Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

The

sion of expectation that cash payments would not be again postponed. The preamble should comprehend a direct declaration that the restriction was continued, in order that the Bank might be enabled to reduce its issues, so as to resume cash payments at the time fixed by the bill. He presumed that no one would object to his proposed amendment from any attachment to the present preamble. That only stated, that unforeseen circumstances had arisen which rendered it expedient to continue the restrictions. Although he had closely attended all the discussions on the bill, he could not state what those circumstances were. right hon. gentleman had indeed, on a former night, mentioned four arguments as justificatory of the bill, of which the loans to be negociated for France afforded the only grounds on which the measure rested, though most extravagantly overcharged. It was notorious that we had witnessed of late a large subduction of gold from the continent for the purpose of supplying the coffers of the Bank, and yet that subduction did not enhance the price of gold among the continental nations. Why then should any effect of that kind, likely to arise from the loans alluded to, be supposed to be calculated to produce any enhancement of the price of gold in this country? He was astonished to find gentlemen so much frightened at the bugbear that loans to France, or to any other country, would serve to withdraw our bullion, and that we should be reconciled to a system which gave the Bank the power of in

fluencing the distribution of all the property in the country. One argument frequently urged by the Bank directors was, that parliament ought not to interfere with the affairs of the Bank; and in this opinion he entirely concurred. But the bill before the House was a most lamentable and fatal interference with them. Parliament had enacted the restriction, and that restriction rendered farther interference absolutely necessary. The Bank might, if they should think proper, discount bills payable at three years, as well as at two months, and thus throw into circulation a quantity of paper that would never return to them. While it possessed a discretion of this kind, parliament must interfere in its concerns, or abandon altogether the most important interests of the country.

It

There was one other consideration of a general nature which appeared to him to deserve attention, which was, the opinion which the continuance of this system must inculcate in Europe with respect to our financial resources; for while our present state of currency continued, we must be regarded by the continent as helpless and exhausted. was impossible to suppose that a nation able to relieve itself from its difficulties would remain in such an unsound state. It was vain to hope that the next year would be more favourable than the present for entering upon the subject; and it was for these reasons that he was anxious to call upon the House to adopt the amendment with which he intended to conclude. It was, to

leave out all the words in the preamble from "whereas," in

order to add the words,

"It is expedient that the provisions of the said act should be farther continued, in order to afford the directors of the Bank the opportunity of making such gradual reduction of the amount of their notes in circulation as may be necessary, in order to enable them, with safety to the Bank and to the public, to resume cash payments at the earliest period, and that another time should be fixed at which the said restrictions should cease."

Mr. Canning, in opposing the amendment, dwelt upon the declaration of the first preamble, which assigned as the motive of the continuance of the restriction, that "unforeseen circumstances" had rendered it expedient that the restriction should proceed; and this, he assured the House, was the only reason which at present could induce him to support the bill. In various other respects he adhered to his former opinions relative to the subject.

Mr. J. P. Grant, after various observations in favour of Mr. Lewis's motion, said, that when he recollected that the advances to government led to the Bank stoppage in 1797, and when he saw that the chancellor of the exchequer founded his system of finance on farther advances from the Bank on exchequer bills in the present year, he could not help thinking that the cause still continued, and would continue to operate to prevent the resumption of cash payments, just so long as this system between the Bank and the government was suffered to continue in full and

active operation. The hon. gentleman concluded with giving notice of his intention, in a future stage of the bill, to move that the restriction do continue no longer than six weeks after the next meeting of parliament.

Several other members on each side spoke on this topic; at length the question being put, "That the words of the Amendment made by the committee, proposed to be left out, stand part of the question, the House divided: Ayes, 88; Noes, 21: Majority, 67.

Mr. Tierney (whose motion took place of that of Mr. J. P. Grant) then proposed the 25th of March next, as the proper time for the Bank to resume cash payments. The question being put "That the words of the Amendment made by the committee, proposed to be left out, stand part thereof, the House divided: Ayes, 88; Noes, 27: Majority for 5th of July, 61.

The order of the day for the third reading of the Bank Restriction bill took place on May 19th, when Mr. Finlay rose, and alluding to a speech of Mr. Gur ney the preceding night, said that he could not suffer this bill to pass without taking some notice of the unfortunate prejudice to which that hon. member had lent his sanction, namely, that it was impossible to place our currency on its former footing. From this course nothing but the most serious evils were to be apprehended; and the hon. gentleman instanced in several continental countries the evils which had actually happened from the necessity of employing paper money instead of cash. It was

absurd

absurd (he said) to think that the Bank would next year, or in any future year, be more able, or more willing, to return to cash payments. Now or never was the time for the House to return to a wholesome currency. They must meet the evil, and they ought to meet it in a manly way at once, and not allow themselves to be abused longer with the farce which had been playing off upon them.

Mr. Tierney, seeing a secretary of the Treasury in his place, hoped that in the absence of the chancellor of the exchequer he would be able to inform him whether any and what steps were taken for paying the nine millions due by the public to the Bank of England. În an early part of the session provision was made for six millions of that sum; but with respect to the remaining three millions, he did not know of any provision for it.

Mr. Lushington assured the right hon. gentleman that he could give an answer which, he trusted, would prove satisfactory. Preparations were making for the payment to the Bank, not only of the six millions, but also of the three millions; but the particular sums, and the periods when they were to be paid, were yet matters for consideration.

Mr. S. Thornton farther an swered the right hon. gentleman's question, whether the Bank directors had given the notices required by parliament for the repayment of the sums of six millions and three millions, by saying that such notice had been given; and he could add, that it was understood on the part of the Bank that the sums in ques

tion would be paid off in the course of the present year.

The bill was afterwards read a third time, and passed.

In the House of Lords the Bank Restriction Continuance bill was introduced on May 26th by the nobleman considered as at the head of the ministry, the Earl of Liverpool. His lordship followed in some measure the steps of the chancellor of the exchequer, particularly in declaring that he considered the Bank fully prepared to pay in cash; but whereas the chancellor had split into several heads the arguments by which he endeavoured to prove the necessity of the restriction, the earl was content with taking a single ground, and laid the whole of the necessity to the stipulations of the French government which promised to pay, within a short period, more than 30,000,000l. sterling. He concluded a speech of no great length with saying, that he could not, consistently with the respon sibility which attached to his station, consent to the return of cash payments at the present period by the Bank; and he had therefore felt it an imperative public duty to propose the present bill.

Lord Grenville, after expressing the greatest disappointment at the statement he had just heard from the noble earl, said, that if he felt or stated fewer objections at the time when the continuation of the restrictions for two years was proposed, it was because he confidently believed that parliament had given the country a sacred pledge, which nothing but the most urgent necessity could tempt them to forego; and he

fondly

fondly clung to the hope that the day was at length positively fixed when the nation would return to that system of circulation under which its credit was untainted. That hope had now unhappily fled, destroyed as it was by the introduction of the present bill. Not only on account of the pub lic, but on account of the Bank itself, it was high time that the truth should be known. It was not fitting to go on with what was called restriction and restraint, if that restraint was in truth no other than a boon and indulgence granted to the Bank of England, by which they were enabled to pay their creditors in a depreciated currency. Whether that body looked upon it as a restraint to which they were willing to submit, or, as was sometimes insinuated, in which they were unwillingly but singularly acquiescent, in either case the great interest to which parliament was bound to look was that of the country; and looking to that, he never could be induced to consent to such a measure, even for the shortest period, upon a ground so problematical and inconsiderable as had been urged by the noble earl.

Lord G. continued to speak at considerable length on the dangers of perseverance in the system of paper currency, and on the mischief and ultimate destruction that it threatened to the finances of the country. The evils, he said were so many that he could not enumerate them, and so great that his majesty's ministers did not dare to look them in the face.

The Earl of Harrowby defended the bill by calling in question

several of the positions advanced by the last speaker, whom he charged with taking for granted' many of the unavoidable evils with which the nation had been threatened. He thought that the dangers of recurring to cash, payments at the present critical moment were much greater than the persisting in a system under which the country had flourished so long.

Of the noble lords who afterwards joined in the debate, it would be superfluous to give an analysis of their speeches, as they would necessarily fall into the track already anticipated by the speakers in the other House. The question being put, the House resolved itself into a committee on the bill, when the earl of Lauderdale proposed as an amendment, that instead of fixing the 5th of July 1819 as the term of the restriction, it should expire in six weeks after the commencement of the next session of parliament. Upon this the House divided; Contents, 9; Not Contents, 22. The bill then went through the committee.

On May 27th on the third reading of the Bank Restriction bill, the earl of Lauderdale moved a change in the preamble, which was negatived.

The same was the fate of a proviso moved by lord Holland, to put an end to the operation of the act in the event of the price of gold falling to 31. 17s. 6d. per

[blocks in formation]

CHAPTER VII.

Chancellor of the Exchequer's Motion respecting the Building of Churches. Dr. Phillimore's Motion relative to the Spanish ships engaged in the Slave Trade.

N March 16, the Chancellor of the Exchequer having moved the order of the day for taking into consideration that part of the Lords Commissioners speech which related to the building of Churches, Mr. Tierney gave notice that soon after the holidays he intended to move, that the sum granted by parlialiament for the erection of a monument to commemorate our vic tories by sea and land, be laid out in the erection of a parish church or churches.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that the subject to which he was about to call the attention of the House was not connected with that alluded to by the right hon. gentleman; at the same time he was far from being disinclined to coincide with the view of the right hon. gentleman on this subject; for he thought that if they should communicate with each other, it would be found that they did not disagree.

Mr. Tierney expressed much satisfaction at what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman, especially as this idea had been adopted in the quarter where it could be most advantageously carried into execution.

The House having resolved itself into a committee, that part

of the speech of the Lords Commissioners which related to the want of accommodation for public worship, was read by the Chairman to the following effect:

"The Prince Regent has commanded us to direct your particular attention to the deficiency which has so long existed in the number of places of public worship belonging to the established church, when compared with the increasing and increased population of the country. His Royal Highness most earnestly recommends this important subject to your early consideration; deeply impressed, as he has no doubt you are, with a just sense of the many blessings which this country, by the favour of Divine Providence, has enjoyed, and with the conviction that the religious and moral habits of the people are the most sure and firm foundation of national prosperity."

The Chancellor of the Exchequer began by expressing in the warmest terms his satisfaction, together with that of the public, respecting the communication from the throne which the Lords Commissioners had been instructed to deliver by command of the Prince Regent at the opening of the present session. He went on to say, that in support of a fact

[ocr errors]
« ZurückWeiter »