The National Register.
London, England, 1816-02-18 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER.

Cher sum of three millions, without any interest at aH; yet still
they had large balances on their hands; and these different
concessions in, the pat t of the Bank proved that there was
nothing in the Act for the renewal of the Bank Charter which
should prevent the public from a participation in these profits.
The Hun. Nlember then took a review of the state of the balan-
ces at different periods, from 1600, to the present linte; and
contended, that from 1500 to 1508, the Batik hail balmier, to the
amount of 5,509,0001. in its hands, mum which they made a
profit of 300.ata01. a year. From that time, to the year 1814,
they hail iii their hands 5,100,0901.; upon vs Inch sum they hail
tuade a profit of per edit.: and again, from 1511. to the pre-
sent time. they hail had 8;09,0001. of balaitee iu their hands.
On the Nt talk, they had. for the last I I ado-4. been inakiag a
profit of 450,0001. annually; and for this munificent income
they did nothing, but merely carried ou a plain common mercan-
tile banking transaction, which there was nut a bauking-house
in London or Westminster would not readily perform it fur
2:1,0001. a year. The Hon. Gentleman said, lie must nose again
advert to the charge for the management of the public debt ;
mid whilst he did justice to the admirable and correct manner
in which this part of the public sersire vv as performed, lie
most be allowed to recommend, at a time w hen nothing but
ronomy could save the country, that some further reduction
should he made in the sum allowed to the Batik for Ale per-
formance of this branch of service, and contended, that since
1506, the increased espcuse to the Bank round not, on the
most liberal allowance, bit stated at more than 38,0th01. while
their increased profits were 155,0001. at Want. The Hon. Gen-
tleman nextobjected to the allowance of 4,4001. a year towards
the support of their house expeuses, which they had enjoyed
eser since the establishment of the Bale— If the Hank stood
upon their chartered rights, certaltily this sum could nut be
taken from them. Oo 'lr. Perceval's proposing to suppress
this allowance, the Bank absolutely refused to assent, and
nun, for a reason which, in his opinion, was the strongest that
could be urged for its suppressioli; namely, that they had bad
it so long. Another item of allowance was, one of between 3
and i,OOOl. for the management of 4 minions Smith Sea stock
which they had purchased in 1721, and which bad since Hugg-
ed in the other public funds, and they were otherwise paid by
the public. The last !win which lie had to mention was also
one of the most singular that he could imagine ; it amonnted to
about 3,0001. per amnion, and was composed of an allowance of
one.eighth per cent. claimed by them for the management of
such potion of the Property-tax as wet to paid by individuals
into the Bank direct. The Hon. Gentleman then rot °recited
to enumerate the different heads of profit derived by the Bank
from the public; and observed. that taking the sum paid fur
the mauagement of the public debt at 3a0,3001., the profits on
the suspension of cash payments at 800,0001., amid adding the
profits on other branches of balances, aft!. their pi Mils were
not less than 1,535,0001. ammally, independent of the profits
derived from their exemption from the fair propartlon of the
stamp duties, which was not less than 400,0901. a-year more.
These were profits tool, mid lie was convinced, that tithe House
would insist on it with firmness; the Bank w mold not long resist
to gime up to the public some of their overgruri n profits. The
Hon. Grandam] cmiclnileil by musing fur the appointment of
a Committee to enquire iuto the state of the to:sitting engage.
meats between the public and the Bank, and the profits which
the Bank derived front those engagements, and to report to the
House thereon. . .

......„
Mr. VANSITrAter opposed this motion, as considering it un-
necessary, Was •It as lie considered the affairs of the Bank
had been folly investigated by the Committee in IKOT ; and by
the repeated animal accounts since laid before the House.
Neither could he agree with the Hon. Gentleman in his po.
sition, thattbe public ought to participate in the profits arising
from the suspension of cash payments ; since die earliest oppor-
tunity might and would be seized for restoring cash payments,
though he feared circumstances would oblige him to propose
a further extension of that measure, but certainly not with
any view to increasing the profits of the Bank. He had brought
the lion. Gentleman to acknowledge, that more than half the
profits of the Bank were derived from the suspension of cash
payments, and that the Committee were not to take cognizance
of that branch of the profit; and he was persuaded he should
prove there was PO necessity for a Committee to enquire into
any other part of the profits. Ile thought the present question
divided itself into two heads; whether the arrangement made
with the Bank by Mr. Perceval in hors was a provident one,
and whether the public had a right to any large r share in the
profits made by the Bank. For his own part, his duty was to
obtain every fair participation in the Bank profits for the pub
lie. But his opinion WAS, that they had no right to attempt to
coerce the Bank to any other arrangement than that w hich it
had entered Into with Mr. Perceval. Instead of there being an
increased amount of balances in the bands of the Bank some
Demi, they had gradually dimicished since that period. If that
were the ease, surely the public ennui not call on the Bank to
give a greater participation in its profits; especially when it was
considei e el, that whateser the profits of the Bank really were,
they must be greater in a time of war than in a them of peace ;
for in the latter case the deposits must be smaller than in time
of mar. In the arrangements he would lease to propose with
the Bank, the public would teceive an advantage of 210,0001.
a year, %Nell amounted nearly to half the amount of the advan-
tages obtained by the Bank from the public, es en taking the
lion. Gentleman's own statement. He dekuded the Directors
of the Bank ft out the charge which had been made itgaiust
them of a want ofaccommodation to the paisley. In volieeting
the tax tit income, the Batik did the duty for about 3,0001,
year. which would cost the public above 50,001.11. if done accord-
ing to the original proposition. Upem all these grounds, to ga
luso a Committee, tee ase.ertain what further 'motifs could be
obtained from the Bank, would be a waste of the time of the
House.
Mr. RANRES contended, that what was done by the Com-
mittee of I ftsi was nut equal to the expectations lit' Mr. Perce-
val, but he was swayed by the opinion of the Governor of the
Bank. it never was intended by Mr. Perces al, nor was it laid
down in the act of InUts, that that arrangement setts to be !im-
manent. And if Mr. Percival had attended more to the opi-
nions of the late Mr. H. Thornton, and to those of that very
Committee, he would have found, even then, that a much better
arrangement might at that time have been made with the Bank.
The Chaneelior of the FAclicq. ought to allow the I louse to ap-
point a Committee, in order really to ascertain a !tether the
Bank nodd not afford a little more to the public service. He
had no wish to dissolve the connection between the Bank and
the public ; but a snflicieut cheek should be established on the
Bank, se hie+ if not done that night mot he done soon.
?dr. Banino contended, that the profits of the Bank had
been considerably over-rated by his Ham Friend ( Mr. Gum-
fell). He reckoned the advantages derived from the Bank by
the public since the renewal of the Bank Charter to amount to
between seven and eight The Bank had also sup.
plied considerable sums of money in gold dining the war, at the
:sterling value, when it must have been a consideranie sacrifice
to the Bank. Ile denied that the Bank could make 5 per
cent. per annum by such fluctuating proptrty as balances,

I'EB. 18.

which might lie suddelds withdrawn from the Bank foethn
public servive. Even it'a C mittee were appointed, their
oOi lintlu ng lieW for them to discover, except in what manner
the balance, of public money in die hands of the Bank had been
(doomed ; an account of which could be laid before the House
without the assistance of a Committee.
tl r. lIA N NES explained.
Mr. TIERNEY haul no intention of trespassing on the time of
the Ileum., by entering Into the details of this subject : but be
was of opinion that enquiry was flue only mode of ascertaining
whether the Bank might or not to give 111010 itel'offirAullittiOn to
the politic fur the balances suffered to remain in its hands.
Lord CASTLEREAGH thuuuht no sufficient grounds had been
laid far au enquiry into the situation and ciremnstances of the
Bank ; for if without strouuds such an enquiry wen; "ante into,
it must he prejudicial to the eredi: of the Bank. a u.n7l through
it, to the credit of the country, in the eves of foreign nations.
He contended that the public had divided the yearly adVAll-
tages with the Ba nk. arising from the deposits in the hands or
the latter, oboist equally. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr (iro,-
fell) might bring the subject before the House by a roceine
motion, without the assistance of a Committee, which ho
(Lord C.) considered as quite uncalled for.
Mr. Pox•oxur said, the enquiry sought for was simply is
know whether the Batik, acting as the Banker of the Public,
did noisier the latter such assistance as was equal to the outran-
tap.% derived by the Bank from the lodgment of public balan-
ces in its hands. How this could affect the credit of the Bank
finch less that of the Public) he was nt a loss to know. It
WAS impossible for the Chancellor of the Exchequer not to
wish to keep well with the Bank, and that could only ie done
by allowing the Bank to make as great profits from the Public
as possible. It was the House of Commons alone that could,
in such a ease no the present, become the true guardian of
the politic interest.
Mr. MAIM VAT spoke in favour of going into a Committee
on this subject.
Mr. NIANNINn spoke against the Committee.
Mr. Giusw.t. replied, and the House divided—For thn mo-
tion, 4l—against it, 81—majority, 37.
On our rendinission to the Gallery, we found Mir C. Monett
moving a call of the House for Monday sc'night, on account
of the Property-tax.—After Amite conversation, the motion
was agreed to.—Adinurned at Twelve o'clock.