The Express.
London, England, 1847-11-11 00:00:00

LITERATURE,

A Fiaancial,3lOnetary,and Statistical History of England.
By THOS. DOUBLEDAY, Esq.
Nothing has more impeded the progress of econo-
mical science than the disposition manifested in all
ages by its professors to separate the agency of man
from the phenomena of matter, and to base all cal-
culations upon the latter, to the neglect of the former.
Such a mode of dealing with the complex and subtle
problems of economics could not but mislead and dis-
hearten from the numberleso contradictions which it
produced Premises to all appearance similar produced
everywhere incongruous results. The laws sought to
be deduced from isolated facts were found to be iucapa-
ble of general application, and often to prescribe
a course directly at variance with moral precept and
the finer feelings.
Sad, indeed, has been the rule of this school of
economy for England. Under its influence we have
seen whole classes set at variance with their fellow-
citizens. Food has been doled cut by a classification
of land instead of cultivation, and improvements in
agriculture have been denounced by the leader
of these false prophets as tending to diminish
rents. It has been supposed necessary to con-
demn the poor and the morally weak to
unprofitable and debasing labour, lest their earnings
should be found to detract from the gains of the fair
trader. The free interchange of the productions of
industry, the means ranted to man by his Maker to
compensate for a distribution of gifts specially scattered
with seeming irregularity, in order that this bond
of union among wilful denizens of the earth should be
stronger than the turmoil of their passions—this
interchange,lthe source of wealth and the firmest gage
of peace and enjoyment, has been interdicted and
denounced as prejudicial to national wealth and
power. How can we wonder then that one of the

simplest results of national economy, the trust-
worthiness that one man acquires, and the con-
fidence that another is willing to repose in hiss,
should be denied a fitting place in the cata-
logue of the sources of wealth recognised by such
a school ? Credit, the moat valuable result of
moral restraint and neighbourly feelings, to the
creation and extension of which, punctuality, order,
honesty, and friendly trust, are indispensable re-
quisites—credit has until recently never been pointed
out either by English or French economists as the
distinguishing feature between highly civilised states
and such as are backward in cultivation. It is not
enumerated as part of the productive property of
nations, although manifestly an object of high money
value where it is saleable. It may safely be affirmed
that credit, more than anything else, determines
the value of houses and all town property. The
price of a house is fixed by the demand for houses in
that particular neighbourhood. Hence the varying
rents of tenements of all kinds ; and those arc sure to
bring in most which are situated in the most thriving
neighbourhoods. There is in this respect a difference
between countries: both property and labour are more
valuable in countries where order is well developed
than elsewhere. But some transactions actually show
credit to be tangible and saleable : such is the price
paid for the goodwill of a shop, the fee to celebrated
engineers or other professional men, on whose repu-
tation the person paying it stakes so much to ensure
his success. On giving these considerations their due
value, it will be seen that this precious element
of political economy allows of our bringing within
the scope of economical calculation all the duties, feel-
ings, and springs of moral power that society engen-
ders. Indeed, after a little contemplation it becomes
evident that these form the leading economical func-
tions in calculations of loss or gain. It caunot be
denied that the success of a nation, as of an individual,
is far more ascribable to the use made of the intellec-
tual faculties than to the nature of the goods or pro-
ducts, artificial or natural, towards the acquirement
of which our attention is turned. Thus many of the
nations of Europe abound in wealth far beyond that
possessed by the countries in the western and eastern
hemispheres where gold is extracted from the earth.
Venice and Genoa, like Marseilles, Hamburg, and
Antwerp, have been at various times greater depots
for porn, although mere seaports, than large agrarian
districts. Europe probably consumes the greatest
share of all the products of the tropical countries.
And are we to ascribe all this to aught else
than the power of the mind—a power which
can only be exerted to advantage in obedi-
ence to the dictates of justice, moderation, and
humanity ? Ought we not, therefore, to re-
joice at the notion of reinstating this grand
principle in its place as an element, and that the
leading one, of economical power ?
But, in order to effect this change, a host of preju-
dices (certainly peculiar to the learned world) must
be destroyed, and common sense reinstated as the
standard of judgment.
Foremost amongst the innovations, it mast be re-
cognised that things are only valued according to their
usefulness. Either they give us pleasure, or they satisfy
our wants. There can be no greater absurdity than to
assert that things are only valuable from the labour
or coin or any other price that must be laid out in
producing them. The notion is disproved by the ex-
perience of every man in common life. Judged by
this test, Dutch or Irish butter must be more valuable
than that of Epping. A farm in the Highlands ought
to produce for the Londoner more costly products than
one in Kent or in Essex, East India might to be bettet
than West India sugar, and, in short, a masa of ridi‘
culous contradictions might be cited until we wearied
our readers. That certain things are limited in num-
ber and extent, and that in such case the more expen-
sive fixes the price of what cost less to produce, di-
rectly contradicts the supposition that the coat of pro-
duction is the source of value ; for we see that all are
valued by consumers exactly alike, if their quality be
the same, whether they cost much or little to pro-
duce. We have dwelt long upon this point on ac-
count of the sad demoralising tendencies of the old,
happily aeon to be the exploded, view of value. To
recognise the wants, wishes, and feelings of men as
the index of value, is to acknowledge the importance
of cultivating men's tastes: it is the grand argument
in favour of education. To measure value by mils, by
labour, by arguments founded on necessity, chiefly
inducwl by ignorance, is to plead the cause of that
ignorance against improvement, to set up an idol
made with hands, in the place of that power which
'sea into the heart and judges man as an intellectual

being.
But in no branch of political economy is this creed,
which in oar day has been worshipped in the most
bigoted manner, more dangerous than when it is
applied to currency. For instances of the amusing
contradictions into which its followers are led, we
refer to the two first letters of Mr. Doubleday's work,
where the many fallacies that fill volumes of political
economy of the old school are retailed without inves-
tigation and without reserve.
Thus we are told (p. 17), " Things are not valuable
in the proportion in which they are useful." We
must not seek for the cause of value in commodities
themselves, but in something extrinsic and external ;
and that cause is the vunatity of labour required to ob-
tain them. " Gold is twenty times as valuable as
silver, because to obtain an ounce of gold takes twenty
times the labour that is required for acquiring an
ounce of silver." (p. 19). But then again he adds,
(p. 19), " If gold were twice as plentiful, and re-
quired only half that labour, it would fail in value ac-
cordingly and be only ten times as valuable as silver."
We know that these propositions are repeated to
nausea in almost every book published in London that
professes to treat of these matters. But are the ex-
ceptions not to meet with any regard? Mr. Senior
pointed out long since that gold is obtained with far
less difficulty than silver, and is constantly found
pure, whereas silver demands a highly refined and
costly chemical process to produce it. Mr. Doubleday
has thrown together the two very different circum-
stances of demanding labour and being limited in
quantity. But it is less to correct his logic that we
go into the matter here, than on account of the im-
mense importance to the nation, at a moment when a
legislative crisis is approaching for our currency, to
have clear views upon it.
The intrinsic quality of gold and silver—their not
being liable to corrode—is the true source of the value
of those metals; and there is, in fact, a perpetual
rivality between the goldsmith and the banker, which
upholds the true par of value. For table, culinary,
and many ether utensils, gold and silver are in each
demand, that to keep. them in the shape of coin
somewhat higher price must be given than they
would otherwise bear. But, that their usefulness as
stoney is very much diminished, needs no other proof
than the comparatively small quantity used in Eng-
land as compared with other countries, regard being
bad to the comparative extent of traffic in all. Our
mote circulation (exclusive of government issues or
exchequer bills) equals our circulation in gold. Bills
circulate to perhaps seven] or eight times the amount
of both. Now, money may be defined as each
theorist chooses for himself : the broad fact isevident—
with less than our present circulation, this country
cannot be contented. With this circulation it has
done wonders, and the chances are that, with greater
facilities, it would do still more wonderful things.
But will any one pretending to reason affirm that
what has been achieved by our merchants and mann-
fireturers would have been better done, or would have
resulted in more, if, instead of every bank-note used
in the present century, a sovereign had circulated,
and if bills had been rendered unnecessary by the
presence of five hundred millions of sovereigns? We
think nobody will be so bold. Well, then, of what use
is a proposition like this (p. 19) : " Money is only
valuable as the material of which it is made is
valuable." This value is afterwards explained to
mean, that sovereigns are more valuable than notes.
The value which some readers might attach to a note-
from its being possible to carry it in one's pocket in
stead of on a wheelbarrow, does not enter into the
author's calculation. Setting aside the cost of pro-
ducing the growing quantity of money required for
trade, and which would have to be deducted from
profits, we would merely suggest that the intellectual
qualities called into play to produce the value that has
been lent to half a million of pounds annually repre-
sented in paper, is the true capital of the Itritish
nation. The qualities that create credit, and the skill.
to use it, are sources of wealth for:which we need not,
resort to slaves in Brazil nor to astkin ROW&RnMfa. Let
every Englishman carry it, if lit:fail* about with
him. . .
The deplorable aide of our preie is,
that instead of turning people's thOfig to the notes-)
sity of creating credit, and to the of what they
should do with it, all are taught t 6 &eta of par-

lisment as guides for the one and as the power re-
quired for the other. Instead of a Bauk Charter Act
we should like to see temperance, punctuality, scru-
pulous honesty, knowledge, judgment, held up as the
sources of credit. But even a Bank Charter Act is
more to our taste than the bullionist doctrines of
which Mr. Doubleday is the historian, and which
would substitute a bit of gold as the standard alike of
our intelligence and of our wealth.

upon demurrer, but to wait until the cause came to a hear-
ing. The prayer of the bill might be divided into two
grand branches; one was the agreement and the performance
of it, the ether was the relief which could be granted by
way of injunction. The latter pert was not subordinate to
the first purpose, but was itself independent and separate.
It was asked that the agreement might be specifically per-
famed between the plaintiffs and the Birmingham and Ox-
ford Company; that the Birmingham and Oxford Com-
pany might be declared trustees for the Great Western Com-
pani,and that they were bound to complete the undertaking
as such trustees, pursuant to the agreement of 1847. The
prayer, in calling upon the court to direct a performance
did not require it to direct such ministerial acts as should be
necessary for the purpose of carrying the agreement into
execution. The bill then prayed that the Birmingham and
Oxford Company might both at the hearing and in the mean
time be restrained by injunction from making or entering
into any agreement for the sole use and occupation of the
Birmingham and Oxford Railway with the London and
North Western, or from dealing with the railway or disposing
of its effects, except with the approbation of the plaintiffs;
and also from passing or giving effect to any resolution to
prevent the payment of • cad of M. per share made by the
directors and still in great part unpaid, and from doing or
omitting to do any act which may be in breach or evasion of
the agreement of 18.46. Such a decree as this bill sought
would merely have the effect of obtaining relief from the
court in respect of its jurisdiction to carry the agreement into
effect, and to preserve the relation of the parties during the
time which must elapse before the question could be deter-
mined. To this a general demurrer had been put in, and it
would be for the court to decide whether there was any portion
of the relief sought which could be granted; if there were,
then the demureer must fail. There were three distinct grounds
upon which the plaintiffs relied; one was, that the agree-
ment for sale and transfer was binding and valid originally,
and would be binding, and have 'effect given to it by the
court. Secondly, that there was, independently of the
general agreement, a minor agreement binding between the
parties, to the effect that application should be made to par-
liament for an act, and that that of itself would entitle the
plaintiff to receive at the hands of the:court all that species of
relief which might be denominated conservative relief, by
which it was intended to preserve the state of the parties,
and to save the subject matter of the contract from being
destroyed until that portion of the agreement relating to the
application to parliament should either have been sue-
eessfid or should have been tried and found unsuccess-
ful. The third was the right and title growing out of
the results and consequences of the contract.. By the
agreement, it was provided that the Great Western
Company should incur heavy liabilities; that they should I
enter into contracts, and should be liable to the contractors
in the capacity of sureties for the Birmingham and Oxford
Company; and, after this had been effected, and the Great
Western had pledged themselves to the liabilities of the Bir-
mingham and Oxford Company, the Birmingham a Kl Ox-
ford Company were fraudulently endeavouring to avoid the
contract,and nitres the dutyof the court to interfere on behalf
of the Great Western, and restrain any act being done to
their prejudice so long as these liabilities remained undis-
charged. It was surprising that when this demurrer was re-
solved up-n by the learned gentlemen on the part of the de-
fendants, that it did not occur to their minds that it was of
too extensive a character, and that it was inconsistent with
common honesty and justice that the Groat Western Company
should be deprived of the advantages of the agreement, and
yet be left subject to all the consequences of those
onerous liabilities resulting from it. Surely the court would
interfere to prevent such conduct being pursued, and such
obligations being borne by the plaintiffs. The learned counsel
then went through various parts of the bill for the purpose
of showing that the Great Western Company, in executing
the agreement, had taken upon themselves the expenses of
executing the works of the railway, as sureties fur the Bir-
mingham and Oxford Company. In pursuance of the object
of the parties originally entering into this contract, calls
were made upon the shareholders in the Birmingham and
Oxford Company; but subsequently they refused to pay
such calls, so that unless the agreement were enforced, the
Great Western would be liable to pay all the contracts
entered into, or the entire works would be put a atop
I to, and in that case the company would be unable
to finish their railway within the time specified and
allowed by their act of parliament. It was also to
Ibe observed, that the majority of the shareholders
in the Birmingham and Oxford Railway, who were
I now opposing the performance of this contract, and who
I wished to repudiate the agreement, bad become shareholders
I since November, 1846, and the ground upon which they re-
fused was, in fact, that they were desirous of entering into
another contract with the London and North Western Com-
pany with the very same object as the agreement already
subsisting. Under such circumstances it was the com-
monest proceeding of this court, pending an agreement
entered into between two parties, to interfere and say that
the subject shall remain in state quo until the validity of the
agreement should be finally settled. With such important
objects to be maintained, it was worse than useless for the
defendants to set up a demurrer to the bill when it was evi-
dent that some part of the relief must necessarily be granted.
The present bill was in the nature of a cross-bill to the pro-
ceedings adopted by the Birmingham and Oxford Company
a short time since,jand those very persons had filed abill, pray-
ing for an injunction to restrain a certain number of the di-
rectors from completing the contract, or otherwise acting so
as to effect any purpose mentioned in the agreement. In
the previous bill the Great Western Company were not even
made parties, they were designedly omitted upon those pro-
ceedings, and it therefore became absolutely necessary to file
this bilol, in order that the real facts might appear. The
plaintiffs bad, upon filing this bill, given notice of motion
for an injunction, and the defendants had immediately put
in a demurrer, which bad created the most serious results in
rap* al the delay occasioned thereby. If the Great
Waimea bad not been omitted in the first bill
AY by the Birmingham and Oxford Company,
Ass snit would, in fact, have been rendered useless.
The 'attract contained this further stipulation, that an'appli-
alien should be made to parliament for an act to carry into
effect the object of the parties, in ease they could not be per-
formed without the intervention of the legislature; that
would constitute an independent contract. That portion of
the contract was endeavoured to be prevented by the share-
holders of the Birmingham and Oxford Company 'peeling
together and requiring the directors not to fulfil the stipula-
tions ; but it was evident that the bill having been intro-
duced Into parliament by the coneent of the majority of the
shareholders, the object could not be defeated or invalidated
by the resolutions of a subsequent meeting. Suppose an act
should be requisite, it was the province of this court to direct
its being obtained in pursuance of the agreement. It had been
argued that the court could not compel persons to go to par-
liament to obtain an act ; but the bill had no such object
in view; the object was to prevent the defendants
from injuring the subject of the contract until the plaintiffs
should have had en opportunity of obtaining the sanction o
the legislature. The authorities cited by passel for the
defendants were not applicable to this ease. When the
object of the bill was to alter the character of the under-
taking, then no doubt the court would interfere to prevent
it; but where the application was, es in the present case, to
carry out the purposes of a contract, a court of equity would
at any rate interfere, to prevent either party from opposing
each an object, and for that purpose it need only decide that
one party had the capacity to give and the other party to take
the thing in question. It might also be as well to show the
meming of the term amalgamation, which was so often used.
This expression was made use of to denote that the Birming-
ham 7and Oxford Company was intended to flow into the
great basin of the Great Western, to become en integral part
of that concern, as one stream necessarily must when run-
' fling into another. The Birmingham and Oxford, after
haying been joined with the Great Western, was to be eon.
sidereal to have fulfilled its destinies, and then to be entirely
obliterated ; that was the meaning of the term. The court
was now called upon to restrain the shareholders of the
Birmingham and Oxford Company from preventing the con-
tract being carried out • and that they might be declared
trustees for the Great Western Company ; this would effec-
tually establish all the rights consequent upon the
agreement. If this were directed, it might not be
necessary to have any application to parliament. When
the contract was first entered into it was requisite
on this account, that there was so power in the third railway
—the Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley—to aril
to the Great 'Western, but an act had since been passed
iving the Great Western .power to purchase that railway,
The Great Western undertook to give more for the Birming-
ham and Oxford than it was worth by itself, but this was to
be made up by the amalgamation of the two railways—the
Birmingham and Oxford and the Birmingbamiand Dudley";
the amalgamation spoken of was in fact a temporary blend-
ing of the two, in order to call into existence a joint direc-
tion, in which the Great Western was to participate. The
question never depended upon the application first being
made for amalgamation, as had been contended by the
other side ; but that object was to be effected in conformity
with the provisions of the contract. The legislature bad
confirmed and validated the agreement by the act subse-
quently passed. The agreement was the legitimate offspring
of the act of parliament, and was in every respect in
conformity with it. The whole agreement was one trans-
action, and binding upon all parties. If the defendants
could relieve themselves from the contract with the
Great Western, still they would be bound by the con-
tract with the Birmingham and Dudley, and the link was
incomplete without the entire trilateral contract being speci-
fically performed ,• surely, all these subjects were such as the
court was justified in entertaining, and they were not to be
met by the general demurrer that had been put in.
The arguments on behalf of the defendants were not con-
cluded at the rising of the court.

cue, the:
Lak'us &alit the h
-