Hermann Schwarzwald’s 1914 review examines Keynes’s account of Indian currency through a critique of colonial monetary power. Its argument moves from the administration of reserves and silver purchases to the political foundations of the gold exchange standard, then develops a metallist alternative centered on property and voluntary credit. Schwarzwald’s central objection is that stable exchange rates do not remove the dependence of Indian wealth on British authority and London financial interests.
The review begins with the suspension of free silver coinage in 1893 and the subsequent administrative maintenance of the rupee’s gold parity. Schwarzwald emphasizes the placement in London of coinage profits, note reserves, and fiscal balances. Invested in securities or deposited with banks, these resources supplied funds to the metropolitan market while India faced substantially higher interest rates.
Der Londoner Staatssekretär für Indien ist so ein gar mächtiger Bankier, dessen Disponibilitäten auf dem Londoner Geldmarkt eine große Rolle spielen.
English translation: The London Secretary of State for India is thus a truly powerful banker, whose disposable funds play a great role on the London money market.
The description makes monetary administration an exercise of concentrated financial power. The issue is not simply whether sufficient reserves exist, but who controls them and whose economy benefits from their deployment. Schwarzwald extends this criticism to discretionary coinage and the government’s silver purchases. The politically connected brokerage involved in the 1912 purchases gives the institutional argument a concrete focus.
Die betreffende Maklerfirma gehört nämlich politisch zur regierenden Partei.
English translation: The brokerage firm in question belongs, namely, politically to the governing party.
Although the corruption allegation was dropped, Schwarzwald treats the controversy as evidence of the risks inherent in metropolitan control over Indian money. His criticism therefore exceeds an accusation against particular intermediaries: it concerns a system that places decisions affecting an immense colonial population within a narrow circle of British officials and financiers.
Keynes receives qualified recognition for explaining monetary administration, banking, reserves, and India’s balance of payments. Schwarzwald nevertheless challenges the question organizing that explanation. Efficient maintenance of the existing parity does not, in his view, establish the lasting security of the arrangement. Convertibility through gold drafts on London depends on governmental capacity and willingness to redeem. Bad harvests, financial crisis, war, or revolt could expose the fragility concealed by successful management in ordinary circumstances.
Schwarzwald consequently interprets the gold exchange standard as a colonial distributional settlement: British creditors and officials receive gold while Indians hold silver currency whose nominal value exceeds its metallic worth. He connects Keynes’s defense of economical substitutes for circulating gold to the state-centered monetary theory associated with Georg Friedrich Knapp.
Wie ersichtlich, stehen diese Anschauungen der bekannten Knappschen „Staatlichen Theorie des Geldes“ mehr als bloß nahe.
English translation: As is evident, these views stand more than merely close to Knapp's well-known "State Theory of Money."
This theoretical association marks the transition from administrative criticism to Schwarzwald’s positive conception of money. For him, money is first independently valuable property and only thereafter a means of exchange. Drawing explicitly on Eugen Dühring, he grounds the monetary role of precious metals in their material qualities and limits the state’s proper function principally to weighing and certifying coin. The difference between the rupee’s nominal and metallic values consequently appears as a governmental liability, rather than as an unproblematic achievement of monetary management.
This conception also supports his defense of Indian precious-metal saving against criticism of hoarding. Gold purchases and the retention of metal represent efforts to preserve wealth independently of official promises. Credit, by contrast, should rest on consent and confidence. Schwarzwald welcomes the development of banking within India but rejects the compulsory substitution of claims and securities for metal as sufficient evidence of financial progress.
The conclusion broadens the argument beyond India. Against quantity theory, Schwarzwald insists that money must be understood as accumulated possession as well as circulating purchasing power. Internationally, holdings of London bills reinforce Britain’s financial predominance by supplying inexpensive credit. The review thus links monetary technique to imperial hierarchy: what Keynes treats as efficient reserve management, Schwarzwald interprets as dependence sustained through currency institutions. Its critique of colonial financial power remains inseparable from its uncompromising metallism.
This work was divided into 5 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 5 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian