as decided, that if the measure recom. mended in the Report of the Bullion Com support such a system, we must give a fic- ble for the country longer to carry on The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. PERCEVAL) observed, that he should feel himself guilty of an inexcusable neglect of duty, if, holding the situation which he had the honour to hold, he refrained from expressing his sentiments at some period of this important discussion; and he did not conceive that he could seize a more advantageous opportunity than that of following the two Honourable Gentle-currency of the country was depreciated; men who had last spoken. The Committee were now in possession of the opinions of two highly respectable individuals, both of extensive knowledge and great practical experience. From the one they had heard a decided opinion that there was no remedy for the existing evil, but the adoption of the measure recommended in the Report of the Bullion Committee. From the other they had heard an opinion that that depreciation was attributable to the excess of paper; and that the evil resulting was so great as to make it incumbent on Parliament to take immediate measures for averting it, which measure must be the reduction of the quantity of paper in circulation. On the other hand it was contended that the supporters of the Report advanced no proof of the excess of the general circulation of the country, nor any proof of the depreciation (in the sense in which they understood the word) of that currency; but that what they substituted for direct and legitimate proofs, was capable of being explained by other circumstances which the Bullion Committee had certainly not kept quite out of sight in their Report, but on which they had merely touched, and then affected to consider them as unimportant. Such was the state of the question which he would now proceed to consider. In the first place, he asserted, that there had been no proof given of our existing excess of currency. Of this term "excess," as well as of some other terms, it was necessary to know the precise meaning intended to be affixed to it. Excess beyond what? His interpretation was, that there had been no excess beyond what he conceived absolutely necessary for the circulation of the wealth and revenues of the country. No proof had been advanced of an existing excess of circulation beyond the circulation which existed at the period of the suspension of cash payments at the Bank. But even if the advocates of the Report could prove that there was an existing numerical excess of circulation, beyond the circulation which existed at the period of the suspension of cash payments at the Bank; yet if that increase was not beyond what the extended commerce and augmented revenue since that period required, then it was no excess. (Hear, hear, hear!) His Hon. Friend near him seemed to conceive that there was an existing excess beyond what would have been the state of the currency had that currency been confined to gold, or to paper immediately convertible into gold. Let the Committee consider after the drain of wealth which many years of war must occasion, what would be the state of circulation in a country in which no paper was issued to supply the deficiency. Unquestionably, if things could have gone on in this country without such a supply, the existing circulation would have been much less than it was at the present moment. But if for domestic purposes we had occasion for a circulation as large as the existing circulation, he then could not allow, situated as the country was in other respects, that the circulation ought to be diminished. He was prepared to expect that his Hon. Friend near him would admit that the circulation could not be exocs is Long as the paper circulated was vertible into gold; con there was no excess in our circulation before the suspension of the cash payments at the Bank. But although this was the opinion of his Honourable Friend, it was not the opinion of all the Members of the Bullion Committee. The Hon. Gentleman who commenced the discussion of that evening (Mr. Parnell), contended that the circulation in the year 1797, before the suspension of the cash payments at the Bank, was excessive, and that it was indispensable to reduce our present circulation below the circulation of that period. In his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) opinion, however, any attempt to reduce the circulation, and still more to reduce it below what it was in 1797, would be productive of the greatest practical inconveniences. The advantages of a large circulation were the means which it afforded, of invigorating agriculture, commerce, and manufactures. Adverting to some of the arguments of his Hon. Friend near him, he would suppose a case in answer to them. He would suppose a country, possessing a circulation of 60 millions, all in coin, to enter into a war, that this war should continue for four years, and that the expenditure of wealth beyond the balance of foreign trade should be ten millions annually; the circulation would thus be reduced to twenty millions. He would suppose that during the four years an issue of paper was made to the amount of ten millions. The country would therefore possess at the end of the four years' war, a circulation (composed of 20 millions of coin and 10 millions of paper) of 30 millions instead of 60, as at the commencement. It was evident that but for the issue of paper this country would have possessed but 20 millions of circulation. According to the interpretation of the term "excess,' therefore, by his Hon. Friend, this supposed country would have an excess of ten millions. His Honourable Friend's notion, therefore, of an excess was not always that it was an increase, but was compatible with the fact of a considerable decrease of circulation, even to a moiety. (Hear, hear, hear!) This appeared to him to be rather a novel kind of argument. He certainly had not the least doubt, that if paper had not been issued, the currency of the country would not have been so large as it was. In that interpretation of the term, therefore, there was an excess of circulation, though, for any thing that had been proved to the ontrary, more gold had been taken out of the circulation since the year 1797 than paper had been introduced into it; and this he really believed was the fact. The proposition came to this-whether, in the existing state of affairs, having proceeded for four or five years in a course generally considered as essential to the security and independence of the country, namely, the carrying on of the war by a foreign expenditure to a very considerable amount, it was advisable to supply the domestic deficiency in circulation, which that expenditure must occasion, by a paper currency. This was a plain question of policy. Nothing could be more clear to his understanding than that if the foreign expenditure were deemed necessary, the domestic currency must be considered inseparable from it; for where our foreign commerce was so circumscribed, and we had not the opportunity, as in ordinary circumstances, of bringing back the wealth which we expended, the only way to provide the means for a future re-purchase of the coin that now quitted us, was by giving a vigour to our agriculture and commerce, to which an increased internal circulation alone was competent. (Hear! hear!) If this was called an excess, he would say that it was an excess without which we could not carry on the great contest in which we were engaged, as we had hitherto done. In no former war had the expences of the country been so great, or the means of supplying those expences so limited. The question, therefore, for the Committee to decide upon, was, whether or not the country should continue to make the exertions in which she had hitherto persevered. Were the Committee prepared to say that the evil of not having the balance of exchange nicely adjusted was so tremendous as to make it necessary, and, Great God! to make it necessary at the present moment to withdraw from the contest which the country was so gloriously maintaining? (Hear, hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman who had last spoken, had done the Committee the favour of giving them a fine opportunity of contemplating what the situation of Great Britain might have been, compared with what it actually was. He had characterised the conduct which this country had pursued as absurd and timorous. He had called upon the Committee to look at Hamburgh; to look at Holland. Happy Hamburgh! happy Holland! They, it seemed, had not had the cowardice to imitate the example of Great Britain."Sir," exclaimed the Chancellor of the Exchequer," without any intention of denying that our present situation is one which demands the most serious consideration,, I have no hesitation in declaring, notwithstanding the imputation of cowardice on the manner in which the finances of the country have been conducted, that I prefer that situation to the situation in which the prowess of Hamburgh and of Holland have placed them."-(Loud cries of Hear, hear! from all parts of the House). So much for the question of excesss; now for the question of depreciation. And here again he begged leave to say something on the meaning of the word, as it applied to the currency of the country. Some, he conceived, by the term " depre ciation," meant that the whole currency of the country was depreciated, gold and paper equally. This opinion had the sanction of high authorities. By the advocates of the Bullion Report the term was not so applied. They thought paper depreciated below coin. There was a strange confusion in the Report, in the reasoning upon which this opinion professed to be founded. The different members of their syllogism were unconnected with each other; and beginning in their premises with a reference to coin, they applied their conclusion exclusively to bullion.-(A laugh). was not quite so logical as might have been expected in a performance affecting such minute accuracy. It was perfectly fair for Gentlemen on the other side to contend, for the purpose of maintaining their own propositions, that there was no difference between gold in coin and gold in bullion; but it certainly was not fair to commence the proposition by a reference to gold in coin, and then, without any notice, to substitute bullion in the room of it. If Gentlemen meant merely to maintain the self-evident truth that abstractedly speaking, an ounce of gold was worth an ounce of gold, he for one would have no difficulty in agreeing with them; but if they meant to say that gold neither acquired nor lost any thing in value, when it was stamped as coin, in comparison with gold in bullion, was an assertion to which he could by no means accede. (To be continued.) This Published by R. BAGSHAW, Brydges-Street, Covent Garden :-Sold also by J. BUDD, Pall-Mali, LONDON :-Printed by T: C. Hansard, Peterborough-Court, Floet-Street, COBBETT'S WEEKLY POLITICAL REGISTER. VOL. XIX. No. 42.] LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 25, 1811. [Price is. 1281] [1282 little into what sort of people they are SUMMARY OF POLITICS. and what is the nature and what the DISSENTERS' BILL.This measure, to tendency of their ministry. For, upon the great mortification of the lovers of the good or evil that they produce dewrangling, has been abandoned.The pends the answer to the question before Bill, of which I took notice, and the sub- us. -That men, that all men, should be stance of which I gave, in my last Num- allowed to worship their Maker in their ber, was brought forth for a second read-own way, is, I think, not to be doubted; ing, in the House of Lords, on Tuesday but, if the government once begins to last, the 21st instant, by its author, Lord meddle, it must establish somewhat of an Viscount SIDMOUTH, late Mr. ADDINGTON, uniform creed, and that this creed will not and sometime Prime Minister of this king-suit all men is very certain. Whether the dom. When he brought it out for a government ought ever to meddle with relisecond reading there was, it appears from gion is a question that I will not now the Report of the proceedings in the attempt to discuss; but this I am not House of Lords, not less than five hundred at all afraid to assert: that, without petitions against it, presented by different a state religion, a kingly government peers. After these petitions had been and an aristocracy will never long exist, presented, Lord SIDMOUTH moved that the in any country upon earth; therefore, Bill should be then read a second time. He when the Dissenters, as in the present case, complained of the misrepresentations that came forward and volunteer their praises had gone forth about his Bill, and said a of kingly government, and boast so loudly, great deal in its justification; but, the and so perfectly gratuitously, of their tide was too strong against him.-The" ardent loyalty to their venerable SoveARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY said, that no reign," whose goodness to them "has persecution was intended; but, he recom-made an indelible impression upon their mended the stopping of the Bill.Seve-hearts;" when they do this, they do, in ral other Lords spoke; some, and especi- effect, acknowledge the utility and the exally the Lord Chancellor and the Earl of cellence of a state religion; because, as I Buckinghamshire, defended the Bill; but, said before, and as all history will clearly still thought it not adviseable to press it at prove, without a state religion a kingly gothat time. When, therefore, the ques-vernment cannot exist.—If this be the case, tion was put upon the motion of Lord it must be allowed, that the government is Sidmouth, it was negatived without a division. bound to protect its own religion, which Thus ended this offspring of the is to be done only by keeping down others statesman of Richmond Park; but, since as much as is necessary to secure a predothe subject has been brought forward, minance to that of the state. And, then, there is something more to be said upon we come to the question: whether it ought it than has yet been said.- -In my last not, for this purpose, now to do something Number, ending at page 1259, I endea- to lessen the number of Dissenting Minivoured to show the effects which the Bill sters, who are daily increasing, and whose would produce; and, my conclusion was influence increases in proportion beyond this: that it would lessen the number of that of their number. Indeed, if we allow, Dissenting Ministers, and, indeed, render, that a state religion is necessary, this is no as to them, the Toleration Act of very question at all; for, in proportion as these little avail; but, whether it was right to Dissenting Ministers increase, the Church do this was a question that I did not then of England must lose its power.---But, enter upon, and that I reserved for the in another view of the matter, in a moral present Number.-In order to answer view, I mean, it may still be a question the question, whether it would be desira- with some persons, whether the increase ble to lessen the Number of Dissenting of these Ministers be a good or an evil. I Ministers, we ought first to inquire a say, in a moral view; for, as to religion without morality, none but fools or knaves do, or ever did, profess it.--Now, as to the moral benefit arising from the teaching of Dissenting Ministers, it is sometimes very great, and I believe it is sometimes very small indeed, and, in many cases, I believe, their teaching tends to immorality and to misery.-Amongst the Ministers of some of the Sects, there are many truly learned and most excellent men, and such there always have been amongst them; and, even amongst the Sects called Methodistical, there have been, and, doubtless, are, many men of the same description. But, on the other hand, it must be allowed, that there are many of the Methodistical Preachers, who are fit for any thing rather than teaching the people morality. I am willing to give the most of them full credit for sincerity of motive; but, to believe, that the Creator of the Universe can be gratified with the ranting and raving and howling that are heard in some of the Meeting Houses, is really as preposterous as any part of the Mahomedan Creed; and, if possible, it is still more absurd to suppose, that such incoherent sounds should have a tendency to mend the morals of the people, to make them more honest, industrious, and publicspirited, for this last is a sort of morality by no means to be left out of the account. Never I have heard it observed by very sensible and acute persons, that even these ranters do more good than harm; but, if they do any harm at all, the question is, I think, at once decided against them; for, that they can do any good appears to me utterly impossible.I am clearly of opinion, that, to lessen the number of this description of Ministers (for so they are called) would be a benefit to the country, provided it could be done without creating a new source of political influence. And, as to the politics of the whole Sect of the Methodists, they are very bad. has any thing been done by them, which bespoke an attachment to public liberty. "Their kingdom," they tell us, is "not of "this world;” but, they do, nevertheless, not neglect the good things of it; and, some of them are to be found amongst the rankest jobbers in the country. Indeed, it is well known, that that set of politicians, ironically called THE SAINTS, who have been the main prop of the PITT system; it is well known, that under the garb of sanctity, they have been aiding and abetting in all the worst things that have been done during the last twenty years. These are very different people from the Old Dissenters, who have generally been a public spirited race of men. The poli tical history of THE SAINTS, as they are called, would exhibit a series of the most infamous intrigues and most rapacious plunder, that, perhaps, ever was heard of in the world. They have never been found wanting at any dirty job; and have invariably lent their aid in those acts, which have been the most inimical to the liberty of England.Their petitioning now, I look upon as a selfish act. If a Bill had been before the House to enable the government to bring 200,000 German soldiers into the country, not a man of them would have petitioned. They never petitioned against any of the acts of Pitt and his associates from the year 1792 to the year 1799; and, therefore, I give them very little credit for their alacrity now.Seeing them in this light, I must confess, that I do not wish to see their numbers increase; and, at any rate, I can not imagine any ground, upon which their Ministers can, without having cogregations, claim exemption from service in the Militia. As the law now stands, any man, be he who he may, except he be a Catholic or an Infidel, can exempt himself from the Militia service for life, by only paying sixpence. An exemption from Militia service is now, to a young mall, worth 100 pounds at least. But, he can obtain it for a sixpence. A carter, for in stance, who is 25 years of age, is now liable to be drafted into the Old Mil and also into Lord Castlereagh's Local, may obtain a security for life for sixpence He has only to go to the Quarter Sessions and there take the oath of fidelity and that of abjuration, and to declare, that he is a Protestant and a Christian and that be believes in the Scriptures. He has only to do this, and pay sixpence, and he is se cure against military discipline for his life. And, what objection is there to it? Whe need object to take the oath of allegianct to the King, to abjure the Pope, or to de clare himself a Christian? This is all; and thus, you see, as the law now stands any man but a Catholic or an Infidel may without any perjury or falshood, exempl himself from all militia service. So tha really the project of our good old Rich mond Park Minister was not wholly destitute of reason in its support.is reported to have given some instance of the abuse of this privilege. He me tioned an instance, in Staffordshire, of -He |