"

expenditures, "much of that sustenance and wealth of this nation which now goes to foreigners would not be kept at home, and nourish and circulate among our own people (402) ? "Whether an Irish lady, set out with French silks and Flanders lace may not be said to consume more beef and butter than a hundred of our labouring peasants" (144)? "of how great consequences are fashions to the public" (99)? "Whether it may not concern the wisdom of the legislature to interpose in the making of fashions" (13)?

(2) The wisdom of the legislature is also to be employed in creating a national bank. The scheme is explained more fully in the first than in the second edition. Berkeley asks "Whether the sure way to supply people with tools and materials, and to get them at work, be not a free circulation of money" (239)? He regards the "promoting of industry" as the true and sole end, the rule and measure, of a national bank" (314). It may appear to us more doubtful "Whether there be any difficulty in comprehending that the whole wealth of the nation is in truth the stock of a national bank" (438) And it savours now of heterodoxy to ask "Whether the true idea of money as such be not altogether that of a ticket or counter" (23, 441)?

(3) A less prominent, but still cardinal, part of Berkeley's teaching is that the multitude as well as the quality of population is an element of well-being. "Whether the main point be not to multiply and employ our people" (352)? "Whether it would not be delightful to live in a country swarming, like China, with busy people" (359)?

Some of the suggestions made in the Querist are found in the Essay towards preventing the Ruin of Great Britain (1721), where, besides inculcating moral reforms, Berkeley proposes to encourage population and manufactures.

[The Works of George Berkeley, formerly Bishop of Cloyne, edited by Professor A. C. Fraser, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 4 vols. 1871. The Querist, with notes, 1829.]

F. Y. E. BERLIN DECREES. See CONTINENTAL SYSTEM.

BERNARD, SIR THOMAS, BART. (1750-1818), was one of the originators of the co-operative novement in England. He was employed by his father, Francis Bernard, the Governor of the province of New Jersey, as his secretary, and was called to the bar in 1780, but early devoted himself to philanthropical pursuits. Assisted by Count Rumford, Eliot, Wilberforce, and especially by the Bishop Shute Barrington of Durham, he founded in 1796 the "Society for Bettering the Condition and Increasing the Comforts of the Poor," the reports of which are for the most part his personal work.

The same benevolent tendencies inspired him to publish The Case of the Salt Duties, with Proofs and

135

Illustrations, 1817, in order to bring about their repeal. Besides the above-mentioned

works his "Observations on the different Proposals which have been made respecting the Poor during the two preceding Centuries," are very important, through their wealth of information. They are joined by way of an appendix to: The Life of Sir Thomas Bernard, Baronet. By the Rev. James Baker, his nephew and executor, 1819.

[Dictionary of National Biography, vol. iv. pp. 387, 388.-G. J. Holyoake, Self-help a Hundred Years ago, 1888, ch. iii. ch. iv. ch. vi.] 8. B.

He

BERNHARDI, THEODOR VON, economist, historian, and diplomatist, born at Berlin 1802, died 1887. His youth was spent in Russia. In 1820-23 he studied at Heidelberg, and then, after travelling abroad, settled in Silesia. was appointed a Prussian "Legationsrath" in 1865, and for some years was actively employed in diplomatic work in Italy, Spain, and Portugal. He is known as an economist by his Versuch einer Kritik der Gründe welche für grosses und kleines Grundeigenthum angeführt werden, 1848. "Under this modest title," says ROSCHER, "is concealed a series of thorough-going investigations on the questions which are most important from a general point of view. The whole belongs to the best of what has been written against whatever is one-sided in the doctrines of SMITH, and still more of RICARDO. Were Bernhardi writing in our day, he would without doubt be spoken of as following the same direction as the SOCIALISTS OF THE CHAIR." The point Roscher finds most characteristic in him is the historical spirit of his work, seeking, as it does, to explain what are the views of human affairs out of which the opposite doctrines on large and small properties have respectively taken their rise, and with which they must stand or fall. Bernhardi is also author of several valuable works on political and military history. (Roscher, Geschichte der Nat. Oekon. in Deutschland, p. 1041). J. K. I.

BESOLD, CHRISTOPH (1577-1638), the greatest German master of political science in the first half of the 17th century, was born at Tübin

gen in 1577. After the battle of Nördlingen

he announced his conversion to Roman Catholicism, entered the Austrian service, and was for a time privy-councillor. So renowned was he in his own day that the emperor wished him to fill a chair in Vienna, the pope one at Bologna, and the court of Denmark one in that country. He died in 1638 at Ingolstadt, where he was professor. He was characterised by a many-sidedness which, says RosCHER, reminds us of GROTIUS and SALMASIUS. He was a most voluminous writer on theology and philosophy, law, history, and politics. In his De Aerario (2d ed. 1620) he gives a full enumeration of the questions to which statistics should furnish a reply. His economic doctrines are stated in

his Synopsis politica doctrina, and his Vita et mortis consideratio politica, 1623. His views on usury are remarkable, especially when we remember that they long preceded the arguments of Salmasius on the same subject. He denies the Aristotelian doctrine of the unfruitfulness of money, makes loans on INTEREST a case of legitimate locatio, disputes the common interpretation of the Jewish prohibition of interest, and only asks for a legal limitation of the rate. He agrees with the mercantile school as to the necessity of preventing the exportation of money and regulating the corn trade, and as to the propriety of sumptuary legislation. His great defect is the unsystematic character of his writings, which often consist merely of collectanea from various sources, loosely connected and interspersed with frequent digressions. THOMASIUS attributes to him "multa diligentia, magnum ingenium," but "exiguum judicium."

[Roscher, Gesch. der Nat. Oek. in Deutschland, p. 195.]

J. K. I.

BETTERMENT. A word imported from the United States of America, and denoting an improvement of property. It has recently become familiar in England as the name for a principle of taxation, the adoption of which, for the purposes of local taxation is recommended by some politicians-the principle being that persons benefited by public expenditure should contribute to such expenditure to the extent of the increased value of their property, and this not only if the improvement effected by the public authority was carried out for the purpose of conferring a benefit on such property, but also if the resulting benefit was purely accidental, the expenditure having been undertaken for a totally different purpose. The advocates of the principle assert that it has been recognised by previous legislation both in the United States and in England, and that in extending its application they are introducing no new system of taxation.

As regards England the following instances are given :

(1) Various Sewers Acts, beginning with a statute of Henry VI., by which Commissioners were appointed for the purpose of constructing sewers, drains, seawalls, and other works for the prevention of floods, and for the purpose of apportioning the cost of such works among the owners of property within their respective areas. The Commissioners were to ascertain by whose fault any damage had previously been caused, who was specially injured by the previous state of things, and who would be specially benefited by the new works. These facts were to be considered in the apportionment (see the words of the Commission as set out in 6 Henry VI. c. 5, and 23 Henry VIII. c. 5).

(2) § 159 of the Metropolis Management Act (18 & 19 Vict. c. 120), which enables any vestry and any district board to impose

special rates on any part of the parish or district, or to exempt any part of the parish or district from rates, with respect to expenditure which has been incurred for the benefit of any particular part, or has not been incurred for the benefit of the whole of any parish or district.

(3) § 8 (8) of the Artisans' Dwellings Act (45 & 46 Vict. c. 54-now reproduced by $38 (8) of the Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1890-53 & 54 Vict. c. 70), according to which the arbitrator appointed under that Act has power, in the case of the compulsory demolition of an obstructive building, to impose a special rate on the owner of a building previously obstructed, to the extent of any increase in the value of such building resulting from such demolition. Other statutory provisions have also been relied upon, but they are either exactly analogous to those mentioned or obviously irrelevant.

It is not difficult to show that the principle brought out in the first two instances is not even superficially analogous to the principle of betterment as defined above. Landowners belonging to a district threatened by floods must take common measures for their protection, and as some individuals are more careless or more selfish than others, public officers are appointed to ensure efficient measures and a just apportionment of the expense. There is here no public expenditure in the proper sense, nor is there any apportionment, based on the increase in the value of property. The Metropolis Management Act, in authorising the sub division of parishes and districts for rating purposes, only recognises a principle which underlies all local government and taxation; viz. that expenditure incurred for the exclusive benefit of a particular area ought to be borne by the inhabitants of that area. As it often happens that a metropolitan parish or district comprises parts widely separated from each other, and public works undertaken for the benefit of one part may be useless or even hurtful to another part, it would be manifestly unjust to recognise no other area for local taxation except the arbitrary and frequently fanciful area of the parish or district. Housing of the Working Classes Act seems, at first sight, to come nearer to the principle of betterment than the other statutes mentioned, inasmuch as it expressly declares that the increase in the value of improved premises is to be considered for the purpose of the apportionment of the contributions payable in respect of the compensation to the owners of obstructive buildings, and inasmuch as it introduces special rates upon individuals as distinguished from local areas; but here the analogy ceases. demolition of an obstructive building is ordered on the ground of its being injurious to an adjoining house, and the primary object of the demolition is, therefore, the benefit of that

The

The

particular house. The special rate to be imposed in such a case is to be levied like a private improvement rate under the Public Health Acts; and, like a private improvement rate, it is not a tax in the usual sense of the word, but the repayment of a sum spent by the local authority for the special benefit of the party from whom it is to be collected.

In all these cases the expenditure is to be incurred with the special object of conferring benefits on a particular area or particular persons, and it is from that area or from those persons that the rate is to be collected. As Mr. Pember tersely says in his speech against the Strand Improvement Bill (p. 2): the principle hitherto not departed from is "that the incidence of taxation should be determined by the motive of the expenditure, and not by its accidental results."

The American legislation on the subject has been summarised by Mr. John Rae (Contemporary Review, May 1890, p. 644 seq.) He defines a betterment tax as "the special assessment of the expense (or part of the expense) of a local improvement on the adjoining property which is specially benefited by the improvement." This definition is somewhat ambiguous, as it is not clear whether such an assessment is to take place irrespectively of the object of the expenditure; and the ambiguity is not removed by the instances which are given of the imposition of a betterment tax, many of which seem explainable in the same way as the English statutes to which reference has been made. It is, however, quite clear that the principle of betterment, even in a more restricted sense, is not recognised in all the States of the Union, and that where it is recognised, the manner of applying it is by no means uniform.

The argument from precedent does not, under these circumstances, seem well founded, and the question as to the advisability of introducing the principle of betterment must be decided on the merits only. Before considering whether the proposed new method of taxation is just or expedient, it will be useful to ascertain how it can be carried out in practice. For this purpose the evidence taken by the Select Committee on the London Streets (Strand Improvement) Bill -a bill promoted by the London County Council and withdrawn after the rejection of its principal provisions-is highly instructive. The object of the bill was the widening of the Strand for the purpose of facilitating metropolitan traffic. This clearly appears from the preamble, which begins: "Whereas obstruction and delay to traffic is caused by the narrowness of the thoroughfare known as the Strand near the Churches of St. Mary-le-Strand and St. Clement Danes, and having regard to the extent and character of the traffic using the said thoroughfare, it is expedient that it should

137

be widened and improved," etc., but as it was believed that the improvement was likely to cause an increase in the value of the adjoining property, it was proposed to raise part of the expenditure (not exceeding one-half) by contributions from the owners or occupiers of such improved property, which were to assume the form of yearly rent-charges. The bill created a betterment area, and provided that an arbitrator was to determine whether and to what extent the improvement rent-charge was to be imposed on each separate plot within that area. The award was to state (a) the amount of the increased value which would accrue to each plot; (b) the amount of the rent-charge to be apportioned to such plot; (c) the name of the person or persons by whom such rent-charge should be payable (being the owner of, occupier, or person otherwise interested in such plot).

The following are some of the practical difficulties disclosed by the evidence before the Select Committee.

1. The area of betterment was settled before. hand, and the arbitrator had no power to make an assessment on any property outside the area. At the same time the limits of the area were not fixed on any intelligible principle. The surveyor who made the plan almost admits this in his evidence. To the question (p. 101) "Why have you taken one side of Devereux Court and not the other?" he replies: "I am obliged to draw the line somewhere." Later on when asked (p. 103) "Why have you put it [New Court] in the betterment area?" he says: "You cannot always tell the reason why;" and similar answers are frequent. It may be objected that these facts are damaging to the proposed scheme, but not to the principle of betterment, but it is easy to see that the difficulty is not due to the accidents of this particular case. It is quite impossible to fix an area beforehand which is not more or less arbitrary; and if it is left to the arbitrator to find betterment wherever it exists without regard to any area, the difficulty of his task becomes insurmountable.

2. Even within a limited area the arbitrator's work may be so arduous as to become practically impossible. If no time be fixed for the making of the final award, great inconvenience must result; and if a time be fixed, the pressure of time must interfere with the completeness of the inquiry. Mr. R. C. Driver, one of the best known estate agents in London, being asked: "Now, apart from any machinery in this particular bill, do you think from your experience as a surveyor you could deal with this question of betterment?" replies: "I do not know the surveyor at the present moment amongst the whole range of them who is competent to deal with it" (p. 229). It might be said that the difficulty of the inquiry in the particular case was due to the large extent of the area, but it

138

would never be feasible to apply the principle of betterment to a small area, as no appreciable part of the total expenditure could be recovered in such a case.

3. The arbitrator, before making his award with regard to any particular plot, would have to hear the evidence concerning the whole area (see Mr. Tewson's evidence, on p. 273). There would, therefore, be a period of uncertainty extending over several years, concerning every piece of ground within the area, and as no one would purchase land subject to an uncertain contingent rent - charge, the whole property would become unsaleable during the period of

suspense.

4. The arbitrator might find that only a very small part of the area derived any benefit. It would therefore be impossible to estimate beforehand what proportion of the cost would eventually become chargeable to the Metropolis.

5. The metropolitan ratepayers are now paying interest on sums borrowed for other metropolitan improvements which probably have conferred benefits on particular localities. If some inhabitants of the Strand district were made to pay for part of the expenditure by which they were specially benefited, they would be justified in asking for a readjustment of metropolitan taxation, so as to be relieved of part of the burden borne by them for the benefit of other localities.

Apart from these practical difficulties there are serious objections to the proposed adoption of the principle of betterment on grounds of justice and expediency. These may be shortly stated as follows:

1. There is hardly any public expenditure which does not benefit somebody, and it would be obviously unfair to give away these benefits in some cases and sell them in other cases. The erection of the New Law Courts has increased the value of property in the neighbourhood to an enormous extent, yet the cost has been paid entirely from imperial funds.

2. If public bodies may ask for contribution from persons benefited by their expenditure, irrespectively of the objects of the expenditure, private corporations or individuals ought to have the same right. A landowner who rebuilds a particular plot of houses, or plants trees or gardens for the benefit of his own property, may thereby increase the value of property within a whole district. A railway company may open a new area for building purposes; yet the persons benefited are not required to contribute to the outlay.

3. It is dangerous to establish a principle of taxation, the incidence of which, instead of being determined by definite general rules, depends on the discretion of one or more individuals whose fitness cannot be ascertained beforehand, and upon a calculation of probabilities which may and frequently will be erroneous.

4. If the effect of public expenditure on private property is to be considered at all, irrespectively of the object of the expenditure, the loss ought to be considered as well as the gain. If those who benefit ought to contribute, those who lose ought to be compensated. Some of the advocates of betterment recognise this consequence. Mr. James Beal, one of the witnesses called on behalf of the London County Council, in reply to the question (p. 199): “If you adopt that principle without regard to distance, would you also admit that to any distance people might claim, on the other hand, from the Council, for what you call an improvement doing damage to their property?" answers "Certainly." "Can you give any idea to the committee of what the pecuniary ultimate result would be, what your balance-sheet would look like?" "No." "It might turn out to be a very bad principle for you?" "When you assert a principle follow it to the death; do not trouble about results." It should be remembered in reference to the last remark that in this case the persons who asserted the principle were not the persons whom the result would have affected.

The metropolitan authorities have hitherto adopted a plan for obtaining the benefit of a rise in the value of property, occurring in consequence of improvements effected at the general expense, which has produced satisfactory results, and is free from the inconvenience of the betterment tax. This plan is known as the method of recoupment, and is applied in the following manner. The public authority acquires compulsory powers to purchase land beyond the immediate necessities of the contemplated improvement, at a valuation which does not include the prospective increase in value which will be due to improvement. Such land is resold when the improvement is completed, and by the profit on the re-sale a part of the cost of the improvement is repaid. The principal objection urged against this plan is that the price of the compulsory purchase includes trade interests which are destroyed, and that this loss takes away the profit which would otherwise have been obtained on a re-sale. There is not much force in this objection, inasmuch as most of the houses occupied for trade purposes are held by the tenants on short leases, and the public authority can therefore buy the freehold without paying for any trade interests, and allow the leases to run out before re-selling. The duty to re-sell may be postponed for a number of years, so as to allow for time for longer leases to run off. This plan, which is just and fair to everybody concerned, is free from most of the objections against the betterment scheme, and answers every legitimate purpose for which that scheme has been devised.

E. S.

BETTERNESS. A term used in bullion

transactions. It is usual in the older methods of reporting the results of assays, which are still retained side by side with the decimal system of reporting, to refer the proportion of gold or silver in ingots or bars to "standards" for the respective metals. Standard gold contains 22 parts of gold and 2 of baser metal in 24 parts; these parts are called carats, the gold carat containing 4 grains, the grain being subdivided into 8 parts. The standard for silver coin and plate consists of 11 ounces 2 dwts. of silver and 18 dwts. of copper in the pound of 12 ounces troy. Betterness, and worseness, are merely conventional terms which have been adopted for centuries to show how much gold in "carats" and "grains" and "eighths," and how much silver in ounces and pennyweights, the mass of metal contains in addition to, or in defect of, the legal standard, which standard affords the basis for calculating the money value of the metal.

C. R-A.

BEZANTS. A name given to gold and silver coins which were struck at Byzantium (Constantinople), the capital of the Eastern empire, and which circulated throughout Europe from the 6th to the 15th or 16th centuries. The gold coins were current in England in AngloSaxon and Norman times, and may be said to have been used as international money.

Of the original bezants the chief gold coin was called the "SOLIDUS" and the silver coin the "miliarision." They were struck about the year 500 A.D., in the time of Emperor Anastasius, and were made of fine metal. They were, however, gradually debased, and by the 15th century, when the Eastern empire fell, they had become greatly reduced in fineness. Their weight also did not remain constant, and it is impossible therefore to say what was their exact value. A gold coin, however, which was probably the largest to which the title bezant could correctly be applied, was issued in the reign of Heraclius (615 A.D.) under the title of "hexagram." The weight of this coin was 105 grains (probably fine gold) and its value in sterling therefore would be 18s. 7d.

The current rate at which gold bezants were received throughout Europe has been estimated at a ducat (9s. 4d.), so that they may be taken as roughly equivalent to a HALF-SOVEREIGN; and this estimate would appear to be confirmed by the fact that 200,000 bezants, paid for the ransom of St. Louis of France (1250), were taken as equal to 100,000 LIVRES (pounds). Bezants, however, which were distributed at the coronation of Henry II. of France (1547), three centuries later, were equal in value to two DUCATS. As, however, it is certain that in the course of time the word bezant came to be applied to any gold coin in common use, quite apart from any consideration of its value or of its place of origin, such discrepancies in their estimated value cannot but be expected to occur.

F. E. A.

139

BIANCHINI, LUDOVICO, born at Naples 1803, died 1871, was an economist, statesman, and historian of merit. Though much occupied in the highest official positions of the kingdom of Naples, he found time to write many excellent works on economical, administrative, and historical subjects.

His principal economical writings are the following-Principii del credito pubblico, viz. Principles of Public Credit, published in Naples in 1827 and 1831.-Della influenza dell' amministrazione pubblica sulla industria nazionale e sulla circolazione delle richezze, viz. On the Influence of the State on Industry and Circulation of Wealth, Naples, 1828.-Della storia delle finanze del Regno di Napoli, viz. History of Neapolitan Finance, 3 vols., Naples, 1834 and 1839.-Sullo stato delle ferriere nel Regno di Napoli, Napoli, 1835.-Sulla conversione delle rendite inscritte nel gran libro del debito pubblico, viz. On the Conversion of the Public Debt, Naples, 1836.Principii della Scienza del ben vivere sociale e della economia pubblica e degli Stati, viz. Principles of containing the history of political economy, was the Science of Social Welfare; the first volume, published in Naples in 1845; the second volume, containing the principles, was published in Italian in 1855, and in French in 1857.-Storia economica di Sicilia, viz. Economical History of Sicily, Naples, 1841.

M. P.

BIBLIA, FABRIZIO, of whose life nothing is known except that he was born at Catanzaro, and wrote in 1621, by order of the Viceroy Zapatta, during one of the most serious monetary crises of the time, a pamphlet having the title, Discorso sopra l'aggiustamento della moneta e cambii nel Regno di Napoli, in Napoli, 1621. He proves himself to be much inferior to Antonio Serra, who wrote in 1613 (see A. SERRA).

M. P.

BIDDLE, NICHOLAS, born 1786, died 1844; president of the Second Bank of the United States. A graduate of Princeton College, and later a student of law, he first became connected with the bank as a government director; was its president from 1823 to 1836, and a prominent figure through the eventful years of its unequal struggle with President Jackson. Biddle managed, on the whole with success, the affairs of this great institution, ramifying with its twenty-five branches through the United States. Most of his theories of banking were sound; but his theory as to bank-note issues was mischievous. Following the principle that guided the conduct of the Bank of England during the restriction, he believed there could be no excess of issues so long as the bank's advances were confined to good commercial paper, arising out of real transactions. failed to distinguish between a bank-note proper, redeemable on demand at any branch in coin, and a draft, redeemable only at the branch on which it was drawn, and therefore practically irredeemable. Nearly all the difficulties of the bank can be traced to the vicious effects of this

He