The Sun.
London, England, 1858-11-05 00:00:00

THE LEEDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, AND
THE BANK COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF
COMMONS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SIR,—I send to you, as one of the warmest advo-
cates of Monetary Reform, the enclosed letter to
the President of the Leeds Chamber of Commerce,
as illustrative of the bias of the Chairman of the
Bank Committee, whose report reads more like the
speech of a counsel for his client than the summing
up of a judge. You mark truly, in your Tuesday's
edition, on the vast importance it would be, were
John Bright, whom I am to call my per-
sonal friend, to turn his honest mind and splendid
talents to the consideration of the Money Question.
Were he to give the same assistance to the destruc-
tion of the monopoly in money—the mere instru-
ment of exchange—which he did to the monopoly
in corn, he would find many of the evils of which
he complains vanish; and that the same necessity
would not exist for the working classes to emigrate,
and seek in banishment to a foreign land the
necessaries and comforts of life which they cannot
find at home.—l remain, Sir,
Yours sincerely,
HAMER STANSFELD.
The Grange, Burly, near Otley,
Nov. 4, 1858.

TO DARNTON LUPTON, ESQ., PRESIDENT OF THE LEEDS
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
Dear Sir,—Not finding in the evidence of Mr. Smith,
who was deputed by the Leeds Chamber of Commerce to
appear on their behalf before the Bank Committee, any
reference whatever to the excellent resolutions passed by
them relative to the Bank Charter Act, I beg to call your
attention to the false position in which the Leeds Chamber
of Commerce are placed by the omission.
The following extract is from their minutes :
" BANK CHARTER ACT.
" This Chamber having been requested to depute some
gentleman practically conversant with the working of the
above act and its effects on the monetary system and trade
of the country, a meeting of the Council was held on the
12th of May last—Darnton Lupton, Esq., the president, in
his place—when, after considerable discussion, the meeting
passed a resolution in favour of the following views :
" Ist. That the clause in the act which limits the Directors
of the Bank of England to an issue of £14,000,000, except-
ing against gold, ought to be abolished, and that the
, directors should have a discretionary power to exceed that
I limit as necessity may require.
"2d. That the Bank directors should also be allowed to
issue £1 Bank of England notes, convertible into gold in
London, in times of pressure and difficulty."
The first resolution virtually recommends the repeal of
the Act of 1844, as the clause restricting the Bank of Eng-
land to an issue of £14,000,000 against securities is the very
essence of that Act.
The Leeds Chamber of Commerce, in passing these reso-
lutions, have, in my opinion, distinguished themselves be-
yond all other chambers of commerce, having pointed out
therein the principal cause and cure of monetary panics in
this country ; and their views, representing those of Leeds,
the metropolis of the important manufacturing district of
the West Riding of Yorkshire, having been requested by
the Bank committee, are entitled to be properly recorded on
their minutes. That this has not been done appears to
have arisen from the circumstance of Mr. Cardwell, the
chairman, a staunch supporter of the Act of 1844, having
had a private interview with Mr. Smith previous to his
examination before the committee.
It may be the privilege of chairmen of committees of the
House of Commons to have such interviews; but if so, it
is a practice liable to great abuse.
What would be thought of the conduct of a chairman of
Quarter Sessions holding private interviews with witnesses
previous to a trial, and yet such were held, in more cases
than one, by the chairman of the committee appointed by
the representatives of the people, to try the vitally important
cause of "the Country versus the Bank Charter Act and
its respondent, Lord Overstone." It is but human nature
that a chairman, having a strong bias in favour of certain
opinions, would, under such circumstances, however un-
consciously, shape his questions to a witness in such a man-
ner as to elicit answers which would meet his views and
omit those which would not.
Should not Mr. Cardwell, as an impartial chairman, have
put questions to Mr. Smith before the committee so as to
have given them the opportunity of recording on their
minutes the resolutions of the :Leeds Chamber of Com-
merce, which were known to Mr. Smith, and doubtless
communicated by him to Mr. Cardwell, and are not the
public entitled to know what passed in the private inter-
view as well as what occurred before the committee ?
What chance was there for the public, after witnesses
had passed through such an ordeal, to obtain a just verdict
on the trial of "The Labour Interest versus the Money
Interest," and with a select committee holding its meetings
with doors closed to the public—with two Bank directors
amongst its members, sitting in judgment on their own
monopoly with two other members selected expressly to
watch over the interests of the joint-stock and private banks
of issue—with three bankers besides the Bank directors—
with a Peelite for a chairman, who was a party to the in-
troduction of the Act of 1844, and is still a most strenuous
supporter of it—with three other members of the committee
similarly situated, or who voted in favour of the act on its
former trial before the committee of 1848. With such com-
bined adverse influences what chance was there for the pub-
lic of a just verdict ? Are they not warranted in denounc-
ing such a jury as packed—such a committee as "a
mockery, a delusion, and a snare ?
The testimonies of Mr. Smith, a partner, Messrs.
Becketts and Co., and one of the oldest and most respected
banking firms in the country, are entitled to great respect,
and in its condemnation of the Act of 1844 is most valuable,
corroborating views which I have long entertained and
published, . .. ... . . . . __

He bears witness that the act is inoperative in ordinary
times, and fails in times of pressure and panic ; that it in-
duced a want of confidence which caused money to be
hoarded ; that although in the district of Leeds, in 1857,
there was no excess of credit to any great extent, no ac-
commodation bills, as far 'as he could find out, and not
one in his own bank, that trade was apparently very
sound, and there was not the slightest reason to apprehend
a panic ; that only one failure in the district connected with
the crisis occurred; yet that, if the Treasury Letter sus-
pending the Act had not been issued on the 12th of
November, the entire commercial body of this important
district "must have gone to the wall."
His views, nevertheless, should be regarded as those only
of a private banker, interested in the monopoly of issuing
notes, and not as those of the Leeds Chamber of Commerce,
from which, in some respects, they widely differ.
The Leeds Chamber of Commerce wished the clause re-
stricting the issue of the Bank of England to £14,000,000
to be abolished, and a discretionary power to be given to
the directors to exceed that limit as necessity may require.
Mr. Smith wishes the clause to be retained, but a discre-
tionary power to be given by law to the Government to
exceed it in times of pressure.
Mr. Smith also wishes, as a private issuing banker, that
the period fixed by the list for taking the averages of the
issues of country bankers should be altered, so as practi-
cally to add to their issues 15 per cent. more than they dare
at present issue for fear of the penalties imposed by the Act
for exceeding the authorised amount.
These wishes of his are almost identical with those ex-
pressed to the committee by Mr. Rodwell, the chairman of
the Association of Country Issuing Bankers. This body
wished their own issues to be practically enlarged to the
amount intended by the act, by altering the period for tak-
ing the averages ; but they would forego their fair claim,
and " continue the provisions of the act precisely as they
now stood, rather than open the whole subject for public
disoassion."
Foremost amongst these provisions is the clause restrict-
ing the Bank of England to an issue of £14,000,000 against
securities, the keystone of the work of monopoly; but, as
regards this point, Mr. Smith so far differs from them, that
he would allow the Government to enlarge and strengthen
it, when no longer able to bear the pressure of the super-
structure of commercial liabilities.
Mr. Smith is warranted in giving his own views, from
the nature of his appointment by the Leeds Chamber of
Commerce. He is asked by the committee (5,575), "You
have been deputed by the Leeds Chamber of Commerce to
come and give evidence before this committee ?" and he
answers, " They passed a resolution requesting me to come
here. I was not at home at that time. It was done,
therefore, quite ignorant of their intention." Of course,
under such an appointment, he was not committed to re-
present exclusively the views of the Leeds Chamber of

Commerce.
The following questions respecting the propriety of an
issue of one pound notes were put to him, not by the chair-
man, who must have learnt from Mr. Smith that such an
issue was recommended by the Leeds Chamber of Com-
merce in time of pressure and difficulty, but incidentally
by another member of the committee, Mr. Cayley—(s,7so).
" You have asked with regard to the year 1825, when there
was only £1,260,000 of bullion left in the coffers of the
Bank, do you remember that in spite of that low state of
bullion, the panic was relieved by the issue of a number of
one pound notes ?" "Yes, perfectly" (5,751). " That,
in point of fact, was analogous in principle to the extra
issue which was empowered by the Government Letter ?"
" It supplied the place of bullion, and would do so again ;
it would do so at any time."
The Leeds Chamber of Commerce have a duty to dis-
charge—they owe it to themselves and to the public, to
ascertain and make known how it happened that their deli-
berative resolutions respecting the Bank Charier Act were
suppressed, and never reached the Bank Committee.
Not doubting that they will faithfully discharge this
national duty, and place themselves in the right relative to
this all-important question, I remain, dear sir, yours sin-
cerely, HA.MER STANSFELD,
The Grange, Burly, noir ()den Nov. 3, 1858.

GOVERNM T EMIGRATION. Her Majesty's
EN
Emigration Commissioners chartered yesterday afternoon,
the 4th inst., the Commodore Perry, 2,143 tons, to sail
from Liverpool for Melbourne, Victoria, at £l3 13s. )d.
per statute adult, to be ready for the reception of passengers
on such day as the CoramissionerS way appoint between ole
10th cud 17th December. -