The Evening Star SATURDAY, JANUARY 3, 1874.

Evening Star, Issue 3391, 3 January 1874, Page 2

The Evening Star SATURDAY, JANUARY 3, 1874.

In the columns of the ‘Southern Mercury,’ a journal apparently with strong mining bias, are two articles on Gold : one headed “ The Gold Monopoly,” and the other “ The Price of Gold,” In both of them we think there is much tending to mislead. No doubt it is highly desirable that every man should receive full value for the result of his labor, but we fail to see that gold is any exception to other raw produce as an article of commeroe, or that any greater reason exists why pecial arrangements should be made to secure the top value for it, than for grain, or wool, or flax. We have every sympathy with miners, that ought to bo extended to them, but we feel equal interest in the welfaro of constructive artisans. Shoemakers, cabinetmakers, bricklayers, carpenters, machinists, agricultural laborers, as well as their employers, are equally dependent upon changes of markets for a fair return for their work a? witters arc, bat GoYeromettli voter-

ference on their behalf would be impossible even if it were asked, so far as the regulation of the prices of their produce was concerned. The plea put forward by miners why arrangements should be made for their special benefit, is that they cannot obtain more than L 3 15s per ounce for their unmanufactured gold ; that being the price the Banks have determined upon giving. In the article on “The Price of Gold,” the ‘Mercury ’ calls this action by the Banks “ a monopoly,” tells the miners that L 3 15s does not represent the value of an ounce of gold, and condemns the Banks because they give for rawgold a price that measured in sovereigns gives them a profit of somewhat over five per cent, on the transaction. The whole argument is based upon a fallacy. We are told that “in every other country in the world the Government fixes the price of gold, and by the aid of Banks, mints, and assay offices the price is kept steady.” This is not a correct statement. In no country in the world that we know of does the Government fix the price of gold, although wherever gold is made the standard coinage of a country, it is found necessary to specify by law the quantity of pure gold that a certain coin shall contain. Thus the English sovereign is by law required to weigh five pennyweights and three and three-eleventh grains, and to be of twenty-two carats fine. “The carat was a small weight used for gold and jewels, and varied greatly in different countries. But at last it went out of use, except only in the sense in which it still exists, namely, that a carat means the twenty-fourth part of any gold or gold alloy. If such a weight be all of gold, it is said to bo twentyfour carats fine ; if one-third only he gold, it is said to be eight carats fine.” Thus then it is that the price of pure gold can be measured or estimated in nmnoy, and thus it is that the establishment of a mint where gold can be converted into money gives an advantage to miners over any other class of producers. Every other industry is dependent for price upon what Adam Smith terms “the higgling and bargaining of the market, according to that sort of rontfh equality which, though not exact, is sufficient for carrying on the business of common life.” But the relative value of gold to money can be estimated to the utmost nicety. It does not, however, by any means follow that Banks are to be denounced as monopolists, because it does not suit their commercial arrangements to give more than I9s for the quantity of gold that the law says a sovereign shall contain. They are not compelled to take the gold in the same way as the Bank of England is required to receive it; and, like every other class of dealers, it mast be for them to say whether it will answer their purpose to give a higher price. On transmission of their gold to Melbourne or Sydney for coinage, the miners would of a certainty be entitled to receive back again a given number of coins ; and no doubt whatever agents can be found faithfully to conduct all the necessary arrangements, irrespective of the Banks, provided the miners find it cheaper to transmit their gold through other media. As a matter of policy, no Government can ignore the pressure of a large section of the population; but it is n it the less true that the miners, in asking the Government to interfere with their transactions with the Banks, are asking what no other section of the community won'd seek for; and equally true it is that the * Mercury ’ is guilty of injustice, both to the Superintendent and the Banks, in saying “it is apparent that the onus ef relieving the miners from the yoke of an oppressive monopoly now rests with his Honor the Superintendent and the Provincial Executive.” It is not correct to term the Banks monopolists, nor to throw upon a Government the task of devising means to profit one class of the community rather than another; although it is part of the duty of a Government, if at no coat to the public, to have a mint or assay office established ; for the country must be the richer, the higher the price obtained for articles of export. So far as the public are concern- d, a self-sustaining mint would be a great advan tage : it is altogether a question whether it would pay better to send gold to Australia for coinage, or do it our-e res.