The Express.
London, England, 1848-09-29 00:00:00

ideldnes. -
These results lead so tat remark that the ten-
delay of one mod important clan of these companies
is to die off and &wpm, unless the law give them
authority to make modified/oos in the conditions of !
their existence. Joint stock banks cannot thrive
under their present mastitedons.
When a binle assnians of eve hundred partnere la-
ssoed of five, the that esseiderstion that occurs is the
superior, and, lased, the absolute, security for its
customers which the former asgociation gives : the
next is, a drawback, that only a certain class of =
teeners and business will flow to a concern managed
in such publicity as Its destitution rupposeriTTMe
g
object of all joint stock banks lid, of course, been the
removal of this one great obstacle to their obtaining
the most general end lucrative business; that,nemik,
which mores a certain amount of massy amid
deuce. And the body of partners are, Otersimm,
quired to surrender their right of inspection more or
less completely to a more or lees numerous manage-
ment more or less fettered by general rules.
The legislature has not suffered any limitation of
the advantages of perfect security—or of seeurity as
nearly perfect as any human work can be—which the
joint dock system holds out. The responsibility of
each proprietor for all the debts of the partnership is
left in the hands of the severe common law; and un-
fair escape from apprehended peril of disaster to the
common fortunes has been prevented by equally se-
vere special legislation.' he knowledge of this should
have hindered shareholaers from placing the manage-
ment of their affairs in unfit hands, or an imprudent
amount of authority in any.. But in some cases we
have seen the former fault ;in others the latter. A
great northern town (Newesetle-upon-Tyne) presents
au instance of each: one most melancholy disaster
there being chargeable to an incompetent direc-
tion ; another to a single person being ma-
nager of the bank with such absolute power
over the credits granted, that neither the directors
nor the very auditors were allowed to examine the
books of the establishment, or to ascertain to ilAttiO
' the accommodation recited in the accounts " audited •
was given. In such cases it frequently turns out,
when the crash coma, that the most wealthy share-
holders have retired in time, and a few respectable
ISM find themselves in a partnership of domestic
est-rants and small farmers to pay the accumulated
smears of long-accruing disasters. The clue which
it would be most desirable to engage as partners in
Nish banks, retired tradesmen, merchants, and small
capitalists (because their money would thereby be
rendered actively useful in the promotion of commune
and the employment of labour), are, of course, send
from such adventures. And thus, for instance, the
town we have alluded to is now notoriously without
the proper amount of banking accommodation, and
will long remain without it. For with or without
reason no new joint stock bank can be established at
Newcastle-oo•Tyne.
It is, we think, questionable, whether the determi-
nation
of the legislature to secure the creditors of
Joint Stock Ban to the utmost is not defeating its
▪ May they not become either impossible, or be
devoted of an inferior and unfit clue of shareholders
not really (though legally) responsible beyond what
they contribute to the common capital at first—or, be so
uttered by their own regulations as to be confined to
a limited and least important branch of businees
Private banks at the best must be less secure than
joint stock beaks at the worst, supposing each
dam to do the same business, and that the latter is not
barrel by bad laws from their natural constituency—
' small capitalists seeking a good interest without
trouble for their money? May not the effect of the
present state of the law be either to make the joint-
stock banks so badly composed as to deprive them of
public confidence, or to compel their proprietary to re-
fuse their managers• the powers necessary for the
bulk of banking biomes.? In either case the risks
and the profits of the trade will be thrown on private
banks.
Since the law, as it stands at present, threatens
these results, the rational course is surely to retain in-
stitutions that may nt such advantages as to
security and the ei on of capital, by relaxing the
severity of the responsibility of their shareholders—a
severity that defeats itself. Remove the fears of those
who have aught to lose, by limiting their stake to
what they choose to make it. Concurrently reasonable
security might be given to creditors by compelling
publicity as to the amount of capital subscribed and
paid up to the bank, the state of the circulation, the
amount of deposits, and the total sum of its liabilities.
The creditors of joint-stock banks would thereby be in
an infinitely better position than those of private
banks, of the state of whose fortunes nothing can be
known. The condition now often adopted by the
shareholders themselves might be enforced—that the
bank should be at once wound up when a certain
proportion of the subscribed capital was lost.
In the case of other public companies than joint-
stock banks, some remedy more speedy and less ex-
pensive than " Chancsef should In allowed to ag-
grieved shareholders. The proceedings now pending
in the British Copper Company show us a direction
making for. years a handsome dividend when the
capital was in process of rapid annihilation. Five per
cent, in the , and in the autumn a declaration
of insolvency Accommodation bills floating between
the company and the private firms of the directors
• ton of books and lepers conveniently sold off to the
&adman : and after the utter bankruptcy of the
concern is known, the shareholders are infused all in-
ibemation as to its causes, and to obtain a knowledge
of their own affairs have to meek it through the me-
' diem of the LORD CHANCELLOR. This is one of the
outrages perpetrated on shareholders by directors;
and it again makes us inquire whether the proprietary
of public companies are not, after all, from their num-
bers, position, and importance to society, entitled to
some of that consideration so plentifully bestowed on
their creditors. It surely cannot be necessary or ad-
vantageous to absolve creditors from all fear or
thought as to the ultimate payment of the advances
they may make to reckless managers of thabinterests
of others.

RAVING in two provisos ertieles on Poor Law ex-
pmditure ermined—ent, rte total amount and gra-
dual increase as a national batten; and, secondly,
the causes of that premme, as arising from a parallel
increase in the number of applicants for relief; the
third point which naturally suggests itself for inquiry,
is the comparative distribution of that burthen be-
tween town and country. It is, we believe, a very
common impassion among the inhabitants of our
large cities end the adjoining districts that, somehow
or other, they contribute considerably more than their
just sharsof the poor-rate. Many of themareaequelnted
with, or have happened to hear ot, certain fevoured
I places in the country where the poor are few, unim-
Crior self-reliant, and the rates miraculously
s tad what is tree perhaps of one parish in a
tbstand they amine to be true of the majority.
Thule jealousy and dissatidaotion are aggravated by
their attributuig a portion of this light proems on
country people to the heavy prem. on themselves.
Large cities have, they think, a strange attraction
for all who, from whatever cause, find them-
selves ill at esse in the country~. The
P
that is ashamed of itself, and the viceo;:a
has other motives then shame for hiding itself from
public observation, flow to great cities, sleet is
eostiserns. The inhabitants of Diarylebone and St.
Martin's-in-the-Fields suppose themselves to be
naleted for the ignorance, incapacity, and improvi-
dence of squires, and farmers, and labourers hundreds
of miles away from them. Such views on the part of
the sumiremaiming tax-trammelled inhabitant of
London sr Liverpool are not greatly to be wondered
at. The multiplicity of rates sad taxes that come out
of his nob= and the small proportion which the
poor-rake been to the entire amount, do butaggravate
the bitterns= of his discontent. The very tin. on
the elements. the peice-ho is made to pay for air, light,
and water, do not so move his gall as an additional
penny in the poor-rate. Pity that he does not oftener
reflect that great cities Qe a magnet stall more attrao-
dye of the rich than of the poor; and that there is
sot a pariah in the countri that does not furnish its
quota to the wealth and intelligent* which take up
disk permanent abode in the city to which he
belong
The~ inhabitants of the country, on the other hand,
complain with a still greater show of plausibility, of the
far more unequal premium of the poor-rate on their
inferior resources, and of the increasing rapidity

4 most stable elements of their former
seduced from them by the attractions
"• or of the continent. Poverty-
.way Dorsetahire, no doubt, often
rents which she pays, but which are
ly-fair or in Belgrade—in Paris or
Those is much to be said on both sides,
it such speculations were not growing
rather obsolete. Their complexity is inextricable
and the fallacy of partial deductions therein be-
coming daily more palpable. Be it granted that
London absorbs the wealth of the country whole-
sale. In proportion as she does so, she becomes a
customer for its produce, besides sheltering certainly
no inconsiderable share of its superabundant poverty.
The old state of things might have been better. could
it bat have lasted. We are anything rather than
bigoted admirers of overgrown cities.
As regards the comparative pressure of the poor
rate on town and country, we are bound to my that,
on the whole, the great cities have as yet no valid
cause of complaint. If they paid a trifle more in pro-
portion to their wealth and population, it would be no
more than, for reasons above alluied to, we think
they might reasonably pat up with. But they do
not. If a national rate were levied to-morrow, it
would increase instead of diminishing the quota of
the metropolitu districts. In moot caeca like
the present nothing is at once so con-
vincing and consoling as a trifle of arithmetic—
The following is a comparative statement of the prin-
cipal relations of last year's poor-law expenditure for
all England and Wales, and for what are called the
Metropolitan districts :
nitre! t. Metropolitan
=
districts.
Rental or annul value of rate-
able property In 1847 .C67,291,171 £8,829,518
Money expended is direct relief
of the poor R5,296,786 £691,069
Population in 1841
State per bead of manal nine to
Raination t4 474 £4 10 10
the pound of poor relief
expenditure
Rats per bead ot pow relief ex-
penditure to population £o 6 8 £0 6 64
The excess of the wealth of the metropolitan dis-
tricts over the average wealth of the rest oldie country,
as evidenced by the rental or rated annual value, is
less than might have been expected. The population
of those districts was in 1841 a trifle under one-eighth
of the total population of England and Wales. The
annual value of rated property is somewhat over one-
eighth of the total valuation. In this item, supposing
the City population not to have subsequently in-
creased at a more rapid rate, there is &slight excess.
IThis excess is, of course an advantage; thus, from every
point of view, the balance is slightly in favour of the
1 metropolitan districts. The total sum levied therein is
poor -rate of course greatly exceeds that in the above
Butthe sum deducted therefrom for extra purposes,
suposially for police, so far exceeds the propor-
tion in the rest of the country, that our only
moans of drawing a fair comparison was
ley confining our calculations to the direct expen•
ditare on the relief of the poor. For the extra charge
slider the heed of police, &c., the denizen of the me-
VcWhat we
is, we conceive, sufficiently remunerated.
we set out to establish was, that up to this
time the relief of the metropolitan poor is less, and
net, ss is generally supposed, more expensive than in
the rest of the country.
If instead of comparing the poor-rate of the metro-
paten districts with that of the entire remainder of
the country, we contrast it severally with that of each
county, the favourable position of London is demon-
strated still more forcibly. The poor relief expen-
diture in the metropolitan districts averages 6s. 61d.
per head of the population of 1841. Of 64 counties in
Ragland and Wales (counting Yorkshire as three).
23 are under, and 31 exceed, that average ; the lowest
expenditure being 4s. per head, and the highest
10s. 11d. The expenditure per head on poor relief in
the counties of Berke, Buckingham, Cambridge, Doe-
st, Essex, Huntingdon, Norfolk, Northampton, Ox-
ford, Suffolk, Sussex, and Wilts, exceeds the metropo-
litan average by fifty, per cent. or upwards and yet
we Londoners complus. We give the names of the
counties, as showing at a glance in what parts of
Ragland, and on what class of our population, the re-
sponsibility of providing for the poor will be found to
press most heavily. We are sorry to disabuse oar
London readers of the belief that they are
the worst off : bat fair play is a jewel all
the world over ; and we are not the less solicitous for
the interests of our country population because we
happen to have less personal experience of the evils
under which they labour.
Had we space we could elicit similar results for
most, if not all, of our great cities which rank next to
London in wealth and population. For instance, what
we may call the Liverpool metropolitan district, or
the contiguous unions of
Annual valor! of Expended on
Rated Property. Poor Relict Rata per S.
Liverpool. £1,021,896 567,163 ls. 4d.
AM West Derby M 6,534 13,697 Oe. Std.

TotiL 11,60,02 80,858 A. le. Od. •
This is for net expenditure on poor relief. The
extra charges in the two unions are about 32,0001.
Similarly for
Annual Vslue. Poor /Wet. Rata per S.
Manchester £865.785 £66,414 Is. 6d.
Salford 338,703 13,771 Os. Ind.
And C3torlban

Total. £1,826,458 91,227 Ay. is. 14d.
Inboth these examples the reader will observe the
rate in the pound of direct poor relief is less than the
average rate in England and Wales, even in the most
heavily bur honed unions of each district. At Man-
chester, however, the extra charges are much heavier
than at Liverpool, amounting to about 80,0001. for
the three unions, of which near 70,0001. is for borough
or county rate, which in Liverpool and West Derby
does not much exceed 12,0001.
W. confess these restate surprise ourselves i but
that is only the stronger motive for presenting them
to our readers. All we can say is that we have made
our calculations with the most rigid accuracy from the
data supplied by the Poor Law Reports. One thing is
plain at all events, that it is not the inhabitants of the
great cities and their environs who would benefit by
the establishment of one common national rate.

Tim recent events of Ceylon furnish instructive and
curious elements of study, and the government of
that distant island suggests so many comparisons with
the duties and policy of government at home that it
is well worth a few moments' attention. Ceylon has
been of late years a prosperous colony. Its coffee plan-
tations came to extend over immense districts, end
wend millions of English capital were vested in them.
The mums of the island, though raised not in the
wimstemeomical way, such u by duties on exporter
12i:garfa ample, amounted to nearly half a million
, and covered all the expenses of the colony.
We will de its government the justice to admit
that they were anxious and forward to abolish what
was most objectionable in the old mode of raising a
reasnan; that they reduced the duties on exports,
did away with correes, and showed a wish to im-
prove. But in the midst of their plans of improve-
ment a serious chill cams over the wealth and pros-
perity of the colony. With the protecting duty on
coffee, its high price in the home market declined,
and a certain degree of distress came to affect the
commercial and proprietorial climes of Ceylon.
What was the duty of government in such a
crisis? It was undoubtedly its duty and best
policy to put itself in harmony with the state
over which it ruled, to retrench expenses, and
thus to weigh as lightly as possible on a people
irritated by losses and privations. But this is
an idea that never enters into official heads,
either at home or in the colonies. Did the La
gislaitve Council contain any member of the suf-
fering dames, they might have suggested or insisted
on the necessity of this beet mode of alleviation. lint
a legislative council of functionaries cannot be ex-
pected to reoommerd retrenchment. Far from this,
their best wit was employed in devising new modes of
taxation. The rich having suffered, and being un-
able and unwilling to pay, the statesmen of Ceylon
imagined nothing better than to tax the poor.
A tax on guns and dogs was implied upon the
, who need both, not for sport, but for food
ata protection. If this was not enough, a poll
tax was superadded, as a kind of redemption from
the abolished comb', and from it even the Buddhist
priests, who make a vow of poverty, were not spend.
Lest the humble clue of town.lrshould not have
their share at discontent as well as the peasant,
a pound sterling was demanded indiscriminately
from every shop. A fitter scheme for rendering
tvhi:rvernment obnoxious could not have been &-
And the result has been seen in a very for-
midable insurrection, to suppress which troops most
probe* be brought from a distance, and which will
cod more than the sum of all the new taxes levied in
peace for any number of years. It is the story of the

EVENT/46 SEPTEMBER 29.3t4it•
-..*
Wavers Ur' nt. We me* € ous,.with which the mod
wig -fait 6 ' which .01, the eeethrt ar• ''dace(
al &ban,. • Egg d ; dit.thilallC 0 yob. 144 ,of the metropolis
0 2.6001. WU
r frays by 111111 4,0 Uwe recently^ bid epportema • Of :co @minium, ost.orrheo
maw for emus on newer before equal/K. l'he flonth Sea computes the rent'
rise cm- and 1826 poseented us with the phenomena of spent in Msicireri
1e....eel ter i action only; 1847 and 1848 ► rwr shown us the te- in Naples.
salts of loog operation in some of these complicated or would, 11 each
mamma tlim . . rather obsolete. T