To The Editor Of The Sheffield
Independent.
SIR, - Oh that mine enemy would write a book! After years of
suffering - years all tortured into ages - it is delightful to read in a
newspaper such a letter as that which graced your paper on Saturday last, sighed
John Wright, ironmaster, - the said John Wright, landowner, having by the Corn
Laws which he advocates, secured his paper-rents in gold.
Thank God, who
brings forth good in his own good time, the ultra-loyal are beginning to believe
that they may be better employed than in vituperating, on this side of the
grave, the victims of Castles and Oliver. Encouraged by the example of your
wealthy correspondent - for in this land of castes the poor will imitate the
rich - I venture to put a few questions in writing, not to John Wright,
ironmaster and landowner, but to our ancient friend, James Goose, alias James
Goose, Esquire.
It is now some years since James refused to return my salute - he has
been really civil to me of late, for we can all see that he has pawned the last
rag of his attire, except the unmentionables. I therefore hope that he will nor
only deign to read my queries, without muttering the words "Jacobin, vagabond,
leveller" etc., but that he will also ask some questions of his own; and I would
willingly believe that both the questions and the answers to them will find
their way into the Independent. Let me ask then,
1. Whether, in August 1824, the Bank of England notes in circulation did
not exceed twenty-one millions?
2. Whether, in November 1825, the Bank of
England notes in circulation were not reduced to less than eighteen
millions?
3. Whether, if there was a sufficiency of Bank of England
notes in November 1825, there was not a superabundance of them in August
1824?
4. Whether the superabundance of paper money in 1824 did not force
investments of capital in manufactures, in consequence of which forced
investments we have since been manufacturing in excess?
5. Whether the
bullion held by the Bank of England about five months ago was not less than one
million?
6. Whether the bullion now held by the Bank of England is not eight
millions?
7. Whether a machine which raises or lowers prices at will, can be
safely regulated by any power but that of competition?
8. Whether, if we had
fifty Banks of England, instead of one, the eight millions of bullion now
held by that bank, would not be in the hands of every body?
9. Whether wise
men advocate free trade in money and all other things, "although our people are
idle and starving," or because they are idle and starving? *
10. Whether, if
the Bank of England had not existed in 1825, and if all the other bankers in the
empire had been obliged to find gold for themselves, every sovereign wanted
would not have been forthcoming?
11. Whether it is not contrary to the
interests of all bankers to hoard bullion?
12. Whether if one-pound notes,
payable on demand in gold, or in Bank of England notes, were allowed to
circulate, the consequence would not be a repetition of the calamities of
1825?
13. Whether every dealer in bullion does not know well, that a good
bill will always buy gold or silver at the market price?
14. Whether the Bank
of England, towards the close of 1825, did not refuse to discount good bills,
(much better paper than their own.) and by so doing, prevent the purchase of
bullion, when it was most wanted?
15. Whether the
Bank of England, in 1825, did not restrict its discounts to avoid having gold at
a loss?
16. Whether the restriction of discount by he Bank of England did not
cause, or rather constitute the crisis, of 1825?
17. Whether the Bank of
England is not a great nuisance, and the source of all our sufferings since
1813, and before?
18. Whether Government, in 1825, did not do all they could
to crush our useful banks, and exalt the nuisance?
19. Whether the ministry
of that day were not the wise men of Gotham?
20. Whether some of them might
not be fundholders, as well as wise men of Gotham?
21. Whether the United
States of America are not now suffering great distress, in consequence of having
a chartered or monopoly bank, whose charter is about to terminate?
22.
Whether if there were twenty banks of the United States in New York, instead of
one, there would now be any scarcity of dollars in that city?
23. Whether
corn-lawed and bank-chartered John Bull, is a bull or a goose?
24. Whether a
tariffed and bank-chartered Jonathan, is not as great a goose as his
brother?
25. Whether there is any difference in principle between a one-pound
note and a five-pound note?
26.
Whether the objection to one-pound notes,that they would displace gold, does not
prove too much?
27. Whether, if there be any force in that objection, it
would be not nullified by allowing the issuers of notes to pay in gold or
silver?
28. Whether if one-pound notes, payable on demand in gold or silver,
were allowed to circulate, the best security to the public for the ultimate
payment of them, would not be the prudence, and mutual watchfulness of the
issuers?
29. Whether any other supposed security would not ensure danger
rather than safety?
30. Whether any other security is possible?
31.
Whether men can place their property in the hands of the idle and extravagant,
and, at the same time, lend it to the industrious?
32. Whether
Governments are more trustworthy than bankers? whether all history does not
prove the contrary?
33. Whether our reformers, before the passing of the
Reform Bill, would have been pleased to see the property of all the bankers of
the nation in the hands of Blucherloo and Co.?
34. Whether if, before the
passing of the Reform Bill, the property of all our bankers had been in the
hands of Killtrade and Famineton, we should now have had Reform or
Revolution?
35. Whether one-pound notes, payable on demand in specie, could,
possibly, at any time, depreciate the circulation five per cent. without
effecting the exchanges, and thereby making the depreciation known?
36.
Whether, since the suppression of one-pound notes, the prices of commodities
have not fallen fifty per cent.?
37. Whether the wise men of Gotham are
aware, that fifty per cent. is ten times five per cent.?
38. And whether,
after starving the cows, and the bees, they still expect that the land will flow
with milk and honey?
I am Sir, your most
obedient Servant,
CORNLAW
RHYMES.
* See the letter of
John Wright, ironmaster. He says, Corn Laws
are necessary, because land pays only two and a half per cent; meaning that if wages
fall threepence per day, and potatoes rise to 4d per lb, still all will be well,
provided that land, worth ten pounds, sell for a hundred, and pay two and a half per
cent, or 25 per cent. on the true value. All persons who advocate Corn Laws,
cannot do better than buy land largely, and soon, at the bread-tax price; I
entreat them to do so, for I could like to see them break stone on the highways
for a subsistence.
In 1825, 80 banks
collapsed following the Bank of England's refusal to supply cheap money at a
time of massive speculation. A restructuring of the banking system
followed.
Elliott's speeches are
always full of sparks - he played to the crowd. His letters are mostly less
exciting, being the result of longer consideration. The tone of this letter is
quiet, serious and obsessive (though tinged with sarcasm), but then the bard was
talking about money which was not a topic for levity. The first paragraphs show
hints of Elliott's personality, but the 38 questions are dull to read. In 1832
when Elliott sent his letter to the newspaper, the Corn Law Rhymer was very busy
writing poem after poem following the unexpected success of his "Corn Law
Rhymes." He still found time to construct his 38 questions though - and run a
business. This says a great deal for his energy & how important he felt that
it was for an effective banking system to exist. He appears in his letter to be
thoughtful & well informed. And aware of the banking situation abroad,
too.
Elliott mentions
in the first paragraph of his letter that John Wright is both ironmaster
and landowner; this would make Wright a business competitor & as a landlord,
he would be a target for the Poet of the Poor. Add that Wright was for the Corn
Laws, and we can assume that the two men were not great friends! Elliott also
talks of "our ancient friend, James Goose, alias James Goose, Esquire."
Presumably this is a term of affection concealing the actual identity.
