English banknotes are owned by the Queen?

[Maharg]

Hello,

I remember hearing a teacher once say that all British banknotes belonged to the Queen. I can't find any reference to this on the Bank of England's website under history of the banknote. Does anyone know about this? I want to use it as part of an illustraion in one of my lessons if it's true.

Many thanks

Maharg

 

[MercuryAndy]

banknotes belong to the bank that printed them.

 

[Captivated]

It seems unlikely to me. Bank notes were brought in- as far as I recall - to save carrying gold around, hence the sentence on banknotes even today, "I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of five pounds" or whatever. That five pounds meant five pounds (in weight) of gold. The banknote meant you could, in theory at least, go to the bank on which the note was drawn and obtain the relevant weight in gold. However, Britain abandoned the gold standard in the 1930's. Banknotes were drawn on the bank who issued them but I imagine ownership belonged to the person who held the deposit of gold. Today, I would suggest that banknotes, drawn on the Bank of England or the Bank of Scotland, belong to the person holding them. Otherwise the Queen would have possession of ALL the currency in circulation, which she doesn't.

I know the Bank of England can recall notes for destruction for various reasons but the holder would get the value of them in a bank account or new note.

 

[Dale]

I believe the point is that you can own a British pound, a unit of the currency, but legally you don't own the paper it is printed on. That belongs to the the State. It's the same way with the American dollar. It is against the law to burn a dollar bill, not that many people can afford to.

Saying that a pound note, the paper, is owned by the Queen is British for saying that it is owned by the government. Another term the British use a lot is the Crown. They say the Crown when an American would say the government.

 

[MercuryAndy]

I believe the point is that you can own a British pound, a unit of the currency, but legally you don't own the paper it is printed on. That belongs to the the State. It's the same way with the American dollar. It is against the law to burn a dollar bill, not that many people can afford to.

Saying that a pound note, the paper, is owned by the Queen is British for saying that it is owned by the government. Another term the British use a lot is the Crown. They say the Crown when an American would say the government.

The goverment does print money. but banks also print money. The money belongs to whom printed it.

 

[OttovonBismarck]

The goverment does print money. but banks also print money. The money belongs to whom printed it.

Not exactly. The government itself doesn't print the "money". Central Banks, at least in Western nations, print the fiat currencies. Central Banks are generally independent from governmental ruling bodies(Congress, Parliament, etc). So to say the government prints the money is not entirely accurate.

Banks really can't issue alternative forms of money. They normally just distribute fiat currency through loans, but all of the notes we use are owned by the central bank, never by the bank who issues the loan. Banks, however, can issue alternative media like, say, checking accounts. I think in this scenario the bank owns the checking account until it's purchased by a customer. Once the checking account, and check book, are handed over to the customer, the customer owns the fiduciary media.

So, no, the Queen does not own the money issued by the Bank of England. No individual does.

 

[Maharg]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I wanted the information becauseI was planning a lesson on causes of disadvantage and I thought it might be a good starting point. In the end I did something rather different: I put half the class at a disadvantage by standing with my back to them for the beginning of the lesson and then got them to discuss how they felt. It was part of a teaching interview and I got the job!

The idea that the paper itself isn't what contains the value, but rather that it has its origins in being a promise could be quite useful in demonstrating some other aspect of RE, I'm sure. I just haven't figured out what yet. I'm bound to use it somewhere as I love teaching through analogy.

Thanks again,

Maharg

 

[huldah153]

.

 

[OttovonBismarck]

No interest on mortgages? That's laughable. You probably could create a mortgage system which is independent of a central bank. However, market forces will still create an interest rate. Do you realize what kind of chaos Britain would be in if the interest rate was at 0?

 

[LostFound1986]

English banknotes are all owned by the Queen, as are English courts, the British Armed Forces, all British land, and all British subjects! Its a formality really, the Queen is influential but would be entirely unable to claim much political authority if she tried to exercise her sovereign powers more than her ceremonial duties, despite her being allowed to by law.

 

[Christopher Fox]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I wanted the information becauseI was planning a lesson on causes of disadvantage and I thought it might be a good starting point. In the end I did something rather different: I put half the class at a disadvantage by standing with my back to them for the beginning of the lesson and then got them to discuss how they felt. It was part of a teaching interview and I got the job!

The idea that the paper itself isn't what contains the value, but rather that it has its origins in being a promise could be quite useful in demonstrating some other aspect of RE, I'm sure. I just haven't figured out what yet. I'm bound to use it somewhere as I love teaching through analogy.

Thanks again,

Maharg

Congratulations on getting the job

PS: If the Queen wants my banknotes she's going to have to come 'round and get them from me!

 

[Maharg]

Congratulations on getting the job

PS: If the Queen wants my banknotes she's going to have to come 'round and get them from me!

Thank you!