[904 creditors. He had never understood that, I the country. The issuing of one-pound before the Bank Restriction act, any prac- notes was the least profitable part of a tical inconvenience had been felt for want of this summary power. Mr. Hudson Gurney said, the hon. gentleman's amendment was intirely at variance with the principle of the bill. The hon. gentleman wished the continuance of the issue of small notes, under such regulation as should protect the public from inconvenience; but the object of the bill was to put an end to them, and (if it could be compassed) by such gradual extinction as would allow of their being replaced by a better medium. If the hon. gentleman's clause were admitted, in the present temper of the country, no banker, in his senses, would issue another note. Colonel Johnson said, unless the clause was adopted, the poorer classes would have no means of recovering payment for their notes but by an action at law, which was leaving them without any remedy. Mr. Monck observed, that country bank- | ers could not object to the proposed clause at the present time, when specie could be so much more easily obtained than when it was formerly in existence. How could a poor man compel the payment of his note in specie, when he was forced to bring an action? The clause had been continued in all the Bank Restriction acts, until the 3rd of his present majesty, when it was left out. It would be strange that the clause should be continued when there was no specie to pay, and expunged when there was. If they did not adopt this clause, they would allow gold to be put out of circulation, and trash of paper to be substituted in its place, without giving any remedy to recover its payment but by an action at law. Such a course was the reverse of returning to a metallic currency. Mr. Alderman Heygate said, the hon. member charged the country bankers with putting gold out of circulation, and substituting trash of paper in its place. Now, in 1797, country bankers had no more to do with issuing notes than the rest of the king's subjects. The gold was sent out of the country by government to defray the expenses of the war, and onepound notes were then issued at the recommendation of Mr. Pitt; and, in 1822, they were again allowed to be issued with the unanimous concurrence of the House. During all this period, so far were the country bankers from being abused, that they were lauded as of great benefit to banker's business, while it was the most troublesome, inconvenient, and onerous; so much so, that nine-tenths of the country bankers would be happy that they were precluded from issuing them. Mr. Warre observed, that the worthy alderman admitted, in using the words of the hon. member who preceded him, "that gold was put out of circulation, and trash of paper substituted for it," that there could not be a current circulation of the one-pound note and a sovereign. This was the plain English of the words; but indeed it was already pretty well known, from good authority, that they could not co-exist. When country bankers issued their one-pound notes, and these notes filled up the place of gold, what was it but issuing so much trash? But it was said, that country bankers derived no profit from these issues-that they would be better pleased to be precluded from issuing one-pound notes. This he was not very willing to believe. If they so expressed themselves, it must be a sort of nolo episcopari. That they were so inconvenient, onerous, burthensome, and what not, he could not believe. That they were profitable he had no doubt, and that in proportion to the amount of their circulation. He drew a distinction between the holder of a one-pound note and the holder of a promissory note. The claim of the holder of the currency was much stronger. He had no choice; he was obliged to have it whether he would or not; but the holder of a promissory note had a choice; he might refuse it if he pleased. The lower classes, particularly, had no choice left them but to take this trash; and, if they were obliged to take it, they had a right to have a more summary power for its recovery. Sir R. Wilson was of opinion, that the clause proposed was in favour of country bankers, and one which they ought to support. The universal complaint was, that their notes were discredited. It must, then, be their wish to impart credit to them. If the clause was introduced, many persons would take their notes who would otherwise refuse them, and thence credit would be restored to this part of the circulation. Mr. Hume would ask the right hon. the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, who described the situation of the lower classes, with respect to these one-pound notes, in such pathetic language the other night, if | fore counteract the effect of a measure for he would now give them no other remedy than an action, by which they could not recover their money for six months? Lord A. Hamilton observed, that the bill itself was a compulsory measure to force the payment of gold instead of paper. It had been argued, on a former occasion, by the right hon. Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and the President of the Board of Trade, that, according to the state of the law, the bankers were bound to pay on demand; but was it not a which he had already voted. Mr. Home Drummond said, he differed from the hon. and learned gentleman in considering the present proposition as tending to force the one-pound notes more rapidly out of circulation, by diminishing their credit. On the contrary, he was inclined to think that the certainty of obtaining the value of them in a summary manner would tend to maintain the public confidence in that species of circulation. In Scotland the process for recovering all mockery to oblige men to bring an action | small debts under eight pounds was exat law to compel them? The amend-tremely summary, and not very dissimilar ment, let it be remembered, was not pro- from that provided by the clause in ques posed to extend beyond notes under 51. Unless some measure was adopted for this object, the chancellor of the Exchequer would depart from the very principle of his measure. Mr. Monck said, that if this clause was not adopted, the holders of small notes would be in a worse situation than they were in 1797, and up to 1823; for, up to the 3rd of the present king, the clause now proposed had been law; so that if it were a hardship, it was one to which the country bankers were accustomed. If they were compelled to issue small notes, they might have some reason to complain; but now they must take the good and the bad together. When they knew that it was always in contemplation to return to a metallic currency, they had no reason to complain that they would now be compelled to pay in gold by a summary process. Mr. Abercromby said, that when this question was brought under discussion last session, on the occasion of a petition being presented by the hon. member for Montrose, from a person in Bristol, complaining that he had been refused gold for notes, he then entertained the opinion, that a summary process would be most expedient on account of the deficiency of security to the holders of one-pound notes. But the circumstances of the country were now essentially different. When the question was then discussed, the country was inundated with country notes, many of which were now swept away. The principle upon which there was an extension of time in the original measure was to prevent the too rapid contraction of the issues. To guard against this danger he supported that measure. The clause of his hon. friend would, he thought, increase that rapidity, and there tion, with regard to one-pound notes; and he believed that the facility with which debts could be recovered in Scotland, contributed to maintain the credit of bankers notes in that country. If, therefore, he was not to vote for the proposition of the hon. member, it could only be on the ground that he did not see why this advantage should be given in the case of one-pound notes (for such he considered it both to debtor and creditor) over every other species of small debt. Mr. Hume said, he expected his proposition would be supported by every banker in the House; but he would not rely on the bankers alone; he should expect the support of the ministers themselves. The system in its present form, afforded no security. The bankers might again get out immense amounts of notes, and might again spend large sums for their own living, as too many had done, if there were not some check upon such a system. He was sorry to see the day arrived when Mr. Cobbett's prophecies were realised; when, in fact, they were threatened with his feast of the gridiron. The prophecies had been realized; for the ministers now, in reality, acknowledged that notes were not equal to gold; that they were admitted to be not convertible into gold; and that was the fact respecting them, if the amount in specie could be rufused by bankers, and not be recovered but by an action. He would enforce his proposition, if he divided alone; but he expected he should have the support of every solvent banker in the House (Cries of "Order."] Mr. R. Martin considered the expression of the hon. member to be unwarrantable and indecent. To imply that there were insolvent bankers in the House was indecent. The Chairman said, he felt it necessary | But, would not the effect of the clause to call the hon, member to order. His now proposed be to undo what the House speech was more disorderly than that of the hon. member of whom he complained. Mr. Martin said, that if he was disorderly, he begged pardon; but he would ask whether the hon. member was entitled to say, when there were bankers of great opulence and respectability sitting in the House, "I expect every solvent banker will vote with me." If that was not disorder, he did not know what disorder was. It followed that if those persons did not vote with the hon. member, they were to be published as insolvent. Such language was indecent. The Chancellor of the Exchequerthought the House ought not to be involved in a discussion on this subject. The hon. member would perhaps be willing to admit that the use of the word "solvent" was not quite proper. He was sure he would say it to save the House from a squabble. Mr. Hume explained. He had first said "every banker," and admitted that afterwards he had used the word "solvent," though without any individual application. Mr. Secretary Canning said, that this clause would imply an injurious degree of suspicion, and throw unnecessary discredit on the country banks. There was a good deal of difference in the situation in which they now stood from that in which they were in last year respecting this part of the currency. Then it was expected that the small notes were to continue for a considerable period; and if the system were to be continued, it might be advisable to consider the propriety of adopting | some such remedy as the one now proposed, to remedy the evil now complained of. But what had the House resolved to do? Not that the small-note system should continue, but that it should altogether be put an end to in three years. The measure was to facilitate the return to cash payments, and to decrease the inconveniences that might result from the suddenness of the measure. It was at first imagined that inconvenience would result from suddenly contracting the issues of small country notes. He thought such would not be the case, but he had found that inconveniences would result from a sudden contraction of the currency, and therefore had they been obliged to remedy this evil by substituting, for an extended period, the Bank of England small notes. had done? By the alteration of their measure they had endeavoured to guard against the consequences of the sudden withdrawal of the country notes; but if they adopted this clause, the pride and the prudence of the country bankers would alike impel them to withdraw all their small notes from circulation, to avoid the pain that any one might inflict on them, by dragging them before a magistrate on account of some small note. He therefore opposed the clause. Lord Milton was of opinion, that if the bill passed with the clause, the evil would be increased tenfold. He was sorry that ministers should have thought it necessary to introduce the measure at all. In his view, the measure was calculated to do nothing but mischief to the country; and if he had been present at its introduction, he would have voted against it. What did the bill do but create fresh alarm, when the only cure for the evil was to inspire confidence? The persons against whom it was directed were not those whose flimsy means had failed in the panic before Christmas, but those who, by weathering the storm, had given proof of their competence and security. He regretted that ministers had legislated at all upon the subject. If left to themselves, matters would in due time have found their level. As it was, he could not conceal his opinion from the House, that the end of the panic was not yet arrived. He believed, on the contrary, that the most serious period of the storm was yet to come; and felt convinced that what had been done by government would only aggravate the danger. As he was decidedly hostile to legislating at all, he thought that the fewer powers the bill passed with the better, and he should therefore resist the proposition of the hon. member for Aberdeen. Lord A. Hamilton could understand very well how the noble lord could object to the clause, objecting as he did to the bill altogether, but he was at a loss to understand how those who had introduced the bill could object to a clause calculated to ensure its effect. The committee divided: For the clause, 19; Against it 163. Majority 144. List of the Minority. Burdett, sir F. Griffith, P. W. Mr. Hume again rose. He said, that he held in his hand four or five Bank notes, such as those which were to form the circulating medium of the country, and carry the House to the accomplishment of its object. Now, he called the attention of the committee to the inconsistency of ministers, for the notes which he held in his hand were not, strictly speaking, convertible into gold upon demand, and the holder was left to his remedy by an action at law. It was true that a rich man might obtain justice in this way; but what was to become of the humble holder of a single pound note, about the necessity of relieving whom so much had been said? It appeared that ministers were about to leave the poor man without any remedy whatever. The country banks were all alike; their "promise to pay" was false. They would not pay their notes in the country unless compelled to do so. One of the notes he held in his hand was the issue of a Warwick bank for five pounds, and it ran thus-"I promise to pay at the banking-house of sir R. C. Glyn and Co., London, the sum of five pounds, for value received here." But the receiver of this note in the country, "for value received," could not convert it into specie, unless he hired an agent in London, or came to town himself; and, in the latter event, the expenses of the journey would absorb the whole of the money. Another note belonged to the Stratford-upon-Avon bank, and was so much worn as to be scarcely legible. He would state, in order to show how long these rags would last, that this note was dated 1818, so that it had been eight years in circulation-a proof how little the return of stamps issued yearly was likely to show the actual number of such notes in circulation. All these notes were payable in London only. As this was an extreme hardship, he proposed to enact that, in future, all promissory notes should be made payable at the places whence they were issued. Mr. Huskisson said, that it was his in tention to propose a clause to that effect. When an hon. member first stated, that country notes were made payable in London only, he was not aware that such a practice prevailed. Having found that such was the practice, he had determined at once to remedy the evil. But how to do so most effectually was the question. The plan which he proposed was, that country bankers should issue no notes under 20l. unless such as were made payable in gold at the place where they were issued, leaving it to the country bankers to consider whether they should also make them payable elsewhere. Mr. Calcraft was satisfied the hon. member for Montrose had no doubt of the solvency of all those banks whose notes he had so ostentatiously displayed. The hon. gentleman had shown his confidence in the notes, by keeping them in his possession; and no doubt he entertained a sanguine hope that now they had anwered the purposes of his speech, they would not be refused payment. Mr. Benett thought it would be advisable that the notes of country bankers should be made payable in the country and in London also. Sir J. Wrottesley said, it would be a great hardship to compel country bankers to make their notes payable in two places, as in that case they would be obliged to provide double funds to meet the demands in each place. place. Mr. Huskisson was not prepared to compel country bankers to pay their notes in London, but he felt it right that they should pay them where they were issued, leaving it at their option to make them payable elsewhere also. Sir W. Ridley said, he had not been aware that there were such things as notes not payable at the place of issue. There were none such, he could take upon himself to state, current in the north. Mr. S. Rice said, that the notes issued by the branches of the Bank of Ireland were all made payable only in Dublin. Mr. Attwood said, that his majesty's ministers had throughout acted, with respect to this measure, in the greatest degree of ignorance of the actual state of the country, and the nature and operation of its currency. They had at one moment rejected a measure proposed to them, and in twenty-four hours after, and under precisely the same circumstances, they had come down and themselves proposed the adoption of that very measure. right hon. Secretary for Foreign Affairs had told them, on the authority of another The great statesman, that if a pound note and a guinea were circulated together, the guinea would disappear. The right hon. President of the Board of Trade said, it was impossible that a pound note and a sovereign could circulate together; and yet the right hon. gentlemen introduced a measure which was to keep that pound note in circulation with a metallic currency! The right hon. gentlemen excused this course by saying, that circumstances had arisen pending the discussion which had not been anticipated; but there had arisen no circumstances but such as any practical man of business in the House could have told the right hon. gentleman must be inevitable from the course they were pursuing. The custom of drawing notes payable in London only had long been general in the midland counties, and particularly in Leicestershire. Mr. Mansfield rose to set the hon. member for Callington right, upon the custom which he said was so general in the midland counties. The fact was, that in Leicestershire all notes above one pound were made payable, both at the place of their issue and in London. And he would add, as a practical man, that, in ordinary times, he could not see what difference it could make to a country banker whether he paid his 51. or his 20l. notes in the one place or the other, or whether they were payable in London only. And in times of alarm like the present, that man must possess more boldness than he himself possessed, who would venture to refuse to pay one of his five-pound notes in the country, even though justified by the form in so doing. Mr. Secretary Canning said, that the hon. member for Callington had reproached ministers with having acted without consulting practical men. He could assure that hon. gentleman, that they had consulted those whom they considered best informed upon the subject, and had done their best to procure the necessary in formation. The hon. member had complained also, that ministers had ill-treated country bankers, and had imputed to them an attempt to thwart the measures of government by suddenly narrowing their issues. They had not directly made that charge before; but if the hon. member would have it out, he now asserted that the country bankers had, by suddenly narrowing their issues, endeavoured to defeat the measure now before the com mittee. Ministers perceived their object, and proposed the remedy for the evil. Mr. Hudson Gurney said, that if any combination or understanding amongst the countrybankers to call in their smaller notes, in order to defeat the measures of government, existed, he was entirely ignorant of it, and totally disbelieved its existence. He wished to meet the right hon. gentleman's assertion with all deference; but thought he must have been greatly misinformed on the subject. The House in which he was concerned, had never issued onepound notes; and, therefore, personally he could wash his hands of the imputation. The branches, indeed, connected with that Bank had been in the habit of issuing them, and, he believed, continued issuing them still; but every one knew, particularly since the commencement of these debates, that the small notes being brought in on the bankers for payment, the amount in circulation must, of necessity, have been much reduced. The hon. member for Montrose wished this private issue to be continued without limit. He (Mr. G.) wished to see it put an end to; and he was satisfied the only possible way in which the measures of government could have been carried into effect, was by the course which they had recently taken; namely, the allowing the Bank of England to continue to stamp their notes for a certain limited time, in order to take the place of the country paper, which might be cancelled or discredited. He acquitted the right hon. gentleman opposite of any inconsistency in conceding this alteration of their original plan; but he must repeat, that it had been forced on them by the obvious necessity of the case, and not by any conspiracy of the country bankers. Mr. J. Martin thought it would be a great tax upon country bankers to make them find a fund for the payment of their notes in two places. Mr. Calcraft said, he was bound to enter his protest against the imputations which the right hon. Foreign Secretary had cast upon the country bankers, and to say that he defied the right hon. gentleman to prove his assertion, or to show that there had been the slightest combination among them for the purpose of withdrawing their notes. That the notes had been withdrawn was the fault of ministers themselves. They had cried them down when they were the main, and almost the only currency of the country; and the consequence was, that the bankers |