The National Register.
London, England, 1811-07-28 00:00:00

4eg

tional sums in checks drawn upon-then* by their customers.
This they were forbidden to do by this under penalty of the
pillory; and without being enabled MIMIC: it, how were they
to carry on their trade, how were they to procure change to
pay their fractional parts of checks ? If, however, this Bill w s
considered so good a Bill by those who supported it, why was
it not extended to Irelaud ? Why were the landlords in Ire-
land to be allowed to insist tin their rents in gold, which the
landlords in Great Btitain.were forbidden .to do, unless upon
the most vicious principle in legislation, that the crime, as it was
row to be called, was so frequent in Ireland, that it was in vain
to attempt to cheek it ; and that it having only just commenced
in England, it was to he met by a legislative enactment ? It was
qbiolutely necessary that some steps should be taken to restore
that sound and healthy state of circulation, without which the
credit of the country could not long be maintained, and to place
the paper currency of the country upon its only sure and certain
basis, that of golde
• The Earl of LIVEit POOL could not allow the question to pass
without observing on some of the statements of the Noble Lord.
The value of' the gold coin of this country was not to be esti-
mated according to its weight in gold, but according to the
value fixed upon it by, the reigning Sovereign of the country.—
The value'of Bank notes, as for every purpose of internal nego-
tiation, he contended, was by the general consent of the coun-
try, declared not be depreciated. There were no persons out
of thg Houle who had repressed their opinion, that the conduct
of the'Noli'.e Lord who had riven rise to this Bill, was so far
proper, thet they ,hemselves would wish to follow his example;
and their not foliowirg it was- a proof that they did nut think
any depre.i.7lqon of our Bankpaoer had taken place.
The. Earl of Lauri cR DA 1.. E , in explanation, thought it was not
fdr to judge what the opinions of Noble Lords, or of any other
persone must be, from their ftillowing or not. following the ex-
ample of the Nobe Lord (Kiele). If every person who agreed
the there was a depreciation 'of paper, were to follow the line
• of conduct suggested by his Noble F: lend (Lord King), he (Earl
1..) suspected the Noble EOM oprosite would find tie. present
13 11 a lots effectual measure than he now supposed it. The
Nohlk Lord was bound to take them as they peached, not as
they practised.
fEarl.S•raltuorr strongly supported the opinion he had for-
merly de ivertd, and in which he was happy to find the Nob:e
Earl ( Liverpool) concurred, as to the cause of the value affixed
to the current coin of the coutitry. It was only by violating the
law,svhich prohibhed the turning guineas into bullion, that the
value of a guinea could be.• rah:td above that conferred on it by
the Proclawat km of the or the Act of the Leislettire.
The Lord CuA :.)c begeed to rernitel the:House, that,
Isevitig already agreed to the Amendments made by the Com-
piens on the Bill, the questron now was, whether a Message
should be. sent to the Comanoas, stating that they had 'agreed to
those amendments.
'flue ciaestiun was then put and agreed to.—Adjourned.
• i