was much dearer. Cheapness without a demand for labour was a symptom of distress: cheapness always prevailed, where enterprize was at a stand. Thus, in France cheapness, in England capital, prevailed. Either state of things was injurious to the labourer; for high wages tended to make him dissolute, and uncertain wages to expose him to misery. The great object to be attained was steady prices, and an active demand for labour.

An honourable gentleman had indulged in some observations upon the increased degree of luxury in which our farmers now lived, and lamented that they sometimes preferred a bottle of wine to a mug of ale. Now, for his part, he thought the change extremely natural, and considered it to be the necessary consequence of improved skill and enlarged profits. Had not the same effects taken place in the commercial world? Did not our merchants now think it desirable to exchange the narrow lanes of the city, for the squares at the west end of the town? And, instead of dining at one or two o'clock, with their clerks, as their forefathers did, were they not now to be seen sitting down to a table, profuse in its variety of dishes, at six or seven? But he did not complain that it was so. He honoured the industry, and gloried in the success, which had occasioned it; and though the comparison might appear invidious, he had been driven into it by the equally invidious comparison made by the honourable member.

From the state of the evidence which had been given before the Committees of both Houses of Parliament, it was, in his opinion, clear, that less than 80s. as a protecting price would not remunerate the farmer; but that at that price he would be remunerated, if properly protected. Nor did he at all anticipate the dangers which seemed to be apprehended, that because 808. were fixed as the protecting price, corn could never be at a less rate; seeing that • Mr. Alexander Baring.

the experience of the last century abundantly proved, that the market price of corn was frequently, nay, almost always, below the protecting price. In behalf of the agriculturist-in behalf of the manufacturer-in behalf of the public creditor-in behalf of the whole community, he earnestly recommended the adoption of his right honourable friend's proposition.

Mr. Baring's amendment was negatived without a division. After which, the original motion was agreed to by 209 against 65, and leave was given to bring in a bill founded thereupon.

STATE OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND.
March 2.

Lord Archibald Hamilton moved, "That a Committee be appointed to examine and state the total amount of outstanding demands upon the Bank of England, and of the funds for discharging the same; and also, to examine into, and state their opinions upon, the effect produced upon the currency and commercial relations of the United Kingdom, by the different acts passed since the year 1797, for continuing the restriction on payments in cash by the Bank of England, and to report their opinion how far, and under what limitations, it may be expedient to continue the same."

Mr. HUSKISSON said, that whatever opinions he had formerly entertained and advocated, with regard to the theory of money, and the depreciation of our currency, those opinions he still retained. He had no hesitation in saying, that the currency of the country was depreciated. At the same time, if he had seen sufficient reason for changing that opinion, he should have acknowledged that change, in an honest and open manner. As to the practical question before the House, it appeared to be simply this: whether the restriction upon cash payments by the Bank of England should be continued fifteen months longer?—a propo

sition which he could not by any means consider unreasonable. It would be recollected that, in 1811, it was not thought practicable to put an end to the restriction within less than two years. He could not therefore consider the present measure as improper, especially after the declaration which the House had heard from his right honourable friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. When a responsible minister of the Crown stated his confident expectation, that within the period specified in the bill, it would not be inconvenient for the Bank to resume its payments in cash, he could not but consider that statement entitled to attention, and that it served to render the proposed Committee altogether unnecessary. Indeed, he should oppose the appointment of such a Committee; believing, as he did, that its appointment would serve to impede the object for which that statement encouraged us to hope.

For himself, bearing this statement in mind, and taking into consideration the improved prospects of the country, and the reduced price of bullion, he did not see why the removal of the restriction upon our natural currency should not take place, even sooner than some honourable gentlemen seemed to contemplate. With regard to a vote which he had given in 1811,* for the resumption of cash payments in two years, he would not disguise the satisfaction he now felt, that that vote had been overruled by the House; because, if it had not, it would have been impossible for this country to have made those great efforts, which had happily produced such glorious results. Nor was there any inconsistency between his past and his present conduct; for no human foresight could, by any possibility, have anticipated those results. Had the struggle been of longer continuance, greater and more serious difficulties must have followed, from a protraction of the restriction to an indefinite period, than he was willing to state.

See p. 186.

It had been insinuated by an honourable member, that upon the breaking out of any future war, they were to expect a renewal of the restriction. He, for one, should deprecate any such measure; for nothing, in his opinion, but such a war, and such a singular concurrence of circumstances, as had produced the restriction of 1797, could warrant the Bank in applying for, or the Government in consenting to, a renewal of that restriction. There was no

safety for the public, but in the resumption and continuance of cash payments. With regard to the present motion, as no possible good could result from an inquiry, he should certainly oppose

it.

The House divided: Ayes 38. Noes 134. Majority against the

motion 96.

ROMAN CATHOLIC QUESTION.

March 30,

Sir Henry Parnell moved, "That this House will resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take into consideration the state of the laws affecting his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects."

Mr. HUSKISSON said, that he sincerely lamented, in common with every honourable gentleman who had spoken in the course of the debate, the conduct and the language of the Roman Catholics of Ireland-conduct and language, much more calculated to retard the attainment of their object, than the arguments of those who conscientiously opposed their claims. He should, however, certainly vote for going into the Committee; because, whenever any considerable portion of his Majesty's subjects came to Parliament, complaining of privations and disabilities, he, for one, would never oppose the consideration of their grievances. At the same time, he wished it to be distinctly

understood, with reference to the resolutions which had been proposed, that he hoped the House of Commons would never allow itself to be dictated to, either upon this, or upon any other subject.

The House divided: For going into the Committee 147. Against it, 228. Majority 81.

MR. WESTERN'S RESOLUTIONS ON THE DISTRESSED STATE OF AGRICULTURE.

March 7, 1816.

Mr. Western, pursuant to notice, moved "That this House do resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take into consideration the Distressed State of the Agriculture of the United Kingdom," and laid upon the table of the House the following Resolutions; which he said, he intended to propose as the basis of several different measures, which he considered applicable to the relief of the Agriculture of the country:—

1. "That the portion of the community, whose capitals are engaged in agriculture, as well as those numerous classes whose employment depends thereon, are at present suffering under the pressure of unexampled distress.

2. "That the continuance of such distress is fraught with extreme danger to the most important interests of the country.

3. "That the demand for the extended produce of our agriculture is, at this time, insufficient to produce that price, which is necessary to cover the heavy charges and burthens upon it.

4. "That the demand for barley has been very materially reduced, by the excessive duties to which it is subjected, in the course of the various operations which adapt it to the use of the consumer.

5. "That the continuance of those duties, during peace, when the facility of smuggling is so much increased, cannot fail to injure the home manufacture of spirits, which must still further diminish the demand for barley.

6. "That it is therefore necessary to reduce the duties on malt, beer, and spirits.