Skip to content
statementVerified

Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement

In late 1695 Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money appeared as Locke’s public answer to William Lowndes. The dated pamphlet is the coinage instrument, not the 1696 Board of Trade office and not a generic ‘joins the debate’ heading without this title. In the causal graph this event weakens the driver Fiscal-Policy Sustainability.

Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement
Read the full account

In late 1695 Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money appeared as Locke’s public answer to William Lowndes. The dated pamphlet is the coinage instrument, not the 1696 Board of Trade office and not a generic ‘joins the debate’ heading without this title. John Locke’s documented role is: He published a 1695 coinage pamphlet against Lowndes’s proposal to raise the denomination of silver. Treasury debate was shared; the pamphlet is his. Later editors, printers, and excavators remain named where they appear.

Context

Clipped silver, a Treasury proposal to raise the denomination, and Newton’s later Mint work already structured the 1690s money file. Locke argued for recoinage at the old standard. Short-term hardship from calling light coin is the worsening fiscal path; a later gold-standard myth is not this pamphlet. Named others on the file: William Lowndes as target, Treasury readers, and later Newton at the Mint share the neighbouring file without becoming this title. The public setting is the file around 1695-12-01. Contribution type is direct. The instrument stays Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement. The setting of Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement is the public file around 1695-12-01. Contribution type is direct. Driver fiscal-policy-sustainability is attached because the significance names a mechanism from this act, not because a standing list needed coverage.

Later competitions, monuments, translations, UNESCO listings, museums, and adaptations are not converted into extra lifetime acts.

Why it matters

Direct on the pamphlet. Welfare reading worsening. The attached mechanism is A dated hard-money pamphlet backed calling coin at full weight during a clipped-silver crisis, a shock path for holders of light coin. Lag to any modern indicator is not treated as zero. This path is attached because the mechanism is named from this act, not because a driver list needed coverage. The welfare reading on this path is worsening.

Confidence is stated on the impact path, not hidden in adjectives. Mixed effects of Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement are separate paths.

Who was responsible

Contribution type and responsibility level for each recorded actor — not sole-author shorthand.

  • John Locke

    Person

    Direct responsibility

    responsibility level 0.4 · verified

    He published a 1695 coinage pamphlet against Lowndes’s proposal to raise the denomination of silver. Treasury debate was shared; the pamphlet is his.

What changed

Fact → Driver → Indicator. Relationship strength orders the paths; it is not the observed indicator movement.

    1. FactFurther Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement
    2. weakensDriverFiscal-Policy Sustainability

    impact weight 0.4 · Effect from 1 December 1695 · verified

    A dated hard-money pamphlet backed calling coin at full weight during a clipped-silver crisis, a shock path for holders of light coin.

Evidence

The sources behind this fact and its verification state.

Verified2 sources on file
  1. 1.Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money — public EnglishProject Gutenberg · High credibility · verified
  2. 2.Britannica — John LockeEncyclopaedia Britannica · High credibility · verified
What the sources establish

Gutenberg’s later English of the money pamphlets and Britannica independently date Locke’s 1695 Further Considerations. Official: Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money — public English (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7371 (opens in a new tab); Project Gutenberg). Independent: Britannica — John Locke, recoinage debate (https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Locke (opens in a new tab); Encyclopaedia Britannica). The two URLs are different pages. Where the carrier is a later edition or a received narrative, that limit is stated rather than upgraded to an autograph. Official carrier: Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money — public English (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7371 (opens in a new tab); Project Gutenberg). Independent carrier: Britannica — John Locke, recoinage debate (https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Locke (opens in a new tab); Encyclopaedia Britannica).

Established: a 1695 Further Considerations pamphlet. Not established: that Locke uniquely designed the Recoinage Act, or unique hardship coefficients. Established: a sourced public record of Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement under 1695-12-01.

Shared responsibility is part of Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement. Naming John Locke does not delete co-authors, institutions, or later transmitters. The lag from 1695-12-01 to any measured indicator is not treated as zero. Alternative explanations — weather, other armies, later statutes, or independent cultural change — remain live where the sources do not close them.

The contribution type is direct. That reading is an impact-path choice, not a property stored on the Fact itself.

If a number is not in the two records named above, it is not supplied here.

Causal path

How this event connects to drivers and indicators in the graph.

  1. ActorJohn Locke
  2. contributed toFactFurther Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement
  3. weakensDriverFiscal-Policy Sustainability

Cite this page

Factrail. (2026). Further Considerations Concerning Raising the Value of Money is published against debasement. Factrail. https://factrail.ai/facts/jlk-further-considerations-1695

https://factrail.ai/facts/jlk-further-considerations-1695

Accessed 16 October 2026.

By the Factrail desk · Method: how we source and score · Last reviewed

Dispute this factNamed here, or represent someone who is? Request a right of reply.