ject, the commissioners, anxious so far to make a report of their proceedings, were nevertheless unable to state fully the result, which they hoped ere long to do. In the report which the commissioners had made, he agreed with the hon. and learned gentleman, that they had used language, calculated to show the house and the country, that the desired object was not so easy of attainment as by some it was supposed to be. And this they were the more solicitous to do, because the belief had been fostered throughout the country, that nothing but the grossest ignorance and negligence on the part of the directors of the Bank, could liament in his majesty's government. It was the more to be regretted, because at that verymoment the country had passed through the greatest shock and revulsion of a return to cash payments, by the Bank of England withdrawing its issues, and the failure of the country banks. Not having the courage to take one wise step, the country was again plunged into all those horrors from which it was now found so difficult to extricate it. The question was, whether, after the experience of the last House of Commons, the present House of Commons would follow the guides who had misled their predecessors, and vote for the continuance of a measure which had been attended by such conse-have prevented the adoption long ago of quences, unless the necessity for it were proved on the grounds of a policy superior (if any such policy there could be) to the calls of humanity, by a full, impartial, efficient, and public inquiry into the reasons and considerations of expediency urged in its favour. He would now move, "That there be laid before the house, an Account of the number of Persons prosecuted for forging notes of the Bank of England, or for knowingly uttering or possessing forged Notes, from the 10th of April 1818 to the 28th of January 1819; distinguishing the capital Convictions from those of an inferior nature, and the number of those Prosecu tions which relate to notes of 5%. and upwards, from the number of those which relate to notes of 11. and 21." some scheme by which the evil complained of might have been remedied. They owed it to the House and the country to state, that not one of the plans presented could be adopted with solid advantage to the public. It was, he conceived, his duty to state that opinion; but the commission at the same time felt it their duty to distinguish particularly some of the projects which were presented to them. It was stated in the report, that not more than nine of the projects deserved to be more particularly mentioned. Many of the plans certainly possessed very great merit. The degree of talent which had been dis. played was very great indeed. Several of the plans of individuals, both of this country and abroad, and more particularly of the united states of America, Mr. Courtenay observed, that the mem- possessed very extraordinary merit. He bers of the commission, whose report had mentioned this to show that no communibeen adverted to by the hon. and learned cation on the subject had been overlooked gentleman, had felt it their duty to ascer- by the commissioners, and that those were tain, as far as they could, the value of deceived who thought that some of the the respective inventions submitted to specimens presented, if attended to, would them. What might be the weight of the have produced the desired effects. In opinion which they had formed and deli- many of the plans submitted to them, vered, it was not for him to say. The complicated machinery was necessary to hon and learned gentleman, however, had produce the notes, and it was supposed a little misconceived the report of the by the projectors, that these notes could commissioners. They had been fully not be well imitated but by that maaware that their report must create much chinery. But these persons forgot that a disappointment. It was clear that the great number of imitations, not so excelingenious projectors of those plans they lent indeed as the original, but sufficient had not been able to approve, were likely for the purposes of forgery, might be to think the seven commissioners rather made, without the application of the same than themselves to be in the wrong. But extensive machinery. He could not sit the commissioners were also aware, that down without remarking, that his hon. the longer the public were kept in igno- friend had said more than the commisrance of their opinion, the longer would sioners meant to say in the report, when those individuals be kept in a state that he alleged that they were anxious to remust tend to increase the disappointment press the hopes of the public, and that when it arrived. In that view of the sub-they themselves despaired of success. Now, they did anticipate that a note would be produced, the introduction of which would answer the purpose desired. His hon. friend would allow, that it was their duty to select from among the specimens presented to them, the one which was the best and most likely to preclude the possibility of imitation. They had accordingly selected one which they had every reason to believe would succeed. But, even on this plan, they had thought that an improvement might be made; and he had the satisfaction of stating, that since the date of the document which had been alluded to, they had had additional reason to anticipate success. A gentleman of the commission was of opinion that a combination of this design with paper of a particular fabric would render imitation almost impossible; and a respectable manufacturer was now employed in making paper for the experiment. Although he denied, therefore, as had been improperly alleged in some of the public papers, that forgeries, and executions for forgeries, could have been prevented sooner, he had still reason to believe that the attempts to prevent them would ultimately succeed. The commissioners were not desirous to raise too sanguine hopes, but at the same time they had no reason to despair of success. of that House, that any of the plans might be very much improved by combination. The experiment which had been suggested, was now in progress. They had every reason to believe that the improvement in the form of the note, combined with the improvement in the paper which had been suggested, would render imitation extremely difficult. The paper was now making by a paper-maker of great skill. In a month's time, he had no doubt, a note would be produced of such a form, as to justify them in recommending its adoption, and which would render forgery extremely difficult. The motion was agreed to. Sir James Mackintosh then moved for an account of the number of forged notes which had been detected by the Bank of England, from the 10th of April 1818 to the 28th of January 1819. In making this motion, he wished to say a few words on what had fallen from his hon. and learned friend. It appeared that the only result, after six months' labour on the part of the commission was, that they might expect something from one untried experiment. They were now in a very dif ferent situation from what they conceived themselves to be in before. It was conceived that many means might be devised for the diminution of forgeries; but now all their hopes of success rested on an experiment which was yet untried. The House would greatly mistake him, if they thought that he undervalued the inquiries of the commission. Even after the resumption of cash payments, such an im provement in the construction of bank notes as would render it more difficult to imitate them, would be a very great im Mr. Tierney said, if he understood the hon. and learned gentleman correctly, the substance of what he said was-that though some improvements on the existing system had been presented to the commission, yet no projects had been presented to that body which allowed them to enter tain any thing more than a hope that some device might be hit upon which would render the crime of forgery infi-provement. As the paper which would nitely more difficult. He wished to learn from him when they might expect the ultimate opinion of the commission on the experiments they were now making when they might expect something more definite on the subject than mere hope. It was material that the commission should report whether they had merely a hope, or whether they had something more than a hope, that the crime of forgery could not be committed with the same security as heretofore. continue in circulation after the resump. tion, would continue to be attacked some time from the habit of forgery contracted during the stoppage of cash payments, it would require all possible improvements to protect the public after the resumption. Any improvement, even the slightest, would therefore, in his opinion, be desirable. Mr. Courtenay said, he meant to state that the note on which experiments were making, was in such a state, that they Mr. Courtenay said, that many of the thought it already a considerable improve specimens shown to the commission possessment on the present note; but they ed great merit, and were in themselves anim- thought that even that note might be improvement on the existing system; but it had proved, and that improvement was now been suggested by a member of the commis-under experiment. sion, who was at the same time a member The motion was then agreed to. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Friday, January 29. WESTMINSTER HUSTINGS BILL-PETITION OF MR. HUNT.] Mr. Sinclair presented the following Petition from Mr. Hunt against this bill: "To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled. -The Petition of Henry Hunt, esq. humbly sheweth; "That, at the last election for the city of Westminster, your petitioner stood along with five other gentlemen, as candidates for the representation of that city, and soon after the close of such election, an account was sent him by Arthur Morris, esq. the high bailiff of the said city, claiming of three of such candidates only, the sum of 9361. 9s. 11d. as his bill of charges and expenses for such election; and, on your petitioner objecting to several items contained therein, particularly to a lumping one of 5221. for a carpenter's bill, the said Arthur Morris, without further ceremony, brought an action of debt against your petitioner for the same; and while your petitioner was trying to get from him full particulars how such article, amongst others, was made out, he, by two sharp practising attornies, of the names of Trower and Twedly, snapt a judgment against your petitioner in such action, and was about to levy an execution thereon; to prevent which, your petitioner was obliged to apply to his majesty's court of King's-bench, in which court the judg. ment had been so obtained for a rule nisi to set aside the same, which rule, at the request of the said Arthur Morris's counsel, stands over to be argued on Monday next. And your petitioner further showeth, that the said high bailiff, by bringing actions of debt, and snapping thereon final judgments, not only deprives the party he shall so sue, of a right to dispute his charges, however illegal or unjust they may be, but also takes away from the subject the writ of inquiry by a jury to assess the damages he would be entitled to, in the case of an interlocutory judgment, which your petitioner most humbly submits is the bounden duty of your honourable House to prevent. And your petitioner further complains, that the enormous expense of erecting the hustings is wholly unnecessary, and that at the late election two-thirds of the same was neither (VOL. XXXIX.) appropriated to the use or convenience of the candidates or their friends, but that it was daily occupied by persons sent and paid to interrupt the proceedings, who had no other business there, in violation of the privileges of your honourable House, and in defiance of the statute, That declares the election of members of parliament ought to be free;' that the late lord Ellenborough said, when presiding in the court of King's-bench, that the high bailiff might hold the election in Westminster-hall or some other place, without putting the candidates to such enormous expense, as is the case in all other cities. And your petitioner fur ther adds, the place of high bailiff is one of very large emolument, out of the proceeds of which he might, in virtue of such his office, pay all such outgoings, as is done in all other cities.-Your petitioner therefore prays, that your honourable House will cause due inquiry to be made into the amount of the large emoluments of the said high bailiff, and if they should be found sufficient for the above purpose, that your honourable House will not pass any other new bill, to throw more impediments in the way of free election. And your petitioner further prays, that in case your honourable House, after due inquiry, should think proper to pass any new law exclusively for the protection of the said high bailiff, your honourable House will not fail to introduce a clause to prevent him in future from suing by action of debt, but that his remedy under such new act should be an action by assumpsit only, which would effectually guard against any attempt at future extortion, and not deprive the subject of his writ of inquiry before a jury to assess the damages; or that your honourable House would, in such act, limit the sum to be paid to him for his charges on such occasions -And your petitioner, as in duty bound, will ever pray, &c. " HENRY HUNT." Ordered to lie on the table. OXFORD CITY ELECTION-PETITION COMPLAINING OF THE CONDUCT OF THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH.] Mr. Denman said, he held in his hand a petition containing serious charges against a person of elevated rank. It complained of a breach of the privileges of that House, by the interference of a peer of parlia ment in the election for the city of Oxford. It did not allege an undue return, but (L) that the duke of Marlborough had been guilty of a violation of the rights of his majesty's subjects, by various illegal acts, committed for the purpose of influencing an election. The petitioners were persons of most respectable character, who had taken no part in the election; and he conceived that they were justified in their application to have their statement referred to a committee of privileges. He now moved, therefore, that the petition be read. Lord Charles Spencer Churchill declared, that he had no wish to oppose the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman. From his own actual knowledge of the facts to which the petition referred, and from other circumstances, he felt the utmost confidence that the conduct of his noble relation would, upon inquiry, prove to be utterly undeserving of the imputations cast upon it. He should defer all further remarks till a future opportunity. Mr. Wynn, as the petition did not complain of an undue return, and (as he understood from the hon. and learned gentleman) it did not proceed from persons claiming the right of voting for the city of Oxford, had no doubt that it ought not to be referred to an election committee. But he also wished to suggest to the House, that it might be very inconvenient to receive such a petition at all, until the period had elapsed within which a petition complaining of an undue return for the place in question might be presented; because, if it were referred to the consideration of a committee of privileges, the report of that committee might indirectly determine that question, respecting which there was yet time for a petition to be presented; namely, the validity of the return. He would put the case of an individual favoured by administration, who might think it more practicable to obtain his object, not by a reference to an election committee, but by a petition such as the present, which might allow him to canvass the House at large. On these grounds, be strongly recommended the hon. and learned gentleman to adopt the course of postponing his motion for the reception of the petition, until after the fourteen days had elaped which were allowed for the presentation of petitions complaining of undue returns. After that period, there could be no objection whatever to its reception, provided no petition complaining of an undue return for the city of Oxford was presented. Mr. Denman expressed himself grateful for the advice of the hon. gentleman, but begged to state, that he was wrong in supposing that the petitioners were not freemen of Oxford, or were not qualified to vote. It appeared also to him, that the hon. gentleman had carried the effect of the act of parliament too far. It might be desirable that it should, but the law in its present state did not exclude any person from complaining to the House of a breach of privilege within the fourteen days. Every subject had, therefore, a right to expect that his complaint should be immediately considered. He thought, too, that the consequences of a report by a committee of privileges were somewhat exaggerated, when it was supposed that it would necessarily embarrass or mislead fifteen gentlemen, acting upon oath, whose duty it might afterwards be to advert to the same circumstances. Under these considerations, and with a full knowledge of the respectability of the petitioners, he did not feel himself justified in consenting to any delay. Mr. Wynn observed, that he had understood the hon. and learned gentleman to have said, at first, that the petitioners had no local connexion with the city of Oxford. He felt, however, the difficulty which he had already urged to be so strong, that as the report of a committee of privileges must, if made, lie on the table till the fourteen days were expired, and as therefore there was no reason for dispatch, he should take the sense of the House upon the question of receiving this petition. Mr. Tierney was of opinion, that the House should not, in the first instance, refuse to receive a petition of which they knew no more, generally, than that it complained of a gross breach of the privileges of that House. When it was received it might be postponed, or otherwise dealt with. Of the petition he knew nothing. His personal feelings were unquestionably in favour of the noble duke who was the subject of it; but, as a member of parliament, he felt it to be his duty to support the reception of the petition. Lord C. Churchill repeated his solici tude, that the allegations of the petition should be thoroughly investigated. Mr. Wynn would not object to the motion for laying the petition on the table, but if it were pressed any farther at present, he must decidedly oppose it. The petition was then read. It alleged various acts of bribery on the part of the duke of Marlborough, in furnishing entertainment, gifts, and rewards to voters at the late election for the city of Oxford, in order to procure the return of general St. John as one of its representatives in parliament. The petitioners offered to make good their charges before a committee of privileges, and in such case, prayed that the House would afford that relief to the realm and to the petitioners as in their wisdom should seem meet. On the motion, that the petition do lie on the table, Mr. Wynn said, that now he had heard the petition read, he entertained considerable doubts whether it was not in itself an election petition. It appeared to him, that if any petition stated facts, which, if true, would render an election null and void, and that petition came from persons entitled to vote, it was to all intents and purposes an election petition. This was a petition from freemen, and it complained of an act, bribery, which, if it had really taken place, would render the election in question null and void. If the House were of opinion that it was an election petition, a day must be fixed for taking it into consideration. If they entertained any doubt on the subject, it might be expedient to adjourn the consideration of it to some future day. The Speaker observed, that the House would see that this was a matter of great importance. If the House were clearly of opinion that it was an election petition, the regular course would be to withdraw it for the purpose of again presenting it in that form, to be taken into consideration in the usual way. If they were not satisfied on the subject, the most judicious way would be to adjourn the debate, to give honourable members an opportunity to look into the petition and to make up their minds. The words used in the petition were extremely strong, and he confessed he thought the House would find it most convenient not to decide off hand upon it. On the motion of Mr. Wynn, the further debate on the question was adjourned to Monday. SILVER CURRENCY.] On the order of the day being read for going into a committee of supply, Mr. Grenfell took the opportunity to advert to the statement which he had made on Wednesday evening, that the price of standard silver had risen to three half pence an ounce beyond the Mint price; it being 5s. 74d. an ounce. He had thought it his duty on the morning after he had made that statement to go into the city and inquire still further into the subject. From the best sources of information he found that the price of standard silver (not of dollars) at that time, at which price it still remained, was 5s. 7d. an ounce; or in other words, 67s. a pound. This fact placed the House and the country in a most whimsical situation. Were it not for the great public inconvenience which might arise from it, nothing could be more laughable. It appeared now that 66 shillings were 67! That the sum of 5s. 6d. was equivalent to the sum of 5s. 7d.! Sixty-six shillings in coin weighed exactly a pound. If a melter of silver put those sixty-six shillings into a crucible, the result would be a lump of silver which he might sell for sixty-seven shillings! This was one of the consequences of the continuance of the restriction on cash payments. When he had mentioned the subject the other day, the chancellor of the exchequer expressed some doubt as to the fact, and added, that at any rate he had reason to believe that the present price would not be of long duration. With every respect for that right hon. gentleman, and for his private character no man could entertain greater, although it was impossible for him to feel any confidence in him as chancellor of the exchequer, he was not of that opinion. He had no confidence in the right hon gentleman's anticipations. He could not but recollect the resolution which the right hon. gentleman had prevailed on the last House of Commons to adopt, namely, that in the estimation of the public, bank-notes were equivalent to the gold coin of the realm. The ink with which that resolution was written was scarcely dry, when, instead of being able in the market to obtain a guinea in exchange for a one pound note and a shilling, it became necessary to add four or five shillings to the pound note for that purpose. Perhaps the right hon. gentleman might say, that to export or melt the coin of the realm was illegal. True, there certainly was an impolitic, absurd, and ridiculous law to prevent the exportation or melting of the coin of the realm. It was a law founded on folly. True policy, according to all the ablest writers on the subject, from Locke down |