The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1850-01-08 00:00:00

of goods to the amount

hipped to a me
ies to be paid. ]

ant in

Exchange

he last packe

to be 54d

t, for the

"Manchester, Jan. 5

ght, as the case may be)
e for three hundred pounds
Dr paper of like value at the

The stipulation in Italics is used in all cases
when the currency is especially in danger of sudden
and arbitrary fluctuation. In the ordinary course
of business, the manufacturer would pay the Bill
into his bankers, who would forward it to their
London agents, to be negotiated at the rate of
Exchange of the day, which we have stated to be
54d. to 541 d. per milrea. The Bill is by them sold
to some party who wishes to place, or pay, money
in Oporto, and is endorsed with the rate of Ex-
change at which it had been negotiated,-
54d. or 541 d. per milrea, according to the
relative demand for and supply of such Bills in
the market. Had it been originally drawn in
London, the rate of Exchange would have been
inserted in the body of the Bill. In either case, it
has now been rendered a document perfectly secure
from any fluctuations in the value of the currency
of the country on which it is drawn. The holder
will receive for it in Oporto as many times 54d. or
541 d., in gold or silver, as he has paid for it in
London, or, if in paper milreas, as many as will
give a purchasing power of the corresponding
amount in specie. He is, therefore, enabled to
fulfil his obligation in Oporto, whatever fluctua-
tion in the value of money may take place before
the Bill remitted arrives at maturity.
The Guardian conceives it to be a fact strongly in
accordance with his views that "a foreign bill,
drawn in London, in the year 1813, would have
been paid on nominal pounds sterling, worth, in
gold or silver, about thirteen shillings each." Of
course it would, if the obligation to be satisfied by
suchbillhad been contracted in nominal pounds ster-
ling Worth thirteen shillings each. And no injustice
would accrue to the drawer. Say, for example,
that the remittance was for goods sold by a British
merchant on foreign account. The return of sales
would be in the same sort of pounds as the rem it-
tance; commodities would have appreciated here,
in proportion to our depreciation of money; and
the foreigner would receive in exchange for
the bill as much of his own currency as if his goods
had been sold for specie at specie prices. The
Guardian omits, however, to observe that in what-
ever way the obligation arose the foreigner would
negotiate the bill at home ; and that the rate of
exchange would regulate any difference in the re-
spective values of foreign and British money. Do
we find, for example, any difficulty in adjusting
our money transactions with the Brazils ? None.
Yet the paper dollar of that country is only worth
27d. to 28d. sterling.

In conclusion, we cannot but regard as an ab-
surdity the conclusion of the Guardian, that foreign
capital has been transmitted here, in order to he
made available for settling foreign international
transactions; or to enable the merchant in Frank-
fort, for example, to fulfil a monetary obligation by
drawing on London. The system would not work,
or answer the objects which our contemporary an-
ticipates from it, for the simple reason that although
the monetary pivot in London might be steady,
the two ends of the balance in Frankfort and
Vienna would be constantly oscillating. We re-
spectfully invite our contemporary to show us the
process by which it would be worked. That a con-
siderable quantity of foreign capital was transmitted
to this country for safe investment, and because it
could not be_ employed in its ordinary channels in
the disorgani4eti condition of Europe, it would be
folly to deny;.and equally so, that it had the effec
of turning tlie.exChanges in our favour, and thus