The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-11-14 00:00:00

Ebr Malaria.

TUESDAY MORNING, NOV. 14, 1848.

WE are not aware that it is very necessary to
reply to an article in the Albion of yesterday, in
which our contemporary takes up the cudgels for
Mr. Eyre Evans in his absence. We shall only
say, therefore, that we adhere fully to what we have
stated; and shall be perfectly prepared to maintain
our position should Mr. Evans, on his return, chose
to assail us.

WE are glad to perceive that we are drawing
towards a satisfactory conclusion of our controversy
with the Manchester Guardian, upon the subject of
the Liverpool Association's proposed scheme of
currency. His comparison of a system of paper
money, based upon Consols, to the depreciated and
inconvertible paper money of Buenos Ayres, was
given up by him in his previous article. The
French assignats, to which be referred so triumph-
antly, and the foreign exchanges are abandoned in
his last article ; and the question between us, he
says, itiaw, is" narrowed to a single point," viz., the
liability to fluctuation of the proposed basis, as
compared with that of the present basis. " If,"
says the Guardian, "it can be shown that the
scheme in question is founded upon a real measure
of value, which can be relied upon as more stable
and unvarying than gold, we shall feel disposed to
admit that it may be an improvement on the
present system of currency." We hold him, there-
fore, to this point.
Now we know of no "real measure of value"—
we believe there can be none, unless by the arbi-
trary adoption of one particular description of
property. This under the present system is gold,
the very property of all others most liable to fluc-
tuations from its portability, uncertain quantity,
and other causes, which we conclude, by his con-
tinued silence upon this point, our contemporary
admits to be the case ; whilst the property proposed
by the association can only be subject to one
disturbing cause, viz., a political commotion, by
which all property would be affected alike. But
the Guardian appears to object to this property as
being " a mass of debt," overlooking the fact that
it is nevertheless considered the best, and safest,
property in the kingdom • and that people are wil-
ling to give even their gold for it. This property
not being an "assumed," but an admitted and
definite amount, it follows that it is as divisible
into any number of parts for a measure of value as
an ounce of gold. The Guardian's illustration of
a " man assumed to be six feet high," cannot, there-
fore, apply to the case, for if the man's height were
as well defined as is the amount of the funded pro-
perty, there can be no doubt that he would then
"afford a satisfactory measure for a standard foot."
In our last we directed the attention of the
Guardian to the fact that, so recently as October
last year, Exchequer Bills were not convertible;
and asked him " whether this arose from a depre-
ciation in the Government Securities or from an
appreciation of the gold." The question is shirked
altogether in his attempted reply. He says :

" There might possibly have been some apparent
foundation for the allegation that the low price of the
funds arose from 'an appreciation of gold ;' but, then, un-
fortunately for the argument, there was no gold in circu-
lation at the time when the price was the lowest. There
was nothing in circulation but depreciated paper, and it
was in that paper that £lOO consols sold for £57, and, we
believe, even lower. As, therefore, gold had nothing to
do with the transaction, directly or indirectly, it seems to
us to require something more than a bare assertion to
prove that the low price was caused by 'an appreciation
of gold!"
- -

Not a word about the inconvertible Exchequer
Bills ! It was too notorious, we presume, that in
October last year gold had appreciated, and the
bank was only saved from stoppage by being per-
mitted to pay in paper. Gold had certainly some-
thing "to do with that transaction." What, how-
ever, does our contemporary mean by On Consols:
being worth only £57 "in depreciated paper ?" It
could not be much depreciated when ±:57 returned
£3 per annum, or 5 per cent. interest, except as
compared with that gold, of which our contem-
porary says " there was none in circulation." Such
a state of things, moreover, could never occur under
the system proposed ; for fifty-seven hundredth
parts of a thing could never be equal to the whole.
We can see easily enough how consols could flue-
tuata, and have fluctuated as compared either with
gold, or with a paper based upon private credit or
property; but they could never depreciate or appre-
ciate in the relation of the whole to its own
component parts, except at times of under or over
issues, which we have shewn would be self correc-
tive by the rate of interest.
But upon what was the currency based, and
what was the measure of value at the period
referred to by our contemporary, when "there was
no gold in circulation," and Consols were bought
and sold, though "geld had nothing to do with the
transaction, directly or indirectly ?" Obviously the
country was left without a standard measure of
value. Besides any fluctuations which may have
taken place under such a wild and confused state
of things. afford no criterion by which to form a
sound judgment upon the system of currency pro-
posed by the association.
In considering the tendency of the proposed
'currency to vary in value, we must ask the Guar-
dian to dismiss gold from his mind altogether, ex-
cept as a commodity; and to make no deductions
from the relation which its basis, Consols, has
borne at any past period to a pound, either in gold
or paper. Having done this, let him apply himself
to the consideration of the point as to whether it
would not be possible to obtain a steady value for
money by a definite rate of interest ; and then in-
form us under what circumstances, save the one
we have alluded to, such currency could vary in
value.

The Guardian concludes with the old bullionist
inquiry,—" after all, what is a pound i " We shall
not, ourselves, be drawn by this manoeuvre from
the particular point, to which he says, " the
question is now narrowed." We shall refer him
instead to the following answer to it, by a very
able writer, whose views approach nearly to those
of the association, and who is the author of a work
recently published by Longmans', entitled "The
National Distress, its Origin and Remedy," which
the Guardian might find it worth his while to
peruse. It would save him hereafter the necessity
of his continued attempts to trace the existing
monetary distress to railway investments or com-
mercial imprudence. _ _

" If it now be asked, 'What,' under the proposed mo-
dification of the currency standard and basis, 'is the mean-
ing of a pound" the answer is,—`A pound is a fixed
standard and measure of value, secured by the State to
yield the owner an annual return or increase equal to the
average increase or return of gold, or 3 per cent. per
annum, and consequently of definite interest or money
value and purchasing power.'—As with the present basis
and standard, the answer to the same question would be,
that,—`A pound is a substance of intrinsic value, limited
at present to be a certain quantity and fineness of gold ;
but ofindefinite, because ever variable, interest or money
value and purchasing power.' "

MR. WEBSTER has published a second letter on
Dock matters, addressed to Mr. Bramley-Moore,
wherein he plunges and flounders, if possible, more
than in the first, and establishes the fact of his
gross ignorance about the Liverpool Dock Estate.
Mr. Webster is evidently wishing to obtain noto-
riety, arid to fill up vacant time caused by the cessa-
tion of briefs from his clients at Birkenhead. We
might very safely leave him and his letters in the
hands of the public ; but we shall, nevertheless,
give the second, like the first, a passing notice, to
show how little reliance can be placed on Mr. Web-
ster's statements.
The real object which Mr. Webster appears to
have in view is to persuade people to lend their
money to Birkenhead •; but this effort, we are
apprehensive, will be " love's labour lost ;" and,
could he even write like Cicero, employ the per-
suasive eloquence of Demosthenes, or warble as
melodiously as Saint Cecilia, he will never induce
money lenders into the delusion of burying more
sovereigns in the slob on the Cheshire shore.
At page 2, Mr. Webster says—

" It is no part of my object to dispute the sufficiency of
such security, (the Liverpool Docks), or to deny the large
margin that exists for raising the rates. It is enough for
me to show ' that money can be better laid out at Birken-
bead than at Liverpool ;' that such expenditure at Birken.