The Bankers' Magazine, and Journal of the Money Market

The 10th section, relative to the use of receipt stamps, to denote the duty of one penny on drafts payable to the bearer or to order on demand, or the use of draft stamps for receipts, refers entirely to adhesive stamps, and therefore a draft cannot legally be drawn on paper with an impressed receipt stamp.

I may observe that the words on demand' ought to be expressed in drafts drawn on the penny stamp ; but a bill at sight, or on presentation, is liable to the ordinary duty on a bill of exchange.

With regard to affixing two or more adhesive stamps on bills drawn abroad, it is held that it would not be contrary to law to do so, but the safer course is, to use one stamp only to denote the duty payable.

As regards the duty on bills drawn abroad in sets, payable in this country, I have to state that each part of the bill is liable to the duty on an inland bill of exchange. With reference to your concluding inquiry, as to whether one impressed to denote the duty of a penny, and an adhesive stamp of the like amount, could not be used to denote indiscriminately the duty of that amount payable on receipts, bills, promissory notes, or drafts, I have to state that your proposal would be inconsistent with the objects for which the present stamps are provided.

The receipt stamps are both impressed and adhesive; because it may happen that persons could not immediately procure, when wanted, the former description of stamps, but they can always be provided with the latter.

The impressed stamps are, however, generally preferred by persons who keep books of receipts, which they get impressed with the stamps, and are then saved the trouble of affixing and cancelling them on each occasion of their use. The two descriptions of stamps, therefore, promote the public convenience, and facilitate the means of complying with the law.

The use of an adhesive draft stamp for a receipt, and of an adhesive receipt stamp for a draft, is permitted by a provision introduced into the last act of Parliament, with a view to the public convenience; but a single stamp is now in preparation, to be used for either of these purposes.

The impressed bill stamp for foreign bills in sets is designed for such bills drawn in this country to which it is not intended that adhesive stamps should be applied. It is necessary, also, that there should be an adhesive stamp for bills drawn out of this country liable to the same amount of duty.

I have perhaps unnecessarily entered into this detailed explanation, showing the necessity for the different kinds of stamps; but it may be more satisfactory to you to know the grounds on which they are provided. I am, sir, your obedient servant,

W. Grain, Esq.

THOMAS KEOGH."

"Bank of England, Oct. 26, 1854.

MY DEAR SIR,-I am quite sorry to trouble you further on questions arising under the new Stamp Act; but I am rather puzzled at the answer you have given to Mr. Grain, with respect to bills in sets drawn abroad, and payable in the United Kingdom.

Will you, therefore, allow me to ask if you mean that each bill of the set is liable to the full duty on a single inland bill of the same amount?

In other words, supposing that I am the holder of two parts of a bill for £1,500, are both these parts liable to the full duty of 15s., or only to

58. each?

If you hold that they are both liable to the full duty of 15s., then double duty is exacted; and, in the latter case, one-third of the duty would be lost to Government.

I raise this question simply on this ground:-It is the most common of,

practices to draw bills abroad in sets, send the first for acceptance, and negotiate the second or third, affixing a note at the bottom, that the first is with A. B.'

The first is claimed by the holder of the second; and, as the latter contains all the indorsements, the two are pinned or wafered together, and form one bill, liable, I think, as in the case of a £1,500 bill, to the duty of 15s. The third, probably, never makes its appearance.

Now, we hold a large number of bills in this condition, on one of which the full duty, as for a single inland bill, is indicated by the appropriate stamp ; and, as they are maturing every day, and paid without hesitation on presentation, it is of importance that the point I have raised should be clearly understood.

Thomas Keogh, Esq., &c.

I am, my dear sir, yours very truly,
M. MARSHALL."

'Inland Revenue, Somerset House, Nov. 3, 1854. MY DEAR SIR,-I have laid your letter before the Board, and the subject has been carefully re-considered."

I have now to acquaint you, that it is the opinion of the Board, that, although a bill drawn abroad, and payable in this country, may be in duplicate or triplicate, it only represents one transaction, and that is liable to the duty on one inland bill of the same amount.

The practice of the Bank, as described by you, is, therefore, correct.

I am further directed to state, that, although the Board desires to pay the most respectful attention to every question, and give all the information in its power, yet that the public ought to recollect that the opinion of the Board can have no authority in a court of law, and that it would be safer and more expedient, on every ground, for parties to apply to their own legal advisers for the solution of doubts on the construction of acts of Parliament.

M. Marshall, Esq.

I am, my dear sir, yours very truly,

THOMAS KEOGH."

TRIAL OF THE GOLD AND SILVER COINAGE.

ON Thursday, the 7th of December, the ceremony known as "The trial of the Pyx" was performed at the Exchequer-office, Whitehall-yard. Four years have elapsed since the last previous trial was made, and it was noticed, as a very singular fact, that the proceedings have very rarely been chronicled, and that, consequently, the public have been left in a state of ignorance of a matter in which they are intimately concerned—namely, the purity and proper value of the current coin of the realm.

The Lord Chancellor arrived at half-past nine o'clock, at which time four privy councillors were summoned to meet him. The learned Lord was alone until a quarter to ten, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Sir E. Ryan arrived. The necessary number was not, however, complete, and although Mr. Cardwell entered shortly afterwards, a considerable delay ensued. despatched to the Court of Exchequer, and, at a few minutes past ten o'clock the Chief Baron arrived in his full judicial robes.

messenger was

The Lord Chancellor, who was accompanied by the Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms, the Mace Bearer and the Purse Bearer, then took his seat, and the court was opened, there being present-Sir John Herschel, the Master of the Mint; the Chief Assayer, the Superintendent, the Melter, the Coiner and other principal

I may observe that the words 'on demand' ought to be expressed in drafts drawn on the penny stamp; but a bill at sight, or on presentation, is liable to the ordinary duty on a bill of exchange.

The use of an adhesive draft stamp for a receipt, and of an adhesive receipt stamp for a draft, is permitted by a provision introduced into the last act of Parliament, with a view to the public convenience; but a single stamp is now: in preparation, to be used for either of these purposes.

W. Grain, Esq.

THOMAS KEogh."

“Bank of England, Oct. 26, 1854.

Will you, therefore, allow me to ask if you mean that each bill of the set is liable to the full duty on a single inland bill of the same amount?

In other words, supposing that I am the holder of two parts of a bill for £1,500, are both these parts liable to the full duty of 15s., or only to

58. each?

you hold that they are both liable to the full duty of 15s., then double duty is exacted; and, in the latter case, one-third of the duty would be lost to Government.

I raise this question simply on this ground:-It is the most common of,

practices to draw bills abroad in sets, send the first for acceptance, and negotiate the second or third, affixing a note at the bottom, that the first is with A. B.'

Thomas Keogh, Esq., &c.

I am, my dear sir, yours very truly,
M. MARSHALL.”

"Inland Revenue, Somerset House, Nov. 3, 1854. MY DEAR SIR,-I have laid your letter before the Board, and the subject has been carefully re-considered.

The practice of the Bank, as described by you, is, therefore, correct.

M. Marshall, Esq.

I am, my dear sir, yours very truly,

THOMAS KEOGH."

TRIAL OF THE GOLD AND SILVER COINAGE.

ON Thursday, the 7th of December, the ceremony known as "The trial of the Pyx" was performed at the Exchequer-office, Whitehall-yard. Four years have elapsed since the last previous trial was made, and it was noticed, as a very singular fact, that the proceedings have very rarely been chronicled, and that, consequently, the public have been left in a state of ignorance of a matter in which they are intimately concerned-namely, the purity and proper value of the current coin of the realm.

The Lord Chancellor arrived at half-past nine o'clock, at which time four privy councillors were summoned to meet him. The learned Lord was alone until a quarter to ten, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Sir E. Ryan arrived. The necessary number was not, however, complete, and although Mr. Cardwell entered shortly afterwards, a considerable delay ensued. A messenger was despatched to the Court of Exchequer, and, at a few minutes past ten o'clock the Chief Baron arrived in his full judicial robes.

officers of the Mint; Mr. George Smith Hayter, the Prime Warden, and other officers of the Goldsmiths' Company, the Queen's Remembrancer, &c.

On the table, before the Lord Chancellor, were "the pyx," or boxes containing samples of "the gold moneys coined by Sir John Frederick William Herschel, K.H., Master and Worker of Her Majesty's Mint, and delivered into the office of receipt of the said Mint from the 16th day of December, 1850, to the 30th day of June, 1854-the said moneys being coined after the rate of 46 29.40 sovereigns to the pound weight troy, of the standard of 22 carats of fine gold, and 2 carats of alloy, pursuant to act of Parliament the 56th of George III., chapter 68, sec. 11, and the Mint indenture bearing date the 6th of February, 1817." The amount of the gold moneys represented was £28,838,534 16s. 10d. The pyx also contained samples of the "silver moneys coined by Sir John Frederick William Herschell, K.H., Master and Worker of Her Majesty's Mint, and delivered into the office of receipt of the said Mint from the 16th day of December, 1850, to the 30th day of June, 1854-the said moneys being coined after the rate of 66 shillings to the pound weight troy, of the standard of 11oz. 2dwt. of fine silver and 18dwt, of alloy, pursuant to the act of Parliament the 56th of George III., cap. 68, sec. 11, and the Mint indenture bearing date the 6th of February, 1817." The amount of the silver moneys represented was £1,030,005 ls. 3d. These returns were duly certified by Sir John Herschel, and by Mr. W. H. Barton, the Deputy Master and Controller of the Mint. There was also a large bar of standard gold, by comparison with which the new coinage has to be tested.

The Queen's Remembrancer administered the oath to the following gentlemen (all goldsmiths and silversmiths), who composed the jury:-Mr. James Garrard, of Pinner; Mr. James Henderson Watherston, of Henrietta-street, Covent-garden; Mr. Henry John Lias, of Myddleton-square; Mr. John Grey, of Billiter-square; Mr. Richard Fownes Wingrove, of Wood-street; Mr. Henry Sykes Thornton, of Birchin-lane; Mr. George Grenfell Glyn, of Lombard street; Mr. William Summers, of Great Marlborough-street; Mr. George Matthews, of Hatton-garden; Mr. Jeremiah Fuller and Mr. Josiah Sharp, of the Assay Office, Goldsmith's Hall; and Mr. Henry John Lias, jun., of Myddleton-square.

The Lord Chancellor, in addressing the jury, said,—the object for the attainment of which they had assembled was one of very great importancenamely, the securing of the due state of the coinage, and preventing it being debased. In former times, he believed, the proceeding the jury were now about going through was adopted before the coin was issued, but in modern times that was not the case. Security was now taken for the coin before it was issued, that it was in conformity with the former standard, and that was held to be sufficient. The ancient custom, however, of preserving some of the old coin, was continued. Whether that was very essential, or whether it afforded the same security as in former times, was not for them to speculate upon, and he did not, therefore, feel called upon to make any observations on it. The oath the jury had taken imposed upon them the duty of testing the coin which had been issued since the last trial, four years ago—namely, in 1850-to ascertain whether it was in conformity with the weight and standard which the law required, The jury were probably aware that the course which was formerly taken between the Sovereign and the Master of the Mint was this: The Master of the Mint entered into a deed with the Crown to make the coin in conformity with the legal standard, and successive Masters of the Mint had executed similar indentures. That custom had been altered, and, instead of a new indenture being executed by each Master of the Mint, it was held sufficient that he should be bound by the last that was executed-namely, that of Mr. Wellesley Pole, afterwards Lord Mornington, when he was Master

« Eelmine Jätka »

Books

The Bankers' Magazine, and Journal of the Money Market, 15. köide