The Sun.
London, England, 1833-02-01 00:00:00

We allude, of course, to the experience of
Scotland. But Mr. SCROPE so well illustrates
the advantage of freedom that we cannot do bet-
ter than quote his own words :

" All important," he says, " as is the due supply of
money to the commerce of Great Britain, it is yet not
more important than the due supplies of the necessaries
of life—bread and meat, for example—to the vast popu-
lation of Britain's metropolis. But what would be the
reply of any one, who—insisting on the disturbances and
convulsions, the suffering and danger, that must ensue
from any considerable deficiency of these necessaries to
such a vast population, and on the ruinous waste which
any excess must occasion—should, with a view to secure
the precise and equitable adjustment of the supply to the
demand throughout the year, propose to charter a com-
pany, or appoint a government-board, with the exclusive
privilege of supplying London with bread and meat?
Would it not be answered, that the proposed method is
exactly the one most likely to occasion inequality in the
supply. That the neglect for mistakes, the indiscretion
or ignorances, or fraud, of the few individuals to whom the
management of this important business must be intrusted,
might, and in all probability would, occasionally compro-
mise the existence of a million and a half of people, and
bring upon this mighty centre of wealth and industry,
all the evils of alternating scarcities and gluts of pro-
visions ? Would not the proposer of this scheme be referred
to the fact of the mode in which this great population is
supplied with its daily food—quietly and effectually-
-without bustle, without organization, or even combina-
tion—without excess, as without waste—the supply so
equally adjusted to the demand, that the prices of
butchers' meat and bread do not, perhaps, suffer a varia-
tio❑ of the fraction of a farthing throughout the year,
which may not be accounted for by the causes affect-
ing the original sources of supply? And what is
it that performs this daily miracle,—which only
does not excite our continual admiration and asto-
nishment, because it is self-effected, with all the
order, ease, and certainty, of a great natural process ?
Why, the principle of competition—the free rivalry of
thousands of individuals, each acting in his own sphere,
each actuated by the unerring instinct of self-interest, to
sell as much as he can, end yet to provide no more than
he can dispose of without loss—to keep the supply full,
but to prevent excess.
" Now, is there anything to prevent this simple prin-
ciple from winking quite as beneficially in the supply of
this great metropolis with money, as with the necessaries
of subsistence ?"

Mr. SCROPE puts the question, and we an-
swer, at once, Nothing ; and our attempt to
supply the place of this natural machinery, is
something upon a par with the ignorant legisla-
tion of ELIZABETH, in attempting to limit the
number of houses which should be built in
London. Mr. SC ROPE acknowledges the
strength of the case in favour of freedom ; says
it would be an " innovation of great magnitude,"
knocks down the objection, and then, in the
next sentence, jumps to his monopolizing com-
pulsory national notes ! But then it is said,
" Oh, but issuing notes is coining money, and
coining money is always a function of the Go-
vernment." Issuing notes is not the coinage of
money. Mr. DYER, the principal manager of
the Manchester Joint Stock Bank, quoted with
approbation by Mr. SC ROPE, says, before the
Committee of Secrecy,—" To issue cash notes
is not coining money, any more than it is to
issue bills at a short date ; both kinds of issue
being, in fact, nothing more than , circulating
credit." Such is, indeed, the fact ; and the de-
lusion of supposing that to issue notes is the
same thing with coining money, arises from
overlooking the causes of the coinage of money
being universally taken into the hands of Go-
vernment, and the absolute differences in the
nature of metal and paper. Gold and silver
have an intrinsic value as articles of commerce,
because in universal demand and limited in quan-
tity. The main cause of their coinage being
taken up by the governing power was the incon-
venience—not to say impossibility—of indivi-
duals testing the bullion brought to them in such
a way as to ascertain the exact quantity of pure
gold or silver offered them. If coins were merely
counters representing value, as some suppose,
their coinage would never have been taken up
by Government at all, except upon the false
principle of making a profit out of them, of
which, as applied to note issuing, we shall
speak presently. The primary object, then, of
coining money being to assure individuals of
the amount of intrinsic value in the metal of-
fered to them, it is clear that the principle of
coinage cannot enter into any transaction where
there is no intrinsic value to be fixed. Every
one knows there is no intrinsic value in paper
money, and, as Mr. DYER says, it simply
represents the credit of the issuer. But,
then, say the National Bank advocates. " Ban-
kers make a great profit of their paper, which
you sav is circulating credit, and why should not
the public make a profit of its credit ?" Just
for the same reasons that it does not attempt to
make a profit by grazing bullocks or sheep for
the London market ; just for the same reasons
that it does not follow the silly example of the
Government of France, which has the mono-
poly of selling tobacco, or that of Spain, which
has the monopoly of selling salt. No doubt
these Governments make a profit of their mono-
polies, but there can be as little doubt that the
public is injured at least fourfold the amount of
that profit. But the banking monopoly is even
less defensible than that of the continental
Governments in the articles we have mentioned.
The violation of principle which makes a Govern-
ment enter into trade, ends in these cases only
in the levy of a heavy tax upon two particular
articles, and the having those articles of an in-
ferior quality ; but the establishment of a
National Bank, such as Mr. SCROPE advocates,
would end, some day or other, in the perfect
ruin of all trade ; and all for what ?—The
chance of obtaining a circulating medium, which
we have shown could not exist for any length of
time, and the reaping of an imaginary profit.
We say imaginary profit advisedly, for we con-
tend that the public would be losers instead of
gainers by any profit which a National Bank
could make. Bankers make no more than
the fair profits of trade. Under a free
system, their profits, like those of graziers,
or shoemakers, or tobacconists, or salt manu-
facturers, would be reduced to the lowest amount,
and the public would have the services bankers
render at the least possible cost. Any surplus,
therefore, beyond what is sufficient to pay for
the expenses of management, and give the ave-
rage rate of profits, taking all circumstances
into consideration, would be just so much taken
out of the pockets of the people, which ought to
have remained there. How Mr. SCROPE, or
any other man able to distinguish principle from
prejudice, can persuade himself that this is public
gain, is one of those unaccountable phenomena