The Sun.
London, England, 1849-11-13 00:00:00

,0 the wealthiest nobleman, even in the commence

ment of the present century.
It would appear as if they supposed that
gold and silver were the materials chiefly used in the
construction of the railroads, and that what was once
invested could never in any manner be recovered.
They will not believe that there was a continual and
active circulation of the money employed in the pay-
ment of the labourers, or that all classes benefited by
the additional stimulus afforded to trade and com-
merce, and the extra demand for articles of comfort
thereby occasioned. To these persons the employ-
ment of the working classes, and the rendering a
" fair day's wages for a fair day's work," are
calamities of no ordinary magnitude, that should
be averted by any means and at any sacrifice. Better
that the sturdy labourer should waste his time in
unprofitable idleness, that he should sustain the
utmost privations, dragging on a miserable existence,
badly fed, and badly clothed, a constant inmate of the
union workhouse, than that he should be enabled to
support his family by his own honest industry, and
to become a well fed, comfortably clad, and hard

worked man.
Of the money invested in railways, about 20 per
cent., or one-fifth of the entire cost, was paid
to the proprietors of real estates, for the
purchase of the land required for railway
purposes. These enormous sums then were merely
transferred from the shareholder to the former owner,
who perhaps paid his debts therewith, or possibly
invested the amount in the very undertaking from
which he received it. That money was not abstracted
from the circulation, nor was it sent out of the
country. Probably no coin or notes changed hands
during the transaction. The entire process in each
case was completed by the delivery of a cheque and
the transfer of certain credits in the bankers' books
from one account to another. It could no
more impoverish the nation than the change of a
purse of sovereigns from the right hand to the left
hand pocket could impoverish an individual. The
same may be said of the Parliamentary and legal
expenses, which were arranged in like manner. The
other, and by far the greater part of the expenditure,
consisted chiefly in the payment of wages to the
different classes of workmen. These payments cer-
tainly required the use of some amount of money,
but it circulated rapidly from hand to hand,
and speedily found its way back to the
bankers to be again drawn out and
again disbursed to the labourers. The railway
" navvie" did not usually hoard or make away with
his money. He was paid his wages every week,
and they were acarcely received before they were
handed over to the butcher, the baker, the grocer, the
lodging-housekeeper, the publican, and perhaps, oc-
casionally, to the tailor, hosier, or shoemaker. These
latter persons derived considerable profits from the
sale of their goods to the new class of customers,
but the tradesman did not put by the money either.
In turn they paid it away to farmers or wholsale
dealers, from whom it went to the landlords,
manufacturers, or merchants, and thence again
to the bankers. Now, no part of these
operations took money from the country.
The articles required for the labourers were chiefly
of home production, and a very small portion indeed
went to the foreigner. The course was as certain as
that of a river flowing towards the sea, fertilising and
irrigating the lands through which it passed in its
progress. In a few weeks at the outside—probably
in a single week—the whole process would be gone
through, and the money restored to the original
custody. If 500,0001. or 600,0001. was thus distri-
buted on every Saturday during a series of years,
not more than a single million, or a million
and a half would be required, and a paper
currency would be just as efficient for that purpose
as bullion, were it not for the absurd and impolitic
law that prohibits the circulation of small notes,
which are found so beneficial and convenient in
Scotland and Ireland.
These opinions are fully corroborated by the testi-
mony of Mr. GUMMY and of Mr. BIRKBECK, who so
ably represented the provincial bankers before the
Committee on Commercial Distress. The former
gentleman says, " I cannot in my own experience
trace the effect to the railways. My own experience,
which is in the floating money of the country, has not
led me to perceive much derangement in the circu-
lating medium on account of railways." The latter,
however, enters so clearly and explicitly into the
question that we cannot refrain from giving his
evidence on this point in extenso
Question 5919. And there has been, in conjunc-
tion with that, a very large investment in railways ?
That, I think, would not have been felt to a serious
degree but for the other causes ; it would have caused
individual suffering, but it would not have cause national
suffering.
5920. Does it not raise the rate of interest in the
market?—No, it does not, the money is there still.
5921. Then you do not think that the calls upon the
country for railway purposes, to the amount of 3,000,0004
or 4,000,0004 a month, have had any effect in raising the
rate of interest in the market or producing a scarcity of
money ?—I cannot conceive that it could do so ; pro-
vided there was a good state of trade, I do not think the
nation would have felt it in the least ; individuals might
have felt it, but not the nation. The money is there still.
5922. It goes to landed proprietors, shopkeepers, and
others?—Yes.
5923. There is the same amount of railway calls
going on now, but yet money is at the cheap rate you
have described?—Yes. There is nearly the same
amount of railway calls.
5924. At the time you allude to money was very
cheap in the market?—lt was.
5925. There was a great difficulty in employing it:—
Yes.
5926. If it had not been employed in railways do you
think it would have gone for investment elsewhere?—
I think a good deal would have gone abroad.
5927. Being kept at home, have not the labourers
of the country benefited from the general expendi-
ture?—Yes.
5928. And the revenue has also benefited
_from that
expenditure?—Yes.
2929. Did it at all lessen the amount of currency in the
country cannot conceive how it could lessen it.
5930. As you said before, it might have created some
individual distress?—No doubt it has done so.
5931. But nationally it has not produced any effect?—
No. All that I can ch 2rge upon the railways is, that it has
occasioned the difference between keeping a number of
labourers upon good wages and throwing them upon the
poor•rates.
And that is all that any candid and unprejudiced
man could charge against them. They have kept
the money in the country, which, in place of being
invested in foreign stocks and foreign produce, as on
former occasions, has been retained at home in the
employment of labour on useful works that have per-
manently increased the capital of the country. It
has benefited the labourers, benefited the shop-
keepers, and manufacturers, and benefited the public
revenue, and the only cost has been the difference of
throwing
ahnumberofolabroruarteers.,,son good wages and
Would to GOD that we had many such works in
progress, and that every man able, and willing to
work, should receive the legitimate rewards of his
nd honest industry.

A wise lawyer never goes to law himself.—Eliza
CoA's Journal,