they were asked to give an opinion. For instance, they were consulted as to the goodness of the rules or system of management exercised by the Bank, though it is much to be doubted whether any one of them knew very precisely what these rules were. And as it has never been pretended that this great question can be settled by instinct, such opinions cannot of themselves be of any value.

From such enquiries, therefore, little good can be expected. But still the Report contains information which may be turned to useful account, and upon this information we shall take the liberty of making such imperfect remarks as have occurred to us. And,

First. With regard to the Country Bank circulation. It has been found by experience to increase and decrease with a general rise and fall of prices. Now the Country Bankers are of opinion that it is the rise and fall of prices that produces the increase and diminution of their issues-that their issues are the ef

fect of prices, and not the cause. But this, though apparently consistent with experience, is contrary to received principles, by which it has been established, that it is the quantity of money in circulation which regulates prices, and not prices which regulate the quantity of money. Now an enquiry, properly conducted, into the

principles upon which the issues of Banks took place, such as that directed by the House of Commons, must necessarily have settled this question, and by consequence determined the true cause of those fluctuations which have occurred in the Country Bank circulation.

That a simultaneous increase or diminution of issues by the Banks should irresistibly take place throughout the kingdom, and that by human agency, without its being traceable to a precise and definite cause, cannot be for a moment supposed. And it was the business of the Committee to trace these changes to their source, and explain the principles upon which they occurred.

It must be admitted that this was the most difficult branch of their instructions, and when we consider the manner in which they attempted to carry them into effect, we cannot be surprised that they should totally fail in throwing any light upon it.

The individuals called before them, connected with Banks of issue in the country, and from whom we persume light was expected, were the following:

Mr. STUCKEY, Banker, Somersetshire.

Mr. WILKINS, Banker, Wales.

Mr. FOSTER, Banker, Walsel, Staffordshire.

Mr. BECKETT, Banker, Leeds.

Mr. THOS. ATTWOOD, Banker, Birmingham.

Mr. BURGESS, Secretary to the Country Bankers.

The gentleman last mentioned, though not connected with the management of any Bank of issue, is a writer on the subject of currency, and so intimately connected with country bankers, so much in their confidence, and so well acquainted with all their proceedings, as to render him not an unimportant witness on the subject.

Mr. Stuckey, in answer to enquiries as to the principles upon which he conducted his issues, stated that every Banker who managed his business properly regulated his issues by the exchanges and the issues of the Bank of England; that when the exchanges were favourable, and the Bank increased their issues, he increased his; that when the exchanges were unfavourable, and the Bank decreased theirs, he did the same. But it did not appear that the issues of his own Bank exactly corresponded with this rule.

On the other hand, Mr. Wilkins stated, that the exchanges had no more connexion with the issue of the Country Banks than last year's snow.

Mr. Foster stated, that his issues were not governed by the exchanges, but by the wants of his customers.

Mr. Beckett stated the same thing; but that the issues of his Bank were with him a matter of very little consideration and attention.

Of Mr. Thomas Attwood no enquiries were made as to the principles upon which his issues were conducted, nor were any questions put to Mr. Burgess on this point.

The evidence respecting the issues of the Country Banks, therefore, as has been already stated, adds nothing to our previous information on the subject. It only establishes, what was before very well known, that the experience of the Country Bankers, unaided by more comprehensive views than are usually derived from the mere practice of business, afford a very imperfect clue to the enquiry which the Committee was appointed to make,

There was, however, one fact of some importance, if it be a fact, elicited by the evidence of Mr. Burgess, which it will be proper to mention for two reasons, first, from the importance of the information itself, and next as a specimen of the acuteness which the Committee exercised in eliciting the truth of such facts as occupied their attention. When we consider the vitally important nature of the subject itself, and that our knowledge of it is to be attained through the medium of Committees of the House of Commons, it is necessary that we should form a right estimate of the capabilities of this medium, with a view to determine the degree of confidence we can safely repose in it.

Although the Stamp Office returns of the amount of the demand for stamps by the Country Banks exhibit the relative increase or decrease in it, so that by comparing the demand for one year with that for another it may be ascertained whether, upon the whole, the circulation is en

larging or contracting, yet as the aggregate circulation cannot be very accurately ascertained from this return, it does not furnish us with the actual fluctuations. The Committee, it would, therefore, seem had taken steps to obtain this information more distinctly. Mr. Burgess, as Secretary to the Country Bankers, wrote to each of them to request an account of their respective issues; which he obtained from 122 of them, so as to enable him to furnish table No. 59, page. 268, being an account of the relative circulation of each from 1818 to 1825 inclusive. The total

result is, that for every 1007. circulated by these Banks in 1818, their issues, to 1825, were as follows:

Now, 122 Banks ought to give a very fair average of the whole, and if the returns be faithfully furnished upon one uniform principle, we certainly have a right to infer, that the issues of the Country Banks have not fluctuated to so great an extent as the Stamp Office returns had led us to suppose. Not that the truth of the Stamp Office