The Sun.
London, England, 1847-11-09 00:00:00

TUESDAA
__EVENING, NOVEMBER 9, 1847.

will command less commodities than before ?—As I
do not know in which sense you view the pound as
being liable to depreciation, I will answer on both
points.
With regard to the depreciation of the "pound"
as measured by gold, it is a matter of very
considerable doubt among the members of
the Anti-Gold-law League, whether the Ex-
chequer paper pound would depreciate at
all. Though they think there can be no question
that commodities in general would advance in price,
so as to embrace that indirect taxation which they are
burdened with in this country, yet, that gold would
rise to any appreciable extent they consider it ven-
turesome to affirm. It is sufficient, in their estima-
tion, that gold would be permitted to rise, if neces-
sary, if withdrawn for exportatation. They cannot
shut their eyes to the fact that under the system of cur-
rency they propose, forty or fifty millions of gold coin
would be rendered unnecessary as legal tender, and
thrown consequently upon the bullion market of the
world ; and they are not sure but that this additional
supply would have as great a tendency to keep gold
down, as the issue of the Exchequer notes would
have to raise it. Should it prove so, the most ardent
bullionist might still be gratified by obtaining 5 dwts.
3 grs. of gold for his paper pound, and it is within
the limits of possibility that he might obtain more,
for we are not at all sure that the paper pound might
not frequently be at a premium when compared with
dwts. 3 grs. of gold of standard fineness.
But whether this should prove to be the case or not,
we hold it of no importance at ail. We maintain
that it is really of very little consequence, either to
the payer or receiver of pounds, whether the " pound"
will command less or more gold, otherwise than as
that lesser or greater quantity of gold will again
convert into less or more commodities. The real
and true standard of the value of money is the
" bread and cheese" standard before spoken of. This
is clearly laid down by Adam Smith (corroborated
by every man's common sense) in the following para-
graph from the " wealth of Nations :"—" The revenue
of a person to whom a guinea is paid, does not so
much consist in the piece of gold, as in what he
can get for it. or in what he can exchange it for. If
it would exchange for nothing it would, like a bill
upon a bankrupt, be of no more use than the most
useless piece of paper." The real question at issue
is, therefore, will the pounds that the Anti- Gold law
League proposes to be issued purchase less corn-
moditie3 than the present pounds ? Will there be a
deterioration of their value in that respect, and will
creditors be defrauded by being compelled to accept
these pounds in lieu of those now circulating ?
We reply, yes ! They will be of less value than
the present pounds in their power of purcbasing com-
modities ; further, that strict and even-handed justice
to all classes imperiously demands a " pound " of this
description, and that Government cannot act honestly
unless it causes such a system of money to be adopted ;
and lastly, that creditors will not be defrauded of
a single farthing, but merely be called upon to
pay the just debts they themselves owe. We will
not condescend to accept a concession of such money
upon the ground of expediency or even charitable
consideration for debtors—we demand it upon the
principles of stern and impartial JUSTICE.
To establish this point, let me put the circum-
stances of the country before you in the severest
mathematical form, and let me remind you,
what seems indeed to be entirely lost sight of
in the discussion of this question, that the coun-
try is indebted to the extent of about one-fifth
of its means, and that the diminution in the value
of the pound in the system of currency recommended
by the Anti-Gold-law League, is merely an expres-
sion of the indebtedness of the nation at large to the
national creditor, and a means whereby the national
creditor collects from each person that sum which is
his fair proportion of the general liability of the
country. The property of the country has been va-
riously estimated to amount in value to between
three thousand and five thousand millions sterling.
For the sake of argument let us assume it
to be four thousand millions. The debt of the nation
in round numbers is eight hundred millions, or just
one-fifth of the total wealth. Now, who owes this
sum ? Is it owing at all, or not ? We concede that it
is owing, though most wastefully, not to say fraudu-
lently, contracted. And we say that each man of the
country owes it in precise proportion to the property
he is possessed of in the country. The property of the
nation is mortgaged to the national creditor to the ex-
tent of one-fifth; and, however recklessly and un-
wisely this mortgage may hare been contracted, we
say, there it is—" a great fact "—and one that can-
not be repudiated without a loss of national faith and
honour. Instead of being repudiators, as has been
ignorantly averred, we are the very parties who throw
the strongest guards around our national honour and
the fulfilment of our national engagements.
Now, how is this debt to be paid ? We know that,
from the terms of the contract, it is not obligatory on
Government to call upon the individuals who owe
it for the principal ; but it is incumbent on the
I Government to collect the interest from them. This
can only be done in one of two ways ; either by
direct taxation, such as an income or property tax,
or by indirect taxation on the commodities they
consume, such as Excise and Customs' duties. In the
first case, that of direct taxation, a person having
1001. per annum, and the tax being one-fifth, the Go-
vernment takes away twenty of the pounds, leaving the
person eighty for himself, and he thus cancels his share
of annual inaebtedness to the national creditor. In the
second case, the Government leaves the original number
of pounds in the possession of the proprietor, but so
enhances the cost of the commodities he consumes,
that for his 1001. he can only obtain as many commodi-
' ties as 801. formerly purchased him, and in this way
he likewise cancels his annual indebtedness of 201. to
the national creditor. If fairly and honestly carried
out, both these systems of taxation lead to the
' same result, viz., the abstraction from every man
of that portion of the annual proceeds of
his property which belongs to the creditors
of the state. Thus Mr. Ricardo most truly re-
marks, "If my revenue be I,ooø/. per annum,
and I must pay taxes to the amount of 1001.., it is
of little importance whether I pay it from my re-
venue, leaving myself only 9001., or pay 1001. in ad-
dition for my agricultural commodities or for my
manufactured goods. If 100/. is my fair proportion
of the expenses of the country, the virtue of taxation
consists in making sure that I shall pay that 1001.,
neither more nor less, and that cannot be effected in
any manner so securely as by taxes on wages, profits,
or raw produce."
You will perceive, therefore, Sir, that the pound
which the Anti Gold law League advocates is n
pound lessened in "bread and cheese" value solely to
the extent of the liability or indebtedness of each
possessor of pounds, and that this diminution of value
is accomplished simply by means of allowing commo-
ipprrold.c ue et? ifjohilz.chofwill these include
comm aidhie
taxes
s e
nttofwdseielldfoira ttheha
ties. It is a mere question of the proper price of
commodities ; or rather, whether taxation is to
take effect or not on the parties who ought
to pay it. We -hold it to be essentially unjust, if
indirect taxation be adopted, to use any pound
which, embodying a fixed invariable value in itself
as a commodity, does not permit of that addition to
price which a system of indirect taxation requires.
Any intrinsically valuable currency merely provides
for, and permits of, natural prices exclusive of taxa-
tion, while the currency required under the pre-
sent fiscal arrangements of the country is one
which will permit of taxation being added to
the price of commodities. It is most astonishing
that there should be any objection to such - a
system of money as the Anti-Gold-law League
recommends, when the object to be effected by it
is simply to make the taxes payable by the
parties upon whom the Government professes to
charge them, and this effected merely by a diminution
in the purchasing power of the pound sterling, owing
to goods selling for taxation prices. It would effect
precisely the same result indirectly, as the property-
tax now does by taking 7d. in the pound away from
all rents, interests, and investments. For instance, I
go to a tenant:for half -a-year's rent, say 50/. In-
stead of his paying me 50/., he pays me fifty times
19s. 5d., and if I ask him why he does not pay
me the fnll rent agreed upon—why he pays me
19s. sd. instead of a pound, he tells me has already
advanced 7d. in the pound in income-tax, and that I
am not entitled to a pound of full size, but to a pound
short the 7d. he has paid iu taxation. The principle
we contend for is, therefore, conceded in the present
property-tax' and if carried to the full extent of the
taxes, would effect all the Anti-Gold-law League
wants to effect as far as taxation is zoncerned.
And why should it nOt be carried so far ? It will
not, I presume, be denied that it is perfectly compe-
tent for Parliament, if it so thought fit, to abolish the
whole system of indirect taxation, and substitute for
it a direct property-tax. In that case, instead of 7d.
being deducted from every pound of the revenue of
individuals, it would require probably 4s. to be taken
from each pound ; and where is the difference I
should be glad to know, between this result and
that proposed
ame end by the
gained by means of' the Anti-Gold- law League,
where
currency instead of by taxation ? The only difierenc
b
is,t
shaytstienm of the formereurren currency, would alter the system you would retain the pre-
sent
of taxation; while in the latter you would alter the
system of currency and retain the present system of
taxation. Both would lead to the same end, and
neither of them is more a fraud than the other.
Though I
athlieemn
utphoant
ethveerypapbelric.
But many persons are not satisfied wthietyh
raeggielinreeraal
statement of a principle or a
practical application of it in a case given.
liabilitiesm ay probably
ofthe
havee
country
son's property to the extent of one-fifth, they may
probably not see how this has anything to do with
andth the
man.pri v a t e
Theyengagementswould probably
raonbdabldyebimtsagbetween
that
theman
system, when applied to private debts, would only