The Sun.
London, England, 1840-08-01 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, JuLT 31.
BILLS OF EXCHANGE BILL.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the Order
of the Day for going into Committee on this Bill. He
strongly recommended it to their Lordships as a tem-
porary measure, on account of the severe commercial
distress now prevailing. He stated, on the high autho-
rity of Mr. Jones Lloyd, that but for the operation
of the Bill, many of the first mercantile houses in this
country would have been ruined. During the late crisis
in the United States, individuals had been enabled
to raise money at a rate of interest exceeding 5 per
cent. Many other instances of its beneficial operation
might be cited. He did not however ask it as a per-
manent measure, but only for a limited period, though it
would be for theirLordshipshereafter to consider whether
it would not be for the interest of the commerce of this
country that it should be made a permanent measure.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said the Noble Lord
Mated all the advantages, but omitted to state the dis-
advantages of this measure. He objected to prolonging
this Bill for any length of time, without inquiry ; or,
if it must be prolonged, he thought it should not be
for_a further period than six months.

Lord ASHBURTON, who was heard with great
indistictnPss, was understood to object to the measure.
He said that the Noble Marquis was quite mistaken in
supposing that the trade of the North of Europe was
carried on by bills of Exchange. There could be tio
greater evil to trade than the introduction of ion!, credit—
for six months, for instance—which this Bi!:1 tended to
introduce, instead of the present Inevailing credit of
two months. Even in the Chi.-aa trade, the usual cre-
dit was no more than six Months. After the relaxation
which had taken place in the Usury Laws, he would
not recommend their Lordships to go further, or to
pass this Bill without inquiry.
Lord MON TEAGLE was rejoiced to find that it
was intended to inquire into the state of the Usury
Laws, as the most beneficial results might be expected
from the labours of such a Committee.—( Hear, hear.)
The parties who had paid largely for accommodation
might object to the system, but the question was not
the amount they paid, but whether they would have
been able to obtain any accommodation whatever under
the previous system. The head of one of the most
eminent mercantile establishments in the metropolis,
namely, .the Governor of the Bank of England, stated
that he thought the effect of the Usury laws during
the severe commercial pressure in 1837, was most be-
neficial. Mr. Jones Lloyd's evidence was to the very
same effect. If a Committee was moved for in the
next Session, he trusted the question of repealing these
laws altogether would be entertained. _ _

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE contended that
the Government was bound to keep faith with the parties
who were interested in the Bill. He had no objection
to substitute one yearfor four, with the understanding
that a full inquiry would take place in the course of
next Session.

The Bill then went through a Committee.
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND.)
Viscount DUNCANNON moved the Order of the
Day for the third reading of the Municipal Corporations

(Ireland) Bill.
Lord LYNDHURST bad two or three amendments
to move in the Bill, the first of which referred to the
Recorder of Dublin, the object of the clause which
he proposed to amend being to exclude the Recorder
of Dublin from Parliament, and he thought that object
should not have been attempted by a side wind, but by
a direct enacting clause. The office of Recorder b
Ot I
Dublin was one of great antiquity, possessing very x
tensive powers, and his chariie, h
charter required
owev him to hold
four Sessions every year.
more than that—he held a Court for theer'trdiaild ofto upri-
soners twelve times a-year, and altogether upwards of
twenty-eight sessions per annum. How did he conduct
himself? He (Lord Lyndhurst)t could pledge him-
risonletrecofordrertrialnenvlr
self to the fact, that
quitted his Court until every
Np
antchonnvvoictthetdel.i.
discharged or
N rhyt then, should the,
power of interfering with that
t 1 was said that tehetimes for holding the ses-
sions? Court, or of appointing
were 'dissatisfied with the mode
hP profession
holdingessi on a and
these
oe
Courts.Judsg es
The fact, however,
one,
t at all the profession, and all
tolft e
eJounddgneest, save
exception wainsghighly approved of the mode
easiness at these sessions. That
the Justice Perrin, who it was known
was a violent partisan—who had been returned for the
Oity of Dublin, and who had been unseatzul in cons,-
et the proviso in clause
quence of a charge of bribery. E' .
Lord
sessi 01, which empowered the
on. -Lieutenant • '
I, _ moved the omission
..,o appoint the times of holding the