CURRENCY AND THE FARMER.

Press, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20493, 11 March 1932, Page 16

CURRENCY AND THE FARMER.

TO THB EDITOR OF THE PBSS3. Sir, —Out of consideration for. your space, when writing-to you yesterday, I omitted from my ..list of curious currencies the most curious of all—rthe cheque. The dispassionate observer .will give this instrument a high importance among the inventions of the nineteenth century, "for it has destroyed most of the sovereignty of the British King and still more of that of the. President and Legisi laturO of the American Republic. I ... For the issue of money is, in civilised States, the oldest assertion of sovereign authority, and the most jealously guarded. As long, as there was a Roman or Byiantine Empue, its subordinate

kings and princes were forbidden, save by special authorisation, to coin gold, and didn't. It was only when the Empire failed that they rushed to seize this prerogative. As well they might:, for there was great profit in it. There was in it also, in a time of no newspapers and no telegraphs, a ineans of asserting their sovereign authority and power; for instance, no sooner was a new Roman Emperor proclaimed' than he hastened to issue his coins, proclaiming by their means his assumption of imperial and priestly power; Our own Henry styled himself Defender of tho Faith. Counterfeiting is a kind of treason. The issue of bank notes has alwa3 r s boon jealously guarded too; and I have been -told that our banks pay interest to the Government on theirs. When the cheque appeared its superiority in convenience to the bank note wis at oice perceived: you drew an exact sum of pounds, shillings, and. pence, and didn't have to expose yourself to. robbery by keeping notes, in your house or on your person. What wasn't perceived was that the prerogative of issuing money had suddenly passed into the hands of . the banks. For cheque payments are now so enormously in the majority that payment with gold or notes has become comparatively trifling. As your ''Truthseeker" perceives, banking became profitable. But since the change stability of prices'has become a thing of the past.' Prices can be made to rise by the expansion of the currency or to fall by its Hence the so-called tradecycle, a' disastrous panie every eleven years or thereabouts. Tho King, desiring the welfare of his lieges, might be able to maintain a steady level of prices. The private companies issuing money had, properly and naturally, to consider the welfare of their ■ share- 1 holders, and these might even profit by the alternation of confidence and panic: at any rate, the banks could not be the nation's keepers. The power that the present system places in vthe. hands, of united financiers is so great that Governments do their will, and, compared to their inner Councils, Parliaments are impotent. They are thought to have caused the closing of the Indian mints/and Britain's disastrous deflation after the war, which' culminated'in the return to the gold standard in 1925. India is still torn by discontent. Britain, by abandoning tho. gold standard last September, has, after being brought to the vetgo of ruin, loosened their clutch upon her - production and merchanting: it may not be long before she throws it off by restoring his. prerogative to the King. One little touch has exhibited to the world the insolence of the international financiers. The treasury notes, of the post-war period didn't suit them, as they could not be controlled. So the treasury withdrew them —no reason given—and the Bank of England printed notes toreplaco them. The King's head had appeared on the treasury.notes.-Ic did not appear on the bank's no* o*. Thp Caesnv • to whom reverence and. obedience were due was now unknown and. unknowable. ' —Yours, etc., SAMBO. v March 10th, 1932.