Hermann Schwarzwald’s 1914 German-language study connects Chinese monetary practices with a critique of state-centered monetary theory and a reform program. Its governing argument is that China’s silver-by-weight system embodies commercial rationality. Reform should improve measurement and circulation without subordinating money to fiscal extraction or imposing institutions unsuited to Chinese conditions.
The opening dispute between the German imperial treasury and the Deutsch-Asiatische Bank over Boxer indemnity payments makes European misunderstanding an object of inquiry:
Wie wenig es dem Europäer verständlich ist, zeigen gerade auch gewisse Wendungen in den Prozeßakten sowie in den sich daran schließenden Diskussionen.
English translation: How little intelligible it is to the European is shown precisely by certain turns of phrase in the court records as well as in the discussions attaching to them.
The central confusion concerns the tael: a designation of weight is treated as though it were a coin or a nationally authorized monetary unit. Chinese payments instead depend on locally defined ounces and the quality of the metal delivered.
Bei Zahlungen kommt aber nicht allein das Gewicht in Betracht, sondern auch die Feinheit des Silbers, worin gezahlt werden soll.
English translation: In payments, however, not only the weight comes into consideration, but also the fineness of the silver in which payment is to be made.
This distinction explains the coexistence of silver ingots and foreign or Chinese dollars without making coinage the foundation of valuation. Minted pieces remain subject to calculation by metallic content:
Die Preise und Rechnungen gelten trotzdem immer in Unzen, und auf Unzen werden die Münzen als Metallstücke verrechnet — wobei die Kosten des Einschmelzens und Nachprüfens separat und ausdrücklich kalkuliert werden.
English translation: Prices and accounts nevertheless always hold in ounces, and the coins are reckoned against ounces as pieces of metal — whereby the costs of melting down and of assaying are calculated separately and expressly.
Schwarzwald compares this practice with international bullion settlement, where European banks likewise look beyond national coin names. The indemnity dispute exposes its political stakes: China collected customs revenue in silver while owing fixed gold amounts and therefore bore exchange risk. Although he accepts the treasury’s claim against its collecting bank, he regards the disputed surplus as unjustly extracted from China.
The history of copper cash supplies the negative counterpart to silver’s commercial development. Debasement and heterogeneous provincial issues burdened small payments and increased dependence on money changers. Merchants and wealthy households adopted silver, and the state followed through taxation. Depreciated government paper similarly illustrates the damage fiscal intervention could inflict on monetary reliability.
These examples support Schwarzwald’s challenge to the state theory of money. Chinese commerce, banking, and credit demonstrate, in his account, that monetary acceptance need not originate in sovereign authorization. Drawing on Eugen Dühring, he locates money’s basis in metals’ physical properties, scarcity, and general acceptability. Coinage certifies value rather than creating it. His description is thus also a polemic, organized around an opposition between commercial intelligence and governmental predation.
The reform discussion asks how change can succeed where administrative commands cannot simply displace customary practices. Schwarzwald rejects an imposed gold standard and the gold-exchange schemes associated with Jeremiah Jenks and G. Vissering. British India’s arrangements depend, he argues, on colonial administrative power and credit unavailable to China. Such comparisons also expose hierarchical assumptions about national commercial capacities.
His alternative begins with circulating silver. Inconsistent weights, variable fineness, and the expense of weighing and dividing metal are the defects to remedy. He proposes unrestricted minting of privately supplied silver into Kuping-ounce coins and proportional subdivisions of uniform fineness. Convenient, reliable coins would gain voluntary acceptance while spreading a common weight standard. The state should support trustworthy certification rather than manipulate monetary value.
Against this proposal he sets the February 1914 coinage law’s yuan, minting charge, and underweight subsidiary coins. He predicts that users will continue valuing pieces by metal content, making the new issues another complication. Restrictions on silver coinage and a fixed gold parity would repeat this overestimation of governmental power.
Gold nevertheless belongs in his proposed system. Collecting customs duties in gold would align revenue with foreign debt service; separate gold and silver budgets would clarify obligations. Freely coined gold and silver ounces could circulate at market-determined exchange rates, without a legally fixed bimetallic ratio. Full-value metallic reserves would protect against credit crises and adverse international balances. Existing depreciated notes should therefore be redeemed before new paper or a central issuing bank is introduced. Schwarzwald uses Chinese institutions to question European monetary categories, making transparent measurement, voluntary adoption, and restraint of fiscal power the foundations of monetary trust.
This work was divided into 2 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 2 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian