Talk:Mexican peso/Archives/2014

Some incorrect information.

I've removed some incorrect information in the article. I reproduce removed sections here with sources indicating the removed information was indeed false. The removed section stated:

"After a decree adopted by the United States on 6 July 1785, the peso became the official currency of most of North America; it also became the foundation for the U.S. monetary system, at a rate of one peso to one dollar. The U.S. dollar was not issued until 2 April 1792, but the peso continued to be officially recognized and used until 21 February 1857. In Canada, it remained a legal medium of payment until 1858."

Here is a point by point rebuttal.

• "After a decree adopted by the United States on 6 July 1785, the peso became the official currency of most of North America"

This is false for several reasons. First and foremost, the Mexican peso did not exist at this time. The area now known as Mexico was at that time part of New Spain, and had as its currency the Spanish Dollar. Second, there was a decree on July 6, 1785, about currency but it did not use the Mexican peso, nor the Spanish dollar, but instead created the US Dollar, and set its denominations. The decree itself can be found in the Journals of the Continental Congress, Volume 29, page 500.

• "it also became the foundation for the U.S. monetary system, at a rate of one peso to one dollar. The U.S. dollar was not issued until 2 April 1792"

The Spanish Dollar was the basis for the US currency system. The first Mexican currency was not minted until 1821, and at the time of minting was the reales. 1866 saw the first minting of a Mexican Peso, following the addition of the text "pesatas" to Spanish currency in 1864. Individual colonies minted and printed their own currency valued in US Dollars, with continental notes being issued earlier than the 1785 resolution.

• "In Canada, it remained a legal medium of payment until 1858."

This is false, as the Spanish dollar was never an official currency in Canada. Canada, as a British territory, was under the British pound until 1841, when the Canadian pound was introduced. Spanish dollars (not Mexican pesos) saw some use during this period due to a scarcity of Canadian pounds, but were not an official legal medium of payment. 1858 saw the creation of the Canadian dollar to alleviate the money shortage problem.

I find the other claims in this section highly suspect as well, especially given the above history on this discussion list. I will be researching those topics and posting my conclusions here shortly. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 21:05, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Straits Dollar

After reviewing the history of the Straits Dollar, I have removed it from the list of currencies which are claimed to have the Mexican Peso as its root. While the Spanish Dollar and Mexican Dollar saw some use in the Straits Settlements, the Straits Dollar was eventually based on the Pound Sterling. Prior to the Straits Dollar being issued, all silver dollars were freely exchanged in the colony as it had no official currency. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 22:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Hong Kong Dollar

Researching the Hong Kong Dollar proves it not to be based on the Mexican Peso. Hong Kong instead saw free trade in many foreign currencies which included the British Pound Sterling (most common), the Spanish Dollar, the Indian Rupee, the Chinese Wen and the Mexican reales. Mexican and Spanish coins were not used as a basis for the HKD, but rather had their values translated into equivalent Pounds Sterling during trades (4 shillings 2 pence). When the HKD was established, its basis was in grams of pure sterling, with 1 HKD worth 24.44 grams of sterling, valuing it at 1 shilling. Both the Mexican reales and Spanish Dollar were valued at approximately 94.5 grams of sterling. Pounds sterling continued to be currency at which the HKD was pegged for it's history. This refutes the claim that the Mexican peso was the basis for the HKD. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 23:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Japanese Yen

I can find no indication that the Mexican peso was ever used in Japan, and the claim that it was the model for the Japanese Yen is false. The Yen was introduced as a replacement for the Mon in 1871, and was an attempt to model the currencies in use in Europe. It simplified the accounting system under the Mon by using decimal subdivisions and pegged the Yen to the gold standard with 1 Yen being worth 0.78 troy ounces of gold, or 24.26g of sterling silver. As shown in my previous comment, this is not based on the Spanish Dollar, or the Mexican peso, as at the time they were worth about 94.5 grams sterling. Much like the HKD, the Japanese Yen appears to have been pegged to the Shilling, as it's approximately that of the Shilling. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 23:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Chinese Yuan

I am unable to find any source other than Wikipedia which states that the Chinese Yuan was initially valued at 1 Mexican Peso. I have asked editors at Chinese Yuan to help me track down a source for this statement. If anyone here has a source for this statement please share it with us. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 23:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Gentlemen, please tone it down

We're writing an encyclopedia, not fighting in the streets. I'll note that Dove1950's article does mention the Mexican Peso on the page he mentioned. In either case, please show some respect and manners both of you. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 17:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I have put Dove1950's source for the Canadian use of the Mexcian peso back on the page, as it is indeed correct. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 17:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I searched the whole document for "Mexican"... only two hits, the crash and the index. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.136.211.15 (talk) 16:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Then your search feature may be broken, it clearly supports the phrase in the upper right hand corner of the page. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 18:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Response to Dove1950's comments

Dove1950, thanks for your comments on my changes and refutations. I respond to your points below.

Dove1950 writes:
The recent edits by User:Jolliette have been reverted because they removed content. The arguments given above are highly unconvincing. To begin with, 
there seems to be a misunderstanding as to the Spanish currency. There was never a currency called the peso used in Spain. All arguments based on the 
assumption that there was are spurious. Second, there is clear evidence that the Mexican peso was an important trade coin in Asia and was adopted in 
several states as the basis for the States' own currencies.

My edits did not remove content, they removed unsourced, and in a few cases, obviously wrong information. It is not enough to call my arguments "unconvincing", if you would argue the contrapositive, you must do so. First of all, I note I never claim that there was a currency called the peso in Spain. You need to reread my arguments, because if you think I made that claim, you obviously didn't carefully read them in the first place.

The claim that the Mexican peso was the basis for US state currencies is obvious false because Mexico did not exist as a country with its own currency prior to the creation of the US Dollar.

Dove1950 writes:
The statement above "When the HKD was established, its basis was in grams of pure sterling, with 1 HKD worth 24.44 grams of sterling, valuing it at 1 
shilling." is nonsensical. Clearly there was a link to sterling but this does not disprove that the Mexican peso was the original basis.
As to the Japanese yen, what is a "gram sterling"? Yes, there was a peg to the pound sterling, but that again does not mean that the Mexican peso did 
not serve as the origin for the yen.

My apologies for my comment on "gram sterling", I assumed you were familiar with Imperial Measures and therefor would know what a gram of sterling silver was. The HKD and Japanese Yen were clearly based on the Shilling which was worth one gram of sterling silver. This was done at their conception which dispoves the Mexican peso as their original basis.

Dove1950 writes:
There is a need to clarify the events of 1785, which is why I originally asked for a citation. I'm afraid that the link Jolliette gave does nothing to  
say one way or the other as to the origin of the first U.S. dollar.

Actually it does say "one way". As the claim in the article is that this very law instated the Mexican peso as legal tender, and yet the law does not in fact state that, it disproves the claim that the Mexican Peso was made legal tender by this law. Additionally since the Mexican peso was not yet created by 1785, it could not be made legal tender. The Mexican peso was not minted, nor conceived prior to Mexican independence from Spain. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 17:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice try, but having an argument with yourself is not going to convince anybody. As to your responses, the statement "The HKD and Japanese Yen were clearly based on the Shilling which was worth one gram of sterling silver." is clear fantasy and strongly suggests malicious intent. The other responses are little better.
Dove1950 (talk) 20:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I have proved the assertion above about the worth of the HKD and Japanese Yen. If you would like to rebutt my arguments, do so, do not respond with ad hominem. I will ignore your baser comments, and hope you respond with logic and well reasoned arguments. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 21:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Jolliette clearly has the wrong numeric information

• Jolliette: When the HKD was established, its basis was in grams of pure sterling, with 1 HKD worth 24.44 grams of sterling, valuing it at 1 shilling. Both the Mexican reales and Spanish Dollar were valued at approximately 94.5 grams of sterling. Pounds sterling continued to be currency at which the HKD was pegged for it's history. [1].

The first statement is about right. I have Krause, Chester L.; Clifford Mishler (2004). Standard Catalog of World Coins: 1801–1900. Colin R. Bruce II (senior editor) (4th ed.). Krause Publications. ISBN 0873497988. as my reference. The earliest HKD/JPY was 0.78 troy ounce of pure silver from an alloy that is 90% silver. 1 troy ounce = 31.1034768 grams, so 0.78 tr. oz. =~ 24.26 g (of pure silver). So your first statement is correct. But it not equal to 1 shilling. 1 shilling in mid 1800s was 5.6552 grams of 92.5% silver.

Your next statement about the Mexican real and Spanish dollar was also incorrect. 8 Mexican reales or 8 Spanish reales in most of the 1800s was 27.07 grams of 90.3% silver. 27.07 × 90.3% = 24.44. Where does your 94.5 come from? How many different types of grams are there?

Your third statement is also wrong. [2] states that from 1863-1935, it was a period when "Silver dollars as legal tender". Not sterling, not pound.

Sterling silver says it's 92.5% pure silver and my catalog shows that British silver coins in the 1800s are indeed 92.5% pure silver. It is clearly a different standard from the peso/dollar/yen group. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 21:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your response and corrections Chochopk. I'll have to go over my math again, it is possible I made a mistake somewhere. I will work out everything again and verify. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 22:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Value of HKD relative to Peso

I've started a new section, I hope no one minds terribly. Here is my math and reasoning:

 
  Sterling Silver = 92.5% pure silver.
1845: Hong Kong pegs Spanish and Mexican Reales at 4 shilling 2 pence.
  4/20 + 2/240 = 0.208333 pounds sterling.
  0.208333 * 0.925 = 0.1927 pounds pure silver
1863: Hong Kong dollar first issued, pegged at 24.44 grams pure silver
  24.44 grams pure silver = 0.0538 pounds pure silver
  0.0538 pounds pure silver = 0.0581 pounds sterling silver

For reference:
  1 shilling = 0.05 pounds sterling silver
             = 0.04625 pounds pure silver
  1 pence    = 0.00416 pounds sterling silver
             = 0.00385 pounds pure silver

So yes, you're right, it isn't equal to one shilling, I must have been tired or hasty when performing my previous calculations, but I will note that it is also not based on the Mexican silver coin. The HKD is worth 1 shilling, and 2 pence. The Mexican peso at the time was worth 4 shilling 2 pence. Both are simply pegged to a common standard of pounds sterling which does not suggest the HKD is based on the Peso, but rather was based on an exchange of pounds sterling, and divisions there of. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 22:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Here is the Japanese Yen:

 
  Japanese Yen is introduced and valued at 24.26g pure silver
  24.26g pure silver = 0.0535 pounds pure silver
                     = 0.0494 pounds sterling silver

Here I was correct as the Japanese yen is indeed worth roughly 1 shilling. The minor sub pence discrepancy is due to the Japanese utilization of the gold standard instead of the silver standard. So the value of the Japanese yen was 1 shilling, as approximated by the ratio of the price between gold and silver (1 yen = 1.5grams gold) -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 22:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

In the 19th century, 1 pound sterling did not mean 1 pound weight of sterling silver. At that time, 66 shillings in silver coins weighed 1 pound, not 20. Armed with that piece of information, you will realise that your maths is off by a factor of more than three.
Dove1950 (talk) 23:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

It appears you are right sir, here are the modifications, taking that into account:

 
  Sterling Silver = 92.5% pure silver.
  1 lb sterling silver = 66 shillings
  1 shilling = 0.01515 lbs sterling
  1 pence    = 0.00126 lbs sterling

1845: Hong Kong pegs Spanish and Mexican Reales at 4 shilling 2 pence.
  1 peso     = 0.03535 lbs sterling

1863: Hong Kong dollar first issued, pegged at 24.44 grams pure silver
  24.44 g    =  0.05388 lbs sterling
             =  3.556 shilling
             = 42.673 pence
             =  1.534 pesos

 
  Japanese Yen is introduced and valued at 24.26g pure silver
  24.26 g    = 0.05348 lbs sterling
             = 3.5299 shilling
             = 42.359 pence
             = 0.9926 pesos

From this we cannot reasonably conclude any relationship between HKD and either Pesos nor Pounds, but it does appear there is a likely relationship between Yen and Pesos. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 03:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid that your calculation is wrong again. I'm not sure how you derive 42.673 pence = 1.534 pesos for HKD, whereas 42.359 pence = 0.9926 pesos. I'm not used to the Imperial unit. I will repeat and reorganize my data in a tabular fashion:

value	mass of alloy (g)	purity	real content (g)
MXP/8MXR/8ESR	27.07	90.3%	24.44421
HKD/JPY	26.9568-27.25	90%	0.78 troy oz = 24.26071 g
1 shilling	5.6552	92.5%	5.23106
1 shilling × 42⁄12			21.79608
1 shilling × 48⁄12			24.41161

So my conclusion is that MXP = 8ESR = HKD = JPY ≈ 4s 8d (by pure content, but some other sources says 4s2d)

See also User:Chochopk/Latin Monetary Union unit for much more numeric detail. [3] also confirms my claim. The page is large, search for the string "27 April 1842 made Mexican and other similar silver dollars the standard". This web page from the Hong Kong authority also says that the HKD was based from MXP/ESD.

• Just because HK was a British colony doesn't mean it had to peg its currency with the pound sterling. Trade is what matters. Political sovereignty does not. Examples supporting my claim including modern day HK (pegged with USD), Cayman Islands (pegged with USD), and British Virgin Islands (uses USD)
• If you were using Mexican and Spanish coins already, why would you define your new currency with a weird number (4s2d) that happens to be equal to 1 MXP/ESD? Obviously HKD was based on MXP/ESD. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 09:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree on the Japanese yen based on your information, and my calculations. They do appear to be linked so it seems likely the yen was based on the peso. It is not the same for the HKD. The HKD was traded at an explicitly different rate than the Peso. The peso was pegged by law to 4 shillings 2 pence. My numbers for the HKD are based on this pegging, as it was the exchange used for Pesos in HK when the HKD was established. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 00:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

As an additional point Your source does not in fact say the HKD was based from MXP/ESD. It says instead that "In addition, Spanish and Mexican silver dollars were used for international trade," and that an HKD was issued in silver due to the fact that "The government found it impossible even to collect revenue in sterling". Their reliance on silver dollars is not the same as being based on the Peso. In fact their use of the term dollar suggests more basis on the Spanish dollar, than anything else. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 00:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I have repeated pointed out that HKD = JPY, and you agree that JPY = MXP. This web page says HKD = 4s 2d, and you says MXP = 4s 2d. Please explain to me why HKD ≠ MXP. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 14:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Japanese yen

I have added the conclusions derived above about the likely origin of the Japanese yen. However since these conclusions are the derivative of original research and have not yet been confirmed by sources, I have added the Original research warning to the section and tagged the statement about the Yen with a FACT tag. I'll be looking for sources which confirm this basis and would appreciate other's help in clarifying this matter. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 00:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Bank of Japan Currency Museum: "silver coins as in the modern western countries ... settling trades with other countries along the Pacific Ocean". This obviously refers to Hong Kong and Mexico.
• Global Financial Data - Japan - "The Yen was initially set at par with the US Dollar."
• BOJ Establishment of the Gold Standard "in Asia the Mexican dollar silver coin was widely used as a trading currency"

From this we can conclude that the yen was created so that the unit is the same as all of its trading partners, including HK, US, and most of Asia Pacific that uses the MXP. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 14:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your hard work Chochopk. I advise we remove the disputed tags, and add your sources. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 19:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Link to the U.S. currency

It seems that we are now agreed as to the links between the peso and the various Asian currencies. However, it seems that there is still some doubt as to the link between the Mexican peso and the U.S. dollar. There has been a citation request on this point for a while now but, probably because the whole section keeps on being removed, no citation has been added. Perhaps if Jolliette can leave the article alone for a few days, the necessary citation can be found and added to put an end to this discussion once and for all.
Dove1950 (talk) 20:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Such a link cannot be found. The claim of a link between the Mexican peso and the US dollar is false for several reasons. First and foremost, the Mexican peso did not exist at this time. The area now known as Mexico was at that time part of New Spain, and had as its currency the Spanish Dollar. Second, there was a decree on July 6, 1785 (as referenced in the old version of the Mexican Peso article), about currency but it did not use the Mexican peso, nor the Spanish dollar, but instead created the US Dollar, and set its denominations. The decree itself can be found in the Journals of the Continental Congress, Volume 29, page 500. Since your false version of the article claims "After a decree adopted by the United States on 6 July 1785, the Mexican peso, along with Spanish dollars and other Spanish colonial 8 reales coins, became the official currency of most of North America" and the decree does not do so, nor cannot since the Mexican Peso did not exist, no citation can prove that claim. The claim is false, and is utter nonsense. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 22:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

As has been pointed out on several occasions, Mexico predates Columbus, so claiming it didn’t exist in 1785 is patent nonsense. There is no indication in the decree as to what constituted the dollar. Therefore, it cannot be claimed that the decree created anything. This is why further clarification is needed. Please allow the processes of Wikipedia to function as they are designed to rather than continually removing all trace of something you don't believe.
Dove1950 (talk) 23:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Mexico, as a country and currency issuing entity does not predate Columbus. There is exact indication about what the degree did, as the copy is the exact decree itself. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 23:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Haven't you ever heard of Mexico City? The decree states that "That the money unit of the United States of America be one dollar." It does not say what a dollar was. That's what need's clarifying.
Dove1950 (talk) 23:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Mexico city was part of Spain at that time, and used the Spanish dollar. The Mexican peso didn't come about until Mexico became a soverign nation and issued it's own currency. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 23:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Wrong. Mexico City was the capital of New Spain, a viceroyalty which was a distinct entity under the Spanish crown. The peso was a name used for all the 8 reales coins issued in Spain and the New World. Whilst the peso only came to be the principle unit of currency later (see Spanish colonial real), the name existed long before 1785. "Spanish dollar" was a name given by English speakers to the peso or 8 reales coin and is probably the dollar to which the decree of 1785 was referring to. That's what needs verifying.
Dove1950 (talk) 23:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The dollar referred to in the 1785 was the US Dollar, which as based on the Spanish Dollar. While Mexico city was the capital of New Spain, it did not issue its own currency, it used Spanish currency, as it was part of Spain, just like all of the other portions of Spain. The Mexican Peso did not exist until Mexican independence. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 23:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

"The dollar referred to in the 1785 was the US Dollar, which was based on the Spanish Dollar."" How do you know. Where does it say that?

"While Mexico city was the capital of New Spain, it did not issue its own currency" Mexico City had it's own mint.

"it used Spanish currency, as it was part of Spain, just like all of the other portions of Spain." It was not part of Spain but part of the "Spanish Crown", just as Canada was not "part of Britain" but part of the British Empire.

"The Mexican Peso did not exist until Mexican independence." What's this

but a picture of a Mexican peso from 1739? Before you ask, the mintmark for Mexico City was an "o" over an "M"
Dove1950 (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

It clearly says in the source I provided that it is a US dollar they are creating. As the US gov't is not the gov't of Spain, it could not create a Spanish dollar, or a dollar for the Spanish holding of Mexico.

Mexico may have had a mint. So does Colorado, so does Illinois. There is no such thing as a Coloradan Dollar, there is only a US dollar.

Mexico was not independent from Spain until 1810, it was a dependent part of the Spanish Kingdom, and under Spanish Law, authority, and currency.

That is a picture of a Spanish dollar, not a Mexican peso. I present the following:

See the "S" mint mark? It's for San Francisco. This is not a "San Franciscan Quarter Dollar", but a "United States Quarter Dollar". -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 23:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The article itself confirms my point: The first coins of the peso currency were 1 centavo pieces minted in 1863., and earlier the banknote The first banknotes issued by the Mexican state were produced in 1823. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 17:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

"It clearly says in the source I provided that it is a US dollar they are creating." Where? To quote your source again "That the money unit of the United States of America be one dollar." What do you think it says? On another point, you seem to be confusing the existence of the Mexican peso and it's adoption as the chief unit of currency in Mexico. The peso existed long before 1823.
Dove1950 (talk) 22:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

There's an element of truth in the current text, but it's quite confused. The 1785 resolution certainly did not make the Mexican Peso the official currency of the United States. In order to understand what was being resolved, you have to look back a couple of months to May 13, 1785 [4] and see the several options that were being considered. The July resolution chose one of these, with a silver dollar having a different weight in silver than any of the Spanish dollars then in use. The May session discusses the reasons for instituting a distinct US coinage. The weight of the dollar coin in silver was deliberately set to be similar to the Spanish dollar, so in that sense, the US dollar was based on the Spanish coin. But it's quite wrong to say that the Spanish or Mexican dollar was made the official currency of the United States. The article also mentions the first US dollars appearing several years later, which is when the first minted dollar coins were released. In the meantime, the states had been minting their own coins and a variety of foreign coins, including Spanish dollars and British coins, were used. I see nothing to indicate that the Spanish dollar was ever made an official currency. --Reuben (talk) 05:19, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The biggest problem here is that Dove1950 is conflating the Mexican Peso with the US Dollar, which is a serious mistake. Info on the US Dollar being set to par with the Spanish Dollar belongs at Spanish Dollar, or US Dollar, not Mexican Peso, as the Mexican Peso did not even exist at the time. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 21:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not conflating the Mexican peso with the U.S. dollar, I'm conflating (quite correctly) the Mexican 8 reales and the Mexican peso. Please don't put words in my mouth. I'm glad to see that we're begining to get some clarification.
Dove1950 (talk) 22:06, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

It does seem that any information pertaining to the colonial period more naturally belongs in the article at Spanish dollar, which focuses on that time period. This article is mainly about the Mexican peso as the currency of the independent Mexican state. I appreciate that the words "Mexican" and "peso" were both used to describe the coins that we have in the "Spanish dollar" article. It seems to me that naming is not the key issue here; the real question is how the articles should naturally be divided up. Do you agree with the general scheme of one article focused on the coins of the Spanish empire, and the other focused on the currency of independent Mexico? If not, what alternative would be better? Under that scheme, it seems to me that the current article should describe the use of Mexican pesos in other countries during the 1800's, but that the role in the origin of the US dollar should be in the other article. --Reuben (talk) 03:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest that the bulk of the information on Spain's colonial currency goes in the article Spanish colonial real, rather than Spanish dollar, as the latter really only refers to a single denomination. I think it's important to link the later currencies of Latin America to the colonial real and I think a degree of overlap is inevitable and probably necessary for clarity.
Dove1950 (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

But the overlap is not consistent with facts. One would not claim that a US Pound existed, even though the British colonies here did on occasion mint British pounds. Nor would they claim that the Canadian Pound which emerged was based on such a fictional currency. The fact is that the Mexican peso only came into existence when Mexico became sovereign. Suggesting otherwise is the same as implying that the Denver mint produces "Colorado Dollars". The Mexican mints produced Spanish Dollars for the Spanish Empire. -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 21:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Some overlap in the text is natural and desirable, so this article should of course describe the relationship of the peso of independent Mexico to the colonial coinage. The use of post-independence Mexican pesos in the US certainly belongs here, too. However, this doesn't seem to me to be the right place to discuss the link between the US dollar and the colonial Spanish / Mexican dollar / peso / piece of eight. Either Spanish colonial real or Spanish dollar (or both) would be fine, and of course US dollar. I think this is a question of clarifying the scope of each article, rather than the labels that are used. Shifting topics to nomenclature, if the colonial coin was also called a Mexican peso (among other names), should this article perhaps have a "hat-style" disambiguation link to Spanish dollar? --Reuben (talk) 22:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Care to provide evidence of the use of real (i.e. post independence) Mexican Pesos in the US? -- Jolliette Alice Bessette, -- 08:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

A source is also needed to support the claim that Mexican pesos were legal tender in Canada. The source currently used refers only to colonial Spanish dollars, and never mentions "pesos" circulating in Canada. It does use the word "peso" three times: twice in reference to the Mexican peso crisis of the 1990's, and once in describing the US dollar as modeled on the "Spanish peso." Again, no mention of "pesos" circulating in Canada. --Reuben (talk) 17:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to add my 2 centavos here, primarily to Jolliette's claim

• Political sovereignty is not the only criterion for a distinct currency

Hong Kong dollar is the best example. Just because Mexico didn't exist as an independent country before 1810 doesn't necessarily mean it couldn't have its own currency before. At the same time, just because a colony is far away from the "motherland" and is much larger doesn't guarantee a distinct currency either. We need better reasons than political sovereignty. According to my 1801-1900 catalog, there are coins listed under Mexico before its independence. They were similar to Spanish coins of the same period, but not identical.

Regardless, we need to clearly define the start date of the Mexican peso. If we can achieve this, than there would be little to argue about. If the start date is some time in the early 1800s, then what currency did the Mexican peso replace? Spanish colonial real? Do we need separate articles for "New Spanish real" or "New Spanish peso"? I believe answering these questions are the first step towards resolving the relationship with the USD and CAD. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 09:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Another page from the U.S. Congress: Dollar or units—each to be of the value a Spanish milled dollar. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 09:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the sense in splitting currency articles when the country or political entity changes it's name. We haven't done that for Yugoslavia before 1929, or for Sri Lanka before 1972. Of course, we could, but would it be better? It strikes me that it would be awkward to split up what is a single "story".
Dove1950 (talk) 23:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you saying that Mexican independence is only a name change? Or proposing that Mexican peso and Spanish dollar should be merged? I don't quite understand what you are arguing for. --Reuben (talk) 02:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I can give the precedence of (Soviet ruble and Russian ruble, although the content split isn't that good), (West African CFA franc and French West African franc), and (Rhodesian dollar and Zimbabwean dollar). I'm not arguing for or against splitting. All I'm asking is a definitive start date of the Mexican peso. And then we can carry on from there. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm definitely not advocating a merger of Mexican peso and Spanish dollar. That would be totally inappropriate as the Mexican peso was just one of several issues of the "Spanish dollar". I agree with Chochopk that the split between West African CFA franc and French West African franc is a not inappropriate model. I would suggest creating New Spain real as the real was the primary unit, not the peso.
Dove1950 (talk) 22:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)