The Sun.
London, England, 1832-09-13 00:00:00

which has fallen to one-fourth of its value. But
have the labourers or the industry of the Mus-
covite nation profited by the fall ? In 1814 and
1815, it is mentioned by M. Storch, the Rus-
sian political economist, that the currency of
Russia consisted of 575,000,000 paper rubles,
which were originally issued for silver ; but
which had fallen so much, that one silver ruble
was equal in value to four of paper. Was it
any gain to the ltussian peasant or shopkeeper
to find his labour or his commodities repre-
sented by four rubles instead of one ; or would
the Russian empire suffer any calamity at the
present moment, did it see 150,00t000 of silver
rubles replacing its Ittaaruple mass of Govern-
ment paper We are afraid that many of the
perset who thus talk about the marvellous
prosperity which the mere increase of currency
would produce (so far as they do not mean the
robbery of creditors), hate a very imperfect no-
tion of the nature of money, or entertain very
confused ideas of the distinction between paper,
wich can only be supported in value by a re-
ference to a metallic standard, and gold, which
is the standard itself. And yet there seems
no mystery metaphysics,—no charm or spell,
about the precious metals used as money, or
about " the promises to pay" certain quantities of
these metals, called bank-notes. To understand
the whole question-, and to see the whole absur-
dity of the paper-money quacks, it is not neces-
sary that we should strain our intellects, like
some of the Parliamentary wiseacres during the
bullion discussion in 1810, to form the abstract
idea of a pound sterling, as detached from every
sensible object, and represented either by what
the poet calls " yellow dirt," or manufactured
rags. Gold and silver, used for coin, are not
the representatives 9f value,—as they have
been stupidly called, they are value itself. They
are so, as much as clothes, household furniture,
or corn. They are not, indeed, worn like cottons,
nor swallowed like food, but neither is a diamond
ora musical snuff-box fit for such purposes, though
both are allowed to possess some intrinsic value.
They derive this value from the same source as
every other desirable object of exchange,—
namely, the labour bestowed upon their pro-
duction or manufacture. By labour they are
dug out of the earth,—by labour they are refined
from their ores,—by labour they are transported
from the place of their production to the place
of their use. A piece of silver represents labour
as much as a bushel of wheat,—and therefore
the metal exchanges for the grain. These metals,
in serving as the instrument of exchange, do
not cease to possess intrinsic worth of their own,
which renders them a standard for measuring
that of other things. They are so used, not
from any charm in their origin above other
articles, or any special destination of nature, but
for their physical properties,—because they are
easily divisible,—because they are durable,—be-
cause they are universally desirable, and have
been so from remote ages,—and because they
vary little in value, at comparatively long inter-
vals. If they were altogether invariable, they
would form a perfect standard by which to mea-
sure the varying value of other commodities. As
they are, they exchange for all objects of labour,
being themselves the product Of labour. The
King's stamp, however well executed, does not
give them value ; it merely guarantees his sub-
jects against a diminution of the weight, or a
deterioration of the quality, of the metal. It
merely declares the piece of a certain weight and
fineness. When the metals are abundant, they
form the real wealth, though not the only wealth,
of a State, because they represent labour, and
will exchange for labour. But how can the
same be said of Bank-notes ? They can never
enrich a nation, like the precious metals. At
best they are only a promise to pay certain quan-
tities of these metals. If they come in their
place, they allow the metals to be employedpro-
fitably in some other way, instead of being bar-
renly used as coin ; but we must have their secu-
rity, if not their use. If they do not come in
their place, but exceed the amount of the metals
required, then they represent nothing, and must
fall in value in proportion to their chance of not
being paid at all, or being paid with a loss. We
desire in England to have no depreciated paper
like that of the ruble, though some Russian
Attwood were to vouch for its wonder-working
power.—Times.

An incidental question suggests itself on pe-
rusing the evidence taken by the Bank Commit-
tee—namely, what is the effect on labour caused
by the erection of expensive machinery in our
days ? From certain statements made by Mr.
Smith regarding the erection of cotton-mills in
Lancashire in 1825, it appears that these erec-
tions, which owed their origin not to the wants
of trade, but to the facility of obtaining money
arising out of the misconduct of the Bank of
England, have been the main cause of produc-
tion having constantly been somewhat ahead of
consumption. The spinners continued their
operations with a loss, because to shut up their
works would be a still greater loss. In an article
we yesterday copied from the Scotsman, it will
he seen that the cause of the distress in.the iron
trade is, in like manner, the unwillingness of those
who sunk money in the iron works in 1825 to
consent to a total abandonment of them. Mr.
Thomas Attwood, in his evidence, observes with

reference to this subject—"lt is a very curious
fact, that the very distress of trade increases the
production of some particular trades in two ways;
first, workmen work harder in consequence of
the fall of their wages; and second, the capi-
talists, in their struggles to avoid ruin, increase
their productions." It thus appears, that
when works have been erected in excess, the un-
willingness to lose the capital expended in the
erection protracts the period of distress. Another

effect, however, has not been so generally re-
marked. In former times, when less capital
was laid out on works, trade sooner righted

tself than it does now. But the labourers were

then the great sufferers. We never, for instance,
now witness such vicissitudes as those which

Daniel Defoe describes in his Plan of English
Commerce. " I remember," he says, " after the
late plague in France and the peace in Spain,
the run for goods was so great in England, and
the prices of everything rose so high, that the
poor women in Essex could earn one shilling
to one shilling and sixpence per diem by spin-
ning. What was the consequence? 'Twas

too—plain to be concealed. The poor farmers
could get no dairymaids ; the wenches told them
in so many words, they could not go to service
for twelvepence a week, when they could get
nine shillings a week at their own hands, as they
called it. So they all run away to Hocking, to
Sudbury, to Braintree, and to Colchester, and
other manufacturing towns of Essex and Suffolk.
The very ploughmen did the same ; and the ale•
houses in the great towns were throng'd with
them, young fellows and young wenches to-
gether, till the parishes began to take cog-

nuance of them upon another account, too
dark to talk of here. While this hurry
lasted, the Baizes were called for in pro-