the clipping had not been carried to that extent which Mr. Lowndes had previously imagined.

Mr. Lowndes appears to have recommended the depreciation of the standard of the silver money, more for the purpose of saving part of the loss, which would have been occasioned by the callingin and recoining of the clipt money, than from any other motive; not perceiving the injustice which would at that time have been committed by such an act, or by a legal alteration of the standard.

It is clear from what Mr. Lowndes has said, and from Locke's answer to him, that the general circulation of the country, or the legal standard of value, had not been altered or debased; that people refused to take the clipt or debased money, just as they pleased; that the clipt or debased money had not been made a legal tender, and compulsory in payments; that contracts had not been entered into, and transactions founded upon that clipt or debased money, as in legal money; that purchases of land and rents of land, money borrowed, and taxes and rates imposed, had not taken place in that clipt or debased money, as in the lawful money of the Realm; but, that it was permitted to pass for its real value only, some pieces which were previously shillings passing for seven pence, some for eight pence, or what they were worth; "Persons before they concluded any bargains, being necessitated first to settle the value of the money they were to receive in payment." And that two prices had actually taken place, one in the good and lawful money, and the other in the clipt money, which from the scarcity of silver change, was permitted to pass current, only, for convenience sake, until the nuisance became too great, and no longer to be endured.

Locke distinctly states (page 107.) "That no man was compelled to receive the clipt or depreciated money in legal payments, and that there was a Law in existence, with severe penalties, against those who tendered clipt money in payment." And page $1 he says. "I cannot but wonder at Mr. Lowndes, a man so skilled in the Laws, especially of the Mint, the Exchequer, and of our money, should all along in his arguments, speak of clipt money, as if it were the lawful money of England.

།

Therefore, a quantity of clipt shillings, or clipt pieces of silver money, having within a few years crept into circulation, was not, in Mr. Locke's mind, a sufficient justification for depreciating the old lawful standard of our coins. And it was because rents of land, and other contracts and prices, had not taken place and become founded in that clipt or depreciated money at that time, and because the lawful money and standard of value had not become altered or depreciated, that Mr. Locke combated, and justly com

bated, and prevailed over the arguments of Mr. Lowndes, for depreciating the lawful coins, or the then standard of silver money.

But had Locke lived to the present day, would he have discovered no difference between the present depreciated state of our whole Currency, and the clipt money in William the Third's Reign? Would he have advocated a restoration of this depreciated currency again to its former standard, or an increase in its value of nearly one third, or between 40 and 50 per cent., after that money, the whole circulating medium of the country, had become depreciated to that extent; after that depreciated Currency, or medium of exchange had been made by law, a legal tender between man and man, compulsory in payments, and the lawful current money of the country; after money had been borrowed in, purchases and rents of land made, excessive taxes, rates, and duties imposed, and nearly all transactions had taken place in, and become founded upon that depreciated currency; would he, under such circumstances have had so little sense of justice, as to have advocated a restoration of that depreciated legalized Currency again to its fornier value? Or, if he had done so, would he not at the same time, have also had that feeling of "retributive justice," to have recommended other measures to be adopted, to guard and relieve individuals and the public, who must otherwise be ruined, or greatly injured, under its baneful and destructive effects?

But a better judgment can be formed, of what Locke would have done, under such circumstances, from his own words.-page 9. he says, "The standard once settled by public authority, the quantity of silver once established under the several denominations, I humbly conceive it should not be altered, till there were an absolute necessity shown for such alteration, which I think can never be."

"The reason why it should not be changed is this-because the public authority is guarantee for all legal contracts. But men are absolved from the performance of their legal contracts, if the quantity of silver under the several denominations be altered; as is evident, if borrowing 100/. or 400 ounces of silver, to repay the same quantity of silver, (for that is understood by the same sum and so the Law warrants it,) or taking a lease of land for years to come, at the like rent of 100l., they should both pay the one, and the other, in money coined under the same denominations, with one fifth less of silver in it, than at the time of the bargain. The landlord here and the creditor, are each defrauded of 20 per cent. of what they contracted for, and is their due; and I ask, how much juster it would be, to dissolve the contracts they had made, than that henceforth all landlords and creditors, should be paid their past debts and rents for leases already made, in clipt money, twenty per

cent. lighter than it should be? Both ways they lose twenty per cent, of their demand, with equal justice.

"The case would be the same, and legal contracts voided, if the standard should be altered on the other side, and each species of our coin be made one fifth heavier. For then he that had borrowed or contracted for any sum, could not be discharged by paying the quantity agreed for-but be liable to be forced to pay, 20 per cent. more than he bargained for-that is, more than he ought. On the other side, whether the creditor be forced to receive less, or the debtor forced to pay more than his contract, the damage and injury is the same whenever a man is defrauded of his due; and whether this will not be a public failure of justice, thus arbitrarily to give one man a right and possession to another, without any fault on the suffering man's side, or without any, the least advantage to the public, I shall leave to be considered."

It is obvious, that it was because contracts and engagements had not been entered into in the clipt money, and the clipt money had not been made a legal tender, that Locke objected to any alteration in the standard at that time. And the reformation of the silver money, as it was then called, no more affected the Kingdom with regard to the weight of taxes, or individuals as to debts or credits, or their previous contracts, or the general state of prices, or the prosperity of the country, than a recoinage of the silver money, in the last Reign, would have done, had that recoinage taken place in or about the year 1790.

In 1790, the silver money then in circulation was greatly depreciated in value by long wear, many of the plain shillings not having much more than one half of the original quantity of sterling silver remaining in them, and the six-penny pieces not so much; the silver money on the average then, being nearly as much depreciated, by long use and wear, as it was in the Reign of William the Third by clipping. The only effect of calling in, and recoining that depreciated silver money, would then have been much the same as in William's time by the recoining of the clipt money; namely, an inconvenience to the public, for the moment during the operation of calling it in and substituting another coinage in its stead, and also, the expense to be sustained by the recoinage. But the. weight of all taxes and rents, and all transactions, would have remained upon the same footing or basis after such recoinage as before.

In William the Third's Reign, the standard of value was kept perfect, by there being in circulation, not as Mr. Lowndes had guessed, only one million six hundred thousand pounds, but upwards of three millions, (as appeared to have been the case after the recoinage) of good and lawful sterling silver money; and in the

last Reign, the legal standard was kept perfect and undisturbed up to 1797, notwithstanding the depreciated state of the greatest part of the silver Currency, by the circulation of good and lawful weighty gold money.

But from the year 1797, since the Bank ceased to pay its notes on demand, in the legal weighty sterling gold money of the Realm, from that period, up to 1814, the pound note, which was made the legalized pound sterling standard of value, and the sole Currency of the country, was regularly depreciating, as calculated in gold as well as in silver.

If, in the year 1790, a recoinage of the silver money had been proposed, no one would at that time have thought of advocating a depreciation of the standard, merely because the shillings and sixpenny pieces had become greatly depreciated by long wear; and all Locke's arguments, and the arguments of others, against a depreciation of the standard at that time, would have very justly applied; and it is astonishing that the advocates for the restoration of the ancient metallic standard now, have not discovered the great difference existing between the two cases.

This error among others, has greatly tended to plunge this nation into its present distress and difficulties, from the belief that the two cases are similar, and, that because the country soon overcame the inconvenience in William the Third's Reign, of calling in a quantity of clipt shillings, or deteriorated pieces of silver money, and resumed its wonted prosperity, that it will now be equally able to support the ruinous and terrible effects of increasing, or of raising the value of the whole Currency, or circulating medium again (gold as well as silver) nearly 50 per cent., after most transactions had become founded in that greatly depreciated Currency. The effects of which will consequently be, to increase all the burthens of the country in like proportion, to raise all rents, taxes, rates, and all previous contracts, in an equal degree, and to compel every person to pay nearly 50 per cent. more than he contracted for, or ought to pay. But if those who advocate these unjust and im politic measures, were fully aware of the numerous acts of hardship which they are committing by them, and perpetuating upon the community, and the still greater evils, misery, and ruin, which must be entailed upon a great mass of the productive population; if they possess any feelings of humanity, or regard for the good and prosperity of the country, they would review this system of ruin and injustice, with feelings of mingled remorse and shame. The country is now again laboring under the first effects of this measure only, and the longer it is persevered in, the more cruel, the more terrible and distressing will be its effects every day.

The circulating medium, or the paper Currency of the country,

which had become the only legalized money unit or standard of value, had been regularly depreciating in value for nearly twenty years. Just before the close of the war, in 1814, silver had risen in this depreciated paper money, the then only legal money or medium of exchange, to carry on all the transactions of the country, from 5s. 2d. an ounce (the old Mint price) up to 7s. 3d. or 7s. 4d. an ounce; and gold had risen from 77s. 10d. an ounce up to 110s. an ounce. This legalized paper pound sterling, money unit, or standard of value, had then become depreciated as calculated in silver, from the value of nearly 4 ounces of silver, down to 23 ounces of silver; and in gold from 123 grains of gold, down to 87 grains of gold.

And it was in this debased, diminished, clipt, or depreciated money standard, or money unit, of the value of 23 ounces of silver, or of 87 grains of gold, in which the great bulk of the public debt had been contracted, in which rents of land and houses had been contracted, in which the excessively great weight of taxes and rates had been levied, in which money had been borrowed on mortgage and on bond, in which purchases of land and contracts for other property had been entered into, and in which ninety nine, out of every hundred, of all existing transactions had become founded.

And was it either humane, politic, or just, to increase the value again, of this legal depreciated Currency, or medium of exchange, nearly 50 per cent., by lowering of the price of gold from 110s. an ounce, down to 77s. 104d an ounce; and silver from 7s. 4d. an ounce, down to 5s. an ounce? thus putting into the money unit or pound sterling, more of silver or of gold; or increasing it in weight or value again, from 24 ounces of silver up to 4. ounces of silver, and from 87 grains of gold up to 123 grains of gold. And by this measure compelling every one to pay in the proportion of 400 ounces of silver for every 1001. they owed, or had contracted for; or an equivalent in property, to the value of 400 ounces of silver, where they ought to have paid only 275 ounces of silver; perpetuating the weight of all taxes and rates upon the country, at a rate nearly 50 per cent. more burthensome than they ought to have been, reducing one half of the productive classes to ruin, misery, and disgrace, and the laborers to the greatest state of want, wretch. edness, and degradation. "Is not this a failure of public justice, and the giving away of one man's right and possession to another, without any fault on the suffering man's side;" and "a removing of the landmarks of property?" If it be not, it would be difficult to say what could be so. But some one may here observe, that the previous depreciation of money was also an act of injustice. Grant, ed, that it was so; and let those, by whose acts it was depreciated, defend it if they can; that is not the question now at issue. By