd.,” since 118 qrs. 2 bushels are reckoned at £39 8s. 4d. ↩
15 Hen. VI, c. 2. ↩
3 Ed. IV, c. 2. ↩
1 and 2 P. and M., c. 5, § 7. Licences for exportation, however, are recognised by the Act. ↩
1 Eliz., c. 11, § 11, which, however, merely partially exempts Norfolk and Suffolk from regulations intended to prevent exportation from places where no customhouse existed. ↩
5 Eliz., c. 5, § 17. ↩
Neither his Recherches sur la valeur des Monnoies et sur les prix des grains avant et après le concile de Francfort, 1762, nor his Essai sur les Monnoies, ou réflections sur le rapport entre l’argent et les denrées, 1746, contain any clear justification for this reference. ↩
From 1446 to 1515 “Le blé fut plus bas que dans les siècles précédents.” —Essai sur la police générale des grains sur leur prix et sur les effets de l’agriculture, 1755 (by C. J. Herbert), pp. 259, 260 ↩
Ed. 1 reads “with the tenant” here and omits “of the tenant” in next line. ↩
Ed. 1 reads “rent at the price of the fiars of each year rather.” ↩
Chronicon Preciosum, 1707, pp. 121, 122. Fleetwood does not “acknowledge” any “mistake,” but says that though the price was not the market price it might have been “well agreed
