The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-03-14 00:00:00

Yoi-k;

9.3 d February, 1848

" SIR,—As an old 'Mont
mite pleasure in reading y
, on the currency, a

' Reformer I have had infi-
nr,,masterly articles in the
Expres, snore especially from see-
ing that you have avoided the fatal error of allowing the
general principle of ' Money' to be confpunded with the
subject of Banking, which is a question rather of circum-
stance or locality than of principle. Sometime ago I took
the liberty of sending you, through Mr. Brooks, a rough
sketch of what I think should be done in England in
'Money.' Permit me now to remark that I trust my
views entirely agree with yours, and that you will persist
in not entering into the subject of whether the Banking
in the United States is right or wrong. If we carry our
principle this country will be infinitely more prosperous
under the worst system of Banking than it could possibly
be under the best if the humbug of Gold is perpetuated.
Gold I have always viewed as a cannibal, that creates
confidence only to destroy it. The prejudice however is
in favor of Gold (as at least the lesser evil) is so invete-
rate that I don't think MONEY REFORM' will ever be
carried, except we profess our willingness to retain gold
as the SECURITY OF THE CURE.ENCY, and confine our
objections to its being the MEASURE OF VALUE. On the
grounds that the change of the value of Gold robs the
labouring man, thus—the prOduce of a man's labour
brings in France—(ln aforeion country the price got is
not dictated by the_ cost of the article.)-105 cents, of
which 100 goes to the industry of the United States, and
5 cents to the capitalist or man of money in U.S.—but
money becomes dearer through the export of Gold from
U.S.—and the man of money demands a proportion of
10 or 15 or 20 cents of the 105. Now this he is enabled
to do through your having adopted the principle of Sir
Robert Peel's Bill of 1819, by which a bank note is made
exactly in relation to gold, as a dock warrant is to indigo

—the scarcity of the articie,ritises the value of the war-
rant, and the same enhancement occurs to the bank note,
although to blind the people it is not allowed to express
itself directly, but only indirectly through capitalists'
`money' fetching more interest and commanding more
commodities and labour when gold gets scarce through
exportation.
"What ' money reformers want, as I understand, is
that the whole industry and • property of this country be
removed beyond the changes on. gold which are brought
about by foreign influence. We want to show the absur-
dity of every kind of industry and property being made
unsaleable and worth half nothing (as was lately the case
in England), because of the importation of double the
quantity of foreign labour we can pay for by our home in-
dustry. It is enough that our home industry be interfered
with by the competition of foreign labour, without having
the whole currency and also banking or confidence of the
country demolished by the mode of paying for that foreign
labour. If gold must be paid (as of course it must for our im-
portations), let us arrange that its exportation shall not di-
minish the home trade. Gold must be put in the same
category as all other commodities, and permitted to rise
and fall according to the lawsof supply and demand. It
were preeminently absurd to attempt to retain a standard
of value in a country whose imports exceed its exports,
except such a one as would represent a gradual reduction,
as the country's industry and property would of course he
more and more impoverished, the more the country out-
lived its income. But even if there could be any doubt
as to the above, it must be self evident, that gold would
go to no greater premium than the extent of the exporta-
tion of the article, or, in other words, the extent of Fo-
reign Exchanges are against us ; and that when the fo-
reign exchanges are at par, notes a LEGAL TENDER, and
gold would be the same value. We cannot prevent gold
appreciating. It does so now—and at present its doing
so to that extent depreciates all other property and
labour—a state of things 'so utterly ridiculous that it
will not stand long in America. Quite in consistency
with these opinions, I AM AN ADVOCATE FOR SIR R.
PEEL'S! RESTRICTIONS ON BANKING; and I see that
the recent Currency Committee in England will come
to nothing, because the QUESTION RAISED will be
Sir R. Peel's restrictions on banking,' instead of
the simple question of PRINCIPLE, THE CURRENCY,'
or MONEY, to speak more correctly. I have long seen
what you seem to see clearly, that we may have a NOTE
that will not depreciate in reference to gold, any more
than any other property. For instance, you might take
York to the value of a hundred millions,

and issue bonds thereon to twenty millions. Those bonds
would 'surely be as good as, or better (more saleable),
than any other property in the city. But, as I have said,
the prejudice in favour of 'gold is so inveterate, that to
get a ckange commenced from wrong to right principles I
would consent to arrange the national money so as to leave
the people their GOLDEN!BAUBLE till they got tired of the
expense of it. Without interfering with the present legal
tender, I would add thereto; saj, TWENTY MILLIONS OF
PAPER; THE RECEIPTS DR

IDENCES 01, THE DEPOSIT
OF GOLD TO THAT VALUE,' 11 a new department of the
treasury at Washington (or .of the proposed mint at New
York),- allowing the Goveinment to increase the issue of
notes to the extent there is an export of gold, or in other
words to the extent the 20,000,000 of gold rises in value in
the market, decreasing the circulation of PAPER THE EVI
)EPOSIT to the extent the gold falls in value ;
the foreign exchanges got righted.

or, in 'other words,
Thus, i feel satisfies

UNITED STATES I

ROM FOREIGN INFLUENCE

This plan would

not affect t
high, so wc

has jet been delivered

.
We have.spoke rt. elsewhere of Mr. ardw'ell's speech, on
this occasion,—a speech characterised by ;great 'business
talent, although the views of the hon. member do not
accord with ours. To one portion of the speech, how-
ever, we have great pleasure in directing th' attention of
I the hon. member's constituents. .31. r Cm.7lWelLia' ys :
THE INDUSTRY OF TEE " With rP-- 3ne of those

T 1 to the public expenditure, lie.W
who confidently hoped that a great deal might be done in favor
of the depressed energies of the country by way of a feduction
of that expenditure." • 4.
Perhaps we are not very far wrong in taking sas an
all but official pledge from that section of the Conservative
party which, at tio distant period, will have to direct the
affairs of the country ; and the more especially'so when
we find it confirmed by the following declaration of a
member of that party so eminent as Mi. Glad-
stone. We quote the passage :
"Now I. for one, shall not speak slightingly of the subject of

reductioni. , I feel convinced, upon general -prinCipl6s, that a

_
_Teat country like this ought,
,periodically, ihether after ten
years or fifteen years, or what 9ther reasonable term, to have a
searching and thorough revision of its public expenditure.
(Hear, hear.) It is now, I think, fifteen years, or rather more,
since we have had such a revision ; it is thirteen years since
reduction ceased and the tide of increase of expenditure began
I I to turn to flood,' and I think it high time that We should

revise our expenditure; I say that quite independent of the
faet of .the formidable increase in the cost of'onr army, navy,
and ordnance—the increase of nearly £7,000,040 since 1835, of
£4,500,000 since 1844, of .*2,830,000 since 1845, of .E 1,638,000
since 1846. These facts, I think, lay a very strong prima fade
case for a searching revision ; and, moreover, 'they lead to the
inference, that :by a careful examination of details, without
diminishing your effective means—which I wiff,not presume to
suppose you dare prudently diminish —you might effect a con-
Ridersaila arnetrima

The most telling speech of the evening c.V.iis that of Mr.
Disraeli: a speech full of the caustic eloquence of that
consummate parliamentary gladiator, yet at the same
time containins stubborn facts and statistics bearing upon

the question atuissue which are well worthy to be oolidered
over by the political economist and the statesman.
The debate was wound up by perhaps one of the only
members—Mr. W. E. Gladstone—to whom the house

could have been brought to listen and conducted back to
that patient attention which the subject demands, after
the excitement of Mr. Disraeli's splendid effort. That
Mr. Gladstone's speech was a most able one we need not
say. As a vindication of his colleague, Sir Robert Peel's

THE PROVIDENT CLERKS' MUTUAL BENEFIT
ASSOCIATION. ' ,