THE MENACE OF GOLD

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 68, Issue 5940, 8 May 1944, Page 4

THE MENACE OF GOLD

Sir, On reading the news from Washington that “34 United and Associated Nations participating in the currency stabilisation conference agree on . . . the 8,000,000,000 dollar international stabilisation fund based on gold,” the following cable has been sent to the Prime Minister, Mr Fraser, in Washington:—“lnformed New Zealanders insist you represent national protest against gold standard proposals. We are fighting for freedom not international domination.”

Nothing could be more subversive of the unity and determination ranged against the Axis than to learn that a few men are assuming the authority to plan for post-war international finance based on gold. Such a programme means nothing less than the control of trade and industry by nonrepresentative interests. The wealth, progress and commerce of nations does not and must not depend on the manipulation of an artificially valued, centrally hoarded yellow metal. If a few great gold producing nations, including Russia, can be misled into believing that such a programme will benefit them, we at least must speak out. Nine years ago the British economist who is now Baron Keynes admitted that “The Gold Standard is a relic of economic barbarism.” In the House of Commons on April 21st, 1932, Mr Winston Churchill stated: “When I was moved by many arguments and forces in 1925 to return to the Gold Standard, I was assured by the highest experts that we were anchoring ourselves to reality and stability; and I accepted their advice. I take for myself and my colleagues of other days whatever blame there may be. We have had no reality, no stability. Minor fluctuations might be ignored, but this monetary convulsion has reached a pitch where I am persuaded that the producers of wealth will not tolerate so hideous an oppression. Are we really going to accept the position that ... all future progress is to be arbitrarily barred by the price or discovery of gold ... or by the extent to which we can persuade the cornerers of gold to release

their boards? These are becoming dangerous and deadly absurdities.” Any government or representative who does not protest against those who fight for the supremacy of gold in the post-war world grossly betrays the people’s trust. Presumably New Zealand is one of the “34 nations.’ Presumably Mr Nash represented us at the conference referred to, and participated, on our behalf, in “the agreement” which is now announced. If such agreements prove to be in the slightest degree binding, if we find that our economic future is bound up with such plans—and the news is not reassuring—the fight for freedom will not end with the defeat of the Axis. The tragic disappointments that followed the last war will be repeated. Surely this is an issue that will arouse W the conscience and indignation of all sections of the people. Surely New Zealand, small but proud, can raise her voice, even the first voice, against the influences at work.—l am, etc., JOHN HOGAN.