Another phase of the history of bimetallism must be presented before the present status of the question can be appreciated. Four international conferences and a number of others of less importance have considered the questions involved in it, and a brief account of their deliberations and results will help us to understand the general course of official opinion on this question and the prospects for the future.

The first of these conferences was held in Paris in 1867 and was the result of a plan formulated by the delegates of the states of the Latin Union at their meeting in 1865 to promote international uniformity of action on monetary matters. The most significant fact connected with this conference was the declaration of all the states which participated, except Holland, in favour of the gold standard. Other proposals aimed at the establishment of an international unit of value. In February, 1868, the English government appointed a commission to consider the proposals of this conference, but the outcome of its deliberations was unfavourable to any change in the English system, though it expressed a strong appreciation of the advantages to be derived from legislation looking towards uniformity of international action. What happened in other states we already know. Germany adopted the gold standard in 1871-73, and her action was followed by the Scandinavian countries, Denmark, and Holland. France and the other states of the Latin Union discontinued the free coinage of five-franc pieces in 1874, and the United States dropped the silver dollar from the list of authorized coins in 1873.

The next conference was the direct result of the fall in the value of silver which became so marked in 1876 and which affected important interests in most countries. In the United States the silver producers of the West saw their profits threatened; in England the exchanges with India were upset, the business of the cotton-manufacturers of Lancashire injured, and investments checked; in India the increased cost of making the annual payments due in England threatened a deficit in the finances; and in France and the other states of the Latin Union a gold famine was imminent. In March, 1876, the English government appointed a commission to investigate the situation, and the Congress of the United States took similar action in August of the same year. The former committee made no proposals by way of remedy, but presented a full statement of the situation, while the committee of Congress reported in favour of the rehabilitation of silver, and started the movement which culminated in the Bland Act. One clause of this authorized the President to invite the various nations to an international conference on the subject, and the outcome was a second meeting of delegates in Paris, August 10, 1878.

The attitude of the representatives of the various states towards bimetallism indicated a considerable change of opinion since 1867, but a wide diversity of interests and the impossibility of an international agreement for the rehabilitation of silver at this time. The delegates of the United States strongly favoured the free coinage of silver by all the nations at a ratio to be agreed upon. Those of Belgium, Switzerland, and Norway strongly opposed such action, and the English delegate stated that England would not consent to a modification of her system. Germany was not represented at all, and France maintained a waiting attitude. The conference adjourned after declaring that in view of the wide differences of opinion expressed it was useless to discuss the question of an international ratio, and that each nation must be left free to treat silver as it might think best.

The advocates of bimetallism were naturally encouraged over the trend of opinion in their direction since the conference of 1867, and carried on a vigorous agitation, especially in the United States, France, and Germany. This fact, together with the continuous decline in the value of silver, resulted in a third conference, called, on the joint invitation of France and the United States, April 19, 1881. This time the advocates of bimetallism were very much more numerous, including, besides the delegates of the United States, those of France, Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, and British India. The representatives of England and Germany, however, stated positively that the best that could be hoped from their governments was possible action with a view to increasing the use of silver as money, in case an international agreement for free coinage were made by the other nations, and the delegates of Belgium, Switzerland, Greece, and the Scandinavian countries declared against bimetallism. Therefore, in spite of additions to the forces working for bimetallism, an international agreement seemed as far away as ever. This conference adjourned to meet again April 12, 1882, but it was not reassembled until 1893.

Agitation in favour of bimetallism was continued during the eleven years, an international league having been formed for that purpose. A conference of bimetal-lists was held at Cologne in October, 1882, which advised Germany to retain the silver she already possessed, and to substitute it in her circulating medium for small gold coins and paper below the denomination of ten marks. It also urged the Bank of England to make use of its right to keep a part of its reserve in silver. A royal commission on the depression of trade, appointed in England in 1886, reported in 1888, one-half of its members favouring and the other half opposing bimetallism. In connection with the Paris Exposition of 1889 a monetary conference was held, which closed, however, without any practical recommendation. In this conference England was not represented.

The Brussels Conference of 1893 was called on the invitation of the United States, and the opinions there expressed indicate that the cause of bimetallism had rapidly lost ground since the last meeting in 1881. Even the President's invitation was couched in language which was not hopeful. It declared the purpose of the conference to be a consideration of "what measures, if any, could be taken to increase the use of silver in the currency systems of nations." Though the delegates of the United States presented a scheme of international bimetallism, they learned at the beginning that it would be useless to push it to the front, and accordingly most of the time of the conference was devoted to a discussion of two or three plans submitted for an increase in the use of silver for monetary purposes by substituting it for small gold coins and paper of low denominations at that time based on gold. Even these plans, however, were rejected. The delegates of Germany, Austria, and Russia came to the conference instructed by their respective governments not to vote or to express an opinion, and, though unin-structed, those of Roumania, Portugal, Turkey, and Greece took the same attitude. The representatives of France declared that their government would not consent to the free coinage of silver unless the other nations would do likewise, and England's attitude was not materially changed. The conference, therefore, adjourned without any practical result so far as the purpose which called the delegates together was concerned, but not without leaving upon the minds of most people who watched its deliberations the conviction that the cause of international bimetallism was lost.