Hermann von Schullern zu Schrattenhofen · 1891
This short review of Eduard Hammer’s Ein Beitrag zur Lösung der Währungsfrage examines an attempt to redefine money and currency, continuing Hammer’s earlier treatment of the agio. Schullern moves from conceptual exposition to a guarded assessment of the theory’s Austrian implications. His central reservation is that conceptual ingenuity does not establish agreement with economic facts.
Hammer treats the franc and mark not as weights of coined precious metal but as magnitudes adopted as units of value. These units are supposedly permanently recognizable and unchanging; as measures of value, they constitute currency. Schullern calls the opening proposition somewhat startling, then explains its complementary conception of money:
Das Geld seinerseits betrachtet der Autor als ein Zeichen, welches für die als Wertheinheiten angenommenen Werthgrössen zu gelten habe; als solche Zeichen figurieren heute nur Münzen und Noten.
English translation: Money, for its part, the author regards as a sign which is to stand for the magnitudes of value assumed as units of value; as such signs there figure today only coins and notes.
The distinction separates the unit of value from its monetary sign. Gold and silver consequently appear as commodities whose prices express the comparative purchasing power of different states’ money. Schullern finds the resulting Austrian applications interesting but questions their empirical adequacy:
Die Consequenzen, welche der Autor hieraus speziell für die österreichischen Verhältnisse sieht, besitzen gewiss Interesse, ob sie aber mit den Thatsachen klappen, daran glauben wir lebhafte Zweifel hegen zu müssen.
English translation: The consequences which the author draws from this, specifically for Austrian conditions, are certainly of interest; but whether they square with the facts, of that we believe we must entertain lively doubts.
He singles out Hammer’s interpretation of the Austrian agio: a discrepancy between the value coins and notes stand for and the price demanded or paid for them, rather than a value difference between gold and silver or between currencies. The review thus locates the dispute in the relation between monetary denomination, value, and market price. Schullern withholds a fuller account of results that might seem paradoxical in isolation, while acknowledging that Hammer’s connected exposition invites reflection.
This work was divided into 1 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 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian