Aftenposten
- Christianity or Compulsion.
- The Government's Land Bill.
- The Krone — How High Will It Be Raised Today?
Aftenposten's morning edition of 13 October 1926 led with a signed column by F. O. Thomassen, a parish priest in Aker. He had campaigned for prohibition at the previous referendum, but now argued from the Gospels that drunkenness must be overcome by inner conviction rather than law. In place of the ban he called for regulated sales of spirits, social protective work and stiffer penalties. A news report set out the government's new land bill, which relied on voluntary land provision and allowed compulsory transfer only of uncultivated, cultivable land, under limits that depended on the owner's residence. A third report described how Norges Bank's afternoon warning of a new exchange rate brought currency trading to a halt. It also traced the pound rate from 21.95 in June to the 22.20 held since 25 June and read the bank's weekly figures as evidence of heavy intervention buying.
Translation
Christianity or Compulsion.
STIANIA KEMISKE A truly first-class Norwegian leather grease. Large tins kr. 0.75, 1/4 kg kr. 1.25. Available as black tar grease and colourless. No. 517 | Morning edition | Subscription price: In town
Christianity or Compulsion.
By parish priest F. O. Thomassen.
Every priest and every Christian ought to feel it his sacred duty to oppose the terrible vice of drunkenness. For drunkenness destroys homes, ruins the young, fills the prisons, takes away the capacity for work and lowers the whole spiritual level of man. It is the greatest curse of our time. Therefore every priest is bound, as far as he is able, to help create a sober people. On this I believe everyone agrees. But it is the road to this goal on which we disagree.
I once believed that the goal would be reached through prohibition. That is why, in the last referendum, I took an active part in the fight for prohibition. But in the time prohibition has been in force I have learned, not least as a priest in Aker, that prohibition does more harm than good. Social evils such as drunkenness must be conquered from within, by the way of conviction, and not from without, by law and compulsion.
I do not believe that Jesus would have voted for prohibition if he had walked among us today as he did 1900 years ago. For once a man came to Jesus and said: “Tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.” The man meant: here a wrong is being done, so decide the matter. But Jesus turned him away and said: who made me a divider of inheritance among you? The disciples of Jesus took the same position. More than half the people of that time were slaves, treated as beasts of burden without human rights. Should one not then have expected the apostles to take up the struggle for the liberation of the slaves? But no, the apostle Paul on the contrary exhorts the slaves to be obedient to their masters, as though it were Christ himself they obeyed.
Was it then the view of Jesus and the apostles that Christianity has nothing to do with temporal and earthly conditions? As a carter said: I would gladly become a Christian, but then who would look after the horses? This is a complete misunderstanding of Christianity. For Christianity has been, and will always be, a salt in earthly life. History proves it. For nowhere are human rights and human dignity so recognized and carried through as among the peoples where Christianity has taken root.
F. O. Thomassen.
No, the reason was that Jesus would not improve people by law and compulsion. The Jews had tried that, but they had fallen thoroughly short. Jesus wanted instead to create new human hearts which, from inner free conviction and out of love for God, did what was right. Jesus wanted to create a brotherly mind in these two brothers who quarrelled over the inheritance; then the inheritance dispute would resolve itself. The apostles wanted to create love of humanity in the masters of the slaves; then the slave chains fell away of themselves. The gospel is to solve the social questions from within, not, like the Law of Moses, from without.
So too in our days. Transform the hearts, and spirits may well run in the gutters — there will be no drunkenness. This is Christianity versus prohibition. This is also the old temperance line versus the prohibition line.
“But we are bound to remove the temptations,” many Christians object. Answer me! Does God remove the temptations? Did he have the tree of knowledge in the Garden of Eden cut down in order to remove the temptations? Does he not let the vine grow and the sugar ferment, and does he not thus lay temptations in man's path? For God wants people who do what is right not under compulsion but from a willing heart. We are to be people who act from conviction, and not will-less animals dragged along by a nose ring. A father does not cut down his apple trees so that the child will not be tempted to steal; he seeks to bring it up to be an honest person. Instead of compulsion we want upbringing.
Unconditional freedom is not good either. A Statue of Liberty stands shining before the harbour of New York. But I have heard that in the
“Aftenposten”'s London office at Bennetts Travel-Bureau, Greener House, 66 Haymarket, London, S.W.1 (near Norway House) is recommended to all Norwegians in London. “Aftenposten” is displayed and on sale. Writing and reading room. The office forwards mail and telegrams.
The Government's Land Bill.
Supreme Court Advocate LORENTZ N. KVAM, TOLDBODGT. 40, TEL. 25638. Barrister Harald Willett — Fougner & Ohlsen — Advertise in “Ukens Nyt”.
The Government's Land Bill.
Builds first and foremost on voluntary land provision. Compulsory transfer covers only land for cultivation, not cultivated land.
As will be remembered, the previous government's bill for a land law was withdrawn by the present government, since the bill did not coincide with its view of the land question. In the Council of State yesterday a new bill for a land law was put forward.
The Ministry states that it agrees on the great social importance of easing access to land for those who want to take it up and are fit for it. It is a duty of society, as far as reason dictates, to remove the obstacles that stand in the way of the cultivation of the country. Like the previous bill, the Ministry also holds that, to give the work of procuring land the right pace and planning, it is necessary to have a permanent organization whose particular task is to take care of this work around the rural districts. And the Ministry broadly agrees with the previously proposed organization built on the land board, the municipality, the agricultural society and the Ministry.
The Ministry strongly stresses that in the work of freeing the vacant land one must first and foremost build on voluntary land provision. This is the best and the cheapest, and it is the one we have built on so far in our society. Only in purely exceptional cases, where strong social interests call for it and where no other way leads forward, can there be any question of resorting to forms of land provision based on compulsion. And even then only within fixed, narrow limits and under strong guarantees. The Ministry cannot support any form of compulsory transfer of land whose sole or main purpose is to bring about a different distribution of land than before. It therefore firmly advises against opening the way to compulsory transfer of land, forest, pasture, bog land and other agricultural rights solely with a view to getting them into other hands.
On the other hand, because of the great social interests attached to the cultivation of the country, the Ministry finds it can propose a certain right to compulsory transfer of uncultivated, cultivable land, that is, land for cultivation. Transfer is first and foremost to be claimable from companies and from outside municipalities. From owners living outside the district, transfer can be claimed of land for cultivation that the owner himself does not need for running the farm and extending it by new cultivation. If he holds allodial right to the property, however, transfer can only be claimed under the same conditions as from an owner living in the district. From owners living in the district (and an allodially entitled owner living outside it) transfer can only be claimed in a county where the county council has declared itself in favour of it. Transfer can then be claimed of land for cultivation that the owner himself does not need for running the farm and extending it by new cultivation. In the same way as under the previous bill, there shall be no right to transfer when the owner wishes to divide the farm among his children so that they may each have a farm of their own. Those who are to have the right to compulsory transfer are the State and the relevant county agricultural society and
statue's sharp light the migratory birds that come in from the sea, so that one can find them crushed by the dozen at the foot of the Statue of Liberty. I believe that with unlimited freedom not merely dozens of people perish, but thousands. A good father who wants his child's happiness does not give the child unlimited freedom to do whatever it pleases. For that would be the child's misfortune. But the bonds the father lays on the child must accord with the child's moral conviction, otherwise it becomes compulsion and not upbringing, to the child's harm instead of its good.
This was also the thought of the great temperance leader Sven Aarrestad when he writes in “Menneskevennen” no. 56 for 1911: “I am of the view that there is little use in giving laws which the great majority of the people do not find right and reasonable and useful. And I believe that this applies especially to the law on intoxicating drink.”
Therefore away with prohibition, which only demoralizes people because it does not accord with the people's sense of justice. Instead: regulation of the sale of spirits, social protective work and stricter penalties for drunkenness, for this accords with the whole people's sense of justice. And above all: to the fight for a moral awakening on the foundation of Christianity and the old temperance cause, so that the day may come when prohibition accords with the moral conviction of the Norwegian people.
The Krone — How High Will It Be Raised Today?
Out of town ........ kr. 10.00 per quarter. Delivered by messenger, surcharge kr. 0.50 per quarter. Morning edition | 67th year.
The Krone — How High Will It Be Raised Today?
At about half past two yesterday afternoon Norges Bank telephoned round to the banks that “one must be prepared for tomorrow's exchange to bring rates other than those which have now stood unchanged for a long time.” The same notice was at the same time passed to the press through the Norwegian News Agency, as far as we have understood mainly out of consideration for the banking and business world outside the capital.
The notice fell headlong upon the banks and the foreign exchange market and brought business to an absolute standstill. That is to say, there were plenty who wanted to sell, but the buyers held back. For people lacked any hint as to what rate Norges Bank would surprise them with today. Until the notice came, the pound had stood at around 22.15 as usual. Nor was there anything especially disturbing in the market to herald a change in Norges Bank's rate on precisely this day. But on the other hand, no one had held any guarantee of how long the pound rate in force until now would last. On the contrary, it has been obvious to everyone who can read anything out of Norges Bank's weekly statements that foreign exchange has been flowing abundantly into Norges Bank's regulating reservoir, and that to that extent it could only be a matter of time before the rate of the pound was lowered.
— It was, as is known, on 12 June that the Storting approved the agreement which — to use the words of the communiqué — “aims to strengthen the bank's ability to exercise a controlling influence on exchange rates and prevent harmful fluctuations.” When the Storting began its consideration of the proposal, the pound was quoted — on 10 June — at 21.95. The next day the rate was pressed down from abroad to 21.60. On 12 June the quotation was raised from 21.75 to 22.00, and was then successively raised to 22.20 on 25 June, where the rate has since been held.
But it has cost. Already in the week 7–15 June Norges Bank's lending and folio rose by 19 million, which mainly reflects the bank's regulating purchases, and of the purchases made since then one can form some idea from the following comparison of figures from the bank's weekly statements:
15 June / 7 Oct. (million kroner)
Lending .......... 296 / 398
Folio .......... 152 / 249
Notes in circulation ...... 333 / 327
Own foreign exchange ...... 87 / 69
Securities ... 15.7 / 23.4
The statistics suggest that it is not so much foreign countries that have forced this abundance of foreign exchange upon the bank. Foreign gross claims on Norwegian banks fell from June through August from 223.8 to 173.3 million, and net claims from 194.2 to 134.7 million. To that extent the measures taken have proved effective. But in return the selling pressure from abroad has been all the greater, while at the same time demand has been small. This is best shown by the fact that Norges Bank makes its first lowering of the pound rate at a time when the market is otherwise usually marked by the seasonal autumn tightening and the pound and dollar rates have reached their highest peaks.
That the pound rate, which has stood unchanged at 22.20 since 25 June, is now lowered is to that extent in keeping with our comment on the Storting's decision of 12 June: “The practical significance of the agreement with Norges Bank will be that the krone will henceforth be allowed to follow its natural tendency. Only — (Continued on page 2). The right
Context
How spirits prohibition reached the October 1926 referendum
The “last referendum” in which Thomassen campaigned for prohibition was the vote of 1919. Norway had made its ban on spirits permanent in 1916 and banned fortified wine in 1917. In the 1919 referendum, 62 per cent voted for prohibition and the rule was kept. In autumn 1921 the Storting passed a permanent prohibition law by a narrow majority. A new referendum was called for 18 October 1926, so Thomassen's column appeared only days before the vote. His claim that prohibition did more harm than good rests on his own experience as a priest in Aker. Separate national figures point in the same direction: according to Store norske leksikon, offences of drunkenness rose to 18 per 1,000 inhabitants in 1923.
The old temperance line versus the prohibition line
Thomassen set the “old temperance line” of persuasion and personal conviction against the “prohibition line” of law and compulsion, and placed himself on the side of the former. Organized temperance in Norway was old by 1926: local societies had adopted abstinence from spirits and united in 1845 in a national body, Den norske Forening mod Brændeviinsdrik. Store norske leksikon describes the movement's starting point as partly religious, though the labour movement also supported it. Over time the movement's programme came to include strict limits on the production and sale of alcohol, with prohibition as the final goal. Thomassen's argument was therefore a dispute inside a tradition that many Christians shared. He leaned on a 1911 quotation from the temperance leader Sven Aarrestad to argue that a law lacking majority support only demoralizes the people. The side he backed won: in autumn 1926 a majority of 56 per cent voted against prohibition, and the spirits ban was repealed in spring 1927.
The June agreement and Norges Bank's currency purchases
The Krone article refers to an agreement approved by the Storting on 12 June to give Norges Bank a “controlling influence” on exchange rates. Norges Bank's own history describes a matching step that summer. Norges Bank and the Ministry of Finance set up a joint currency consortium to slow the appreciation of the krone, and the Storting approved it in a secret session in June 1926. Capital was flowing into Norway because foreigners thought it likely that the krone would return to its pre-war rate and saw a chance to profit. The consortium paid for its foreign-currency purchases with loans from Norges Bank, so the extra reserves appeared in the bank's balance sheet as an increase in domestic credit. This accounting fits the article's table, in which lending rose from 296 to 398 million and folio from 152 to 249 million between 15 June and 7 October, while the bank's own foreign-exchange holdings fell.
Lowering the pound rate and the road back to gold parity
Lowering the pound rate meant letting the krone rise toward the target of Norway's “parity policy”. This was the effort, shared with Sweden, Denmark and Britain, to restore the gold value that the currency had held before 1914. In Norway the policy was closely tied to Nicolai Rygg, chairman of Norges Bank. From 1925 in particular, some economists and representatives of the Farmers' Party and the Labour Party criticized it sharply. Norges Bank's history records that the consortium's buying steadied the krone in its first months. When upward pressure grew in autumn 1926, however, the buying could not prevent a strong rise of the krone through the winter. The “natural tendency” that the paper had predicted in June thus showed itself as a rapid appreciation in the months after this edition. The krone was finally returned to par on 1 May 1928.
Original
Kristendom eller tvang.
STIANIA KEMISKE En virkelig førsteklasses norsk fetllærssmørelse Store æsker kr. 0. 75 1 / 4 kg.»» 1. 25 Faaes i sort tjæresmørelse og farveløs. Nr 517 | Morgennr | Abonnem. pris: Indenbys Kristendom eller tvang. Av sogneprest F. O. Thomassen. Hver prest og hver kristen bør føle det som sin hellige plikt at motarbeide drukkenskapens forfærdelige last. Ti drukkenskapen ødelægger hjemmene, ødelægger ungdommen, fylder fængslene, tar arbeidskraften og sænker menneskets hele aandelige nivaa. Den er vor tids største forbandelse. Derfor plikter hver prest efter evne at hjælpe til med at skape et ædruelig folk. Dette tror jeg alle er enige om. Men det er veien mot dette maal vi er uenige om. Jeg trodde en gang man skulde naa frem ved forbud. Derfor tok jeg i siste folkeavstemning aktiv del i kampen for forbud. Men i den tid forbudet har virket, har jeg lært, ikke minst som prest i Aker, at forbudet gjør mere ondt end godt. De sociale onder saasom drukkenskap, maa beseires indenfra, ad overbevisningens vei, og ikke utenfra, ved lov og tvang. Jeg tror ikke, at Jesus vilde ha stemt for forbud, hvis han hadde vandret iblandt os idag som han gjorde for 1900 aar siden. Ti der kom engang en mand til Jesus og sa:» Si til min bror at han skal skifte arv med mig «. Manden mente: Her øves uret, avgjør derfor saken. Men Jesus avviste ham, og sa, hvem har sat mig til at skifte arv mellem eder? Det samme standpunkt indtok Jesu disciple. Over halvdelen av datidens mennesker var slaver, som behandledes som arbeidsdyr uten menneskerettigheter. Skulde man saa ikke ha ventet, at apostlene hadde optat kampen for slavenes frigjørelse? Men nei, apostelen Paulus tvertimot formaner slavene til at være lydige mot sine herrer som var det Kristus selv de adlød. Var det da Jesu og apostlenes mening, at kristendommen intet har med de timelige og jordiske forhold at gjøre? Som en vognmand sa: Jeg vilde gjerne bli en kristen, men hvem skulde saa passe hestene? Dette er en fuldstændig misforstaaelse av kristendommen. Ti kristendommen har været og vil altid være et salt i jordelivet. Historien beviser det. Ti ingensteds er menneskeret og menneskeværd saaledes anerF. O. Thomassen. kjendt og gjennemført som i de folk, hvor kristendommen har slaat rot. Nei, grunden var den, at Jesus vilde ikke forbedre menneskene ved lov og tvang. Dette hadde jødene forsøkt, men de var kommet grundig tilkort. Jesus vilde istedet skape nye menneskehjerter, som av indre fri overbevisning og av kjærlighet til Gud gjorde det som var ret. Jesus vilde skape brodersind hos disse to brødre, som trættet om arv, da løstes arvetvisten av sig selv. Apostlene vilde skape menneskekjærlighet hos slavenes herrer, da faldt slavelænkene av sig selv. Indenfra skal evangeliet løse de sociale spørsmaal, ikke som Moseloven utenfra. Saaledes ogsaa i vore dage. Omskap hjertene, saa kan der gjerne rende brændevin i rendestenene, der blir ingen drukkenskap. Dette er kristendom kontra forbud. Dette er ogsaa den gamle avholdslinjen kontra forbudslinjen.» Men vi plikter at ta bort fristelsene «, indvender mange kristne. Svar mig! Tar Gud bort fristelsene? Lot han kundskapens træ i Edens have hugge ned for at ta bort fristelsene? Lar han ikke vinstokken vokse og sukkeret gjære, og lægger han ikke saaledes fristelsene i menneskets vei. Ti Gud vil ha mennesker, som gjør det rette ikke av tvang, men av et frivillig hjerte. Vi skal være mennesker, som handler av overbevisning, og ikke viljeløse dyr, som trækkes efter en næsering. En far hugger ikke sine epletrær ned for at barnet ikke skal fristes til tyveri, men han søker at opdra det til et ærlig menneske. Istedetfor tvang vil vi ha opdragelse. Den ubetingede frihet er heller ikke av det gode. Der staar en frihetsstatue og lyser foran New Yorks havn. Men jeg har hørt, at i de " Aftenposten " s London-kontor i Bennetts Travel-Bureau, Greener House, 66 Haymarket London, S W 1 (nær Norway House) anbefales alle norske i London «Aftenposten» er utlagt og til salgs. Skrive - og læserum. Kontoret formidler post og telegrammer
Regjeringens jordlovforslag.
Høiesteretsadvokat LORENTZ N. KVAM TOLDBODGT. 40 TLF. 25638. Overretssakfører Harald Willett - Fougner & Ohlsen - Averter i " Ukens Nyt ". Regjeringens jordlovforslag. Bygger først og fremst paa frivillig jordformidling. Tvangsavstaaelsen omfatter bare dyrkningsjord, ikke dyrket jord. Som det vil erindres blev den tidligere regjerings forslag til jordlov tilbakekaldt av den nuværende regjering, da forslaget ikke faldt sammen med dennes syn paa jordspørsmaalet. I statsraad igaar er fremsat ny proposition til jordlov. Departementet uttaler, at det er enig i den store samfundsmæssige betydning av at lette adgangen til jord for dem som vil ta fat paa den og er skikket til det. Det er en plikt for samfundet til saa langt rimelighet tilsier at fjerne de hindringer som staar iveien for landets opdyrkning. I likhet med den tidligere proposition mener ogsaa departementet, at det for at faa den rette fart og planmæssighet i arbeidet med tilveiebringelse av jord er nødvendig at faa en fast organisation som har det til sin særlige opgave at ta sig av dette arbeide rundt omkring i bygdene. Og departementet er i store træk enig i den tidligere foreslaatte organisation bygget op paa jordstyret, kommunen, landbruksselskapet og departementet. Departementet fremholder sterkt, at man under arbeidet med at frigjøre den ledige jord først og fremst maa bygge paa den frivillige jordformidling. Denne er den beste og den billigste og er den vi hittil har bygget paa i vort samfund. Alene i rene undtagelsestilfælder, hvor det tilsies av sterke samfundsinteresser og hvor ingen anden vei fører frem, kan der bli tale om at gaa til jordformidlingsformer som bygger paa tvang. Og ogsaa da bare inden faste snevre grænser og under sterke garantier. Departementet kan ikke være med paa nogen form for tvungen avstaaelse av jord, som alene eller væsentlig har til formaal at opnaa en anden fordeling av jorden end før. Det fraraader derfor bestemt at der aapnes adgang til tvungen avstaaelse av jord, skog, beite. myrstrækning og andre jordbruksherligheter bare med det for øie at faa dem over paa andre hænder. Derimot finder departementet paa grund av de store samfundsinteresser, som knytter sig til landets opdyrkning, at kunne foreslaa en viss adgang til tvungen avstaaelse av udyrket, dyrkbar jord, altsaa dyrkningsjord. Avstaaelse skal her først og fremst kunne kræves fra selskaper og fremmede kommuner. Fra utenbygdsboende skal avstaaelse kunne kræves av dyrkningsjord, som eieren selv ikke trænger til brukets drift og utvidelse ved nydyrkning. Er han odelsberettiget til eiendommen, skal dog avstaaelse bare kunne kræves under samme betingelser som fra indenbygds eier. Fra indenbygdsboende (og utenbygds odelsberettiget eier) kan avstaaelse bare kræves i fylke, hvor fylkestinget har uttalt sig for det. Avstaaelse kan da kræves av dyrkningsjord, som eieren selv ikke trænger til brukets drift og utvidelse ved nydyrkning. Paa samme maate som efter den tidligere proposition skal der ikke være adgang til avstaaelse naar eieren vil dele gaarden mellem sine barn for at de kan faa hvert sit jordbruk. De som skal ha ret til tvungen avstaaelse er Staten samt vedkommende fylkes landbruksselskap og tuens skarpe lys trækfuglene, som kommer ind fra havet, saa man kan finde dem i dusinvis knust ved frihetsstatuens fot. Jeg tror, at ved en ubegrænset frihet gaar ikke blot dusinvis av mennesker tilgrunde, men tusener. En god far, som vil sit barns lykke, lar ikke barnet ha ubegrænset frihet til at gjøre alt hvad det lyster. Ti det vilde bli barnets ulykke. Men de baand, faren paalægger barnet, maa stemme med barnets moralske overbevisning, ellers blir det tvang og ikke opdragelse, til skade for barnet istedetfor til gavn. Dette var ogsaa den store avholdsfører Sven Aarrestads tanke, naar han i» Menneskevennen «nr. 56 for 1911 skriver:» Jeg har den opfatning, at det lite nytter at gi love, som ikke folkets store flertal finder riktige og rimelige og nyttige. Og jeg mener, at dette særlig gjælder lov om rusdrik «. Derfor bort med forbudet, som bare demoraliserer folk fordi det ikke stemmer med folkets retsbevissthet. Istedet: regulering av salg av spirituosa, socialt vernearbeide og strengere straffer for drukkenskap, ti dette stemmer med hele folkets retsbevissthet. Og fremfor alt: til kamp for en moralsk vækkelse paa kristendommens og den gamle avholdssaks grund, saa den dag kan komme, at forbudet stemmer med det norske folks moralske overbevisning.
Kronen — Hvor høit skal den hæves idag?
Utenbys........ kr. 10, 00 pr. kv. Ombragt ved bud, tillæg " 0, 50 " " Morgennr. | 67 aarg. Kronen - Hvor høit skal den hæves idag? Ved ½3-tiden igaar eftermiddag blev der ringt rundt til bankene fra Norges Bank om, at» man maatte være forberedt paa at morgendagens børs vil bringe andre kurser end de, som nu i længere tid har staat uforandret «. Den samme meddelelse blev samtidig formidlet gjennem Norsk Telegrambyraa til pressen, saavidt vi har forstaat væsentlig av hensyn til den utenbys bank - og forretningsverden. Meddelelsen kom hovedkulds paa bankene og valutamarkedet og bragte en absolut stans i forretningene. Det vil si, det var nok av dem, som vilde sælge, men kjøperne holdt sig tilbake. Man savnet nemlig enhver pekepind, om hvilken kurs Norges Bank vilde overraske med idag. Pund hadde like til meddelelsen kom ligget omkring 22, 15 som vanlig. Der var heller ikke noget ekstra foruroligende ved markedet, som skulde varsle en forandring i Norges Banks kurs akkurat idag. Men man har jo paa den anden side ikke hat noget brev paa varigheten av den hittil gjældende pundkurs. Tvertimot har det været aabenbart for alle som kan læse sig til noget av Norges Banks ukeopgjør, at valutakildene har flydt rikelig ind til Norges Banks reguleringsdam, og at det forsaavidt bare maatte være et tidsspørsmaal, naar kursen paa pund blev sænket. - Det var som bekjendt den 12te juni, at Stortinget vedtok den overenskomst, som - for at tale med kommunikeets ord -» tilsikter at styrke bankens evne til at øve en kontrollerende indflydelse paa valutakursene og hindre skadelige svingninger «. Da Stortinget begyndte behandlingen av forslaget notertes pund - den 10de juni - i 21, 95. Næste dag blev kursen av utlandet presset ned i 21, 60. Den 12te juni blev noteringen hævet fra 21. 75 til 22. 00, og blev saa sukcessivt forhøiet til 22. 20 den 25de juni, hvor kursen senere har været holdt. Men det har kostet. Allerede i uken 7de-15de juni steg Norges Banks utlaan og folio med 19 millioner, hvad der væsentlig avspeiler bankens reguleringskjøp, og om de opkjøp, som senere er foretat, kan man danne sig et slags begrep av følgende sammenstilling av tal fra bankens ukeopgjør: 15. juni 7. oktbr. millioner kroner Utlaan.......... 296 398 Folio.......... 152 249 Seddelomløp...... 333 327 Egen valuta...... 87 69 Rentepapirer... 15. 7 23. 4 Statistikken tyder paa, at det ikke er saa meget utlandet, som har paatvunget banken denne valutaoverflod. Utlandets bruttotilgodehavende hos norske banker er fra juni til og med august sunket fra 223, 8 til 173, 3 millioner og nettotilgodehavendet fra 194, 2 til 134, 7 millioner. Forsaavidt har de trufne foranstaltninger vist sig effektive. Men til gjengjæld har salgspresset fra utlandet været des større, samtidig som behovet har været lite. Det fremgaar jo best av den omstændighet, at Norges Bank foretar sin første sænkning av pundkursen paa et tidspunkt, da markedet ellers pleier at være præget av den sæsonmæssige høststramning og pund - og dollarkursen har sat de høieste topper. At pundkursen, som har staat uforandret i 22. 20 siden 25de juni, nu blir nedsat, er forsaavidt i overensstemmelse med vor kommentar til Stortingets beslutning 12te juni:» Den praktiske betydning av overenskomsten med Norges Bank vil være, at kronen herefter faar følge sin naturlige tendens. Kun - (Forts. 2den side). Den rette