THE COINAGE OFFENCES ACT, 1867.

Marlborough Express, Volume III, Issue 97, 18 January 1868, Page 4

THE COINAGE OFFENCES ACT, 1867.

To the Editor of the Marlborough Express. Sir,— Now what is a legal tender in New Zealand? I do not know. I suppose London or Sydney (which is now Imperial) gold, and Imperial silver and copper within the limits. The notes of the various banking companies can only be made so by positive legislation, and certainly the Acts of Incorporation of the various banks contain no clause analogous to the enactment in the English Bank Charter Act. Unless, then, there be some other enactment, of which I am not aware, bank notes are not, in the strict sense of the word, a legal tender in New Zealand. The fact of the banks being authorised to issue notes against coin, bullion, and Government securities does not make the notes a tender which must not be refused.

To return to the Coinage Offences Act. As the copper coin is struck by contract, it is easy to see that the best tools for counterfeiting the Imperial bronze coin would be the genuine dies in the hands of the Government contractor and his workmen, who alone could shew lawful authority or excuse for possessing tools or instruments adapted' 'for .Queen’s copper .coin or making or repairing the same., . v r f» It must be remembered that the only difference between genuine and counterfeit copper coin would bo that;'one would be struck for and issued by the Governtnent, the other would be struck and issued by a coiner for his own profit. There would be no necessity to debase the metal. The closer the coin was to theTtnperja! in intrinsic value acd execution the smaller would

the profit could only be secured by manufacturing a large quantity; consequently the coiner must have confederates to whom he sells under the nominal value, the profit (at least 220 per cent, on thooutlay)being divided between coiner and utterer. If you will read over sections 14 and 15 as an Imperial enactment against unauthorised coiners and issuers of imitations on fac similes of the Imperial copper coinage, their . meaning is plain enough. But apply them as a colonial enactment to parties issuing tokens, and you are at once involved in a labyrinth of absurdities. First you must contend that the Imperial authorities while invariably prosecuting all parties detected in counterfeiting the coin of foreign countries or the notes of foreign banks (the prosecutions for counterfeiting French 5-franc pieces and Russian silver roubles and notes of the banks of France and of Russia are without number), have knowingly permitted the manufacture in England and exportation to the Australasian colonies of counterfeit British coin to be circulated within the British dominions.

Again, you must allow that as section 14 imposes the penalty of penal servitude or imprisonment on buyers and sellers of false and counterfeit coin at or for a less rate or value than the same imports, or was apparently intended to import, that if you persist in applying the words of the colonial enactment to copper tokens, then any person selling or buying them as old copper would be guilty of felony. What then is to be done with them ? Every holder must melt them down personally. I recollect that some years ago a,work was published in London with the title of “ Every Man his own Attorney.’' The editor of Punch at the time remarked that such a state of society was fearful to contemplate. New Zealand society would be as bad. It would be every man his own brass-founder without the tools.

In short, the Coinage Offences Act is an Act of the British Parliament carefully framed against counterfeiters of imperial coin, and their agents and customers. It has been copied into the Statute Book of New Zealand by our Parliamentary draughtsmen, and passed by the Assembly as a matter of course. For any practical purpose they might just as well have copied an English Dock or Railway Act. Ido not believe that any one in this colony could strike pence at 4s. per lb., much less at is. 3d. The machinery is not in the colony. In order to pay, the metal must be rolled into sheets, cut with punches into blanks, and then impressed with dies. The machinery is both intricate and expensive. But as not only tradesmen’s tokens but the corpor coin of the North American provinces (the Canadas, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia, each of which has a copper coinage of its own) are struck in Birmingham, it would seem that the only seizure that could be made under the 14th section of the English Act would be that of dies for striking fao similes or imitations of Imperial copper or bronze coin.

The article of the Independent, however, seems to have been circulated through New Zealand, and to have produced a perfect panic, as we find a party who had issued his own tokens refusing ro receive them again, evidently under the impression that he would be committing an indictable offence by doing so. The following is the report of the cu-e in the Canterbury Times , under the head of Resident Magistrate’s Court. Christchurch, Dec. 19.:

“ A. J. Raphael v. H. J. Hall. — Claim for the value of certain copper dies, alleged to have been issued by the defendant as coins and refused to be taken back by him, at the value at which they were issued. “ Dr. Foster for the defendant.

“ F. T. Hoskins said ha had received coppers in exchange for silver coins from defendant and his servants, representing pennies, and being similar to one produced, and some representing halfpence, also similar to one produced. He had presented them to defendant in payment of goods, and defendant had refused to take them lately, but he had taken before. He did not offer them lately to Mr, Hall, but told him lie had got some. He had offered them to the shopman previously and lie iiad refused them. He did not get all the coppers he had from defendant. He could not swear which of the coppers he got from him or in his shop. He did not present them on account of Mr. Raphael. Charles Oswald gave similar evidence, and added that he had lately purchased salt of Mr. Hall with one of them, but that immediately afterwards Mr. Hall ran after him and took the salt out of his hand, saying that he would not take the copper in payment. Mr. Hall had previously told him that these coppers were as good as coins. That was when they first came out. They had circulated as coins.

“ Wm, Kldred said he had been shopman to to Mr. Hall, and had given these coppers in change. He had seen five small casks of them at one time on the premises, about two and a half years ago. He had taken the coppers issued by other people while in the shop; but be bad not seen any such in the casks he had mentioned.

“ Mr. Hall not being in attendance, the Bench directed that he should be subpdened ; and adjourned the case till next day. 1 ' From the Marlborough News of 4th January, I learn that the Christchurch Bench has decided'that Mr. Hall will bo not only permitted but compelled to receive tokens issued by himself.—l am, &c., v Henry Cooes, Blenheim, Jan. 15, 1868.