Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub

really think it so, but that we are afraid to say that it is otherwise. Impunity always renders men bold, It will not fail to have a similar effect on the volunteers, who, if great care is not taken, will go on from step to step till they become complete masters of the country. In the mean while we shall have no increase to the regular army. The enlistments for that service will not suffice, nor nearly suffice, for the deficiencies made by deaths and desertion; and, as to Mr. Pitt's project bill, every body says it cannot be carried into effectual operation.

Some

WARWICKSHIRE TREASON. weeks ago people were congratulating themselves that they were not born on the other side of the Tweed, where the security of men's property and where their personal liberty appeared to depend, in a great degree, upon the workings of the "ardent mind" of a single person; but, this exultation will be considerably abated if what is related in the newspapers, respecting a recent trial at Warwick, be correct in all its parts. It is stated, in the report here referred to, that a Mr. Cooke, the son of a respectable gentleman of Warwickshire, himself a respectable gentleman of small independent fortune, brought an action of damages against the Earl of Warwick, the Lord Lieutenant of the county, for causing two trunks and a hamper to be taken from the Warwick carrier and to be conveyed to and opened in a guard house of the Warwickshire militia. It appeared, that the Lord Lieutenant had caused the seizure to be made in consequence of suspicions of treasonable, or, at least, disaffected conduct, communicated to him by a Mr. Osborn, a miller and farmer of Hampton Lucy, a village near Warwick, where Mr. Cooke, the person suspected had taken a lodging sometime before. The jury gave a verdict in favour of the plaintiff, Mr. Cooke, but awarded him only a shilling damages, it being understood that such award would carry costs of suit, and he having actually received no damage in his property, the contents of the trunks and hamper being only the foul linen of Mrs. Cooke and the rest of the family.-The only circumstance that renders this transaction of any importance at all, in a political point of view, is, the ground upon which it is stated that Mr. Cooke became a suspected person, and this circumstance is very important indeed. I shall state it in the words attributed to Mr. Serjeant Vaughan, the counsel for the Earl of Warwick. "The plaintiff had come to "Hampton Lucy, taken lodgings there at "a Mr. Pritchard's, where his conduct had "excited suspicion of bis loyalty, from these

circumstances, that he would not allow "his letters to be fetched from the Post Office, "but went for them himself; that he refused "to sign the paper which was delivered to "bim for the general defence of the country, "assigning as a reason, that he had given in "bis name at London; these and some other "circumstances were construed by a Mr. "Osborn, a miller and farmer at that place, "into symptoms of disaffection, or, at least, causes for that suspicion; in consequence "of which he communicated the same to "the Lord Lieutenant, and it was discover"ed that these packages were lying for him "at Warwick. The defendant, upon this "communication, wrote to Mr. Secretary "Yorke, and received orders from govern"ment to act as appeared best to him for "the safety of the State. Under this im

66

[ocr errors]

pression he had done no more than his "duty; considering the precarious situation "of affairs in this critical conjuncture, no "blame could possibly attach to the noble "lord.". -With all my heart. No blame could, I think, attach to Lord Warwick; and one cannot help pitying his Lordship when one sees him in person tumbling amongst the hamper of dirty linen, like Falstaff in the buck-basket of Mrs. Ford. But, Mr. Osborn, the farmer and miller! I am not so readily disposed to acquit him of all blame. What! a gentleman become an object of suspicion; suspected of disaffection, and that too in the very centre of the kingdom, the very farthest point that he could possibly remove from the sea in any direction; thus suspected, in such a situation, because he would not trust the carrier to bring his letters, and really perhaps because the saving of the expense was an object to him, he besides having himself nothing to do, and being in the daily habit of going into the town! Suspected of disaffection for this! Disaffection towards the carrier, may be, who had very likely imposed upon him, or been insolent to him, or had delayed the delivery of his letters! A man's reputation, his peace, and even his life, hangs by a very slender thread, if such serious suspicions are to be indulged, and acted on, upon such slight ground as this.→→→ But, there was another circumstance it seems: "He refused to sign the paper that was delivered to him for the general defence of the country, assigning as a reason "that he had given in his name in London." What paper was this? I heard of no paper that the law enjoined men to sign. A paper for the general defence of the country! I suppose Mr. farmer Osborn must have meant the subscription paper for raising money to

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

rig out some corps of volunteers, of whom, perchance, Mr. Osborn was to be Captain, or Major Commandant. I know of no other paper that was handed about; and, if Mr. Osborn had happened to reside in the parish of St. Margaret Westminster, he would, probably, have denounced me; for I certainly refused to sign the paper" that was delivered to me, though recommended to give my signature by persons whom I greatly respected, and though I had every reason to suppose that the money was collected with a view of rendering the country real service. I thought differently; and, therefore, I gave nothing, telling the gentlemen who called. on me, that, as I should not subscribe, it would be a waste of their time to trouble them with my reasons. They did not denounce me. My wife's cloaths went to the bucking without being arrested by any search warrants. But, Mr. Cooke gave a reason for not putting his name down, and a very good reason too: he had already put it down in London, where, probably, he had fallen under the terrific influence of the ballying address to the inhabitants of St. Giles's and St. George's Bloomsbury, in which even the Lord Chancellor and Lord Chief Justice were not very obscurely pointed at. And, was Mr. Cooke to put his name down at every remove, or be suspected of disaffection? Was he to give away all the little remnant of fortune that overgrown farmers and millers had left him in order that they might strut him out of countenance? Was he, reversing the maxim of Swift, to exhaust all his substance and then to die for the purpose of furnishing decorations for beings of an inferior order? Thank God, f these exactions are now put an end to; and, let it be recollected, that there is now a law prohibiting any further collections for the support of volunteers; so that Mr. Cooke may, if he will suffer the carrier to bring his letters in a way to please Mr. Osborn, now remain quietly, perhaps, at Hampton Lucy; but that it is a very hard case, that a gentleman, should be thus compelled to go to the enormous expense of a law-suit, or to lie under the imputation of being a person likely to commit treason, will be denied by no one, to whose mind injustice is not extremely familiar. Before I dismiss this topic I cannot refrain from calling the reader's attention to the penetration displayed, upon this occasion, by the sages of Downing Street; and, he will not fail to observe, that if a very small portion of it had been bestowed in the conferences with Mon

sieur Mehée de la Touche, the world never would have enjoyed at our expense the broad and endless laugh which has been excited by the correspondence of Mr. Drake. NAVIGATION WITH THE WEST INDIES.

A letter upon this subject will be found in another part of the present sheet. The pamphlet to which that letter refers I have not yet had an opportunity of reading, and therefore I cannot submit any opinion upon it. To preserve inviolate the spirit of the Navigation Act is a maxim not to be departed from without hazarding our all, our very existence as an independent nation; but, rigidly to enforce that act, and to squeeze the colonies in the merciless manner that they now are squeezed at the Custom-House is absolutely impossible. While the mother country acts like a mother her colonists will be the last of her children to wish to injure her navigation, because they know that it is the source of her power; but, if a minister tells them, that if they cannot live by "making sugar they may make something "else," they will look out for themselves. They can make nothing but sugar; and if they cannot, as British subjects, live by making it, they will care very little for the connexion. The truth is, that the CustomHouse is eating up the navigation. Taxes, taxes, taxes; this is the continual cry of the minister. Every other consideration gives way to that of revenue; and, the evil must continue to increase until the system is com pletely changed.

FINANCIAL RESOLUTIONS.-The cor respondent, whose letter I inserted in my last, p 168, has favoured me with a second letter upon the same subject, which will be found in a preceding page of this sheet. I have not time, at present, to pay that atten tion to it which it merits; but, it would not be right to present it to the public without stating explicitly, that I disagree with the writer as to his doctrine respecting the nature of the contract between the govern ment and the public-creditor. The public creditor never understood that the value of his annuity was to diminish 60 per centom in eighteen years; it was impossible for him to foresee the bank restriction, which was, to all intents and purposes, a violation of the contract. A. B. thinks the caution to fathers and mothers unavailing; but, if I should succeed in making myself understood to any considerable portion of those who have property to leave to the helpless, I shall certainly flatter myself, that I have done a great deal of service to the country.

Printed by Cox and Baylis, No. 75, Great Queen Street, and published by R, Bagshaw, Bow Street, Covent Garden, where former Numbers may be had; sold also by J. Budd, Crown and Mite, Pall-Mall,

VOL. VI. No. 7.]

[ocr errors]

LONDON, SATURDAY, AUGUST 18, 1801.

PRICE 10D. "The restriction as to exportation of corn is taken off, too, at a wrong time. There is no telling, as yet, what will be the produce of the next harvest. We bave had four dry summers successively; five successively bave not been known, in this country, within the memory of the oldest man living; and, if we should now have a harvest like that of 1799, the quartern loaf may yet sell for a shilling before Christmas."-POLITICAL REGISTER, present volume, p. 82.

[ocr errors]

"

"

[ocr errors]

225]

BIRMINGHAM DOLLARS..

SIR,-In your Register of the 21st inst, you bring forwards the arguments and opinions of Mr. Foster, in his work upon paper currency; and you seem to think them fally decisive, upon the question of a depre. ciation of English bank-paper. You inform us, too, with much self-complacency, of the assistance which he has derived from your own writings. Of the arguments in the particular passage which you have quoted from his book, I certainly agree with you, in thinking that they are originally yours; but I cannot agree with you in thinking that they are worth your claiming. You say, however, that those arguments

"

are the very foundation of Mr. Foster's "doctrine of depreciation;" consequently, if these arguments are shewn to be false, with them his system of depreciation must fall. I esteem it fortunate, that you have allowed the question to be placed upon so simple a footing; more especially as it af fords an opportunity of proving the fallacy. both of your doctrine and Mr. Foster's at the same time. The question of depreciation seems to me to be reduced, by these admissions, simply to this: whether the bank dollars circulate as coin, or as promis. sory notes: whether the price of 5s., at which they circulate, is owing to their intrinsic value, as compared with English bank paper; or to the stamp put upon them by the bank, which thereby becomes liable to pay them again at 5s. I believe I have stated this accurately: yourself and Mr. Foster maintain that they circulate as coin, and owe their price to their intrinsic value; and the foundation of Mr. Foster's doctrine of depreciation rests upon the truth of this. Since this position was so essential to Mr., Foster's theory, it might have been expected, that he would have bestowed considerable attention, in establishing its truth; but he seems to have hastened to the superstructure of his building, and to have been but little solicitous about the soundness of its foundation. In support of this very foundation "of his doctrine," he does not think it ne cessary to produce one single argument, but

[ocr errors]

[226

contents himself with laying down his opinion, that it is impossible for dollars ever to circulate at any other than their intrinsic value. But it was incumbent upon him either to have proved that this was not pos sible, or otherwise admitting it to be possible, he ought to have shewn the reasons which induced him to think, that in the instance he was speaking of, it was not the case. Mr. Foster says the bank dollars "issued at 5s., contain no more silver than "4s. 63. ought to contain; they are there "fore called not 5s. but tokens for 5s. "has been contended that this is no proof "of the depreciation of bank paper, for "that they are only promissory notes, and "that the bank might have called them 15s. as well as 5$.; but a promissory note "should either have intrinsic value itself,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

It

or else be merely the representative of it." Now I would ask Mr. Foster, whence he derived his rule, " that a promissory note "should either have intrinsic value itself, " or else be merely the representative of "it" Why, may not a promissory note possess at once intrinsic value in itself, and be at the same time the representative of so ne higher value? Can Mr. Foster, upon mature consideration, maintain any thing so absurd as that this is impossible? Yet it is upon so palpable an absurdity that he has rested the "o very foundation of his doc. "trine." Mr. Foster does indeed say farther respecting the bank dollars: "If is "sued merely as the representative of value, "why go to the expense of having it of "such precious materials?" There is no necessity for answering this question; the foundation of Mr. Foster's doctrine rests upon its being absolutely impossible to ga to this expense. It is not the wisdom or folly of the directors of the bank that is the point in dispute; probably they have acted foolishly in going to this expense; yet it is also probable, that they may have been ac

also by the consideration, that if the tokens they issued were made of a material possessing a considerable intrinsic value, they would be much less liable to be counterfeited, than if made of a material which

no

did not. If this be their motive, the directors of the bank of England have afforded an example of sacrificing private interests to the interests of humanity; which, it were to be wished, could be seen oftener imitated in the conduct of public men. But if it is possible for tokens or promissory notes at once to possess intrinsic value in themselves, and to circulate as representatives of some higher value; then ought Mr. Foster to have shewn that the dollars he was speaking of did not so circulate. He does not appear to have touched upon this point, but with your permission, I will supply the deficiency (as briefly as I can), and have doubt, but I shall shew that the bank dollars do circulate at a value higher than their intrinsic value, reckoning their intrinsic value as compared with English bank notes. If the value of 5s., at which these dollars circulate as exchanged for bank paper, be not owing to the stamp upon them, then it must follow, that their exchangeable value would remain the same, though the stamp were defaced, and that it would have been the same though the stamp had never been af fixed. If their value of 5s. be not owing to the stamp, the same value must remain though the stamp was taken away. Deface, therefore, the stamp from a bank dollar, or take a dollar of the same weight and fineness, before the stamp has been affixed, and try for how much bank paper it will exchange; not for 5s. but for 4s. 4d. only. A stamped dollar will exchange for 5s.; an unstamped dollar of the same weight and fineness will only exchange for 4s. 4d.; I cannot imagine any thing more conclusive than this. Nevertheless, in answer to a letter which I formerly wrote to you upon this subject, you were pleased to say, that it was not of the intrinsic value of the dollar that you were speaking, but of its circulat. ing value. I then pointed out to you that there was no real difference in this distinction; but as you did not allow yourself to be convinced by my arguments, it may be necessary for me now to say, that the circulating value of the unstamped dollars is at this time only 4s. 4d.; and that there are a sufficient quantity of them in circulation, for the price to be ascertained.You may recollect that in the letters I before wrote to you, it was observed, that it was not my intention to enter into the general question whether our paper currency was depreciated or not. You professed, in answer to this, that you could not conceive any object I could have if this were My object was (and I thought it sufficiently obvious) to prove the fallacy

the case.

of those arguments upon which you had built your opinion respecting the depreciation of our currency. In reality there were at that time several circumstances (but totally unconnected with those which you produced) which tended to shew that a depreciation to a small extent might have taken place. One of these was the exceedingly high intrinsic price of dollars (taking them however, at 4s. 9d. and not at 5s); and another was the premium of of 2 per centum, which was then paid in London to exchange bank of England paper for gold. It then appeared to me probable that both these might be owing to accidental causes, unconnected with any lasting depreciation of paper; and if so, that they would be removed in a short time. It may be recollected I mentioned, that it was probable we should see dollar's vary in price, before the expiration of twelve months, from 4s. 9d., the price they were then at, to perhaps 45, 2d. or 4s. 4d. The alteration has taken place sooner than could have been looked for; and they are now at the price of 4s. 4d. An alteration in the price of guineas has at the same time taken place, and they are now to be procured in London, in exchange for bank paper, without any premium. The rise which the price of guineas then experienced, I take not to have been owing to. any depreciation of paper, through an excessive circulation; but to the great demand for guineas which the fear of an immediate invasion had previously occasioned. It was not that an unnatural quantity of notes had been issued, but that almost every one who held them, was more desirous of holding gold; not that the circulation was excessive, but that the security was doubted. And upon this point I entirely agree with you in all you have said respecting the dangerous, and perhaps even fatal effects, which in the event of an actual invasion, the sudden and unavoidable depreciation of our paper currency would produce. It is to you only that the public owes its having been at all warned of this danger; which must fall heavier in proportion as it is little expected.—Mr. Foster, you inform us, has drawn his doctrine of depreciation from your arguments upon the subject; which arguments, if they prove a depreciation at all, certainly prove a depreciation to the extent of 10 per cent. Nevertheless, Mr. Foster, who gives a very exact account of the degree of depreciation which has taken place at different periods, makes it out that this depreciation has never exceeded 24s. per centum. It

would have rested with you to have reconciled this difference with Mr. Foster, but I imagine you may not now consider it worth your time. Mr. Foster, however, seems to have rested very much of his arguments upon the rates of exchange with Ireland. In truth, no proof of a depreciated currency can ever be drawn from the rates or balances of exchange. No doubt a depreciation of currency cannot take place in any country without affecting the rates of exchange with every other country it has transactions with. But the rates of exchange are liable to be affected by so many other causes, that it can never be more than a plausible conjecture, to attribute any variation to a depreciated currency; unless such depreciation has been previously proved from other sources.Yourself and Mr. Foster seem sensible of this; the foundation of Mr. Foster's system relying upon the fact of depreciation, being previously proved from another source, viz. the price of bank dollars; and the arguments drawn from the variations in the Irish exchange seem to be considered merely as corroborative. I trust it will now be allowed to be sufficiently plain, that the arguments are fallacious, by which a depreciation of paper was attempted to be proved from the price of dollars; and that the variations in the exchange with Ireland, must be looked for in some other cause.-I remain, Sir, your very obedient servant, C. B.-London, 23d July, 1804.

FINANCE RESOLULIONS.

SIR,-Confident that you seek only to establish your opinions, by the assistance. of truth and reason, I do not hesitate to address you a second time, as your letter to Mr. Pitt of the 4th of this month, contains several specious arguments in favour of the conclusion which you drew in your first letter. I venture indeed to think entirely different from you, of your quotation from the speech of my Lord Auckland and the writings of Mr. Chalmers and Mr. Rose: not any one of whom appear to me to have instituted a comparison between different years, of the produce of the permanent taxes, with any idea that it would be supposed, that in the latter periods the produce was worth more than it was in the earlier ones. When Mr. Chalmers compares the result of, his comparison with a similar one made in the distressful times of King William, does he not sufficiently shew, that the inference which he wished should be drawn from it was one relating to the state and condition of the people,

and not one relating to the riches or poverty of the treasury? When my Lord' Auckland precedes his comparison with a reference to the state of trade, the course of exchange, and the general prosperity of the kingdom, does he not clearly mark the inference he intended should be drawn? The subsequent comparison of Mr. Rose of British manufactures exported, are in like manner an evidence to the purpose, for which he advances the amount of the permanent taxes. But, to my very great surprise, you extend your objections to the 13th resolution of the House of Commons on Finance, to this comparison of British manufactures exported Permit me, however, Sir, to remind you, that the official value of imports and exports was fixed by the House of Lords so long back as 169, and that this rate las never since been varied. Your objection I very readily grant is valid, against every comparison of which, in the official language of the Inspector General of imports and exports, is called the real value, but not against what he terms the official value -The late Mr." Irving was the first who introduced this new estimate of our trade, and he was so pleased with the approbation which it pro cured him, that he wished to have substi, tuted the real in place of the official value, until I observed to him, that the official value afforded the best evidence to the quantity of our trade, which was of more consequence than its fluctuating and rela tive value to the political economist. However, at the time I expressed my wish (and I rejoice that it has been gratified), that his new estimate of our trade should be continued, as thereby there was both the quantity and value of our commerce nearly ascertained, and a help afforded towards forming an estimate of the "de"preciation of money" as Mr. Wheatley' terms it, but of the "advance of prices" as 'I should term it, had I that gentleman's reputation. I am aware, that in the opinion of a great many, these terms are synonimous; but insomuch as the one proceeds from very different causes to the other, and as the one will produce very different effects to the other, I think wri ters on these questions should very care. fully distinguish between them. If I have an opportunity, I will obtrude upon you my opinion concerning this last most de licate and important subject, upon which I lament that I likewise am so unfortunate as to differ from you. Before, however, I close this letter, I cannot but remark that your correspondent of the 30th

« ÖncekiDevam »