The Sun.
London, England, 1833-04-08 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE =PUBLIC JOURNALS.

The Currency Club politicians, by an extra-
ordinary hallucination of mind, seem to think
that they have established sufficient grounds for
depreciating the currency. by a renewed over-
issue of bank notes, if they can prove that its
value has been raised by a restoration of the
metallic standard, after having been debased by
the Restriction Act. In employing this argu-
ment they forget two things, which entirely de-
cide the question. In the first place, they for-
get that our ancient standard teas the precious
metals—that bank notes were only so many pro-
mises to pay a certain quantity of these metals
in the King's coin upon demand—that the Bank
Restriction Act of 1797, which was the great
original innovation on our currency, was never
intended to be permanent, and that the public
were repeatedly warned of its repeal by succes-
sive legislative motions, and by two solemn in-
vestigations. In the second place, they seem
to leave entirely out of view that we have
already lived thirteen or fourteen years under
our restored standard—that all contracts and
pecuniary engagements between man and man
have adjusted themselves to this new state
of the circulation, and that a fresh change
from a metallic to a depreciated currency
could not possibly effect a compensation between
ancient debtors and creditors,—who no longer
exist in the same relations to each other,—but
would lead to an entirely new derangement of
all our money transactions and obligations. It
might have been politic in 1819 to have arrested
the proposed alteration ; it might have been
politic at that time to have changed our standard,
or to have reduced the quantity of metal in our
coin, so as to suit the acknowledged deprecia-
tion caused by the iniquitous Restriction Act. Of
that we shall say nothing at present, though,
with all its hazards, perhaps the best system was
to be found in a simple restoration of the
standard ; but though we were disposed to
admit the principles of the currency people in
their full extent, as applied to that time, they
can establish no reason for another change in the
present. The national creditor, it is true, now
receives his dividend in a currency more va-
luable than that of 1819; but he may have
bought the stock which he now possesses with
good hard cash, or its equivalent, and may
-not be the same person who appeared on
the Bank-books some dozen of years ago.
Most other pecuniary contracts, engagements, or
obligation, have been since changed, either in
their conditions, or in the relations of the inte-
rested parties to each other, so that probably
few debtors who were injured by the rise in the
value of money in 1819 would be indemnified by
the proposed depreciation of 1833. Even ifthe na-
tional creditors had continued identically the same
body, a large portion of them would have suf-
fered more from the reduction of the interest on
their stock from 5 to 3* per cent. than they
could have gained by the additional value of the
pound sterling, by the restoration of the standard.
In admitting that Mr. Attwood and his "school
of prophets," in vague terms, predicted national
distress from a return to the metallic standard,
which we had deserted front 1797, at every time
that such a return was seriously proposed or
contemplated, we are not awarding any praise
which the supporters of a sound currency need
envy or refuse. No intelligent man who de-
manded the security of the ancient coin of the
realm denied that a return to the use of gold,
which excessive paper issues had entirely dis-
placed, would be attended with financial diffi-
culty, and must lead to commercial em-
barrassment. The question was ' never one
of fact, but of degree ; and while we can
now laugh at the denunciations of " re-
volution, anarchy, and death," which we lately
quoted from Mr. Attwood's " lamentations,"
we are equally free to confess that the wisest
men, both in this country and in the United
States of America, made too small an allow.
ance for tte effect of the change from a currency
nearly altogether of paper to a mixed circulation,
which at ledst required a third, if not a half, of
its amount in the precious metals. By excessive
issues in both countries the value of the whole
currency, including not only paper but the pre-
cious metals themselves as part of the circulation,
was deteriorated, and therefore the amount of
this deterioration could not be measured by the
relative distance between gold and paper, its
component parts. The following excellent ob.
servations of an official report on Bank affairs,
made to the American Congress in 1830, will
sufficiently explain and support our view :
" No proposition is better established than that the
value of money, whether it consists of specie or paper, is
depreciated in exact proportion to the increase of its quan-
tity in any given state of the demand for it. If, for ex-
ample, the banks in 1816 doubled the quantity of the
circulating medium by their excessive issues, they pro-
duced a general degradation of the entire mass of the
currency, including gold and silver, proportioned to the
redundancy of the issues, and wholly independent of the
relative depreciation of bank paper at different places, as
compared with specie. The nominal money price of every
article was of course 100 per cent. hither than it would
have been, but for the duplication of the quantity
of the circulating medium. Money is nothing more nor
less than the measure by which the relative value of all
articles of merchandise is ascertained. If, when the cir-
culating medium is 50,000,000, an article should cost one
dollar, it would certainly cost two if, without any increase
of the uses of a circulating medium, its quantity should be
iaereaged to 100,000,000. This rise in the price of com-
modities, or depreciation in the value of money as compared
with them, would not be owing to the want of credit in
the bank bills, of which the currency happened Lto be
composed. It would exist though these bills were of un-
doubted credit, and convertible into specie at the pleasure
of the holder, and would result simply from the redundancy
of their quantity."

Now, in order to bring back gold, the paper
currency was not only diminished below the
wants of the country, but a great treasure was
collected in the cellars of the Bank, which was
withdrawn from the general circulation of the
world—and this happened simultaneously with
a similar monetary change in the United States.
by this new demand for the precious metals their
exchangeable value was enhanced among all com-
mercial nations, whereas our English politicians
in 1819 merely calculated on a rise in the value
of our currency which would bring it on a par
with bullion, then itself reduced in value by the
want of our demand. This is a fact which must
now be acknowledged both by the friends and
the opponents of the measure called Peel's 13111.
In this country the difference between paper
money and bullion at the enactment of that
Bill was only about four per cent. ; it was there-
fore erroneously argued that the restoration of
the metallic standard would only raise the value
of our currency, or diminish the rate of our prices
by that amount. In America, under their re-
striction acts (for they had likewise their re.
striction acts), the currency in some of the
states was at 20 per cent. discount; and, at an
average, probably above 10. The restoration of
the standard in both countries produced a much
greater effect on the amount of circulation and
fill of prices than had been indicated by the
previous difference between the value of the bul-
lion and the value of the paper. In this country,
.—thanks to that precipitate, irrational and pas-

sionate course of proceeding [adopted by fir
Bank of England, which diminished the circu-
lation of paper, and accumulated unnecessarily
upwards of 14,000,000/. of specie, or bullion,
in their cellars in the course of two or three
years (as appears by the examinations before
the Committee on the Bank Charter),—prices
were depressed, or the currency was raised, in
1822, not only 4 per cent., but 25 per cent.;
and in America, from the same cause, the
amount of currency with which the country was
supplied under the restriction of the different
state banks fell from 110,000,000 or
120,000,000 of dollars to 55,000,000 of dol-
lars, creating a similar commercial embarrass-
ment and a greater change of prices. In both
cases the temporary effect of withdrawing from
the rest of the world so much of the pre-
cious metals as was necessary to supply the
currency of two great commercial nations was
overlooked, and the insignificant difference be-
tween their currency and bullion before the new
demand occurred was alone attended to. But the
results of this monetary revolution are now
part of history in both countries ; and instead
of warranting new changes, pronounces a solemn
warning against all future vacillation. It is not
yet proved, as we have before mentioned, that
we did wrong in returning to our ancient stan-
dard in 1819, though the change might have
been conducted with more caution, and effected
in a more gradual manner ; but it would not
only be morally wrong, but monstrously profli-
gate, with our past experience staring us in the
face, to renew the disastrous career of our cur-
rency revolutions. In the course of 14 years
a settlement has been effected by the necessity
of circumstances which it would be iniquitous
now to disturb, as it is not likely that the same
parties—namely, the debtor part of the com-
munity, who suffered by the rise in the value of
our money— would now benefit by the deprecia-
tion. Let us therefore hope that the currency
club gentry will desist from their desperate un-
dertakings, and allow the King's coin to circu-
late without obstruction, as in the best days of
our history. We conceive the national tran-
sactions at present as completely accommodated
to a metallic standard as if there never had been
any departure from our ancient system ; and if
such a departure had never taken place, should
we not look upon a person who should now
propose to revive our industry, or to increase
our prosperity, by depreciating our money, as
little bettter than a knave or a madman ? Times.

It has been often observed, that most of the
disputes in the world arise from the want of a
proper understanding of terms. This observa-
tion has been particularly suggested to us by the
comments of our contemporary the Standard,
on a passage from another contemporary (the
Globe). The passage from the Globe is this :

" The situation of the Sultan is deplorable in the ex-
treme, and at this moment the Ottoman empire exhibits
one of the most striking proofs ever afforded of t:,e ulti-
mate of all unprogressive Governments, which never per.
ceives the precipice that awaits it until too late; and then,
perhaps, only hastens a melancholy catastrophe by It-
tempting changes all at once which should have been the
gradual accomplishment of ages."
On this the Standard remarks—

" We have a very strong suspicion that the first part of
this sentence was written in a perfect forgetfulness that the
Turkish Government had been for the best part of half a
century the most actively progressive liovernment in the
world—that it had changed its discipline, laws, habits,
notions, character, and so far advanced in changing its
religion, as to have pretty nearly cast off all respect for the
ancient faith of Islam ; the truth, indeed, flashes across the
writer's mind before the sentence is concluded, and then he
is driven to the trite pretence, that if the Turkish was a
progressive Government, its progression was so much too
late as to do mischief rather than good.
" Phis double-barrelled consequence of political pro.
gression is extremely convenient for those who would
account for the overthrow of all Governments upon one
principle. If the fallen Government has been of a conser-
vative character, then it fell because it was not progres-
sive ; otherwise, as in the case of Turkey, because its
progression was too late. We must, however, submit,
with all deference, that all this talk of progressive Go-
vernments is simple unmeaning cant. We have seen
progressive Governments, as those of Joseph in the Nether-
lands, and Louis XVI. in France, overthrown in a few
years—and we have seen them also prosperous, like that
of Peter the Great, and that of the United States up to the
present time. And we have seen non-progressive Go-
vernments, such as Austria, for 200 years, and England,
during the 18th century, and up to 1812, enjoying per•
feet security, and a full share of happiness. Nay, of the
stability of which non-progressive Governments admit,
Turkey itself may be taken as an example, for doubtless
three centuries of undisturbed dominion are a proof of
stability not to be shaken by the mere fact that such do-
minion is not eternal.

" Beside the manifest motive which the lovers of change
have in amplifying the benefits of progressive Govern-
ment, there is an obvious delusion in the confusion of
cause with effect too tempting not to be taken advantage
of by those who find a pleasure in the practice of sophistry.
" A change of manners and institutions is the neces-
sary consequence of any sudden access of prosperity,
;rum whatever cause proceeding; and, on the other
hand, an ignorant neglect of the proper guards against
'violent change in the natural effect of a long•continued
'prosperity, and abstinence from innovation ; hence men are
taught to believe that prosperity is the consequence, and
not the cause of progression—the ruin of governments,
the effect of their immutability, not of their supine confi-
dence. Experience will, however, show that the most
durable of all governments is that which, being constantly
pressed to innovation, as constantly resists it. Such was
the British Government before the unhappy accession of
Lord Liverpool—such was the Roman Commonwealth,
through its most splendid centuties."

The causes of the fall of Turkey are many.
In the first place, the IVlahometan population in
Europe did not amalgamate with the tributary
nations, so that the empire was ill-cemented.
Then, during the time that the Christian nations,
especially those of the North, were improving
rapidly in the arts of war and peace, Turkey
remained not only stationary, but absolutely de-
clined.
Russia and Austria were its immediate
neighbours, and for more than a century the
former has employed her superiority in the arts
of war in making conquests from the Sultan,
and in creating disaffection throughout all the
empire. There is much of accident too in these
matters. Peter might have failed in his attempt
against the Strelite, and some enterprising Sultan
might have conceived the design of introducing
the modern improvements in the art of war into
Turkey, before his neighbours had availed
themselves of their supe,iority to desolate the
empire. As it wa,,, the last Sultan was too late.
He deprived himself of the Turkish national
army, and did not succeed in organizing another
before a treacherous enemy, alarmed at the at-
tempt, fell upon him. Mehemet Ali had no
Russia in his neighbourhood to stop him in his
career ; and he has been successful in his at-
tempt to create an army on the most approved
European model.—So much with regard to
Turkey. As to what is said of progressive
and non-progressive Governments, in the first
place, our contemporary (the Standard) is out
in his facts, if we have any understanding of the
meaning of those words. Austria, during the
last century, has been one of the most active of
all Governments in the way of improvement. The
longserie s of
reign
eign improvements,
Maria lleresa was one continued
of her son JOSeph was, and
that
thehe greatwish wished
dfautlot
effect too much at once. Any one who
reads the instructive work of Count Pietro Verri
of the calamities inflicted on Milan and the

North of Italy in general, by the Spanish sway,
will be able to appreciate the benefits derived try
the Italians from the sway of Austria. In Hun-
gary, Gallicia, in Bohemia, in the countries
bordering on Turkey, Austria has been con-
stantly labouring to improve the laws and raise
the condition of the people. Religious tolera-
tion was everywhere introduced, improved codes
of law and judicial proceedings framed, the
boundary between civil and ecclesiastical autho-
rity carefully drawn, education extensively dif-
fused. One of the Austrian Princes (afterwards
Emperor)—Leopold—carried the spirit of im-
provement into Tuscany, and that country still
feels the effects of his exertions. Our contem-
porary has committed the mistake of confounding
organical changes with administrative and ju-
dicial reforms. The Austrians will allow no
organical changes, by which the power of the
Government may be modified, but it has always
been alive to all administrative and judicial
reforms. It has generally, however (tho Ugh
there are exceptions,when a change was deemed
conducive to the strength of the monarchical
principle), carefully respected the rights and pri-
vileges of the various classes of subjects. Neither
is it true that England was a non-innovating Go-
vernment during the last century. During that
time Scotland has been subjected to constant
changes. At the Union, that country was cut
up into feudal jurisdictions, which delivered over
the people, bound neck and heel, to their feudal
superiors. On the extinction of the last rebel-
lion, the cause—namely, heritable jurisdictions
—was removed, and the people placed imme-
diately under the Government. The Parliament
of Britain, sitting more than one-half of every
year, was necessarily innovating in matters of law
and administration. Of all countries in Europe,
England was that which was constantly experi-
encing the most rapid changes in its domestic
economy. The Parliament had, during a cen-
tury, materially changed its character, and though
the nation was not so unjust as to deny, that
with all its imperfections, it had been produc-
tive of much good, yet a general conviction that
certain serious evils could not be remedied with-
out a material change in the organization of
Parliament, at length led to the effort which has
been so gloriously successful. But it is ab-
surd to call England a non-innovating coun-
try. There is another country in Europe,
which, though Christian, might be said to be
as hostile to improvement as Turkey—we mean
Spain. By refusing to accommodate itself to the
demands of the age, it lost its colonies ; and, not-
withstanding its great natural strength, and the
hardy vigour of its brave inhabitants, it cuts a
sorry figure among the nations of Europe.
Joseph failed in the Netherlands, because he
united against himself two powerful bodies—the
clergy and the aristocracy. In the hereditary
states he had no opposing power to contend
with ; in the low countries he had powerful
bodies interested in the continuance of abuses.
Had some clever Sovereign of Poland two hun-
dred years ago succeeded in crushing the Polish
aristocracy, and in giving unity to the Govern-
ment, that country might have been now great
and powerful. As it was, the attempt to im-
prove came too late. Russia had in the mean
time grown powerful, and, as in the case of
Turkey, she determined to seize that country,
before any improvements could be effected.
Without wasting words about innovation and
1:on-innovation—it is quite clear that a govern-
ment which does not avail itself of the improve-
ments of the age, and allows all sorts of vices to
pervade the courts of law, and the administra-
tion, is only accumulating difficulties for suc-
ceeding governments.—Morning Chronicle.
Hopes were entertained that the new powers
with which Parliament has armed the Execu-
tive Government for the repression of crime in
Ireland would strike a salutary terror into the
minds of the factious and lawless portion of the
community, and speedily restore society to a state
of comparative security and peace, so that the
necessity for the positive application of those un-
constitutional powers might be averted. We
lament to say that the daily accounts which we
receive of the conduct of the organized conspira-
tors against the welfare and safety of society in
Ireland are little favourable to this humane, and
generous anticipation. There is too much
reason, indeed, to fear that impending coercion
will not supersede the necessity of that coercion
which is immediate, active, and direct. This
opinion, which the accounts from Ireland suffi-
ciently warrant, is confirmed, rather than weak-
ened by the Ministerial changes which nave re-
cently taken place in this country. The sub-
stitution of Sir John Hobhouse for Mr. Stanley,
as the individual upon whom the execution
of the law is to depend, is not calculated to
add any thing to its salutary terrors. The new
Irish Secretary has already announced from
the hustings his intention to administer the
new law in the spirit of conciliation, which
all past experience informs us will be
to administer it in a spirit of hostility to the
Protestants, to regulate whose conduct no new
law was required, and of favour and partiality to-
wards those the repression of whose crimes was
the only motive or apology for its enactment.
The Whitefeet and their patrons are, we fear,
imbued with the conviction that from Sir John
Hobhouse they have more to hope than to fear,
and that in his hands the coercive measure will
be a dormant statute at the least, or that, if called
into lively existence at all, it will be employed,
not for the, restraint or punishment of the White-
feet and their patrons, but for the purpose ex-
clusively of fettering the Protestant and Conser-
vative party. The appointment of the West-
minster Baronet as Chief Secretary for Ireland
will, we fear, be fatal to that indirect influence
which it was hoped the Bill of Coercion would
have been found to possess. In the hands of a
Minister whose only substantial and effective
responsibility is to mobs assembled in front of
the hustings at Covent-garden, whose only pe-
culiarity of character is that of a more eager
craving for popularity that his colleagues in office,
popularity-hunters though they be, the new
powers granted by Parliament may be a subject
of dread to the Conservatives of Ireland, but to
the associations of Whitefeet and Volunteers, to
Captain Rock and Dr. Doyle, those powers
must be a theme of derision, if they be not re-
garded rather as a presage of continued and pro-
gressive triumph.—Morning Post.

CHATHAM.- -Tile Thunder bomb was corn-
missioned for a surveying vessel en Monday last, by Coin-
inander RICHARD OWEN ; Lieutenants BIRD, ALLEN,
THOMAS, SMITH (D), JAMES, CANNON; Mr. JOHN C.
mutt's, purser; EDMUND DUNSTERVILLE, master; and
JAMES VVILsON, carpenter, are also appointed to this ship.
It is said that the Waterloo, of 120 guns, building here,
is to be launched on the 1801 of June next, being the an-
niversary of the memorable victory after which she is
natned. Captain SyMONDS, Surveyor of the Navy, visited
Chatham and Sheerness yards on Monday last. The system
of watching the dockyards, at present practised, is to be
wholly done away; and a corps of police, under similar
regulations as the new police of London, is to be established
in each dockyard, to whom the charge of watching,. Bte.,
is to be intrusted, both by day and night.--Kentish Gaz.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MANSION-HO USE.

Oa Saturday John Henry, a native of India, was
brought up on the charge of having attempted to
obtain money from Messrs. Coutts and Co. and
Messrs. Hammersley and Co., the bankers, by forged
checks. The prisoner was taken by John Forrester,
after an active search.

The LORD MAYOR said, that as other charges
might be discovered by publicity, he should remand
the prisoner, to obtain further evidence, till Friday.

GUILDHALL.

On Saturday a young woman, named Jane Cox,
was brought before Mr. Alderman WINCHESTER, to
account for the possession of a gold wedding-ring.
Mr. Hayes, of the firm of Kelday and Hayes,
pawnbrokers, Broadway, Blackfriars, said that on
Thursday last a boy brought the ring in as a
pledge, and his answers were so unsatisfactory when
questioned as to how he came by i►, where he
lived, &c., that he detained it, and told him to send
his mother, by whom he had said he was sent.
They watched him in the street and saw him meet
the prisoner. After conversing with him she came
to the shop anti demanded the restitution of the
ring, threatening to break the windows instantly if
witness refused to comply. The shopman imme-
diately recognised her as having within the last few
days pawned several wedding-rings, and witness
having observed that she passed a bag to the boy be-
fore she entered the shop, suspected something was
amiss, and gave her into custody. He had since
ascertained that she had made a sort of trade of cheat-
ing the pawnbrokers in the following way :—The
rings were of good gold, but were purchased by her
from Mr. Sirrall, a refiner in Barbican, as old gold,
at the market price. She then went about from one
end of the town to the other to pledge them; and if
the pawnbroker, from being busy or relying on his
judgment, guessed at the weight instead of taking
the trouble to weigh them, and made a mistake of
one or two grains, that mistake gave her a trifling
profit on the transaction. He had taken in six of
these rings, and weighing them altogether he found
she had obtained a profit of ls. 6d. only by these
experiments, unless she should sell the duplicates to
advantage. He had no charge to make against her
now.

Mr. Alderman WINCIIESTER admonished and dis.
charged her.

BOW-STREET.
On Saturday Mr. fames Cooper and Mr. William
Farnar were charged with having stolen a bill of
exchange for 2001.

Mr. Cooper, on being called on for an explana-
tion, stated that this Bill had been accepted by him
for the accommodation of Mr. Farnar, and having
been subsequently obtained by fraud from that per-
son, he, under his directions, when it was presented,
gave it to him, for the purpose of ascertaining by
whom it had been endorsed.

Mr. Farnar, in explanation of his part of the busi-
ness, stated that on the 4th of December last a per-
son named Horatio Inglis Parnell, who was already
indebted to him about 501., came to him in company
wish a well-known individual, named Minto Hart,
and said that as a return for favours for which he
was indebted to him, he then had it in his power
to get a bill discounted for him for 2001. within a
few hours. In consequence of this representation
he drew the bill on his friend Cooper, and having
endorsed it, hart picked it up, put it in his pocket.,
and walked away, saying he would return it or the
money within a few hours; from that time to the
present, however, he had never seen Hart, but met
Parnell, who endeavoured to assist him in the pur-
suit of Hart, but in vain.

Mr. MiNsftuLL, under all the circumstances, did
not feel himself justified in entertaining the charge
of felony. Mr. Farnar was a respectable man, and
would no doubt be forthcoming to answer any pro-
cess of the law to which he had exposed himself.