22 
tion thofe of paper, {ponge, fmouth maho- 
gany, a piece of glue a little warmed, 
finen cloth, leather (of which, that ufed 
for fl e:-foles isthe beft) &c. 
Atrer going through thefe and many 
other fimilar experiments, 1 made a fquare 
deal frame, on which I glued a dhcet of 
paper, I then placed it before the fire, and 
applied the India rubber as in my other 
experiments, but the propenfity to elec- 
tricy was fo weak. that it was only vifible 
by its attracting a light feather, fufpended 
by athread. Hence my opinion that the 
fluid is colleéted from the fubftamce on 
which the paper is laid, and not from that 
by which it is rubbed. 
Yf the paper be rubbed wit: bees’-wax 
‘previous to its being ufed, it will be found 
to have 2 much ftronger prepenfity to the 
production of electric matter, than when 
quite clean. i am, fir, 
Your obedient fervant, 
. THos. GRIFFITHS. 
Manchefler, Dec. 20, 1797- 
To ihe Edtter of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
I AM not inclined to controvert the argu- 
ments advanced in your Jatt, by A Suf- 
fever by Forgery, either as to the propriety 
of adopting every poffible means to pre- 
vent the forgery of bank notes, or as to 
the degree of guilt which attaches to the 
public, or to any clafs of the community, 
when they punifh, with feverity, a crime 
which they have not done every thing in 
their power to prevent. 
His reafoning, on thefe points, goes fo 
home to the conviction of every man, 
that Fam fure his fuggeftions will not be 
overlooked ; but, rowards the clofe of 
his letter, he flarts a queftion which ought 
mot, in my opinion, to have been brought 
forward, until he had afcertained its 
troth ; and the more fo, as the faét to 
which it alludes is of fuch a nature, that 
even more than a commen degree of evi- 
dence would be neceflary to give it any 
degree of credibility. 
Before I proceed farther, I beg leave to 
quote your correfpondent’s own words: 
“< If there be,” fays he, “ any degree of 
culpability on the part of thofe in’ whofe 
fepartment it lies, in not having adopted 
fuch obvious improvements in the fabri- 
cation of bank notes, as the prefent ad- 
vanced ftate of the arts puts within their 
reach, will it net be aggravated if it fhall 
te found, that they bave refufed a plan 
avbich would not only have rendered forgery 
such more difficult than at prefent, but 
aimofi, 1f not altogetber, impcffible—a 

Prevention of Forgery of Bank Notes. 
z 
pal artifisin London have borne tcftimony?”” 
I will readily grant, that if a plan, fo 
powerfully recommended, has been re- 
jected by the Bank Dire€tors, they are not 
only deferving of cenfure, but, howeter 
juftiy the forger may deferve hanging, 
will be acceffaries to murder, if they 
ever profecute to death any future for- 
gery, while their notes continue to be 
fabricated on the old plan. But to me, 
and, I dare fay, to all your readers, it muft 
appear abfolutely impoffible, in the nature 
of things, that the faét can be true. Are 
not the Bank Direétors men of ‘the firft 
charaéter in the commercial world, both 
with relation to property, abilities, probity, 
and integrity ? Could fuch men be {o 
criminally negligent and regardlefs of the 
high truft repofed in them, and of the 
duty they owe, not only to their 1mme- 
diate conftituents, but to the public, as to 
refufe a plan calculated to leflen the num- 
ber of forgeries. and public executions ? 
Impoflible !, But even, if we could for 2 
moment fuppofe them fo devoid of princi- 
ple, as to allow themfelves to be influ- 
enced by a {pirit of patronage and private 
Motives in the employment of thofe who 
are rhore immediately connected with 
this deparrment; could we believe that 
men of their penetration would be fo 
blind to their own intereft, as to negleét 
the means of adding to the fecurity of 
their individual property ? This would be 
to fuppofe them gcverned by principles 
difftrent from thofe which aétuate all 
mankind, and more void of imteile& than 
afs-drivers. 
lf, by “the principal artifts in Lon- 
don,” the ‘* Lefer dy Forgery’ means Bar- 
tolozzi, Heath, Sharp, Fittler, and other 
equally eminent men, which I have a 
right to think he does, by the defervedly 
refpeGiful manner in which he fpeaks of 
them, F will allow that their judgment is 
not to be queftioned on a point of this 
nature. But it will be no eafy matter to 
convince the public, that the Bank Di- 
rectors would arrogate to themfelves a 
right to fet up their opinion, on a queftion 
connected with the arts, in oppofition to 
that of fuch men—of individuals, whofe 
character, for probity and honour, ftands 
as high as that of the Direétors them- 
felves ; for a proper degree of modefty 
willever be found to refult from thofe 
attainments which qualify a man for fo 
diftnguifhed a fituation as that of a Bank* 
Director. 
By principal artifts, it would be unfair 
to fuppofe that your correfpondent merely 
- means 
Dan 
plan, to the excellency of which all the princt-- 
~ 
