The Sun.
London, England, 1821-06-05 00:00:00

IVOOL TRAbE.

. .
Mr. T. WrIASON- vreserted a potii;on f'orn certain hi:i•-
ch;uite of the City of baht)tou a i.i, t dint t:l3:4opf the Bill bt.--

• After a few words tron .Mr.., C. SMITH awl Mr. :ABER-
-6tOiIBIE, the Bill was read a third iime and pass M.
• OI'ERATION, OF 11th ALIEN LAWS. •

Mr. 111331 E wished to have it stated whether or not a native
.of the lonian Islands, coming to this country, could be arrested
and sent away under the Alien Act, or was he entitled to be
protected as a British subject ?
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY was not prepared to
give a full answer to the Hon. Gentleman, as no case had.arisek
in which the point came into discussion. He believed that 4i.
'native of the lonian Islands was not to be regarded as a British
subject, inasmuAl as we were- =rely in the relation of a pro-
tecting Power to the inhabitants of those islands- _ _ •

•
111 r. HUME said; that it.was of consequence that the point
should be settled without delay, as he understood there were
several of the Inhabitants of • the lonian Islands prepared to
come to this country to claim justice, and they were naturally
anxious to •at,certaiiiif they would bt:. liable to be sent away
Under the. Ali Lai Act.

The .'Marquis of LONDONDERR.Y.--WL&teyer be`the
state of the the lion. Gentlcru:!n may rest assured tit it
shall not he enforced,to the prejudice-of inaividuals arrive: here
on such a mission..--(tlear 1)

Sir ROBERT WILSOI%/. was anxious to knowif anydirec-
dons had been :"given against the inflictiOn of tAtrture is th;
Dutch Colonies, and Whiyh was permitted by the Dutch laws.
Mr. GOU LIIUR NE said he was"ziot able to r.nswer the qutt.;-'
tion at that moment. To-morrow -he would give the floAour-
able Gentleman full Information;
USURY LAWS.

Sir J. 'MACKINTOSH moved the Order of the DAy for.
:he.sxond rading tiCtite;Ustiry Laws Repeal Ell, for the put--
:,ose u 1 postpOning it, t:s was understood, to Wceolt,...l;:y uext:

eItaIINAL LAWS.

Sir J. MActoNTOn snid, that in 'Moving the
third reading or the, Bills which lie had intro-
duced into the flonSe,he should Offer a few Obser-
irations'relative to the alterations he had been
iti-
IluCed to wake. Ile felt hound to explain the
preent condition-of the Rill---the principiezi upon
which it now stood7—the.nature of the 01).H:tic/Its
urged against it—the Concessions which: ho hat:
already made to some. of those objections—and
the reasons why
,lit' 'Was determined that no far-
ther C. OUCCS:7iOIIS should be granted. lie took it

that by the-second reading of the Bill- being;_cardi
ried by so.respectable a Majority, the iiiionsv.had
done-that which was -equivalent to . the passing a
resolution,declarin- the :expediency of .a•bating
the punishment now inflicted by law r.forFprivate
forgery. And thatinust:be taken as an ex:pression_
of its opinion, that in some cases the severity .of
that punishineut created impunity
.for nritne,,- and
that its ahatement, instead of giving impunity,
would tend to lessen that crime by.giving facili-
ty to its prosecution. This. fact was no.ionger
upon theory, but it was fully, illustrated prac-
tice.
.The commutation- of capital - punishrnents
.had- been resorted to in the cases of, frandulfeat
bankruptcies, and. of . felonies cominitted;cpon
blgaChing: grounds.;
.YVor.n.the7 effect of the for-
trier, no argument could at present be drawn, as
-it had 'only 'been- •aeted .upon for- olpelealyar.4
could not have. yet- developed its fall-opertetioa.
Ln the- latter • instance they =lead the.evidence of
the Proprietors of. the Bleaching Yat•ds them-
selves in favour of the, repeal of the. old laws,.as
they considered it to be the -means of affording
protection to their property. The repoi .of
the two laWs he had mentioned were. tlfe,oost
recent instances in which the principles of;, fire
present Bills had been -adopted in Parliament.
Small as the
,progress- had hitherto been in, re-
pealing the most barbarous and cruel laws in our
system, it.was a gratifying reflection to -those_
were anxious to instil a larger portion; of...hu-
manity, accompanied with a wholesome pu-
nishment-, into our criminal code, -to know that
that progress had Commenced with the- sway of
George the Fourth. More had been accom-
plished towards attaining that,desirable object hi
the first year of the present reign than in any
since the reign of Edward
.the first. This
was a most auspicious omen ;; and he -trusted
that it would lead to • consequences which
after ages - would view as shedding a brighter
lustre, and a more lasting honour upon. the name
of the- Sovereign than other things which
were held:in more estimation sby some. eyes at
the - -present period. The . Honourable --and
Learned.llle:mber then contended that the.excep-
tions which he had been induced.to make -from
the application of the Bill ought not to be turned
against the principle upon which it was founded.
lt must not be said that he distrusted. his Prin-
ciple becanse he -could not grasp all which he.de-
sired, butit ought. rather to be taken as confi-
dence in his principle, because it proved -his Wil-
lingness to try its merits by experiment before its
application was made general.. lie had no.doubt
but -it would 'speedily work out all -exceptions.
At the same time he could not say tin, he tdid
not regret the necessity of making the -excep-
tions ; being fu'ly persuaded that the unixers.al
application of Os principle-might be now adopted
with perfect s;tfety. lie • was happy
,enotry,li to
introduce it upon a limited- scale, by its applica-
tion to forgery alone, because he was convinced
that it would soon be seen. how much it wag
capable of effecting it' applied - generally. -The
first exception. be agreed to. make was for. -the
forgery of Bank-- of England- paper, because it
was an injury to the- community, and orte..to -
which no private forgery could bear the least.re-
semblance. The one aGeted: the poor, the igno-
rant, and the negligent, whilst the ether affected
only men of opnlence,'and who.were almost pro-
fessionally trained to investigate-,arid detect
frauds of such a- nature. . The -next exception
was with -regard- to country Bank-notes.. .Ole
had thus. distinguished the .paper which-was the
circulating currency of the country, from private
.negotiable. money papers. lie. was obliged...to
draw this line, and to allow the exception to go
no farther, or to submit to- some arbitrary-dis-
tinction.- founded upon mere and -pleasnre,
and consequently wholly ontit beacted. upon
in legislating upon such a question as that which
they were DOW' upon; lie contended that the
Petition. which had just been presented from -the
Bankers of the City of London and Westminster
was not, in point of fact, a Petition against.the
Bill. It only deprecated the exception. which
placed private •Bankers' papers upon.a different
footing, in the eve of the law, with the notes of
the Bank of England. It was not therefore

against the principle of the Bill,. butagainst the
exception; the petitioners prayed that there might
he no difference in the punishment for .public and
private forgery. By one short Bill he could re-

wove :their . ohjoctions altogether, tujutely„ Ate
.aholiOtment.of the puni:ihmettt of death. Tim

supposition Of the country Bankers was, tilat
those who carried on the nefarious practice of
fOrging Bank of England notes as a trade, would
be induced to forge upon thern.if the punishment
of death -remained for the- one, while it Iva& re-
pealed for the other. But for private-forgeries
there could be no apprehensions. of such a nature.
The Birmingham rufllan,. shut up at
his detestable Work, could' not be supported
to be acquainted with the hand-writing' .of
enihrent London Bankers. But,. however„sup-
posing, that he did, that knnwiedge would -not
be enough, because be must. 'know - tire ha-
hit's 'and- connections 'of the-, usual acceptor's
and indorserS of documents.. -Besicks, even if he
suneeded i.r the forgery, how was h.: to.:prestnit
it. for payment ? How could be expected:that
this 'Birmingham ruffian could get any one' >to
present and pass an.aceeptance for three or. four
thousand pounds, • in spite .of the, vigilanc,e-,of
those whose regular -business it was to tleNet
fraud and irregularity: 'and if not, was the.l,louse
to he called on to protea rhtqn with the gallows
and to award the punit,hroent.of death to others
fur their negligenCel—(hlear,,hear.4.)—The ope-
rations-of the.k.stahlistred forqers might have been
carried into the territories. of theecuntu banker,
but they couiLl• not touch upon, the ground of

negociations. The °aim. P'l'tp(ions'l
ere for the forgery of Wills and .Marriage Cer-
-.:;ficates, and Registers. He had excepted these,
ti.cause the House of Lords, in a Bill which
ivtssed this House last Session, thought fit to re-
jo.ct the clauses which applied to them.. He next
eLime- to the application of the Bill to the crime of
.a:Jttering.; and here he was resolutely-determined
.t.) make no concessions. The.nunker of :7-rirni-
::::tsexecuted for this crime (a-5 appeared_ by the
returns in the last seven years) was, upon an
:average, 24 in each year. - The number. charged
-ere seven hundred and fifty-four, and . the
;font of convictions three hundred and ninety-
'hree, With revect to the punishment, he should
i,ropose to take away transportation altogether,
.Ind to substitute for it ten years' confinement
.vith hard labour. He thought this punishment
might easily be made sufficiently terrible by in-
..:-.-easing the labour and confinement; and even by
Iforcing abstinence, Transportation had been
'proved to be inefficacious, and it must be relin-
ipished. Before sitting down he would just ob-
;erve, that it was ,his intention to add a few
~•.-iorcls to the preamble of the Bill, which were of
-si-i6.mament, and to strike out the clause for giv-
re'.vards to informers. These would be all
• amendments he should have to propose.—

?)
• -• The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the con-
. cessions which his Honourable and Learned
Friend had been induced to make, considerably

increased the objections which he had previously

held to •the Bill before the house. Those con-
cessions formed an acknowledgment that the
punishment of death was necessary to prevent
crime in certain cases.—(No, no.)—lt appeared

to him to be an admission-that such a punishment

as necessary for the protection of a certain de-
.icription of property. He could not see upon
That ground the exceptions rested, so as to pre-
;.vent their striking at the very principle of the
- sill. For instance, an exception was made for
transfers of Bank Stock. Now, why were trans-
fers of South Sea and India Stock not to be
placed upon the same footing ? Again, with re-

Bard to the exception for Powers of Attorney for
'the sale of Stock. Why was not the exception
to be extended to the same documents for the

receipt of dividends? His Hon. and Learned
Friend, instead of bringing in a Bill for the com-
mutation of capital punishment in cases of for-
gery as a principle, ought to have called the pre-
sent a measure for removing that punishment
from certain cases in which he thought it was too
severe.—(Hear !)—He had gone on admitting
exception upon exception, until the principle
with which he set out was entirely lost. He con-
tended that previous to the use of 11. notes, the
punishment of death was, and it is now elfec-

• ;Lai in preventing private forgeries; and his
-Hon. and Learned Friend had adduced no fact

• 771:ateVer to prove that it was not so. The
-Honourable and Learned Gentleman then al-
• hided to the repeal of the Bleaching and Bank-

.rript Laws, and argued that there was as much
ground for asurning that it had caused an in-
••c:rease of crime, as that the prosecutions were not
•carried on before, on account of the severity of
•the punishment. It was impossible but that the
''ever;tc of-the criminal laws lutist appear great

in some cases, because it was imtpossible to place
=them upon a graduated scale. In cases of bur-
glary, if a man broke into a house in the dead of
night, and proceeded to offer violence to its in-
habitants, and to carry away their property, no
.one could say or feel that he did not deserve the
highest punishment which the law could inflict.
Yet if a boy was passing-a house in the evening,
-and was tempted to break a window and take out
'a watch, that crime would be the same in the eye
:of the law ; but who could regard it with the
-sdrne feelings ? Yet there could be no scale of
punishment provided by the law ; but at the same
time the•degree of punishment could be propor-
itioned to the crime by the administrators of the
law. If the capital punishenent was provided for
in such a case, it was well known that it would
not be acted upon, and that knowledge would at

least have the effect of restraining criminals in
the degree of atrocity with which their crimes
were accompanied ; and he did not apprehend
'tl►at it could for a moment be supported, that a
intin would rather commit a burglary with the
•d►ance of death ;annexed to the certainty of im-
prisonment, than if the latter punishment Were
the greatest to be expeCted. He conceived that
Bankers' checques ought to have the same pro-

iretion as their promissory notes, and that was
another objection to the manner in which the
exceptions had 'been made. His Honourable
in't Learned Friend had made use of one
:argument founded upon a calculation so falla-
•ciors, that he was really surprised to hear it
fall from one of his powerful understanding.
'He stated, that, because only fourteen each
year, upon an average, were executed for for-
,gerv, there would only be that number to place
in confinement and hard labour. Now the fact

was thlit if his Hon. and Learned Friend's Bill
'were carried into effect, all the persons connected
- -

Inust be consigned to that punishment ! And
these.,•instead of amounting to fourteen annually,
--tvould .be not less than one hundred and eighty.
When they even heard complaints of the Peni-
• tentiary, he knew not how they were in a con-
.dition to erect prisons and establishments afl
Ayer the country to carry this plan into effect.
•Upon the gcounds which he had enumerated, he
-t.ho,ild oppose the Bill, and he therefore moved,
as an amendment, that it be read a third time that
•day six months.
Mr. DENMAN said, that the acute and inge-
nious arguments of his Hon. and Learned Friend
the Attorney-General, had failed to remove
-the conviction which he firmly entertained of
the benefits to be derived from the adoption of
,the 13111 before the House. He contended
that it was unfair to say that the supporters
of the Bill abandoned its principle, because they

were compelled by necessity to make some con-
cessions, in order to serve the general measure.
His Hon. and Learned Friend (the Attorney-
General) had contended that the spirit of the
Enzlish Laws was to affix the highest possible
punishthent to crime. He must protest against
*is doctrine as an imputation upon the Common
Law of England which it did not deserve.—

(Near,)—The two eases of burglary, which his'
lion. Friend had snpposed were not 'in point of
fact the same in the eye of the, law,- an their
being classed under the same name, was one of
these ,technical absurdities which remained the
disgrace of our. Criminal Code, a,nd which had
grown up upon the old law of 012 land without
possessini;- any thing_of its spirit.—(Hear !)
He also stated that the certainty of imprisonment
was provided by the &sting law. This he(Mr.
Denman) must. deny. If it did so, the Bill of
his Hon. and Learned Friend would be unne-
cessary ; because it went to secure that certainty.
At present it could not be certain, for the seve-
nty of
.the capital punishment prevented many
persons from prosecuting at all. The Bill was
not founded upon, or supported by speculative
theories or any wild notions, but upon the opi-
nions of practical men,• whose evidence had
been given before the Committee. But with-
°tit thati. he• should have been contented with
the address' which the House had heard on a
former:night froinfa.n Hon. Friend of his, (Mr.
F. BuXton) whose experience, and whose ad-
mirable talents so well qualified him to judge
upon the expediency of such a measure. Never
had he listened to a speech in that House or in
any other place which contained more of benevo-
lence or of true practical wisdom ; never was the
Spirit of Christianity displayed before any public
assembly in the world, with so much of its pure
and sublime character. It was not brought for-
ward to promote discord amongst parties—it was
pot brought forward to serve political views—it
eras not brought forward for the purpose of puf-
fing its own Pharisaical purity. His Hon. Friend
proceeded upon the true ground of exhorting
them to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk
humbly with the common Father of Mankind.—
(Cheers.)—lt was with the utmost satisfaction
he took this opportunity of expressing his feelings
upon the splendid Address which his Hon. Friend
delivered to the House.—(Cheering.)
Mr. DENT objected to some of the details of
the Bill.

Mr. WILLMOrT expressed his intention to sup-
port the Bill as it at present stood. If that
anomaly in regard to the notes of the Bank% of
England and of Country Banks had not been re-
moved, he should certainly have opposed it. Ile
was aware that the present measure was not
without its practical difficulties, but. he was con-
tent to adopt the principle, in the hope that
these difficulties would not outweigh the pro-
posed advantages.
Mr. MARRY ATT said, he feared the proposed
measure was subversive of all legal rule, and of
all principle. He could see no reason for pun-
ishing Bank forgeries with death, and leaving all
other forgeries to comparative impunity. He
understood the reason for severe punishment to
be most strong in cases where the offence could
be committed with facility and this reasoning,
applied to the law against
.forgery, fully justified
the severity of the present punishment. He
thought also that the numerous exceptions in the
Bill went a considerable length towards destroy-
ing its effect.
Mr. CRIPPS said, he approved of the principle
of the Bill, and should vote for the third reading,
but he should move to except forgeries of Ban-
kers' checks from its operation,' in consequence
of the facility with which these forgeries were
committed.

Mr.MANSFIELD opposed the Bill, as he thought
it perfectly uncalled for, and the moment chosen
for its introduction very untimely.
Mr. JOHN SMITH. believed that the severity of
punishment was one great cause of the increase of
crime, us severity of punishment discouraged
prosecutors. Ile thought the forgeries upon the
Bank of England would be considerably lessened,
if that Establishment would increase the difficul-
ty of forging its notes. The Country Banknotes
were executed in a much better manner, and the
number of forgeries on Country Banks was, in
consequence, materially lessened. He should
cordially vote for the Bill.
Mr.PEARSE defended the conduct of the Bank,
but his observations were made in a very ,low
tone of voice. The Bank, he said, had always
acted leniently towards those who forged upon
its Establishment, except i'n cases of a second of-
fence. He feared the general principle of the
Bill was highly dangerous.
Mr. MILLs opposed the Bill.
Mr. LOCKHART thought there was considerable
inconsistency in the Bill. He could not admit
the justice of the distinction which had been taken
between forgeries upon the Bank of England
and those upon private Bankers. The forgeries
upon the latter had often been made a regular
systematic trade.
Mr. BARING said, all that was desired by the
present Bill was, the enactment of that mitigated
punishment in private cases, which the Bank, as
it appeared from the statement of an Hon. Di-
rector (Mr. Pearse) were in the habit of visiting
in cases against themselves. The forgeries com-
mitted in England exceeded in number, he believ-
ed,those of all other. countries. Neither in France,
nor in Holland, (the latter a country purely com-
mercial) was the crime of forgery punished with
death. The e two extraordinary circumstances
satisfied him that there was something wrong in
our present law, Imprisonment and hard labour
would, he thought, be a more effective punish-
ment. He should vote for the Bill, though he
did not approve of the exception by which it was
clogged.

Mr. HART DAVIS said, he should oppose the
13111, unless a distinction were made between
Bills of Exchange and Bankers' Checks. The
latter were more easily forged, and he therefore
thought that to that offence the capital punish-
ment should still attach.

Mr: T. WIL3ON said, he thought the present
was the most unfortunate moment which could
be selected for bringing forward the present Bill.
The lion. and Learned Mover had called Bank
Notes Government securities, but the same argu-
ment would apply to Exchequer Bills and East
India Bonds.

Mr. HARBOttn said, the exception Was intro-
duced as a matter of expediency, as there would
otherwise be no chance of carrying the Bill. The
Hon. Member at some length supported the prin-
ciple of the- Bill by
__referring to the opinions of

the late S r Sarnntl Aornilly and other Advocates
for Of alteration of the Criminal Law.

Mr. MARTIN (of Galway) spoke in favour of
the' Bill, on the ground of policy. It had been
argued that the forging of wills ought to be ex-
cepted from the Act.; but it. was worthy of re-
mark, that in Ireland the forging a bill tvalkot
felony, and this crime was not more-frequent in
Ireland than in England.—(Hear, bear, hear !)
Strangers:were then ordered to withdraw, and
the House divided, when there appeared—
For the third reading of the Bill - 117
For the Attorney.;.General's Amendment 111
Majority in favour of the Bill - -6
Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH tbennnoved some trifling ver-
bal Amendments, which were agreed to.
CRIPPS moved an Amendment to except from the be-
nefit of the Bill all persons convicted of forgery upon Bankers.
Mr. BARING said it would be much better to reject the
• Bill altogether than adopt the Amendment of the Honourable
Member.

Dr. LUSHINGTON said it was only lately that a Banker
of his acquaintance suffered a loss of 10,0001. rather than pro-
secute a forger to capital punishment. The adoption of the
Amendment would render Bankers as liable to depredation as
they were at present.
M CR IP PS explained:
After a few words from Mr. MART;:i the House divided,
when theic appeared—
, For the Amendment - - 109
Against it - - - - - 102
Majority - - - - —7
• On our admission to the Gallery, we found Mr.Bnotio HAM
on his legs. He said he should rejoice if the Bill met with ul-
timate success, and expressed a hope that it would be received
in another part of the Legislature with becoming respect.
On the question that this Bill do pass, the Gallery was again
cleared for a division, ,
After a lonseliscusnO, in the absence of strangers, tho House
divided. The numbers were—
For passing the Bill - 115
Noes - - - - - 121

It was consequently lost by a Majority of 6.
Mr. CHET WYN D rose, on the order for going into a.Com-
mittee on the Dwelling House Robbery Bill, and having op-
posed the measure, moved that it be committed this day six
months.

Mr. COURTENAY supported the Bill.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL objected to it, but did not
oppose going into the Committee.
The amendment was then negatived without a division, and
the House went into a Committee on the Bill. Several verbal,
amendments having been agreed to, the House resumed, and
the Report was ordered to be received on Wednesday.
On the order for going into a Committee on the Navigable
Rivers Robbery Bill, a Member moved that instruction be given
to the Committee to extend the provisions of the Bill to robbe-
ries on Canals. The motion was agreed to.
The House then went into a Committee, and after a clause
had been annexed to punish robberies on Canals, the Report
was ordered to be received on Wednesday.
Mr. HUME rose on the Order of the Day for receiving the
Report of Ways and Means, and objected to bringing up the
said Report, on account of the lateness of the hour.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER consented to
postpone the consideration of the Report.
The Jrish Coroner's Bill, with the consent of Mr. MARTIN,
was postponed for six months.
The other Orders were disposed of, and the House adjourned
at ONE O'CLOCK.

FOR THE SUN.

ON THE PAST AND PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES

OF THIS COUNTRY,

WITH A VIEW TO THE RELIEF OF AGRICULTURE,

MANUFACTURES, AND COMMERCE.
• (Continued from our Paper of Yesterday.)
Let us contemplate a familiar illustration. The
million of people inhabiting the metropolis, all
consuming, not producing, food, have never been
in our times without supplies, even in seasons of
the greatest scarcity. Food is always cheaper
and better in London than in the surrounding
country. The supplies are always constant and
generally absktidant. These circumstances are
not owing tis; slfe'forceof law or regulation. All
possible force of law could not alone produce
such constancy, abundance, and comparative
cheapness. Simply the certainty of demand, and
a sufficiency of ready money to make payments,
accomplish these truly important consequences.
Not only no over-issue of Bank Notes being
established to have really existed, but the appli-
cations at the Discount Office at the Bank, for
Bank Notes In lieu of Bills discounted, and the
constant employment of Money or Bill Brokers
in the City, during the War especially, proved
that the supply of Notes was constantly short of
the demand, notwithstanding all the payments
made for Government in Bank Notes. As no
Bank Notes in addition to such payments are is-
sped without a demand ; as the land, the trade,
and personal industry of the subjects are pledged
for the public debt, and Bank Notes are chiefly
issued in their security ; how can Bank Notes be
fairly compared to the Paper Money of such
States as have first contracted debts, and then
forced the people, from time to time, to receive
Paper Money ; which never being paid, or ex-
changed by such Slates, but accumulating in cir-
culation, has been depreciated in proportion as
its quantity has increased beyond the amount re-
quired for exchanging the produce of their land
and industry.
The perfection and stability of the operations
of the Bank of England, and the skill and honour-
able views of the directors of that important
establishment, constitute an improvement in the
circumstances of this country, compared with
ancient times. And those hypotheses, which
were formed with reference to a circulation of
the precious metals, before the improse-
ments introduced by the operations of banking
had been well observed, or had even arrived at
any considerable importance, might now possibly
be abandoned, even by their authors, if living:—
Mr. Huss-E, for example, said," It is the propor-
" Lion between the circulating money, and the
66 commodities of the market, which determine
C 6 prices ; increase the commodities, they become
" cheaper ; increase the money, they rise in
" their value. On the other hand, a diminution
" of the former, and that of the latter have con-
" trary tendencies."—This maxim, contained in a
celebrated essay on money which was published
in 1752, according to the practical operations of
production, taxation and circulation now existing,
or within the last thirty years, this maxim, as we
humbly conceive, has lost its foundations, and by
no means should form the ground of present opi-
nions. Even if it were a truisms before we de-
termine the amount of commodities in the market,
and the amount of circulating money to consti-
tute a sufficient cause for the rise or fall-of prices,
we' certainly in our times should first add to the
natural prices of the commodities, the whole
amount of tares now combined in the price by
their direct and indirect accumulating effects, to
render the maxim accurate. And it does not ap-
pear that taxes have been thus taken into consi-
deration in such estimates. The rise of prices
has in an unqualified =Liner been attributed

chiefly to the increase of the quantity of money.
But if this cause were sufficient for the effect,
how shall we account for the rise of three
hundred per cent. in
,wheal and bread during
the war, and for the fall, at the same time, of
many sorts of goods ; cotton goods, hosiery,
Scc. -the depreciatioh of money upon
all,tthe assumed grounds taken' together has been'
estimated at only thirty per cent. and no appre-
ciation with reference to any commodities has
even been thought of? Dr. ADAM SMITH said " the
" proportion which the circulating money of any
" country bears to the whole value of the annual
" produce circulated by means of it, it is perhaps
" impossible to determine. It has been comput-
" ed by different authors at a fifth, at a tenth, at
" a twentieth, and at a thirtieth part of that
" value." This profound and justly admired
writer would not risk his reputation upon this
particular position. ' In truth he confuted the
maxim. After alluding to Bank of England
notes he observed, cc the increase
_of_ paper
" money, it has been said, by augmenting the
" quantity, and consequently diminishing the
" value of the whole currency, necessarily
" augments the money price of commodities.
" But as the quantity of gold- and silver
C 4 which is taken from the currency is al-
" ways equal to the quantity of paper which is
" added to it, paper money does not necessarily
" increase the quantity of the whole currency.
" From the beginning of the last century to the
" present time, provisions never were cheaper in
" Scotland than in 1759, though from the circula-
" tion of ten and five shilling bank notes there was
" then" (in 1759) " more paper money in the
" country than at present. The proportion be-
" tween the price of provisions in Scotland and
" that in England is the same now as before the
" great multiplication of banking companies in
" Scotland. Corn is upon most occasions fully
" as cheap in England as in France, though there
" is a great deal of paper money in England,
" and scarce any. in France. In 1751 and 1752,
" when Mr. flumE published his political dis-
" courses, and soon after the great multiplication
" of paper money in Scotland, there was a very
" sensible rise in the price of provisions, owing,
" probably, to the badness of the seasons, and
" not to the multiplication of paper money."
Dr. ADAM SMITH is universally deemed a
greater authority in political economy than Mr.
flumE. Besides, it may be added that in Eng,
land,after the establishment of the Bank of Eng-
land in 1694, the market prices of corn and all
provisions declined progressively, excepting in
bad seasons, down to the year 1760, notwith-
standing, as we may well believe, the increase
not only of gold and silver money, but of the
circulation also of bank hotes. In France, in
these times, corn and all provisions are conside-
rably cheaper than in England, although in
France the money in circulation has been esti-
mated at more than one hundred millions sterling,
and the estimate of circulating paper in England
has been fifty millions. But the annual produce
of the land, manufactures, trade, and industry of
France has been estimated at only about
298,000,0001. sterling ; of England as exceeding
430,000,0001. sterling ; according to Mr. CHAP-
TAL and Dr. COLQUIIOUN. If the proportion be-
tween the circulating money and the commodi-
ties in the market determine prices, there would
exist in France excessive dearness, where the cir-
culating money amounts to one third of the
amount of commodities ; and in England com-
parative cheapness, where the circulating money
amounts only to one eighth of the amount of com-
modities ; nor will the banking system of Eng-
land and the economy practised in making pay-
ments be sufficient to invalidate this argument.
The secret cause of the cheapness experienced
in France and the dearness of England we attri-
bute partly to the comparative amount, and part-
ly to the different systems of taxation. In Eng-
land the taxes are not only much greater but
5-6ths of the amount are charged on commodities
and augment prices ; but in France nearly 5-6ths
of the taxes are direct taxes, not at all entering
into the prices of commodities.
In this nation all industry is perfectly free.
Government does not possess any trading mono-
polies. The increase of the quantity of money,
therefore, continually , encourages Competition
among the producers to sell in the market the
greatest quantity of commodities ; and this com-
petition continually tends to abundance, as well
as to cheapness. If the increase of money can
possibly for a time raise prices, such higher prices
stimulate production, and still further tend to
produce abundance and cheapness.

[To be coritinuedi

FATAL DUEL.—" We present our Readers
with.a copy of a very important document, which
cannot fail in a great degree to exculpate the un-
fortunate author of Mr. CLTDDIE's death from the
charge of" Wilful Murder." It is an authentic
copy of a declaration made by Mr. GUDPIF,
his death-bed, in the. presence of PHILIP GELL,
Esq. of Hopton, and Mr. JOHN FLINT : •
Copy of the Declaration made by Mr. C UDD I t on his death-bed.
The Declaration of William Cuddie, of Winster, Surgeon,
made before me, Philip Gell, Esquire, one of his Mai?sty's
Justices of the Peace, -for the County of Derby, this 221 day of
May, 1821, who saith, that he was called upon by William
Brittlebank, of Winster, to fight a duel, and that he wished to
avoid doing 90. -That Edmund Spencer, of Bakewell, Surgeon
came to him on Tuesday, 22d May. instant, and told him than
William Brittlebank, and his brothers, were in the garden
waiting for him, and that he, William Cuddie, must make an
apology or fight. That he, William.Cuddie, went to the gar-
den and refused to make an apology. That Edmund Spencer
opened his coat and chewed him two pistols, one of which he
took, and William Brittlebank took the other. That they se-
parated to the distance of fifteen yards or more. That Edmund
Spencer threw up his hat as a signal, and they both fired their
pistols as near together as possible.
Taken before me this 22d day of May, 1821,—P. ,GELL.
Witness to the above Declaration,—JOHN FEINT.

" Several reports having been in circulation,
stating, that Mr. W. BRITTLEBANK had. been
taken at Manchester or Birmingham, and after-
wards lodged in Derby gaol, we believe that we
may safely 'contradict them. A good deal of
mystery has been attached to the circum-
stance of his escape. We are informed that
the father oir:ired no less a sum than 50001., as
bail for his son, but finding that the Magistrate,
Mr. THORNHILL, hesitated as to receiving it, the
young man immediately fled."—(Sheffied Mer-
cury, Joe 2.)