The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-04-26 00:00:00

14111 A, LIVER PC

monetary system,—and to consider the effects produced by that
system upon the agriculture, manufacture, and commerce of
the united kingdom, and upon the condition of the industrious
and productive classes."
That the nation is in a state of embarrassment,—that
embarrassment and distress have been on the increase
for some time—is now admitted by all parties. No one
fact can be more obvious or indisputable than this, namely,
that the people suffer more severely from the pressure of
the present amount of taxation than they did when it was
nearly double the sum nominally, and more than double
the sum when we take into account the increase of po-
pulation since 1815. It is an incontrovertible fact, that
the people of the united kingdom, when the population
was only 18,700,000, paid much more easily and with far
less murmuring £78,000,000 of taxes thin they now pay
1.£48,000,000, notwithstanding that the population is in-
creased to 24,000,000. Now, as Mr. Fryer, the member
, -
for Wolverhampton, says, " how do you account for
that ?" It will not be said, that there is any lack of in-
dustry in the country: The people are as active, specu-
lative, ingenious, and persevering as ever. The bucket
is not suspended in the well—the wheel has not ceased to
turn—the fire is not quenched in the furnace. Neither
can it be said that there.is any scarcity of capital in large
masses, for the 3 per cents. are at 871, and bankers' bills,
and the bills of first-rate merchants can be discounted for
2 per cent. Still, how is this inability on the part of the
people to sustain the pressure of a diminished taxation to
be accounted for ?
Mr. Matthias Attwood and his friends ascribe this state
things to the effects of the currency bill of 1819, corn-
tnonly called Peel's Bill. In that year the Parliament,
'misled by the calculations of Mr. Ricardo, who estimated
*the depreciation at 4 per cent., and no more, (an unfortu-
nate error which has produced all the suffering and cala-
mity,) passed a law that the debts of the country, contract-
ed in depreciated paper, should be paid in gold of the old
standard value, viz., £3 17s. 101 d. per ounce. The effect
of that law, which, after some deferment, and many un-
toward coincidences, has since been carried into full
operation, was precisely this : Every man who owed
twenty shillings—the landlord under a mortgage—the
tenant under a lease, and every other obligant—every
man,' in short, who owed twenty shillings, contracted in
the paper currency, was compelled to pay twenty shil-
lings, not in silver, not in copper, not in iron, but in
gold ! In this way every paper obligant, and there were
no obligants of any other description, was compelled to
pay at least 325. 6d. for every 20s. he owed.
This we contend is a simple statement of the facts.—
Parliament was misled—it legislated in ignorance—the
philosophers were at fault—Mr. Ricardo was a false
oracle—and the people, intoxicated by the auri sacra
fames, consented to• pay their debts nearly twice over,
and be burthened in all time coming with the monstrous
obligation of paying ,the national creditor a hundred
pounds in gold for every fifty-six pounds they had bor-
rowed in a depreciated paper currency. Every advocate
of Peel's bill is obliged to confess that Ricardo was in
error—even Sir Robert himself admits that he was de-
ceived, and that his calculations were based upon false
data. As to the actual aniount of the depreciation there
are various opinions; some admitting 25, and others cou-
tending for 50 and 60 per cent. At all events as regards
the national debt—the sum due' to the national credi-
tor by the public—we are as near the truth as possible
when we say that to the extent of seven hundred millions,
for every £56 which we borrowed in paper, we bound
ourselves, by Peel's bill, to pay £lOO in pure gold.
This being the case, the next question that arises is—
, how is the evil to be remedied ? We have committed a
great error, and inflicted a great wrong. We have beg-
gared thousands of families—we have pinched millions--
we have robbed all .who were debtors at that period, and
benefited all who had the good fortune to be creditors,
among whom, as is very natural, and excessively liberal,
are many of the most strenuous and able advocates of the
measure which we deplore, and now when the error is
discovered, and the day of reckoning has come, we are
called upon to decide whether we should bear the ills we
have, or return back and do an act of justice at the ha-
zard of another monetary convulsion. That is what forms
the subject of discussion in parliament, and the public
await their decision with an anxiety, we had almost said
with an apprehension, which it is impossible to describe.
The motion of Mr. Matthias Attwood, who by the way
is one the ornaments of our own party, and one of the
ablest and clearest-headed men in parliament,—the mo-
tion, -*we say, is carefully and cautiously worded. It
merely pledges the house to inquiry. It recognises the
existence of severe and general distress, which is not de-
nied by. any one meniber, far-. as we can perceive, ex-
cept Sir Robert Peel. This• enquiry is to embrace our
monetary system, but no plan is suggested for the pur-
pose of altering or depreciating the present circulating
medium. Lord Althorp, therefore,. argued most disen-
genuously when he assumed that the objeet of Mr. Att-
wood and his friends was to depreciate the currency.—
They have made no proposition of the kind. Such a pro- '
position, however, emanated from 'an. opponent of the
motion. •Mr. Baring's arguments were as usual in fa-
your of the committee, although he avowed his intention
to vote against it. In .propounding certain remedies, he
admitted the principle contended fur by Me; Attwood, and
proved the necessity for enquiry. His opposition to the
motion, and his proposed remedies, are as singular as
they. are inconsistent. . Sir Robert Peel resisted the mo-
tion, on :the bold ground that no distress existed, or, if
any, that it had not been produced by his bill ; and Mr.
Baring resisted it because •he wished to modify the inju-
rious effects of by certain financial remedies of
his own device. These were, first, by making silver as
well as 'gold the -legal standard; secondly, by making
Bank of England notes a legal tender all over the country ;
and thirdly, by allowing bankers to issue one pound notes.
How a person of Mr. Baring's experience and sagacity
c AIM recommend these remedies, and yet• at the same
time join'Sir Robert Peel in opposing the motion of Mr.
Attwood we are totally at a loss to: conceive.. He had
,the same notion of the right honourable baronet's bill as
the Englishmaa had of the Frenchman's shirt, which,