The Sun.
London, England, 1847-09-30 00:00:00

'tinder. No man can refuse a legal tender. I
livery man can refuse currency. Who, then, Fbould
issue legal tender ? Who should issue money ? We
hold that the Crown alone should be the issuer of the
legal tender of the nation ; and that the Crown should
not be permitted to issue any amount it pleased, but
only such an amount as the united Parliament may
agree upon as the representation of the taxes of the
country.—(Hear, hear.) You will thus have a
guarantee, through Parliament, against the unlimited
issue of money ; end, through the obligation of con-
verting it annually into taxes, a guarantee against
depreciation. Now, these are the two circumstances
which, when rightly understood, liberate paper
money from the charge of being a fraudulent or ficti-
tious medium of interchange. I read in the Times
newspaper last Monday, a paragraph somewhat to this
effect—" Anybody can make money ;"
,and having laid
this proposition down without telling us whether this
money was a legal tender or not, the Times adds—
" But no one will take that money." Now, either
the writer in the Times meant that money was legal
tender, or he did not. If he meant it to be legal ten-
der, then the person to whom it is tendered would
be compelled in law to take it, and that part of the
argument would fall ; hut if the writer meant by
money "currency," then he confounded two things
that are essentially distinct. But he endeavoured, by
using "money" and " currency" in such senses as he
pleased, to throw darkness on the subject.—(Cheers.)
But I would ask the writer in the Times, or any one
else entertaining his opinions, whether he would ob-
ject to receive an Exchequer-bill of 1,0001. in pay-
ment of a debt of 1,0001. ? An Exchequer-bill is
only paper, and therefore intrinsically worthless.
Moreover, it is not convertible into gold either at the
Mint or at the market price. Now, if the Queen be
empowered to issue Exchequer notes for 1,0001., and
you trust her by taking those notes as legal tender,
cannot you trust her for 1/. ? The reason why we
advocate this system depends somewhat upon philoso-
phical principles, but I have no doubt that in the
course of a few sentences I can make that philosophy
perfectly clear. The Queen has no right to demand
from her subjects any duty which her subjects cannot
perform. I think that is a fundamental principle.—
(Hear, hear.) The Queen is entitled to taxes be-
cause she protects her subjects, but she is only en-
titled, as her ancestors were, to taxes in kind—that is
to say, she has a right to receive a portion of the
labour or of the produce of her subjects in exchange
a or in payment for the protection she affords; but
she has no right to commute those taxes in kind into
a foreign metal which Englishmen cannot always ob-
tain.—(Cheers.) If the Queen were to call upon the
people of Sheffield to pay their taxes in cutlery, on
the people of Leeds to pay their taxes in woollens,
on the people of Coventry to pay their taxes in rib-
bons, on the people of Birmingham to pay their taxes
in buttons, and so on, the obligation between the
Crown and the subject would be completely dis-
Charged. The* would be no difficulty in this, be
cause every person would have in his own possession
the instrument by which taxation was to be paid.
Now when for the convenience of Government the
form of taxation is altered, it is not just to increase
the pressure on the tax- payer. A change made for
the convenience of the Crown ought not to oppress
the subject.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Jonathan Duncan
then went en to say that if the Queen were prepared
to say that any pound of taxation represented five
pennyweights of gold, then the people might
justly say to the Queen—" We insist upon your
keeping the gold continually in this country, othetr-
wise you ask us for impoisibilities." They know
that gold having a merchantable value would be ex-
ported to foreign countries when it was dearer in
those countries than at home; and all our Acts of

every hat he sold, and in that view he would ulti-
mately be driven into the Gazette. This illustration
applied to every commodity which foreignerss could
produce ; and the general rule to be deduced was, that
free trade could not be carried on between two
countries unequally taxed in a legal tender money,
which only expressed intrinsic value and did not ex-
press price. Surely free trade, which would give all
the advantage to the foreigner, could not be encou-
raged by any except by those who wished to ruin the
native producer. He would say nothing more as to
free-trade principles generally. He would not say
whether they were right or wrong, but he would say
this, that the man who paid taxes ought to be treated
in a different manner from the man who did not, and
that whether in currency or any other financial consi-
deration, this distinction ought not to be overlooked.
If due allowance was made to the Englishman for the
taxation which he had to bear, he could compete
most advantageously with the foreigner, who would
have to bear all the expenses of transit to the British
market. Under the proposed system, when the
foreigner received paper for 30s. for his hat, and
took it to the bullion broker, the latter would give
him 5 dwts. of gold, and not 7 dwts. as under the
present system, for 5 dwts. would be the intrinsic
worth of the 30s. note. The difference, or 2f dwts.,
was what was due to taxation. Neither would this
injure the foreigner. He got as inuala as he was en-
titled to receive. Under the presefil stupid system,
the foreigner had perfect free trade, while they had
no free trads at all themselves. The foreigner took
the advantage ofhigh prices • for that which was intrie-
sically worth 5 dwts. of gold he got 7f dwts. He
wished to make some remarks upon Sir R. Peel's
Currency Bill of 1844. Sir R. Peel asked, What
was a pound ? He threw up a sovereign and catch-
ing it again, said, " This is a pound.' It certainly
was 5 dwts. 3 grains of gold. But when Sir Robert
Peel asked, What was a pound ? did he mean a
money pound ? He thought it only fair that this
interrogatory should be put to him. Then, the
next question was—What was money ? Sir R. Peel
assumed, by implication, that money should possess
an intrinsic value, but they disputed that principle
altogether, and said that money ought not to possess
an intrinsic value. After declaring that according to
the ancient policy of this country, the meaning of the
word pound was nothing more than an obligation to
pay 5 dwts. of gold, Sir Robert Peel said, I pro-
pound a system in accordance with this principle. It
unfortunately happened that in that speech of May 7,
1844, Sir Robert Peel contradicted this fundamental
principle no less than five different times. He would
show in what manner. The people of this country,
it appears, owed 11,000,0001. to the B ink of England.
The Government of this country, notwithstanding its
great resources, did not seem able to pay off this debt
of 11,000,0001. to the Bank, so they gave to it the
power of issuing 11,000,0001. of notes, which were
not convertible into gold. This was the first
contradiction. Sir Robert said the Govern-
ment of the day always want a temporary
assistance, in the shape of an advance from the
Bank; we will add 3,000,0001. of Exchequer-bills,
making 14,000,0001., to which amount the Bank
might issue notes. Against this 14,000,0001. the
Bank of England was not bound to hold one ounce of
gold. But Sir Robert went further. The country
bankers, for fourteen months before the Bill of 1844
came into operation, issued to the extent of 8,000,0001.
Well, people, on reading the first part of Peel's speech,
would have thought that he was going to extinguish
those banks at once; but no such thing; he still
would continue to allow them to issue 8,000,0001.
without an ounce of gold. He gave permission to
Scotland to issue 3,000,0001. and to Ireland to issue
6,000,0001., making in all 31,000,000/. of paper float

Parliament, our fleets, and our armies, would in such;
case be absolutely ineffectual in keeping the gold in
England. But if gold was the instrument of taxation;
and the Queen would not suffer her subjects to pay
their taxes in any other, she would be acting like
Pharaoh towards his slaves, when he commanded
them to make bricks, but withheld the straw.—
(Hear.) Surely such would not be the conduct of a
paternal Government; and this formed one of the
arguments in favour of a paper currency. Would the
paper currency they proposed be safe ? Ile thought
it would. Let them see its nature. In the first
place, they proposed not to exceed the amount of
annual taxation in this paper currency. If the taxes
levied by the authority of Parliament amounted to
60,000,0001. year'y, then why could not Parliament
issue taxation paper to the amount of 60.000,0001.
At the end of every twelve months, or fiscal year,
the expenditure and receipts would, under this
system, balance, and there would be no overplus or
deficiency. There would be nothing to be funded,
and no further accumulation of the national debt.

ing about in this country, without any metallic basis
whatever. And all this was recommended by a Mi-
nister who laid down as a principle that the obliga-
tion to pay a pound meant nothing but to have al-
ways at hand 5 dwts. of gold to discharge that
obligation. He was willing to believe that Sir
Robert Peel had been misled, and thought he would
yet change his opinions upon the currency as
well as upon all the great subjects which had
occupied the attention of Parliament. During
Mr. Homer's life Sir Robert Peel obstinately opposed
cash payments, hut no sooner did Mr. Horner die,
than he became a thorough bullionist. During Sir
Samuel Romilly's lifetime Sir Robert opposed every
relaxation in the criminal code, but no sooner did Sir
Samuel die, than Sir Robert came forward as a cri-
minal law reformer.—(Hear, hear.) Whilst Canning
lived he vehemently opposed Catholic Emancipation,
after the death of that illustrious man, he repudiated
his former opinions. More recently, Sir Robert Peel
for several years opposed the repeal of the corn-laws,
but finally yielded to the " unadorned eloquence of

The nation, like a prudent individual, would balance
its accounts annually. Had they been acting in this
way since 1688, they would not now be burdened
with an enormous national debt.—(Hear.) He would
endeavour to illustrate this point a little further, and
in so doing would confine himself to the internal
transactions of this country. They would perceive
that in the first instance the Queen was, so to speak,
in relation to the taxes, the debtor to her subjects.
She was so by paying the army, the navy, the judi-
cial establishments, and the fundholders—to sum up,
the Sovereign was the debtor for all those sums of
money which the Government owed to its func-
tionaries. In order that the Queen might acquit
herself of these debts, they proposed that she
might draw bills, at twelve months after date,
upon her subjects. The date to be limited to twelve
months, and the amount of the notes to be such
as the Sovereign and her subjects might think proper.
The notes would vary in amount, as Parlia-

Richard Cobden." In this manner had thirty-five
years of the political life of Sir R. Peel been spent—
the latter part in opposing the opinions advocated in
the former. As soon as Sir R. Peel had got Lord J.
Russell and Sir Charles Wood tightly and irrevocably
pledged to the present currency, so soon would he
come round to his (Mr. Duncan's) opinions, and ad
vocate them most ably, and no doubt successfully.—
(Hear, and cheers.) They would have a missive from
Tamworth, recanting all his former declarations.—
(Laughter.) After some further observations, Mr.
Duncan concluded amid loud cheering.
Mr. TAYLOR, having been called upon to address
the meeting, said he came forward under great disad-
vantages. His life had been passed in a very retired
manner, and he never had addressed a public meet •
ing before. He would not have been present on this
occasion if he had not felt it to be an imperative duty
to come forward and afford his aid in promoting the
cause. He also felt under great disadvantage in fol-

ment should think fit, 11., 51., 501., 1001., &c., and lowing the most excellent speech of Mr. Duncan. He
the Sovereign might command that those notes be (Mr. Taylor) had been long connected with this sub-
taken in discharge of an equivalent amount of taxa- jeet, and had from time to time published the results
tion. This being done, the character of the Sovereign of the inquiries he had felt disposed to make, and he
would be changed from debtor to creditor, and the thought it his duty when called upon now to testify
people would then discharge the obligations to the in public his belief that the doctrines which he had
Crown by paying into the Exchequer these taxation professed were right, just,. and true. COn that account
notes. He thought this system of internal currency he had come forward this evening.—(Hear, hear.)
was not open to any objection. Such paper would The meeting had heard a most excellent account of
never be depreciated, because it never would be circa- the whole of the case relied on by the advocates of
lated above the annual taxation. The annual taxation paper money, but there were one or two points upon
would absorb all that would be issued. Its amount which he wished to dilate, because they referred to
eould not exceed that which the public desired, for something which was more of an historic, and, per-
Parliament would itself sanction it. If Parliament haps, of an antiquarian nature than would be generally
wished for 5,000,0001. to pay the army, then let notes dwelt upon by a public speaker. The money which we
to that extent be issued. In-what way, he asked them, now have had been imposed upon us under a false
so far as their internal transactions were concerned, or colour. Few of the meeting were, perhaps, aware
their internal taxes and debts, would this currency that the currency which now prevailed in this king-
be less valid than a foreign metal ? It would perform dom was a very different currency from that which
all the functions of gold more effectually than gold, formerly prevailed. In the years 1816 and 1819,
and, as he had already remarked, it would be per- under the auspices of the late Lord Liverpool and the
fectly safe, for it never could be depreciated, and present Sir Robert Peel, a great and radical change
it never could be excessive. Gentlemen might say was made in the monetary condition of this country.
that in the time of war paper was issued in excess. Before that period we had a protective currency, as
He admitted this, and its injurious consequences ; but had been observed before. We had now an unpro-
the evil was guarded against in their plan, for Par- tected currency. Severe laws were passed from a
liament would issue no more of this paper than the very early period—from the very first introduction of
annual amount of taxation rendered necessary. He gold and silver currency into these realms—for the
would now call their attention to the evils which the protection of that currency, and to prevent it from
present gold currency brought upon them. Their being taken out of this country. For some years, any
gold was made to discharge three separate functions : one detected in taking the currency out of the country
—First, as regarded the internal taxes ; secondly, was liable to forfeit the whole amount in his posses-
the internal debts between man and man ; and, thirdly, sion. This rule applied also to foreign coin which
to pay the balance due to the foreign trader.—(Hear.) had once found its way into England. A curious
Now this was demanding from one instrument much story was told of Erasmus with reference to the ope-
more than it could accomplish. If there were ration of this law. He consulted Sir Thomas More,
10,000,000/. in the Bank of England under the law the Lord Chancellor, as to whether he (Erasmus)
of 1844, 10,000,0001. of notes were circulated against might take out some money which he had brought
it; but if 1,000,0001. or 2,000,000/. were sent away, into this country. The Lord Chancellor was of opi-
there was a reduction in the paper. What was the nion that Erasmus might do so. Acting upon this
result ? The whole superstructure of bills of exchange, opinion, he proceeded to Dover, where he was
which rested upon this various basis of gold, was af- stripped of all the money he had, and when he got to
fected to the extent of 10,000,0001. or 20,000,000 e, or Calais he was obliged to write a book in order to pro-
even 30,000,0001. If they lessened the depth of the cure himself subsistence. Up to 1819 we had a pro-
water in the Thames, they would strand the vessels, and tective currency, and though it consisted of gold, yet '1
they were performing the same operation when they the country was able to pay its taxes and conduct its
prevented the free circulation of commodities from affairs without being at any time particularly dis-
man to man by taking away the instrument with tressed for money. But there had been during that
which that circulation could be completed. But they time a great issue of Exchequer money, called tallies.
did more than this. Take, for instance, the case of That money would not go out of the eountry, so that
t f
a man who was anxious to raise himself in the world. we had the benefit of all that home money, and, at
He accumulated stock. A scarcity of gold came the same time, we had a protective currency.
tln
n u
—he had 100,0001. worth of goods in his warehouses this system we went on nourishingly. A great
7-yets, if that man had bills to meet, and was not for- ber of our noble families rose during that period from
Ciliate enough to get his bills discounted, he must the ranks of trade and commerce—numbers of them
must take his goods to the market, and sell them at a having served as Lord Mayors of London. The dis-
elepreciated price. So that a man worth 100,0001. covery of South America led to the cheaper produc-
emight; under our present monetary arrangements, be tion of silver; and, during the first sixty years after
Yendered 50,000/. worse off in the short space of a the reign of Elizabeth the silver and bullion coin fell
tostelhiie, for, in order to keep himself out of the 33 per cent. in value. Sir Robert Peel told us that
he would be obliged to sell his goods at in 1819 he restored the ancient money of the
whateveral price they would fetch, even if that were country. He restored- first of all the shilling which
less than. hew of
emir prime cost.--(Hear, hear.) had never existed before.—(Laughter.) This shilling
'He would' give another illustration. Suppose weighed eighty-seven grains. In the reign of Elizabeth
that no indirect. taxation existed in this country, the shilling weighed 96 grains, and in the latter part
that the whole taxation was levied by direct taxes of her reign it was reduced to
92 grains. Sir Robert
upon property, realised or capitalised, and that under Peel also boasted of having restored the ancient
these circumstances the intrinsic value of a hat was pound. His pound, however, only weighed 103 grains,
twenty shillings, or 5 dwts. of gold; then suppose hut the sovereign of Elizabeth weighed in the former
that the Government determined to raise a reveue part of her reign 174 grains, and in the latter part
by indirect taxation, and placed a tax of fifty per 172. The pound coin in her time was worth 11.
cent. upon hats. In order that the hat manufacturer Bs. Bd.,- while our coin was only worth 11. Os. 6d.
should retain his position on the same terms as during He did not, therefore, restore the ancient coin.—
direct taxation, it would be necessary for him to add (Hear, hear.) The silver money of that day was a
ten shillings to the selling price of his hat; that was legal tender to any amount. But Sir Robert Peel
to say, he would get thirty shillings where formerly had given us a silver currency which was not a legal
he got but twenty-th-ee—or, in othr words, ei dwts. tender for more than 'Os. This caused an immense
of gold where he formerly got but 5 dwts., and this difference with regal% to the traffic of the country.
increased price he would get if all foreign competition The gold was a legal tender only as it preserved the.
were
y
prohibited. But admit an untaxed foreigner weight it was originally coined at—namely,
123
into our market, whose hats are in all respects equal grains. Sir Rober Peel asked, " What was a
pound ?"
in quality to those of the native producer, that is to and he (Mr. Taylor) would say,
in reply that a
say, possess equal intrinsic value—the foreigner could pound was that sum of money which the -
Government
sell his hats for twenty shillings, or 5 dwts. of gold; of the country had determined should be apoundi
while the Englishman would require fifty per the legal tender of the country. Whatever the Go-
cent. more, since he owes ten shillings, or 2} dwts. vernment of the country determined should be a legal
of gold as a tax to the Government. Sirtender, thit was essentially money, and 1/. of that
er,
Itobert Peel tells us to buy in the cheapest was a pound, whether it was gold, silver, or paper. •
market; now in this case the foreign article would In the taxation levied in this country much in-
be the cheapest; we therefore should buy it; the jury had been done to the productive classes. They
native producer must therefore abandon his trade, f were a body of men who had suffered grievously from
unless he carried it on by losing ten shillings on our monetary system. The employers of labourers