The Sun.
London, England, 1861-04-09 00:00:00

THE DOCKYARDS.

Sir F. SMITH gave notice that next week he would call
the attention of the house to the report of the committee
appointed to inquire into the state of the Government dock-
yards.

BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY BILL.
After a few words from Mr. VANCE,
This bill was read a third time and passed amid the
cheers of the house.

POST-OFFICE SAVINGS BANKS BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT, ontthe reading of the Ist clause,
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer for some informa-
tion on the details of the bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, said that it
would be an objectionable course to adopt for the house to
discuss the principle of the bill at present, when it had
already been amply discussed and affirmed. Generally
speaking, however, the plan proposed by this bill was,
that the local postmasters were entitled to receive
deposits, which they were bound to transmit to
the Postmaster-General in London, and this operation
would be transacted without the introduction of any new
principle in the savings bank system. The depositor would
take his security from the postmaster in charge of the local
office where he lodged his money ; and in order to give him
every security, the Postmaster-General would adopt the
same course in reference to such transactions as he did
with regard to other business between him and
local postmasters, and increase the amount of secu-
rity required from the latter should the deposits
be augmented to an extent that would render such neces-
sary for the safety of the depositor. The Post-office system
with regard to the transmission of money worked so well
that it would scarcely be believed how trifling was the loss
incurred since its adoption. He would mention that the
loss on £33,000,000 of money transmitted from one part of
the country to the other by the medium of the
post-office order system was only £6,000. He
considered that the bill would not neutralise the principle
of the savings banks system, by allowing persons to deposit
larger amounts in the banks than was permitted by the
existing law, by the increased facilities for deposits which
it afforded. There was provision quite adequate to prevent
the law being infringed in this particular. With regard to an
objection brought against the measure, viz., that it brought
Government into rivalry with private enterprise, he con-
tended that it was entirely unfounded. In support of his
assertion he would state that the Government would ask
the House to limit the interest they were to receive to £2
10s. per cent., so that they would offer no attraction to de-
positors to invest their money with them by the amount of
interest they proposed to give.
The clause was ultimately agreed to.
On clause 2,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER stated that
he had made some amendments to this clause, which would
give additional security to the depositors against any
defalcation on the part of the local postmasters and render
the bill more effectual.
Mr. AYRTON opposed the scheme proposed by the
Government, which he contended would fail in ,realising
the expectations held forth by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to the house and to the country. In the
first place, he believed, from the experience of the past,
that this plan, like other Government schemes,
would not be found self-supporting when it
came into operation, but that it would be found
most expensive. He believed also that instead of the inte •
rest being limited as stated by the Chancellor of ;the Ex-
chequer to £2 10s. it would rise to £3 ss. per cent. Ho
contended further that the experiment now proposed was an
innovation of a system that had hitherto worked satisfac-
torily to a considerable extent, and might operate most
injnriously on a very important social movement which
held forth encouragement to the humbler classes to habits
of prudence. :After some further observations he ex-
pressed a hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would inform the house what would be the probable cost of
remitting money from the different bsnking institutions,
and what would be the cost of these institutions.
Mr. HANKEY said that the sill did not propose to alter
the existing system of savings banks, but to afford increased
facilities for still further developing that system. He re-
ferred to the details of the bill, and said that he felt bound
to give the measure his entire support.
Alderman SIDNEY, while he approved generally of the
object proposed by the bill, still considered that the
expense of the working of the system would be enor-
mous, and that the measure was founded in error. The
result would be that the country would be called on to pay
depositors the highest interest, and would be saddled with
the expense of this institution.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he must
be excused from the task of offering a full reply to the hon.
member for the Tower Hamlets, who had given the house
such a specimen of his discursive force on the present occa-
sion. He would confine his reply to that portion of the
hon. member's speech which seemed to be practically on the
working of this bill. It might, however, be observed that
both his speech, and that of the hon. member who had just
sat down,. as they were directed entirqy against the prin-
ciple of the bill, could hardly be quite in place on this occa-
sion in committee, when they were discussing the question
whether the depositor's book should be conclusive evidence
of title 'for ten days or for a longer period. But the hon.
member for Peterborough had already given an answer to
part of their objections. He (Mr. Gladstone) would at once
admit that the consideration of expense was one vital to this
measure. It would be absurd for the Government and Par-
liament, even for the purpose of encouraging provident
habits among the poor, to make the working classes of this
country pensioners on the Exchequer. To such a principle
he should be altogether opposed. If such were found to be
the operation of the bill, it would be their duty to check
and limit the operation of it, so as effectually to prevent so
enormous an evil. But the hon. member had said that he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) showed some disinclina-
tion to produce returtie from the departments of the Post-
office, giving the calculations, statements, and figures by
which the officers of that department had satisfied the Go-
vernment that this would boa self-working and self-support-
ing system. Although it was undoubtedly in the power of
the House of Commons to call for the most minute statements
from every permanent officer of the Government as well as
from the Ministers of the Crown, yet such was not the prac-
.tice of the House of Commons, and if the house were to alter
its practice in that respect the effect of it must be to divest
the responsible Ministers of all responsibility, and placing it
whore it ought not to be. (Hear.) He begged the house to
bear in mind that this was an experimental system. It was
objected by the same hon. gentleman who had just sat
down that it would rise to such an enormous magnitude
that it would require in time an establishment as large as
the Bank of England to carry it out, and that it would
ea,_te a great deal of patronage. Now, with regard to any
rt°natee under the bill, the chancellor of the Exchequer
eer f'4l have nothing to do. He would not appoint a single
k,
not a half -dozen clerks would be appointed for a
length ot tine after the passing of the bill. If the system
were to
m,~+er_grOW~ the
appointments would be made by the Post-
altoget,,,„ rp earl wisely. He did not think they could
be firaiaadrut rid of the system of patronage, but it might
made by free ,meat appointments of this kind should be
see. As to the ex competition was what he desired to
that point must be of 4-4,e system, any calculations on
They must depend on ea."'l. °litirt4-r hypothetical character.
Asi nksassuvourdphtiaovie;
to t
trou,the amount
of business the savings
Al-
though he had a sang t&
---'- —peas to the successful'opt:
tion of the system he had 11.1 L t],„
—6llthtest conception as to
the amount of business that ve,ouid
dose. He did not
know whether it would be moderate or eu dugly large,
and he felt reluctant to deal withtiger,..ee-
.4 by anticipation
that might be falsified by the result. What
lI
committee to observe were these too thit:gs. pig wi rat thette
operation of the bill would be gradual, and as the first..
yews
expenditure, with the result of the measure, wadd 114
befere the house, the house would be in a position to j,wce
of thole smite, and whether the bill was 801 f-supporting, 0 v

had become a charge on the public. The next point was this, '
that whatever was the expense of the systera it would be an
expense that would be precisely adjusted to the extension of
its operation. It would not begin with an establishment
under highly-paid officers. The framework already existed,
and everything would fall in with the existing machinery of
the Post-office. It might admit of an extension, but that
extension would be in precise proportion to the demand. As
to the expense, he confessed he attached more weight to
the experience of the Post-office authorities than to mere
calculations of figures, however plausible. The modern
Post-office started upon the assumption, which was not be-
lieved at the time, that it could carry letters with a profit
at a uniform rate of id. (Hear.) To the carriage of letters
the Post-office added the book-post, and showed that it
could receive and carrymore weighty matter. It then added
the money-order office, and although the profit on that was
almost infiniteseimal, considering the amount of business
done, it still left a profit of £20,000 or £30,000. The Post-
office authorities had carefully examined all the steps of the
process under which deposits would be received, transmit-
ted, kept, retransmitted, and returned to the depositors
when demanded, and calculated the charge at which that
could be done. The result at which they had arrived was,
that one halfpenny on the receipt and another on the recla-
mation of each deposit would be ample remuneration for
the local postmaster. This was independent of the penny
for the transmission of the letter. It was quite true, as the
hon. gentleman stated, that deposits of Is. would be unre-
munerative, but by the bill they were not compelled to take
ls. They might do so, but it was not the particular depo-
sit they must look to, but the average of the deposits. If
the hon. gentleman saw from the first balance-sheet that
the result of the measure was unsatisfactory, it would be
competent for him or for the Government to step in in order
to stop the slightest appearance of a charge upon the public

for the transaction of this business. ThePosi-office autho-

rides adopted two modes of comparison—the cost of the
money-order office, and the cost of the existing savings
banks ; and in both points of view the result was satisfac-
tory as to the cost of working the proposed measure. The

hon. gentleman who spoke last said that by reducing the
interest from £3 ss. to £2 10s. he gained £750 on every
million, but he might have made a more favourable ma-
nagement of his figures, and he Would have at the same
time been more accurate if he said he would have gained
£7,500. (Hear and alaugh.) It was the opinion of competent
persons in the Post-office that they could transact this busi..
ness more cheaply than the money-order office ; and with
regard to the existing savings banks the result of the calcu-
lation was that that which cost the existing savings banks
one shilling per transaction would cost sevenpence per
transaction under the system about to be established. These
were statements on which the committee might venture to
rely. These were the views with which he trusted the
house would be disposed to make a trial of this experiment,
reserving to itself of course the powers and the duty of cor-
recting any tendency to excess if it should exist ; but on
every calculation that was made he believed it would cause
no charge to the public at all. He could not agree with the
hon. member for the Tower Hamlets that the present sav-
ings banks inflicted an enormous charge upon the public.
It might be that they were far from perfection, but at the
same time he did not hesitate to say that they had been of
the greatest advantage, and that the deposits had been the,
means by which successive governments had effected eco-
nomy for the public which transcended ten times any charge
that the state had been put to by them. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. SOTHERN-ESTCOURT said the right hon. gen-
tleman dealt rather hardly with the two hon. gentlemen
who had spoken when he told them that their observations
ought to have been made when the second reading of the
bill was before the house, seeing that the second reading
was proposed at so late an hour that those who took an in-
terest in the subject could hardly speak upon it. The right

hon. gentleman said that very minute and particular inves-
tigations had been made by the Post-office, and he thought
the right hon. gentleman ought to lay such information as

he:possessed—he did not expect it to be complete—before
the house ere he called upon them to pass the bill ; other-
wise they would be passing a measure which might involve
a large expenditure, without any information on the sub-
ject.

Colonel SYKES hoped the right hon. gentleman would
so extend the time of making the deposits as to render it
more convenient for working men than the present money-
hours were—namely, between 10 and 4.

Mr. BRISCOE wished to know whether this was an
auxiliary measure to the present system of savings banks,
or whether it was to supersede them. Ho could scarcely
conceive how the Post-office could do this business without
a considerable expenditure. It must have a separate ac-
count for each depositor under the bill. He believed there
were 15 counties which had no savings banks. If this mea •
sure was intended to be an experiment let it be tried in those
counties. He regretted that he had not heard a more satis-
factory statement from the Government on the subject.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
although the second reading came on late at night, he made
no attempt to force it through the house, and would have
postponed it if any strong desire had been expressed. With
regard to the hours of business, the Post-office would make
such arrangements as would suit the convenience of the
working classes. With regard to the effect of the measure,
whether it would be auxiliary to or supersede the present
savings banks, that was too vague a question for him to
answer. He could not tell what the effect of the system
would be. One class of depositors to whom secrecy would
be an object would probably prefer to have their deposits in

the Post-office, whilst another class would prefer to have

their's under the direct influence of local gentlemen. His
object was to give greater facilities for saving than now ex-
isted, and that was the sum and substance of all he had to
say. If his hon. friend looked at the 13 or 15 counties in
which no savings banks existed he thought he would not
advise him to try the experiment in them. There were a
few counties in England, several in Scotland, and some in
Ireland, where they did not exist, but these were small in
population and insignificant in trade, and therefore not at
all fitted to test an experiment of this kind. (Hear.) With
regard to the information which the right hon. gentleman
opposite asked for, he could only repeat that they could not
form any clear or positive estimate of the amount of busi-
ness that might be done under the new system. They could
only see their way with regard to the relations that would
prevail between the amount of business done and
the cost. He was afraid that no information could be given
except in a form more or less hypothetical. This they
might assume, that with a given number of deposits the
cost of remuneration to the local officer would be so much,
and the cost of transmitting the letters backwards and for-
wards would be so much, and then there would be the cost
of the central establishment in London. These, he believed,
contained all the elements of the cost. With regard to the
amounts in which the deposits would be received, or the
time for which they would be left, it would be absurd to
I venture at that moment upon any estimate at all.
Mr. H. HERBERT could not allow this discussion to

does without thanking the Chancellor of the Exchequer

for this ;measure. ;He represented a county w here a
failure of a savings bank took place some years ago, and a
committee of this house reported that a change in the law
of savings banks was necessary. So many had been the
difficulties in the way that no Chancellor of the Exchequer
had dared to grapple with them. His right hon. friend,
seeing the difficulty of dealing with the present savings
bank system, had adopted the wise course of giving the
people a choice between the present system, and that which
he proposed to introduce. He sincerely hoped that the ex-
periment would be successful. In consequence of the failure
of the savings bank in his county ten years ago any labour-
ing man in that district who was asked to put his money
into the savings bank would laugh in their face. _

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY was disposed to look with favour
on any experiment which had for its object the extension of
the savings bank system, but the question always must be,
was the experiment a safe one ? They were going to estab-
lish a bank, of which the Postmaster-General was to be the
manager, he being a political officer who was here to-day
and gone to-morrow. If the scheme succeeded the transac-
tions would be numbered by tens of thousands. The
measure would have a serious effect on the present savings
banks, and would break many of them up.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had
already stated that he could not undertake to give any esti-
mate of the probable number of accounts that would be
opened. Those who had the best means of forming an
opinion thought that the number of transactions would be
considerable. With regard to disputed claims they would,
he believed, be disposed of in precisely the same manner as
they were now under the existing savings banks, that was
to say by the intervention of an intelligent gentleman, Mr.
Tidd Pratt, who held an office for the disposal of these
claims, and who did dispose of them without considerable
difficulty, and very much to the satisfaction of the depo-
sitors.

Mr. PULLER said at present when a disputld claim
arose' the parties went before the managers and the matter
was generally settled at once, and if some formality had not
been complied with, the parties received proper advice and
came again another day. If they had to come to town, that
would involve an amount of expense and trcuble which was
disproportionate to the amount of the deposit. He thought
therefore it would be impossible to work the system satis-
factorily unless there was some trustworthy person on the
spot to settle these claims, other than the postmaster.

The CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER agreed that
the intervention of some person other than the local post-
master in disputed cases was desirable, and the Postmaster-
General was already in possession of a staff of officers ad-
mirably adapted to that purpose—district surveyors, whose
duty it was to itinerate for the purposes of the Post-office,
and who could decide in the cases to which the hon. gentle-
man referred. With regard to the number of offices, it
would be the duty of the Postmaster-General to make a
selection of the offices in the country with which to begin
the working of this measure. There was no intention of
absolutely confining them to the money order offices, pro-
vie-1 there was a real need of a savings bank, and pro-
vided that vnstmaster was of a class sufficiently quali-
fied to conduct the mug—
nn the other hand, he had n•
doubt that the number with whim. 4.1,:v would commence
would be copsiderably less than that of the coraw.—e,
order offices.

Clause 2 was then agreed to, and ordered to stand part of
the bill.

On clause 3,
SIZ r. tiOLDSMID moved to insert after " part thereof"

-;

mds "

such parts being one shilling, or multiple of a

shilling."
Mr. AYRTON said, in a previous clause it was stated
that the acknowledgment to be given by the Postmaster-
General was to be conclusive evidence of payment of the
money. He presumed, therefore, that the acknowledgment
would have to be surrendered when the money was repaid.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the
Postmaster-General's acknowledgment ought to be evidence
of the title on the part of the depositor, but the surrender
of the document might not be necessary.
Mr. AYRTON repeated his objection to the proposed
plan of the bill.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
would remain in the power of the postmaster to require pos-
session of the document if he thought it necessary, but it
would not be required except in case of necessity.
Mr. AYRTON said if the depositor were to have the
power of circulating those two-and-sixpenny vouchers as
cash such a system would defeat the very object of savings
banks generally, which was to remove from the depositor
the temptation of drawing out his money at once. Those
vouchers would not, he thought, serve the saving purposes
for which they were intended, but would only aggravate the
evil of improvidence on the part of the working classes.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
the hon. gentleman was entirely wrong in his impression.
They could not prevent at the present moment a man who
had money in the savings bank from pledging his book, if
he so pleased ; and those acknowledgments would not
make them more liable to be pledged. The documents re-
mained in the possession of the depositor, and were not in
any sense capable of circulation. His object in drawing
the bill was to insert in it everything in connection with
the scheme except the executive details, and to set forth
the position and rights of depositors, but reserving
everything in regard to the mode in which the opera-
tions under the bill would be carried on. The general
intention of the Post-office department was that a per-
son who wished to make application for the withdrawal
of any portion of his money in the bank should have
to apply for a form in which he would have to insert the
number of his book, and his name and address, and upon
that being forwarded to London the Postmaster-General
would deem it sufficient, and would forward immediately a
warrant for the payment of the money.
Mr. HENLEY thought a good deal of confusion arose
from their not having more information as to the details of
the plan of the bill. The bill said that "the depositor or
anybody legally authorised." They wanted to know who
were the parties who were legally authorised, and they also
wanted to know in what form the demand was to be made.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer said the number of the
' book was to be sent up. He (Mr. Henley) thought, for one,
that the measure would be one of very great convenience to
the public, and he should like to see it carried out; yet he
thought it might lead to constant attempts at fraud, and
therefore he thought they ought to have more information
as to the details by which the bill was to be worked out.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, with
regard to the question of the party "legally authorised,"
the construction of these words would be governed by the
same principle as under the present state of the savings
banks laws. With respect to the danger which the right
hon. gentleman apprehended, that those acknowledgments
in the ordinary and natural course would not be necessary,
and that if there was a number indicating the number of
the book there would be no security against fraud except
the signature of the depositors, it would be the duty of the
local postmaster to see that that signature corresponded
with the original one.
Mr. HENLEY thought that if people took those deposits
from one post-office to another, and moved about, making
those deposits from year to year, there'would be a danger
that those statutable deposits would get lost.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, with
respect to the amendment of his hon. friend the member for
Reading (Sir F. Goldsmid), he could not introduce into the
bill the words he proposed, because if he did the effect
would be to prevent the depositor from ever withdrawing
the fraction of a shilling.
Sir F. GOLDSMID explained that his amendment
would not have any such effect as that stated by the right
hon. gentleman.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
was not aware of any very great economy of labour that
would result from the adoption of such an amendment;
but he would make inquiry into the subject.
Sir F. GOLDSMID said, under these circumstances he
should not press his amendment.
The amendment was then withdrawn.
Mr. DENT observed that in the savings bank with
which he was connected, the bulk of the working people
received their interest regularly. He wished to know
whether in all cases it would be necessary under this bill
for the depositors to give ten days' notice of their intention
to withdraw.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied in
the negative. After a notice of ten days a depositor would
possess an abselute title. He apprehended that the war-
rant would be sent by return of post in ordinary cases,
though it might happen once in a thousand times that
some delay might occur.
Mr. BRISCOE observed that, unfortunately, a very large
portion of the working classes of this country were totally
unable to write. How, then, was their mark to be verified ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, in
such cases the verification would be made in the usual way,
by witnesses.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT thought that every care ought to be
taken to prevent risk and confusion as regarded those cer-

tificates or acknowledgments. The original scheme of Mr.
Sykes was that those certificates should bear the value of
money and bear interest. He hoped the right hon. gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer would reconsider this

question.
Mr. KINNAIRD thought the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer had exercised a wise discretion in not referring to al!
these small matters of detail in the bill. They ought to
trust to the Government and the Postmaster-General to
deal with them properly,
Mr. AYRTON desired to call attention to the clause in
this respect, that it stated the acknowledgment of the money
should not be conclusive evidence that the Government had
received it, but conclusive evidence of the depositors' claiM
to the repayment thereof. The pass-book would be put
aside, and the paper acknowledgment was to be the only
proof of the right of the depositor. To this double system
of documents he had a great objection, believing it would
lead to much complexity and many difficulties. The pre-
sent system of the Post-office in reference to money orders
would be wholly inapplicable to deposits. The question
required much more consideration, in order that the Go-
vernment should be prevented from falling into serious
difficulties and all sorts of embarrassments.

Lord R. MON TAGU said it appeared to him that all
the objections which had been pointed out as likely to arise
had been met by the language of the clause.
Mr. BARROW supported the amendment, although he
was not sure that a perfect remedy had been provided to
present loss arising.
The amendment was agreed to, as were other verbal
amendments.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER proposed
in line 25 of the same clause that 10 days should be the
absolute maximum, without regard to place, for the return
of a deposit when demanded.

Mr. HENLEY said he at first felt apprehensive that the
insertion of these words would not cure the difficulties
which he had pointed out, but if the time was to be general
he would offer no objection.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said 10days
would be the extreme period in all cases, but the general
rule would be to send the deposit back by return of post.
The amendment was agreed to, and the clause as amended
was ordered to stand part of the bill.
On clause 4, providing that the names of depositors
sheuld not be disclosed,
Mr. AYRTON asked why there should be in all cases
this peremptory secrecy ? He thought there ought to be
some exceptions to it, and especially in tho cases of persnns
who became chargeable to the poor-law,' and in those cases
the facts relating to deposits ought to be disclosed to the
' guardians. There ought to be some protection against per-
sons obtaining relief from the parish, and at the same time
being depositors in a savings bank.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
the point, though a new one, would be met by leaving the
parish authorities to make application to the Postmaster-
General, who, be believed, would not be precluded from
giving all the information required.'
Mr. AYRTON considered that that would not be a cor-
rect construction of the clause. If a postmaster could not
disclose the name, the Postmaster-General would not be
able to do so. There ought to be a proviso enabling the
Post-office authorities to give proper information in certain
cases.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER agreed
that on a proper demand being made the names should be
disclosed. He would make inquiries upon the subject, and
give further information on the bringing up of the report.
The clause was agreed to.
On clause 5,

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in answer
to a question from Colonel Sykes, said the moneys deposited
would be subject to the same provisions of the law as those
which had been deposited under the existing Savings Banks
Acts. They would fall into the same channel and be dealt
with in the same manner.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said the point raised was in re-
ference to the power of the commissioners to buy and sell
stock and Exchequer bills—in fact the using of these moneys
for other purposes than those authorised by the Savings
Banks Acts. Would there be any objection to limit the
power of the commissioners to deal with these moneys
They ought not, in establishing these new banks, to fall
into the system which had prevailed in reference to the de-
posits in the old savings banks.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was sur-
prised to hear this objection raised after the repeated de-
bates which had taken place in that house. If the objection
were sustained it would effectually destroy the operation of
this bill.

131. K. -WILLOUGHBY said there was no doubt that
originally it was not intended that these moneys should be
applied to purposes of stock-jobbing. (Hear, hear.) The
Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt ought
n?t to be permitted to operate upon the money market with

funds derived from savings banks without reference to the
demands of those who were depositors.
The clause was agreed to.
Clauses 6 and 7 were also agreed to.
I Clause S was omitted from the bill, and
Clause 9 was agreed to.
On clause 10,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said he would now propose an
amendment to the effect that whatever moneys were depo-
4ted by the working classes in the manner proposed should
be afterwards invested in the manner required by the
shanks Acts, with this exception, that no sale of the stock
ould be made except for the purposes of the demands
made by the depositors. If this amendment were agreed
to it would prevent those unpleasant discussions taking
place in that house which all had listened to, and there-
fOre he trusted the committee would agree to it. If it were
wise that the commissioners should have the power which
they had exercised in operating upon the money market,
let the committee openly sanction it.
' Colonel SYKES said that in the principle expressed in
the amendment he quite concurred. The object of his pre-
vious question was to learn whether, in addition to the
£40,000,000, which had been dealt with by the Commis-
sioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, they would
have the same power to deal with the £20,000,000 which
he anticipated would coma into their hands under the opeia-
tion of this measure. (Hear, hear.) The amendment pro-
vided that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should have
no power of dealing with the deposits.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed
the introduction of the words. Cases might occur and had
occurred in which the privilege sought to be withdrawn had
been used with advantage. Last year two millions had been
voted for fortifications, but it so happened that only
£200,000 hal been used. That sum had been supplied by
the Commissioners of the National Debt, and the course
was much more convenient than if the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had been obliged to go into the money market
for so small a sum. The only point for the depositor to
examine was that his money should be readylor him, with
interest, when he required it, and beyond that the less he
knew about the details of its investment the better.
Mr. AYRT ON supported the amendment. He contended
that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should have no con-
trol over the funs in the savings banks.
Sir H. WILLOUGBY observed that the National Debt
Commission was a very shadowy institution. Nobody ever
attended its sittings except the Chancellor of the Exchequer
and the Governor and the Deputy Governor of the Bank of
England.
Sir J. PAXTON recommended the hon. baronet to
withdraw his amendment. So important a change as he
proposed should not be introduced without full and suffi-
cient notice.
Colonel SYKES supported the amendment.
Mr. GRIFFITHS took a similar view, and considered
that the Chancellor of the Exehequer himself had opened a
way for the discussion of the principle.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT thought it was undesirable that
they should proceed to a division. Ho recommended his
hon. friend to withdraw his amendment.

Mr. MALINS said the amendment involved a very im-
portant principle. The Government were to receive the
deposits of persons desirous of placing their money in these
savings banks, and yet the depositors were to have a con-
trol over the action of the Government—in fact, a control
over their bankers. He should certainly vote for the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer if a division were taken.
The amendment was negatived without a division.
The remaining clauses were agreed to, and the bill was
reported to the house.
LONDON COAL AND WINE DUES CONTINUANCE