1797. ] 
feed, in an eminent degree, the bold 
and exalted qualities that conftitute a 
great fovereign, though the wanted the 
timid virtues, the reurimgy graces that 
charaterize an amable woman. 
I have now, Mr, Editor, taken notice 
of the principal objections that appear 
in Mr. Wakefield’s ftri€tures. IL fay 
principal, becaufe forme of them are too 
trifling to be noticed, or too vague or ge- 
neral to be particularly anfwered. 
Carlifle, I am, fir, your’s, &c. 
Od?. 6. ATTICUS. 
a 
To the Editor of the Monibly Magazine. 
- MR. ED?TOR, 
{It will readily be allowed that in a com- 
mercial country like England, every 
attempt to counterfeit the paper circu- 
lating medium is acrime of great enor- 
mity—a crime that ftrikes at our exift- 
ence. Severe punifhment has, therefore, 
been annexed to its cemmillion, and it is 
right that it fhould be fo. But as the 
principal end of good government and 
jutt laws fhould ever be to prevent rather 
than to puni/b crimes, how comes it that 
no law is tobe found which compels thofe 
who iffue paper for cafh, to adopt, from 
time to time, fuch improvements as 
may prevent the poffibility of their notes 
er bills being counterfeited? Thofe who 
iffue circulating bills, be they who they 
may, owe this to the public. The go- 
vernment owes it as a duty to compel 
them bya law. 
I am aware that it wil! be faid, that 
“they (the Bank of England, for in- 
ftance) have many checks by which 
to deteét forgeries.’ Thefe checks 
are either obwous or fecret: if obvious, 
they will be attended to by the forger— 
if fecret, they will be overlooked by the 
public. Individuals are hereby expofed 
to fuffer daily loffes, which ought te fall 
only on thofe who are benefited by the 
iffue of paper ; for, when a note is care 
ried to the Bank, which, to all appear- 
ance, is a good one, it may be found to 
want fome /ecret mark, which, from the 
very circumftance of its being a fecret, 
is of no ufe to the public, in faving them 
from being impofed upon. The note 
is taken from the bearer, ftuck into a 
book, and he has no redrefs unlefs he 
can find the man from whom he took it. 
Nay, he even runs the rifque of being 
profecuted as the forger. 
It is true, that every perfon who takes 
a note fhould mark, if poffibie, from 
whom he had it; but this is not always 
pofiible. For inftance, a man whom I 
ever faw before, comes into my ithop, 
and buys fome goods, for which he pays 
Neceffity of preventing Forgeries upon the Bank 227) 
me ready money, I mean paper, for 
cafh is now out of the queftion.—“ Your 
name and addrefs, fir, if you pleafe, that 
I may mark the notes ?””—“ John Doe, 
~ fir; Llive in St. Stephen’s-court.” . i‘he 
notes are forgeries. I fend Richard Roe- 
to enquire after the man from whom I 
had them: he returns, without being able 
to find fuch a place as Sr. Stephen’s- 
court, or the man who bought the goods 
from me. 
It is plain then, that, even in a fmall 
bufinefs, where the returns are on a 
limited fcale, it may not be in the power 
of the party who takes a forged note, to 
find out the one from whom he had it. 
How much more, dificult muft it be, in 
large concerns, where they are daily 
patiing thoufands of 20 fhilling notes 
through their hands.—Mark all the 20 
fhilling notes ! fome houfes would need 
twenty clerks for that fervice only. 
But ought all the expence, lofs, and 
trouble of fuch a fyftem to be borne by 
private individuals *—Would it not be 
more juft, that the lofles and inconveni- 
encies arifing from it fhould be borne by 
thofe who receive the emoluments which 
it yields ? 
hope of feeing the juftice for which I 
contend, eftablifhed by law; but the 
public have, at leaft, a right to infift 
that the Bank do its duty, in fecu- 
ring them, as far as poffible, againft 
the depredations of villains, who are en- 
couraged to counterfeit bank-notes, by 
the circumftance of their being fo wretch 
edly executed, that every botcher, nay, 
every apprentice,who has ferved but one 
year with an engraver, may copy them 
with facility. If a bank note were te 
be held up as a fpecimen of the ftate of 
the fine arts in England, what a lamenta- 
ble condition would they ftill appear to be 
in! Could we hope to fee fuch works 
as have been produced by a Bartolozzi, 
a Heath, a Sharp, a Fittler, and other 
equally eminent men, before, at leaft, 
another century fhould have revolved ? 
We owe it as a duty to even thé moft 
depraved of our fpecies, to put the poffibi- 
lity of crimes as far fromthem as poflible. 
Do we not, on the contrary, zvvite them, 
by the wretched manner in which bank- 
notes, both public and private, are ex- 
ecuted }—When we hang a man for 
committing a crime which we have not 
done every thing in our power to pre- 
vent, are we fure that we do not coma 
mit a fpecies of murder ? 
The bank-dire@tors muft often have 
been plagued and tormented by applica- 
tions from projectors, who pretended to 
be poffeffed of plans that would prevenc 
forservy 

I confefs that I have no 

Hy 
\ 
