The Sun.
London, England, 1833-08-10 00:00:00

stated as matter of doubt by several Hon. Gentlemen,
whether by its exclusive privileges the Bank of England
had the right to prevent the existence of banking com-
p vies of more than six partners in the metropolis. From
the information had received at the time he had
introduced this Bill, he had been induced to think
the Bank of England had this privilege ; but when
doubts had been started, he felt it necessary to consult
the law authorities, and their opinion was most
distinct and clesr, that by the law as it at present
stood there was nothing to prevent books of deposits, com-
posed of more than six partners, being established within
the metropolis. He thought it would be improper to
leave the law doubtful upon this point, and he therefore
proposed, upon the bringing up of the clause, to move the
inset tion of words sled iratory of the interpretation of the
law, which, as be had already said, was distinct and clear
that banking companies of more than six persons could be
estaldished in the metropolis. Such a declaration would
not diminish the privileges of the Bank. which had never
been in+ended ; and as to increase of privileges, if he wished
to gr int any, he was sure be could not have the support
of the House. _ _ _

Mr. GISBORNE inquired if banks of dpposit esta-
blished in London would have the power of accepting bills
drawn on London?

Lord ALTHORP was understood to say, certainly not.
Mr. CLAY requested the Nohle Lord to read the terms
of the dectiration as to the law to which he had alluded.

Lord ALTHORP acquiesced, and read the proposed
addition, which was to the effect stated.
After a few words in a conversational tone between Mr.
GISBORNE and Lord ALTHORY,

Mr CLAY expressed himself so far satisfied with tha
communication of the Noble Lord opposite, that he did
not feel it necessary to press the amendment of which he
had given notice.
Mr. CAYLEY moved as an amendment that 25 miles
be inserted instead of 65 miles. _ _

.....
Mr. BERRIES said, that it lie had understood the
Noble Lord right, it was the Noble Lord's intention to
abolish the restriction now existing against drawing bills
of less than 50/. The present clause, however, contained
no such expressed permission.
Lord ALTHORP bad intended to insert that permis-
sion in the second Bill he had purposed introducing—
natnely, that for the regulation of joint-stock banks. He
was fully of opinion that such a permission ought to be
given, but he thought it would be better to reserve it till
the Bill for regulating joint. stock banks should be intro-
duced next session. He was of opinion that it was ex-
tremely desirable that the present Bill should be confined
merely to the matter of the renewal of the Charter, with-
out the introduction of such a subject as that suggested.
Mr. BERRIES agreed that it was proper to confine
the Bill to all that related to the Bank Charter, and on
the same grounds he would entreat the Noble Lord to
consider whether it would not he equally proper to ex-
clude from this Bill the clause making bank-notes a legal
tender. That was a question which especi,illy ought to
he kept separate from the provisions of the present Bill.
He would appeal to those who thought the Bill would be
a good and proper enactment, whether they did not really
think the subject matter of the clause, as to the legal
tender would more properly be the subject of a separate
measure.—( Hear.) _

Lord ALTHORP said that subject would be much
better discussed when the clause in question came regu-
larly on.
Mr. M. PHILIPS said that he had given notice of his
intention to move an amendment repealing the restrictions
which prevented banking companies of more than six
partners from drawing bills on London for a less amount
than 501. The neces4ity of his pursuing this motion was
removed by the statement of the Noble Lord. He, how-
ever, wished to know whether the remaining part of his
notice would be acceded to,—namely, that joint•stock
banks should be empowered to have an office in London
for making discounts without being compelled to employ
the agency of a London banker.
Lord ALTHORP wished to give entire freedom to the
joint-stock banks, and he believed the clause as it stood
would not prevent that which the Hon. Member for Man-
chester sought. Before entering upon the discussion, how-
ever, be should wish to see the precise words the Hon.
Member wished to insert.

In answer to a question put by Mr. GISBORNE, with
respect to the limit of 65 miles being extended to the
Bank of England,

Lord ALTHORP was understood to reply, that when
negotiating with the Bank Directors, they seemed to think
it material to have 65 miles ; he himself thought it im-
material whether the limit should be 25 or 65 miles, and
did not think the subject worth contesting. The Directors
entertained a stronv, feeling on the subject, and, negotiat-
ing as he had done with them, he had conceded the point.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON opposed the amendment.
The Bank of England h icing agreed to deduct 120,0001.
a year fiom the amount paid to it for the management of
the public debt, the clause confining the establishment of
banks of issue to a circuit of 65 miles beyond London was
considered by the Bank as a fair return and equivalent for
that concession ; and as it made a part of the arrangement
and bargain made between the Government and the Bank,
it should, on the principle of fairness and good faith, be
adhered to.

CAYLEY said they might as well have made the
limiration 165 miles a, 65 miles It should be recollected
that the public and Parliament were partijs to the bargain,
as well as the Government and the Bank.

The gallery was then cleared for a division.
The numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it ll3
Majority 6l

On our return to the gallery, we found the Committee
in conversation upon a proposition made by Mr. GrsooaNE
to omit the words in the clause, "and not having any
house of business or establishment as bankers in London."
The conversation was carried on in such an indistinct,
and confused manner, that it was abso'utely impossible
to collect the precise nature of it. Finally, at the sug-
gestion of Lord Althorp, Mr. Gisborne postponed moving
the amenrim.nt until the bringing up of the report, on t'te
understanding thst the clause being now carried in its
present form, would not prejudice the proposal of the said
amendment at that stage of the Bill.

On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the following
worth were added after the words " hut no such bill or
note shall be for any sun less than 5/.," at the end of the
clause, " or be re-issued in London, or within 65 miles
thereof."

The clause wag then agreed to.

After an explanation from Lord ALTHORP, scarcely
a syllable of which was heard in the gallery, but which,
as well as we could collect it, was to the effect, that in
consequence of the postponement of other parts of the
plan (those, for instance, relative to the establishment of
joint-stock banks) to next session, it would be necessary
to postpone clause 3, which gave a power to the Bank of
England to empower agents to carry on banking business
at any place in England, clause 3 was omitted.
On clause 4, which continues the Charter to the Bank
for a period of 10 years, being read,
Colonel TORRENS rose to propose the amendment of
which he had given notice, " that upon one year's notice
given, within six months after the expiration of three
years from the Ist of August, 1834, the exclusive privi-
leges granted by this Act shall cease and determine." He
would not, he said, trouble the Committee with a repeti-
tion of the at gurnents which he bad already adduced
against this portion of the Bill. After the decided diffe-
rence of opinion which prevailed in the House with re-
sp: ct to this measure, it was too much to enact that the
exclusive privileges which it conferred should continue for
so long a period as ten years.
The CHAIRMAN suggested that the better way would
be to move the insertion of the words " three years" in-
stead of " ten years" in the clause, to which suggestion
the Gallant Colonel assented.
Mr. HUME, in seconding the amendment, said that it
was only justice to the country, if the Bill should prove
disadvantageous to it, to give it the opportunity of reme-
dying the evil before the expiration of so long a period
as ten years.
Mr. T. SMITH said that it would be a most inconve-
nient and injurious course to subject a question of this
importance to the liability of being, at short intervals,
repeatedly opened and discussed.—(Hear, hear.) The
public interest required that something permanent should
he dyne on the subject. He must say that, owing to the
confused manner in which this discussion had been carried
on for the last half hour or so, many Hon. Members who,
like him,elt, had important interests at stake in conn.xion
with it, were perfectly ignorant of what they were just
now didng. This he would say, that nothing could be
more inexpedient or dangerous than to reopen a subject of
this kind in the course of two or three years.
Lord ALTHORP agreed with his Hon. Friend that
the greateat possible inconvenience would arise from re-
opening this question in so short a period as three years.
It was most desirable that the House should settle it as
well as it could now, without renewing the discussion
up-in it for at least ten years to come.
Mr. HUME observed that the present arrangement
of the pharter might prove, as indeed it was expected by
many to piove, disadvantageous to the country. If that
should be the case, it would be most important that the
country should have the power of remedying the evil. At
all events, the period should be limited to live years.
Colonel TORRgNS would alter his amendment to 'hat