The Sun.
London, England, 1848-08-30 00:00:00

IMPERI

destroyed. He thought it just, that when a measure of
relief to the colonies was before the House, attention
should be called to their condition, and that there should
be some expression of feeling on the part of the British
Parliament, in order that the Secretary of State might
know, that if he were disposed to visit on this ruined
colony hii wrath, because the colonists were not in a
condition to furnish the supplies, the House of
Commons, at all events, would not be a party to such
proceedings. He begged to ask whether it was in-
tended, that the Secretary of State was to have the
despotic power of distributing as he thought fit, half a
million loan granted by the Commons of England, and
whether he was to be at liberty to vent his wrath on
every colony which, either from the ruin brought on it
by the Government measures, or the scourge inflicted by
Providence, should become unable or unwilling to grant
the necessary supplies for maintaining the expenditure
of those colonies. He farther desired to ask whether,
if Tobago, which was small and weak in itself, was to be
treated in this manner. Trinidad and British Guiana,
which also threatened to stop the supplies, was to be
put on the same footing as Tobago. If so, for what
purpose were they voting a grant of half a million? Was
it to be altogether monopolised by some servile that
dared not show its independence, or exercise the right of
refusing supplies, which belonged to an independent
people, when they thought they were subjected to into-
lerable governors? Having made this statement, he
should not press his motion for printing the petition with
the votes, as he understood it had been already printed
in the usual appendix.
The motion was then, by leave, withdrawn.
THE RAJA OF SATTARA.
Mr. G. THOMPSON postponed his motion, respect-
ing the Raja of Sattara case, until the third reading of
the Consolidated Fund Bill, on Thursday.
CUSTOMS SEIZURE OF SILKS.
Mr. JOHN WILLIAMS moved for a return of the
number of seizures of silks, lace, and shawls, made at
the Custom-house of London, from the Ist day of Janu-
ary, 1848, to the 25th day of August, 1848, on the plea
of under valuation of entry ; stating the kinds of goods
seized, the amount of entry, valuation of such seizures,
the amount paid by the Custom-house to the importers
of the goods, the amount of the proceeds of the sales of
such goods ; stating the number of lots into which they
were divided for sale, the several days on which they
were put up for sale, and whether sold or bought in, or
postponed, in each case, and the expenses incurred on
such sales ; and a balance account to show the benefit
or loss to the Custom-house department, and the amount
paid in each case to the seizing officer.
The return was agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. HUME, a return was also
Ordered of copies of all correspondence on the proposed
establishment, extension, or improvement of Small Debt
Courts, within the towns of Calcutta, Madras, and Bom-
bay, which has taken place between the Judges of her
Majesty's Courts of Judicature in India, the Governors
of Bengal, Madras, and Bombay, and the Honourable
the Court of Directors of the East India Company dur-
ing the last three years.
EXCHEQUER-BILLS BILL.
On the motion for the committal of this Bill,
Mr. HUME observed that the object of this Bill was
to raise a loan of 2,000,0001., and to add 60,0001. or
70,0001. a year to the permanent debt of the country.
He protested against the principle of borrowing money
in time of peace, particularly under the present circum-
stances of the country; and he intended to take the
sense of the House against it. On the 25th of February
14st, when it was understood there was a deficiency of
2i900,000Z, he urged on the Government and the House
the propriety of bringing the expenditure within the
revenue, or of providing for the excess by additional
taxation, and proposed a resolution with that view. That
resolution, however, was lost on 4 division by a large
majority. On the 13th of March he again proposed that
the income-tax should be limited to one year, in order
that in the meantime Government might take measures
fOr reducing the expenditure so as to bring it within the
income. That proposition also was lost by a majority of
363 to 138, and the income-tax was passed for three years.
Oh the 20th of March he moved to reduce the number
of sailors from 43.000 to 36,000, but that motion,
together with a subsequent one, to make a similar re-
diketien in the army, and another made by an Hon.
Friend of his, to abolish the worse than u-eless African
sqhadron, met with the same fate. All attempts, there-
fore, to effect reduction in the expenditure of the country
hull been met with discouragement by the House and
the Government; and it was now asked, the House hav-
ing refused to meet the deficiency by additional taxes, to
meet it by a loan. Though he had not opposed the loan
for Irish distress, because that was called for under ex-
traordinary circumstances, he objected, as a principle, to
raising loans in time of peace. Looking at the prospects
of the country, the state of commerce, the competition in
trade, the decrease of profits, the large number of unem-
ployed poor, the enormous increase in the poor-rates, he
contemplated with great alarm the tendency which had
been evinced of late to add year after year to the perma-
nent debt of the country. It was admitted by the Right
Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) that taxation had reached
is limits, and that all attempts to increase the revenue by
additional taxes—except a tax on property—had failed.
Cho attempt made some years ago to make up the
evenue by adding five or ten per cent. to the Cus-
ams and Excise it was well known had been a
igrial failure, the returns from these sources having de-
remised under the operation of that scheme, though the
ri of the articles to the consumer had been enhanced.
'hei only item on which there was an increase was the
ss sed taxes, and that was obtained by a breach of
1
sit , old windows which were opened on the under-
ta ing that they would not be charged having been
,ro ght into the account. Between the years 1822 and
84 there had been reductions in the funded debt and
a t e terminable annuities amounting to 3,630,0001.,
'et, with the exception of the reduction consequent on
he 41tered value of money from 5 to 3 per cent., and
•onci 3i to 3i per cent., this reduction had not resulted
1 tise saving of a farthing in the annual charge.—
El4r, hear.) On the contrary, the expenditure had
one, on increasing in consequence of the additions
hich had been made to the permanent debt. He com-
lensed not only that the debt had increased, but that
ie whole management of the financial affairs of the
itin;try was bad. It was, however, in the power of
to 'people themselves to provide the remedy by
hlug representatives who would do their duty.
e must remember that borrowing was not making
rovision—it was the act of the spendthrift. Looking
the state of Ireland and the prospects of the country
.ineially for the next year, he thought the time had
min when the House should grapple with the difficulty,
' showing itself determined to reduce the expenditure.
hmigh no one was more desirous for the maintenance
• peace and order than he was, he did think the scale
a which our establishments were kept up was neither
)cessary nor prudent.—(Hear, hear.) The number of
.med men now maintained was almost double what it
as 45 years ago. By the return of the gross and net
come and expenditure of the country—which showed
to enormous cost of collection, and to which he wished
direct the attention of Honourable Members—it ap-
iardd that the expenditure of the country had increased
e shout 10,000,000/. since 1836. The expenditure of
it 44 colonies was most enormous—not less than
a157t150400,
0/0.
00Byotgitvhiinsg
wouldthes e colonies
ese I f-giouvey th
r n meonutglaat
ie sooner we came to a reckoning with the fundholder
to better; but he thought the moment the public faith
o money
troüble
about
as broken the power of England was at an end.—
leer, hear.) Instead of increasing the debt we ought
ac,abutht
themselves
sleolnvgesans
odvienrninmisehntigt
doeuralde
arly next session he would move resolutions pledging
), !wk.
thato vs
ee
that to
this
Billretrenchmentshould
land b reduction.e
taken
on day three months. tbo et
cuho een matter.s borrowediw.
Mr MUNTZ seconded the motion, and complained of
to 14e period at which the budget had been brought
matt!. There must be some object in this; probably
had been with the view of getting the House into
a
ate in which the Government could carry what they
ted.i Funding and borrowing was nothing better than
.‘travagance; it had been the resource of all bad Go vernnients. A former Whig Government had sought to
bolster up a falling revenue by adding five per cent. to
the assessed taxes. They talked much of the elasticity
f thc ,cLiun,try, but it, did not serve them. Ten tt;
Gofernment physician " was called in; he imposed a
)petty-tax, and the result was to remove the burden,
s a certain extent, from the poor to the rich, although
the measure itself was little better than picking pockets.
The Liberals, though they had opposed the first im-
position of this tax, had no hesitation in asking for its
renewal. Then came the railway speculation, with
its natural consequence of a pressure on the
money market, to which the potato failure contri-
buted, and which the Bank Act of 1844 failed to
prevent, notwithstanding all the good effects which it
had been predicted to produce At the present moment
the Government was much in the same situation as they
were eight or ten years ago: the revenue was falling off,
trade decreasing, and discontent largely prevailing.
Every Government, for the last thirty-five years, had
failed to secure prosperity: the reason was they had uni-
formly kept in the old beaten track. We were told to
keep national faith; but he called that national faith
which was only kept on one side " national humbug."
—(Laughter.) Last year the state of this country was
most disgraceful; no banker on the continent would cash
a bill on any party in London. If the Act of 1844 was
a good one, why not carry it out; why suspend it when
the difficulty came? The discontent which now pre-
vailed arose solely from distress: when all classes were
prosperous, it was impossible to get six men together to
talk politics.—(Hear and laughter.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
was the last person to oppose any proper reduction of
expenditure; and the statement which had been made
by the Hon. Member for Montrose was the fullest
justi-
fication of the course the Government had pursued. He
admitted that overwhelming majorities
concurred with the Government riintietshoef the House had
impropriety of
reducing our establishments; and no one who reflected
on what had since occurred, here andin
Icondemn the course then pursued. But there iliaond, could
Mem-
ber, in speaking of the mode of equalising the rn. and the expenditure, while admitting that the
ue
e
venue
ultra of taxation was reached, had in fact admitted the
propriety of the plan which Government proposed—to
meet the excess of expenditure by borrowing. That
excess was merely of a temporary character, and ought
not therefore to be met by the imposition of permanent
additional taxes. He had thought it the best course to
augment the property-tax; the House having objected to
that he now proposed to take the next best course, after
looking to the reduction of the expenditure to the lowest
point conga • tent with the national security. Upwards
of son,qooL had been struck off the original estimates;
there were many other reductions which might be ef-
fected next year, and with that possibility in view of the
Government, they had felt they should not be justified in
proposing an increase of taxation. Allusion had been
;but in
made to the increased charge of the debt
seven years there had been a reduction in that charge of
not less than a million. Admitting the general c,orrect-
b the
fleas of the financial outline which had been given y

Hon. Member for Birmingham, he would observe that
the imposition of the income-tax had been accompanied
by very large reductions in indirect taxation, from which
the nation at large had derived material benefit. He
could not admit that the change in the condition of our
finances since 1845 was owing to the conduct of any Go-
vernment ; the failure of a large portion of the food of
the Irish people, the severe commercial depression, and
the exportation of the precious metals, sufficiently ac-
counted for existing embarrassments. He certainly
could not acquiesce in the recommendation of. the Hon.
Member for Birmingham, that, after every other expe-
dient had failed, they should resort to the doctrines ad-
vocated by what was called the " Birmingham school."
Mr. H. CURRIE expressed his objection to increas-
ing the funded debt.
Mr. HEYWOOD said he thought the course proposed
by the Government the best that could be pursued under
the circumstances.
Mr. WODEHOUSE blamed the Government for
having yielded to the suggestion of the Hon. Member
for Montrose, in reference to sending out of the country
two regiments, the 50th and the 92d, at an improper
period of the year, owing to which upwards of 600 men,
and between twenty and thirty officers, lost their lives.
The withdrawal of the African squadron had also been
recommended. Such a measure would be most dis-
graceful. He considered that it was essentially neces-
sary to keep up the army at its present amount, in order
to preserve peace in the manufacturing districts.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY referred to the opposition
given by members of the present Government to the
original imposition of the income-tax, and said that
such a tax ought only to be resorted to in cases of great
emergency. He thought it desirable that the Chancellor
of the Exchequer should state whether he proposed to
make up the deficiency by Exchequer-bills or by the
creation of new stock.
Mr. HENLEY complained that the scheme pro-
pounded at the beginning of the present year by her Ma-
jesty's Government had been abandoned, and that a loan
was contemplated. He saw nothing in the state of the
country to justify this course of proceeding, which he
held to be a dangerous, profuse, and reckless mode of
operation. At the same time, looking at the state of the
approaching harvest, the condition of Ireland, and the
circumstances by which this country was surrounded,
he could not vote against the committal of this Bill.
Mr. DRUMMOND (Surrey) concurred with much
that had been said on the subject of retrenchment;
but, looking at the position of affairs, he should re-
gret if the House was driven to a division on the pre-
sent occasion.
Mr. URQUHART expressed his determination to
vote with the Hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume)
if he pressed his amendment to a division.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said he was not prepared to
refuse the supplies, which were called for by the sur-
render of all substantial principles to the advocates of
free trade.
Mr. COBDEN said that the charge had often been
reiterated that the deficiency in the revenue arose from
the free-trade measures which had been carried.
Though it was said that the legislation of 1846 had led
to this state of things, he was prepared to contend that
the revenue was now larger than in 1845. This, how-
ever, was not now the question. The question really
now at issue was, whether or not this country had been
spending too much money. He, and those who thought
with him, complained that the burden of taxation on the
people was excessive, and he contended that the course
of legislation to which the House had assented had
made the proposed loan necessary. On the 25th of
February last he had voted in a minority of 59 on a
motion to reduce the expenditure, and that vote justified
his opposition to the proposed loan of 2,000,000/. The
increased expenditure arising from the cry of an invasion
was a monstrous delusion, which had been got up by
professional men, and, on the whole, was unjustifiable.
On every ground he should vote against the proposed
loan, in whatever shape it might be raised.
After a few words trom Mr. MUNTZ in explanation,
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said that as none of the opponents
of the Government measure had suggested the means by
which to meet the deficiency, he should give his vote in
favour of the Bill now under consideration. It t the same
time he must observe that if the Government would save
the osependiture of the nation they would do' justice to
Ireland. The present cost of the military, naval, and
ordnance forces kept up in that country amounted from
1,500,000/ to 1,600,0001., and if the demands of Ireland
were listened to and admitted, this cost might be dimi-
nished by at least one-half.
Mr. SPOONER denied the assertion made by the
Hon. Member for the West Riding (Mr. Cobden) that the
income had this year been greater than in 1845. On
the contrary, he asserted that before the free•trade
tricks had been practised upon the country the re-
venue was higher. He found that in 1845 the total
income was 54,417,6151., while for the present year it
was 52,082,6571., leaving a deficiency of 1,764,0001.
With respect to the proposition of borrowing in time of
peace, he had no hesitation in saying that the principle
was evil, and if the proposition had been made at an
earlier period of the session he for one should have been
inclined to make a stand against it, and have called upon
the Government to suggest some plan of taxation on
which the nation could rely. He must condemn a sys-
tem by which the Chancellor of the Exchequer would in
fact give a bond for 100/, for the which he would only
receive 861. The system of free trade which had been
adopted by the Government was perfectly incompatible
with its monetary system ; each system was bad in itself,
but the two united would be highly detrimental to the
interests of the country. He wished also to know what
his Right lion. Friend intended to do for Ireland, and
whether ho intended to raise a loan for that country ?
Mr. J. A. SUITH agreed with what had fallen from
his Hon. Friend, the Member for the West Riding, dur-
ing the first part of his speech—that it was the impera-
tive duty of the Government to make the revenue and
the expenditure meet ; and he could not forbear rising
to jilstity the vote which he intended to give in favour
of the measure of the Government. He should give
that vote, because he believed the Government had done
all that lay in their power to avoid the position in which
they were now placed. They had proposed a tax to
avoid the deficiency which existed in the revenue. He
(Mr. J. A. Smith) had supported the measure, and it
was with regret that he saw them abandon it. There
was at the present time a peculiar position of affairs,
which he considered to justify the course which they had
taken. This country was suffering from a deficiency oc-
casioned mainly by a visitation of Providence—
a famine in the sister kingdom.—(Hear, hear.)
He believed that the cause being temporary the
deficiency would be temporary also; and that the cir-
cumstances in which the Government were undoubtedly
placed—the state of the empire—the state of the whole
world—justified the Government in conceding to the
opinion of the House of Commons, that it was not expe-
dient to increase the amount of taxation. In that case
the only alternative was to make a great reduction in
the expenditure. Now he was one of those who consi-
dered that under peculiar circumstances a reduction of
expenditure was not judicious; but he was not afraid to
say that he did not think that even the reduction which
had been made was altogether advisable. He was not
afraid of war; but he was sorry to hear the Hon. Mem-
ber for the West Riding give his opinion that the idea
of war had been started by professional gentlemen for
interested purposes. He thought the insinuation alto-
gether unworthy of the Hon. Gentleman. This country
owed all her tranquillity to her continued preparation
1
for attack, which was the greatest security for peace;
and it would not be wise to reduce ;the expenditure this
year. The Government had done alalthaetrtehaesye of taxa-
tion; ' coutladto-
i
proposing an in t
in yielding to the
opinion
n meet;in theyh e
o
their proposal;
and
that the Hon. Member
for the West Riding was the last Gentleman who should
toLord
fexpenditurethhae d
House
done
what
i bc and
u d p
thought
withdrawingrt wasoo 1.
their present measure.
r
wicuktedhedehlaudsions.
found TnoheonHeotnh.eretohred wouldGß giveEN
TNh is vote c
charge others with
Gen-
tleman might think that seventeen millipns of expendi-
ture could be reduced, but
coincide with him in the opinion. The circumstances in
which this country was placed at the commencement of
the year were very different to the present. The war-
like preparations which had been suggested and recom-
mended by the Prince de Joinville in 1844 had been
faithfully carried out, and an increase in the maritime
-.power pt' France lied taken place suith as had no justi:
fication except in some resolution in the minds of the
rulers of France that the day must come when they
would desire to use them against this country. He was
one of those who would have refused, had the question
come to the vote, to add to the property or income-tax.
He was one of those who voted with the Hon. Member
for Montrose to curtail it to its present amount.
But the House, though prepared to refuse the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer an increase in that tax, was
never asked whether it would refuse an additional
tax on customs. Had the Noble Lord (J. Russell)
and the Chancellor of the Exchequer come and asked
the House to impose some of the taxes on :customs which
had lately been repealed, and to continue others which
were soon to fall to the ground, he would have given
them his hearty support. It had been stated that the
reduction which had been made in taxation amounted to
the same sum as the present deficiency ; and the Hon.
Member for the West Riding had stated that, notwith-
standing the reduction in question, the net revenue of
the country had never been so large as at present. Now,
in 1848, atter the reduction of a considerable amount of
customs duties, the revenue was 51,451,609/. ; while, in
1846, before the reduction of those duties, it was
53,626,178/, being an increase of 2,200,000/. over the
revenue of last year. So that there would now be an
ample surplus instead of a deficiency, had it not been for
the alterations in the customs duties which had taken
place during the last few years. He said, if they
were now in difficulties, let them not look to loans but
to the customs duties. Let them follow the example of
America, and have equal taxes for all the produce of
foreign industry. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had fallen into the old chronic vice of the Whigs of
always getting into a deficiency. Ever since they came
into power in 1830 they had discovered a casualty every
year to account for that deficiency, and this year it was
attributed to the Kafir war. But he maintained that
it was the duty of a Government to provide for such
casualties, for it could not be expected that there
would never be another famine, or more disturbances
on the Continent, which by checking trade would dimi-
nish the consumption of exciseable articles, and cause
the Government to fall into the position at presento
c-
cupied by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Whig
Government, fast travelling into a state of insolvency
and beggary. Ho considered that there were many taxes
which might be re-imposed with advantage in the pre-
sent difficulty, among which he considered that the du-
ties on foreign timber and cotton would fall as lightly as
any on the people of this !;country ; and he considered
also that the duties on corn might have been continued
for a few years more, if for no other reason, for the sake
of the revenue which they produced. Let them not
have recourse to the odious income-tax or to the entail-
ing of debts on our posterity; after thirty-three years
peace,tolifose
who
s let
said them not be ml
that the repeal of wouldby the delusion of
make flour lid. a
.pound, and fill England with pros..

perity by causing her to exchange her manufactures
with foreign countries, so as to leave to every operative
superfluity out of his higher wages and cheaper bread,
to be expended on tea and sugar. Let them rather look
to the result of our diminished exports to the extent of
5,000,0001;
Lord J. RUSSELL did not think, after the expe-
rience of the session, that the Government had acted
unwisely in having proposed an increase of the income-
tax, particularly when he considered that successive
Governments had pursued the plan of reducing the
taxes of the country to a great extent. No less than
10,000,0001. a year had recently been taken off these
taxes that pressed upon articles of consumption; and
that being so, when circumstances arose to call for ex-
traordinary expenditure, they were obliged to propose
an unusual measure to meet it. An Hon. Gentleman
asked, why not take money from the balances instead of
proposing a loan? But, under all the circumstances, he
felt that the course proposed and explained by his Right
Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was the
best. The Hon. Member for Montrose proposed a great
reduction of the naval and military force of the country.
But what appeared lately in the newspapers respecting a
contemplated war by France in Belgium would, he was
sure, at once show how impolitic such a measure would
have been on the part of England.—(Hear, hear.)
On the other hand, the feeling of the country
was so significantly expressed against it, he
thought the Government would not have been justified
in persisting in their proposition of increasing the in-
come-tax, and therefore was it that they had recourse
to a loan. The Noble Lord proposed certain duties
upon timber and raw cotton. Political economists, long
previous to Adam Smith, were of opinion that putting
duties upon the materials of manufacture was a most
unwise course. It had been the great boast of Sir
Robert Walpole, that he had greatly reduced such duties;
and he (Lord J. Russell) certainly would not be disposed
to impose such duties.—(Hear. hear.) Respecting the
corn-laws, he did not then wish to dispute with the
Noble Lord what might be the effect of a 7s. duty ; but
he certainly rejoiced at being connected with a Govern-
ment which had nothing to do with the sliding-scale of
1845. During the whole of this year, corn was intro-
duced with the certainty that there would be no duty
above 10s., and that if the price rose much over 505., it
would be admitted at a 4s. duty, instead of waiting, as
under the sliding scale, till it rose to 70s. before it would
be admitted at that duty. He thought that that had been
of the greatest advantage to manufacturers and con-
sumers, and that a great security had been given this
year over the years of 1841-2-3.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For going into Committee 66
Against it. l5
Majority
The House then went into Committee on the Bill.
The Bill then passed through Committee.
SAVINGS' BANKS BILL.
On the motion for going into Committee on this Bill,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that the English and
Scotch savings' banks considered that the provisions in
this Bill would be injurious to those institutions in these
countries. He did not think it was fair to press the
measure at so late a period of the session, without allow-
ing the persons affected full time for consideration.—
(Hear, hear.) He objected to the clause relating to the
trustees.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that he proposed to strike words out of the clause which
would leave the law as it stood before the Act of 1844.
He did not intend to repeal the Act of 9 George IV.
He proposed to limit the liability of trustees to an
amount not exceeding 1001. He also proposed to add
words similar to those proposed by the Hon. Member
for Athlone (Mr. Keogh).
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that the changes pro-
posed by the Right Hon. Gentleman materially altered
the nature of the Bill and obviated a part of his objec-
tion. But he objected to the filth clause more particu-
larly. How was it possible for the depositors to pro-
duce all the books in two days?—(Hear, hear.) Yet
they would lose the interest on their deposits if they did
not do so. He did not think that the trustees would
consent to act if this clause were allowed to stand. What
had occurred with respect to English and Scotch savings'
banks—he said nothing of Irish banks—to justify the
Government interfering with them at this late period of
the session ? An impression had gone abroad that the
money deposited in savings' banks had been used for
other purposes than those which were intended by their
institution. He hoped that the whole of this Bill would
be postponed except the part relating to the Irish banks.
Mr. HENLEY thought that the Government bad laid
no ground whatever for this wholesale interference with
savings banks. Upon a very meagre report of a Com-
mittee a general measure,,had been introduced, of which
the managers and trustees of savings' banks probably
knew nothing. So crude and ill-concocted a measure
ought not now to be pressed on the House; it would be
much better to consider it deliberately early next session.
To require the production of the depositors' books in a
given number of days would be an act of great hardship,
as many of them might be at a distance, or out of the
country. With respect to the English and Scotch banks
there had been no complaint whatever, and this inter-
ference would probably create a panic.
Col. THOMPSON said, if the Bill did not propose to
give greater security to the poor depositors, its objects
must be unimportant. Nothing was more clear than
that any defalcation in the savings' banks must be made
good by that House.
Colonel SIBTIIORP said the Bill was an admission
that there was something rotten in the condition of the
savings' banks.
Mr. WODEHOUSE, as a trustee of a savings' bank,
should be disposed to resign his trust if this Bill passed.
Lord G. BENTINCK moved that the Bill should be
committed that day three months. The Select Com-
mittee had only examined four witnesses, with respect
to the savings' banks of Tralee, Killarney, and Dublin,
and none at all with respect to the banks of this coun-
try; they had sat nine days, and had produced a report,
recommending that further inquiry should take place,
and that a Bill should be passed regulating the re-
sponsibility of trustees and appointing auditors.
They had made no recommendation with respect to
the savings' banks of this country, and,:yet the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer came down with a general Bill,
ill prepared, which he seemed not to understand him-
self. The proceedings of the Select Committee had
been secret; the officers of savings' banks in the City
had applied to watch these proceedings, but had not
been permitted to do so. It was most unfit that this
measure should be brought forward at this period of the
session, when Ministers were surrounded by their sleep-
ing myrmidons, ready to wake up and vote as they
directed.—(Laughter.) In the Marylebone Savings'
Bank there were 18,700 depositors; how could all these
send in their books in two days? Even if this were
done, how could such a number of accounts be inspected
and verified without increasing the staff of officers, and
consequently augmenting the expense and decreasing
the interest to the depositors? Such a provision would
infallibly reduce the number of depositors considerably.
The Bill had only been printed yesterday, and the House
ought not now to be asked to consider it.
Mr. MONSELL supported the Bill, as being calcu-
lated to restore confidence in the depositors in the sav-
ings' banks in Ireland. Unless some change were made
such as that now proposed by this Bill the most serious
evils would arise.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
sole object of the Bill was to secure a better manage-
ment of the savings' banks with a view to the interests
cf the depositors. The Bill only sought that which the
trustees of the savings' banks had themselves sought in
tbeyear 1844 from the then Chancellor of the;Exehequer,
and therefore he was at a loss to conceive the grounds
upon which the present opposition rested. The Bill
fixed a limited responsibility on the trustees, in order
that a proper control should be kept over the officers
whose appointment I would be vested in the trustees.
The measure was essential to afford a check upon and a
security against the mismanagement which had already
arisen in various parts of the country.
Mr. H. lIIMBERT complained that the Bill had been
delayed to so late a period of the session. He should
vote against the Bill, because it would be useless in Ire-
land, and would be badly received in England.
Mr. BROTHERTON could not understand the mean-
ing of the opposition to the Bill. The Hon. Member
talked as if he expected that the Government was not
answerable for the deposits. They were responsible for
what they received, but not for all the mismanagement
which was exercised. If the Government attempted to
exercise any control in the matter, the cry would be
against centralisation, and it would be said that they
wished to get all the power into their own hands. He
considered that savings banks in England were generally
well managed, but that in Ireland the case was different,
and that the managers generally contrived to put a great
deal of the money into their own pockets. And be thought
it disgraceful to Ireland that, after so much mismanage-
ment of their banks, they should come and ask the House
to make good that which was the result of their own
deficiencies.
Mr. REYNOLDS complained that his Hon. Friend,
without knowing anything of the facts, gave every
credit to the mode of management of the English banks,
and allowed no merit to the Irish. He was sorry to
say that there were certain classes in England whowahlo-
ways looked at the black side of Irish doings, and
always drew their illustrations of dishonesty and pro-
fligacy from that country. Without including the Hon.
Member in that category he thought that in the absence
of facts he had brought his mind to that belief. Not-
withstanding the deficiencies of the Bill, he considered it
to be a step in the right direction, and would give it his
support.
Mr. KEOGH defended the management of the Irish
banks.

Mr. J. A. SMITH said that the opposition to the Bill
of the Hon. Member for Kerry surprised him, because
the Hon. Member was one of the Committee that con-
curred unanimously in recommending the Bill to be
brought in at once.
Mr. HERBERT said he had not concurred in the re-
port of the Committee.
Mr. NEWDEGATE supported the amendment, and
hoped the Noble Lord would persevere in it.
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment Against it.... ..................... 21
................................ 49
Majority ........................
—2B
The House then went into Committee.

On clause 1,
In answer to a question from Mr. HENLEY as to the
liability of trustees,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that a trustee would be liable for wilful neglect to the
whole extent of the defalcation, unless he should have in
writing limited his responsibility to 1001.
The clause was agreed to, as was also clause 2.
The remaining clauses were, after a long discussion,
agreed to, but before the House resumed
Mr. WODEHOUSE moved an amendment limiting
the operation of the Bill to Ireland.
Lord G. Bentinck, Mr. Henley, Mr. Newdegate, and
Mr. Keogh supported the amendment.