The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-23 00:00:00

tain that Switzerland has not been consulted in this matter,

and that if the Government of this country have been eon
suited they have given an opinion with respect to it without
the consent of the House of Commons. I believe I am in a
position to state positively, end upon high and important
authority, that in the month of February an offer was made
to tho Secretary for Foreign Affairs to the effect that France
was prepared to cede those portions of territory adjoining
the Lake of Geneva, in the hope that by means of that pro-
posal arrangements might he quietly made for the cession
of the rest " Now, the cession of Nice and Lower Savoy to
France is a matter which perhaps does not materially affect
us. One Power may cede to another, there being a
mutual understanding on the subject, a portion of her ter-
ritory without an irfringement of the law of nations, but
when such a course is taken with respect t territory whose
neutrality has been guaranteed by seven lit wers of Europe,
in a most sacred and solemn manner, as is the case with
Faucigny, Chablais, and Genevois—l say it is degrading
to the councils of this country, and an insult to the charac-
ter of England, to allow such a policy to be carried out
without entering against it a determined protest in the
name of the English people. (Cheers.) I hope the noble
lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs will be able to stand
up in his place to-night and to state that he has received
no communication such as that to which I have alluded—
but, in order to refresh his memory on the matter—(a
laugh)—l would refer him to a despatch written by Lord
Cowley on the 9th of February, in which he distinctly tells
the noble lord that the Emperor of the French is prepared
to cede the territory in question, in the hope that the an-
nexation of Savoy and Nice might be amicably arranged.
I regret that I have felt it to be my duty to trouble the
house with these observations—(hear)—but, as hon. mem-
bers are probably aware, I have been recently in the loca-
lity of which I am speaking, and I can assure those who
have not, that we in this country can scarcely realise the
feeling of the inhabitants of those provinces when they see
an enemy at their gates, and their rights and libertiesbeing
wrested from their grasp. (Hear, hear.) Those people
are bravo and love freedom. They are anxious to enjoy
the popular institutions which they have, but they know
perfectly well, from the teachings and experience of his-
tory, that the progress of France on that side of Geneva is
fatal to their aspirations, and that if she once obtains pos-
session of the Lake of Geneva the independence and in-
tegrity of the Confederation will be greatly endangered, if
not absolutely and permanently annihilated. (Hear, hear.)
It was only last night that I saw at a meeting in the city
of London the whole colony of Swiss over here, I myself
perhaps being the only Englishman who was present on
the occasion, and I can assure the house I could not help
responding from my heart to the sentiments which ani-
mated those men when they saw the standard of Switzer-
land floating over the chair of the presideit, and heard
from the lips of their Minister that the greatest danger
threatened their country. (Cheers.) I could not, I repeat,
help feeling from my soul the greatest sympathy with those
men—Savoyards and Swiss—whose rights are now, to my
mind permanently menaced by the cruel hypocrisy of
France. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. SCULLY, referring to the proclamation or police
notice, wLioho,or it sor.ight hr, which had been recently
issued by the Government in Ireland, said he had been
asked whether it was illegal to subscribe for certain pur-
poses, and he had mentioned the name of the noble lord at
head of the Government as an authority that the best way
to obey the law was to break it, inasmuch as he had heard
the noble lord state that he had formerly subscribed to-
wards the prosecution of a revolutionary movement in a
foreign State—Greece—a proceeding which the right hon.
gentleman the Secretary for the Home Department, after
what fell from him in that house, must regard as a breach
of the law. (A laugh.) When he was lately applied to in
Ireland for advice in a similar instance, he said he never
advised a breach of the law ; but as the noble lord had
stated that he had broken the law without being prose-
cuted, perhaps they would follow his example. (A laugh.)
He told the parties, however, to be sure not to quote him
as their adviser. (Laughter and cries of " Question I")
He had a question on the paper which he wished to put to
the Attorney-General for Ireland. Before putting it, how-
ever, he would say, with reference to the question of the
hon. member for Finsbury, that he could see no possible
objection to the proceedings of the House of Lords being
laid on the table daily. He wished, in the next place, to
know how the Rag Committee were getting on. (Oh, oh.)
They did not seem alive at all. (Question.) They were
very mate ; they had now been appointed four or five weeks,
and they had heard nothing of their proceedings. (Ques-
tion.) His question related to the transfer of laud in Ire-
land. That was perhaps the most important matter that
had been or could be discussed this session. (Question,
question.) While he made jokes for the amusement of
the house honourable members gave him a very atten-
tive hearing, but the moment he began to talk rational
common sense he was met with cries of "Question." He
would not trouble the house further. (Go on, go on.)
He was in the hands of the house. (Question.) lie
would, then, defer discussion till the Attorney-General for
Ireland brought forward his bill. The notice with refer-
ence to that bill had been on the paper twenty times
at least. (Question.) He did not say this in any unfriendly
spirit to the Attorney-General for Ireland. He knew the
difficulties he had to contend with, having regard to the
business of the Government. (Question.) He would not
ask any question. (Laughter.) He would sit down.
(A laugh, and Hear.)
Sir J. ACTON wished to know when there would be pro-
duced copies or extracts from the despatches of Mr. Lyons
in 1855, 1856, and 1857, respecting the Government and
condition of the Roman States ?
Mr. B. COCHRANE wished to put another question to
the noble lord. On the 16th of February he understood the
noble lord to say that " the Government of which he was a
member would be prepared to maintain the neutrality of
Switzerland ;" and, he added, that the districts of Chablais
and Faucigny were guaranteed under the treaty of Vienna,
and, in fact, he said, " they form part of the guarantees of
the neutrality of Switzerland." He wished to know whether
the noble lord was now prepared to carry out the assurance
he gave on that occasion ? (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—The first question that has been
asked me was put by the hon. gentleman the member for
Devises (Mr. Griffith) with respect to the accounts which he
supposes have been received that a Neapolitan frigate had
captured two vessels presumed to be carrying reinforce-
ments to Garibaldi. So far the Government has received
intelligence that two vessels, supposed to be carrying re-
inforcements to Garibaldi, were captured by a Neapolitan
vessel and carried into Gaeta. But with regard to the fur-
ther question, I can- of say whether that capture was
effected by the hoisting of English colours and offering to
tow them into Palermo. I have seen another statement in
the newspapers that it was by hoisting French colours ; but
her Majesty's Government have not received any corrobora-
tion of either statement. Of course, if the Neapolitan
frigate used English colours the act was a wholly unjusti-
fiable one. I now, sir, come to the question put by the hon.
baronet (Sir R. Peel). And first, as to his statement, that I
was not here last night to answer questions. I believe I am
generally in the house almost every day at a quarter past
4 o'clock. (Hear, hear.) Perhaps the hon. baronet himself
is not here quite so frequently or so punctually as I am.
(Hear, hear.) Every one at all acquainted with the Foreign
Office must know that there are at times questions of con-
siderable urgency, and which take up time at the very mo-
ment one is preparing to do some other business. (Hear.)
It se happened yesterday, just as I was about to leave the
Foreign-office to come down to the house, I was consulted
by the Under-Secretary of State on a question of great im-
portance respecting papers to be laid before Parliament,
and I remained discussing the matter with him till past the
hour when questions are generally answered. (Hear.) The
only question that was on the notice paper was that of the
hon. baronet the member for Carlow (Sir J. Acton) who has
just spoken with respect to the correspondence of 1856 and
W. That was not a very urgent matter, and I desired a
notice to be sent to the hon. baronet that he might have the
papers if he would move an address to the Crows!. The hen.
baronet does not seem to have correctly understoood that
message; but he may reeve any day for papers. It has taken
some time to collect them, beinparts of a correspondence

with. a former Secretary of State ; but they are now in order,
and the hon. baronet can have them whenever he likee to
move for them: With regard to the hon. baronet the mem-

her for Tamworth, I can only say, if he has any question
to ask which he thinks urgent with reference to foreign
affairs, his correct course is to do as other members do, and
to give notice of his intention to put such a question. The
hon. member might have had the courtesy to send me a
note to say that •he was going to ask his question, and then
I should certainly have endeavoured to attend in my place
to answer it. (Hear.) Well, omitting all matters relating to
the Conspiracy Bill, which has hardly any bearing on any

subject now before us, it appears that the hon. baronet has
seen a report in the newspapers that a note has been trans.

witted to us from M. Thouvenel, containing, among other

things, a very strong hint that France would not submit
to any diminution of the territory of which she is now
in possession, viz., Savoy and Nice. Sir, I could
not have answered the hon. baronet on that

point yesterday, because I had then no knowledge of
any note from M. Thouvenel; but at half-past
three o'clock to-day I saw the French ambassador, and ho
placed in my hands a copy of a French note ; and as to
any such intimation as that stated in the newspapers,
namely, that France would not consent to any diminution
of that territory, there is not a word of that kind in the
whole despatch. (Hear, hoar.) The purport of the de-

spatch is to this effect :—lt is states in the Treaty of Turin
that France will come to an understanding with the other
Powers with respect to the neutralised portions of Savoy;
and, according to the view of the French Government, that
understanding is to be arrived at by endeavouring to recon-
cile the second article of the Treaty of Turin with the 92d
article of the Treaty of Vienna. The French note then pro-
ceeds to say that this may be done in one of these three
modes—either the Powers who signed the Treaty of Vienna
may meet in conference with the French Foreign Minister,
or identical notes may be exchanged, the French note stating
that France is ready to take upon herself the whole of the
obligations by which Sardinia has been bound during the
time she held Savoy. And here I may mention, in answer
to the question put to me by the hon. gentleman who spoke
last, that the despatch says that France is ready to make
this neutral territory part of the neutral territory of Switzer-
land in the same manner as Sardinia did. The third
mode would be by leaving it to France and Switzer-
land to effect such a substitution for the former en-
gagements as France and Switzerland might mutually agree
upon. The note then goes on to say that if there should
be a conference, most of the Powers have already said
they think that Paris would be a convenient place in which
to hold it, and that it should meet on the points I have
mentioned. Such is the substance of the note we have
received only to-day; and of course her Majesty's Govern-
ment have not yet answered it. It remains for them to
answer it in such terms as they may think it requires. But
it appears to me the whole question rests upon this—that
the Great Powers of Europe were willing to engage upon a
guarantee for this portion of Savoy being held, like the
other parts of that country, by Sardinia. Sardinia was a
State with whom the Allied Powerdwere ready to agreeupon
such terms, and they might at all events be quite sure, when
they had engaged with Sardinia upon those terms, that Swit-
zerland was safe, and that these obligations would be binding
upon Sardinia. But the case is very much changed when a
great Power like France come into possession of the terri-
tory that was held by Sardinia. (Hear, hear.) And it is
not the same thing—although it is so represented by France,
and although, indeed the words are the same, the technical
engagements exactly the same—for France to say, "We will
undertake to fulfil the obligations of Sardinia, and to place
this neutralised territory in the same position as it stood in
before." (Hear.) That is the answer which we have urged
more than once to this proposal. Really, the hon. baronet,
who speaks frequently and with great ability on these sub-
jects, should endeavour to be more accurate ; because, be
it observed, the engagement of the treaty is not that there
should be no troops at any time in the neutralised provinces.
On the contrary, the specific engagement is that the Sar-
dinian troops, in the case of war with the neighbouring
Powers, shall evacuate this neutralised territory, thereby
implying very clearly that during peace the Sardinian troops
are at liberty to occupy it.' This, therefore, is the position
of the question. We have an opinion—and it is a very
decided opinion—as to the 'node in which, supposing France
to have obtained, as she has done already, the cession of
Savoy, a substitute should be provided which would, as I
believe, be an efficient substitute, and one that would be
satisfactory to Switzerland, for the engagements which have
hitherto subsisted. But lam sorry to say that at no time in
any of our discussions has France shown any disposition to
adopt that substitute which seems to us to be the only one
which would be an equivalent, in point of efficiency, to the
security which the treaty of 1815 created. It would be
impossible for us, therefore, to state that we ehall be satis-
fied with or shall accept this treaty as affording an' equi-
valent security to Switzerland for that which she has pre-
viously enjoyed. (Hear, hear.) I don't know whether
the bon. baronet really means to say that we should not
have given any opinion on the subject without obtaining the
sanction of this house—(" No, no," from Sir R. Peel)—
but that is not the usual way of carrying on such correspon-
dence. The Cabinet must obtain the consent of the Crown
to such despatches and communications as they may feel it
their duty to prepare, and on afterwards presenting the
papers to this house their authors must submit to any
opinion which the house may think fit to pass upon them.
In this case the papers are rather voluminous; but I hope
very soon to place at least a portion of them, bringing the
correspondence down to this time, upon the table. For
France having now, according to her own view, accom-
plished the annexation, and 'French authorities and French
troops having taken possession of Savoy and Nice, as far as
that point is concerned we have at length reached the stage
at which it is fitting to produce to this house the correspon-
dence which has passed on the subject. With respect to
the offer to which the hon. baronet alludes—viz., that
the French Government would give up Chablais and Fan-
cigny if we would consent to the cession of the rest of
Savoy to France, I can only say that the French Govern-
ment has never made any such offer to the British govern-
ment. (Hear, hear.) Ido not think it would have been
becoming in us to accept it if such an offer had been
made to us. But what took place was that in the early
part of February the Emperor of the French and his Mini-
sters declared that they were ready to yield Chablais and
Faucigny to Switzerland. But in a very short time after-
Wards the Emperor declared to a deputation who went to
Paris that ho should not consent to what he called the
dismemberment of Savoy, and that Chablais and Faucigny
could not be separated from the other provinces. Lord
Cowley spoke to the French Minister for Foreign Affairs on
the subject, and was told that the Emperor had been willing
if the population of theso territories had consented to such
an arrarigement—to cede them to Switzerland ; but that
there had been such a strong disinclination, and repugnance
even, evinced to being parted from the rest of Savoy that
the Emperor found himself obliged not to proceed with that
cession. (A. laugh.) Lord Cowley likewise said, he did
not think that the engagement to come to an understanding
with the Powers of Europe had been fulfilled. M. Thou-
venel stated that he thought Lord Cowley was not very
reasonable, that all the other Powers of Europe seemed to
think the despatches which had been written by France
were satisfactory on that point, and that the engagement
had been fulfilled. I have now answered the question of
the hon. baronet. The hon. baronet, always presuming
upon certain facts without ascertaining whether they are
correct, goes on to make some comments. He says that, if
the French Government have made a communication to us
in the terms which he has seen in the newspapers, it is very
insulting to the British Government and ought to be pro-
tested against. But, as he is wrong in his facts, his infer-
ences fall to the ground with them. The remaining ques-
tion for the Government to consider I must say amounts to
little more than this :—how we can best use our influence
to maintain the neutrality of Switzerland, and whether
there be any terms which Switzerland is likely to accept
—that can now be proposed. But if there bo no such terms
if France offers nothing further than that she will under..
take the same engagements towards Switzerland and to-
wards Europe which were undertaken by Sardinia, her
Majesty's Government can only say—and they will say so
in the strongest and most formal manner—that they do not
think the engagements of the 92d article of the Treaty of
Vienna and the 2d article of the Treaty of Turin can in
that way be reconciled. (Hear, hear.)
CEYLON RAILWAY.

Sir W. GALLWEY gave notice that on an early day ho
would ask a series of questions respecting the Ceylon
Railway.

GAME LICENCES.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated
that if the price to be paid for game licences was to be con-
sidered, it must be done on Monday night at eleven o'clock,
the Bankruptcy Bill occupying the rest of the evening.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.

The motion for the adjournment of the house at its rising
until Monday was then agreed to.

SAVINGS' BANKS AND FRIENDLY SOCIETIES

INVESTMENTS BILL.

On the motion that the house do resolve itself into a
committee on this bill,

Sir H. WILLGUGHBY called the attention of the
house to that portion of the report of the select committee
on savings banks, the 19th day of July, 1858, which re-
lated to the investments of the moneys of the savings
banks, and specially to No. 10, p. 21, " That no sales, pur-
chases, or exchanges of stoeks or securities held by the
commission shall be made, except as required for the pur-
poses of the savings banks, and that no funding of the
Exchequer-bills held by the commission, shall in future be
made without the authority of a special act of Parliament."
The provisions of this bill were in direct opposition to the
report of the select committee. The suggestions of the
committee were very clear, and might be summed up under
two heads, that there should be a bona fide commission of
five gentlemen, namely, the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
the Governor of the Bank of England, and three other
persons appointed by the Crown, of whom one should be
paid, and that the whole of the savings' banks money
should be treated as a trust, and that the finance minister
shculd not have the power of operating upon any portion of
the funds without the authority of the act of Parliament.
At the present moment the savings' banks money was
about £41,800,000, and the deficiency of the assets of the
entire fund was three millions and a half. The view which
the trustees and managers of banks took of this bill was,
that they wished the fund placed in a bona fide condition,

and to be treated as trust funds. (tear, hear.) The deficit
began in 1828, and had gone or increasing since. H e
wished to call the attention of he house to the existing

state of the law. It had been stabd that the trustees and

managers of banks had no interes in this money after it
had found its way to the bank. le (Sir H. Willoughby)
could not concur in the statement d the right hon. gentle-
man that they had no interest in tie good management of
their funds. At any rate they hadan interest that the rate

of interest should not be lowered. By the provisions of Ulla
present bill a very important powt would be given to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. re maintained that they

should not place such great andaxtensive powers as this

bill would place in the hands eithrr of a finance Minister,

or of an ex-officio commission. mould anything be more
unwise, more contrary to commonsense, than to trust such
power to a commission composed cf the Chief Baron of the
Exchequer, the Accountant-General of the Court of Chan-

cery, and the Master of the Rolls, when it was well known

What those financial operations wort carried on by some other

party ? He must say, also, it was lot right to place a power
over millions of the people's mom), under the control of a

Minister of Finance: He found hat the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had bought and sold cut millions of the public

stock, for doing which he (Sir H.Willoughby) ventured to
say he had no power whatever. Wore they prepared to vote
that, the Finance Ministers of the day should have the

power to go into the Stock Market secretly and silently and
buy and sell to the extent of millbns of the public money,
without the house knowing anything of it? But above all,
he should advise the house not to entrust that power to such
a commission as ho had referred to ; and if it were to be
placed in the hands of a commission at all, he,should like
to see it placed in one composed of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, the Governor of the Bank of England, and
three others recommended by the Government. The
commission which considered the question recommended
that. He might refer to former years, as for instance to
1844, when the most extensive operations were carried out
on the Stock Exchange in the moneys in the savings banks
without any knowledge of them by this house until long
after. According to the evidence of Lord Monteagle,
extensive transactions to the amount of millions had been
carried on in the market, in the money in the funded debt;
and it further appeared that the commission had gone so far
as to add anew to the debt an amount exceeding £2,500,000.
The funded stock in the country was about 436,000,000,
and as he understood the right hon. gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer was going to write off £31,000,000
of stock, and that for that stock he proposed to pay an
interest of three per cent. Now, he considered that it was
a very arbitrary proceeding to thus seize upon the money
in the savings banks. (Hear, hear.) There was also a sum
of twelve millions of money which, by the 4th clause,
would be in the power of the Finance Minister. The pro-
visions of that clause gave him power to buy and sell,
dealing in that money which was the property of the public
creditor. He considered that no such power should be
given him as that of selling stock and bills, for the pur-
pose of buying other stock and bills, and the sooner that
power was taken away from the Finance Minister the bet-
ter it would be for the depositors in savings banks, and for
the payers of taxes. (Hear.) There was not a shadow of
doubt that a bona fide commission would be the best to be
armed with a power to deal with those funds, which were
trust funds. (Hear, hear.) He had gone laboriously through
the effect of the operations between the years 1828 and 1844,
and had come to the conclusion that they had made a loss
of £120,000.
Mr. HANK EY said that in his opinion this bill was not
the proper mode of legislating upon this question, in refer-
ence to which it unsettled a great deal and settled nothing.
The object of the bill was certainly correct enough—to pro-
vide a fund to secure at all times the payment of deposits.
On that score, however, the bill was quite uncalled for, for
the deposits were perfectly secure. To carry_the object out
the Chancellor of the Exchequer cancelled a certain amount
of stock, and then created a book debt. That was certainly
a novel proceeding. The only means by which it could be
attained was to provide an indisputable security, so that
the money should always be forthcoming, and that we
should not have to pay too high a rate of interest for it.
The great point was to reduce the expenses of management,
and to provide for theinterest when due. (Hear.) The can-
celling of a portion of the debt would no doubt settle it, but
the book debt should be equal to it in amount, and not
merely to a portion of it. By the bill, as had just been
pointed out by the hon. baronet opposite, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer would have control over the difference, and
that was objectionable. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer
requested the Commissioners for the Reduction of the Na-
tional Debt to invest money in the stocks he referred to,
they would do so, and a saving might be effected from it, but
he did not see where the saving was to come from at present.
The creation of a funded debt was objectionable, for it might
go on ad infinitum, whereas Exchequer bills must be met at
a given time, and so come regularly under the notice of the
house. The power which the Chancellor of the Exc, equer
retained over those stocks, and his being in a position to
" rig the market," was highly objectionable. It would
have been far better for him to have gone into the market,
and to have borrowed_ money on his Exchequer bills, and
pay a little more for his money for a short time. The Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer appeared to him to be determined
to ignore the labours and results of the committee which
sat in 1858. Nor did he rigidly fulfil the principle of a
trustee. He did not make those remarks in any unkind
spirit towards the right hon. gentleman personally, and in-
deed, though he disapproved of the bill, ho would say that
he at least deserved credit for being the first Chancellor of
the Exchequer who, for years past, had brought a savings
banks bill under discussion. He objected to the bill pro-
posed because it did not deal with savings as trust pro-
perty, and because it did nut create a sufficient charge upon
the Consolidated Fund to pay the stipulated interests.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT said that, having been chairman of
a committee on savings banks which sat in 1858, and paid
great attention to the subject, he hoped the house would
allow him to say a few words upon the subject. He was
willing to believe that the right honourable gentleman
did not intend any discourtesy to that or the other com-
mittees, because he said that their recommendations sub-
stantially received effect in the provisions of the bill.
Three or four bills had been introduced on this subject at
various times, but they only threw. doubts on what was
before clear, and were rather a prejudice than a support
to those excellent institutions. He had hoped, therefore,
that we might have a good bill, the path to which cer-
tainly had been in some degree smoothed by the inquiries
of the committee to which he had referred. When he saw
the present bill, however, he confessed he experienced a
considerable disappointment. It contained several serious
defects, among which might be mentioned this—that it
dealt with only the portion of a subject which ought not to
be dealt with piecemeal; for, if they dealt only with invest-
ments, as was proposed by it, what chance was their of hav-
ing this question settled by a future bill ? (Hear.) His first
and greatest objection to the bill was, that it dealt with the
question of investment only, and left entirely untouched all
those other important questions in which the managers and
trustees of savings banks took so deep an interest.
But the right hon. gentleman had said, the committee, of
which he (Mr. Estcourt) was the chairman, did not make
any recommendations upon these questions in their report.
Why, the committee had dealt with them in the only way
they could. They suggested the appointment of a commis-
sion, with pffwer to give assistance and information to the
managers of savings banks, upon every point on which
there were doubts and difficulties. They proposed that the
three commissioners, in addition to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer and the Governor of the Bank of England,
should be empowered to frame regulations as to the mode
in which accounts should be kept and audited, and generally
to introduce a uniform and responsible system of manage-
ment throughout the country. Among other deeply inte-
resting questions which had been under their consideration,
and which were left wholly untouched by this bill, he might
mention the enforcement of an audit, the uniformity of ac-
counts, the investments by minors, the best means of pre
venting defalcations, the determining in what manner the
usefulness of savings banks could be extended, by the adop-
tion, for instance, of such plans as that pt7oposed for giving
facilities for depositing money in the post offices. These, and
others enumerated in the 14th resolution of the committee's
report, were omitted in this bill, and believing that if it
passed in its present shape they would not have another op..
portunity of dealing with them, he should prefer that the
whole question should stand over until it could be fully dealt
with. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the main object of
the bill, the mode in which it was proposed in future to deal
with the funds of the savings banks in the hands of the
Government, he fully concurred with the views so ably ex-
pressed by his hon. friend the member for Evesham. The
main principle of the bill was to convert the funds now in-
vested in various stocks into what the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer called a " book debt," upon which a fixed and cer-
tain amount of interest was to be paid. For his own part,
he did not see how that alteratiori would tend to prevent the
losses which the Government had experienced under the
present system, in consequence of the variation in the price
of stocks. When any large demand was made upon them,
they would be obliged to sell at the price of the day, and
according to that necessity they would either gain or lose.
The fact then was, the bill would create a fixed and per-
manent interest, to be paid by the Government on the debt,
while the interest accruing from the investments of the de •
posits would be continually varying. He therefore could
not see how the Government would gain one sixpence by
this. bill. He was sorry that the right hon. gentleman had
brought forward the subject in its present shape, and he
must give his vote against the bill. It was introducing a
new system, it gave no additional security; and it only dealt
with a part of the question, whereas it should be dealt with
as a whole. If they did not take this opportunity of so
dealing with all those matters which had been the subject
of complaint by the country for some years past, and by
which the operations of the banks had been circumscribed,
they would never again have the same chance of settling the
question upon this footing—rendering them much more easy
to establish, much safer when established, and extending
their benefits over a wider area. (Hear, hear.) He said a
wider area, for he believed there were only 600 savings
banks in the kingdom, whereas, according to his view,there
should be a bank in every village. (1-lear.)
Colonel SYKES regretted that no attention had been
paid to the recommendations of the committee who had
investigated and reported upon this subject. Where was
the use of having gentlemen making such an inquiry if the
house paid no attention to their recommendations r He