Bank of England Act 1694

A lawyer friend of mine has pointed me to Sections XXVI and XXVII of this act which have not been repealed (yet).

If I translate correctly, it means the following in nickel words:

  1. the act was written with the intention that their Majesties’ subjects may not be oppressed by the Bank of England
  2. the Bank of England may not monopolize or engross any goods, wares or merchandize
  3. the Bank of England may not deal or permit  to deal or trade with any of the ‘stock-monies’ or ‘effects’, i.e.  ‘deposits’ or ‘collateral’, to buy or sell any goods, wares or merchandize
  4. should anybody do so anyhow,  or by order or directions, such dealings or tradings are prosecuted and punished by treble the value of the goods and merchandize traded, if ‘victims’ sue for action in the High Court.

I read the ‘stock-moneyes’ and ‘effects’ to pertain to the ‘financial economy’, while goods, wares and merchandize belong to the ‘real economy’.

Hence I wonder whether “we, the taxpayers” could construe such a High Court Action on the back of the national debt and the money supply, since ‘effects’ are used for the national debt and ‘effects’ are used to pay bailiffs to engross people’s homes and other assets?

But maybe my German / analytical mind thinks around too many corners here…

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s