The Sun.
London, England, 1857-12-09 00:00:00

IHE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDA '''EVENIN G DPCE MI3ER 9, igNit

nated, to satisfy the just expectation of the country in
this respect.
...
Mr. COLLIER—Having moved a resolution in a
previous session in favour of the principle of limited
liability, he would not shrink from extending that
principle to its legitimate consequence, viz., that every
1 commercial partnership should be at liberty to contract
with the public on the principle of either limited or un-
i limited liability, the putlic having proper notices as to
which of the two principles they were dealing upon. He
considered that the commercial classes of this country
were better judges of theirown interests than that house
could be, and he would leave them to act as they pleased.
If the motion went no further than that, he would sup-
port it. But it went much further ; it committed the
house to the expression of an opinion that unlimited lia-
bility bad been the cause of many disasters, and that in
the business of banking the principle of limited was pre-
! ferable to that of unlimited liability. (Hear.) Now he
did not think is expedient hat the house should express
any such opinion. tCheers.) It was sufficient for them
to say to the banks, " We will not interfere ; you may
contract with the public as you please." If, then, we
were to express an opinion on the subject, he would
say it should be the very reverse of that recommended
by his hon. and learned friend. (Hear, hear.) Though
he would leave the banks free to contract upon either
principle, he was clearly of opinion that the unlimited
principle was the better of the two. (Hear, hear.) Others
might first trust an unlimited liability bank if they
pleased, but he would not. (" Hear," and laughter.)
Whose interest ought they to consult most, that of the
shareholders or that of the public I He ventured to
think that the interest of the public deserved more con-
sideration than that of the shareholders. (Cheers.) The
shareholders had some voice and discretion in the
management, and must be supposed to have some know-
ledge of the conduct of the directors, but the public
knew nothing of the one or the other. His hoe. and
learned friend was wrong in supposing that the interest
of the shareholders was the paramount consideration ; it
was that of the public. (Hear.) Take the British Bank.
In that case the public had not suffered much by the
failure. The creditors had, he believed, received or
would receive 16s. in the pound, and but for the ruinous
law charges, which were wholly indefensible, would
have received the full 20s. Bat what would have been
the result had the shareholders been able to protect
themselves by the plea of limited liability ? His hon.
and learned friend said that unlimited liability encour-
aged undue speculation, while limited liability discour-
aged i' .That was entirely thereverse of every argument
they had h.therte hen don the subject. It was, in fact,
. ignoring all experience and all knowledge of human
nature, which taught them that those who had nothing
to lose were always more ready to speculate than those
who had everything to lose, (Cheers.)
Mr. J. E WART saw no reason why, as the house
had adopted the principle of limited liability in reference
to other joint-stock partnerships, it should not be ex-
tended to banks. In the case of the South Wales Bank
and some others, the consequence of unlimited liability
had been to encourage an unwise extension of banking
operations by means of bills, which, in the end, has led
to stoppage and failure. '
Mr. WYLD denied that the public did not stiffer
under the operation of unlimited liability in banking.
When failure came the unlimited liability did not prac-
tically operate, while it tended to depreciate the charac-
ter of the proprietary body. In the case of the British
Bank, which had paid only Bs. in the pound, but which,
by the exhaustion of the paying ability of the share-
holders, it was hoped might pay 16s. 6d., the result of
the intended principle was that when failure took place,
instead of having a large body of wealthy proprietors to
fall back up.3n, the creditors found that 72 of the share-
holders were governesses, clerks, shopmen, and persons
in humble circumstances, whose whole availabteresouroes
were sunk in the bank. He knew from the investigation
which had taken place into the affairs of the British
Bank that if it had been conducted on the principle of
liability the whole sum due to the creditors would have
been paid. He should support the proposition of the hon
member for Newcastle, and he hoped that if it was not
carried the Government would allow this point to be in-
cluded is the general inquiry into the subject of banking.
Mr. L. KING said that the hon. and learned member
for Plymouth asked why the principle of limited liability
should not be ex ended to banking as to other trades.
The reason was, that in other trades the trading was car-
ried en with the trader's own capital, while the trade of
banking was carried on with the capital of other parsons.
If the principle of limited liability had been applied to
banking he believed that the disasters which had occurred
in the recent crisis would have been greater than they
were.

tingent, and he went as soon as possible to India, where he
was placed in a difficult command. Hejoined Havelock in the
expedition for the relief of Lucknow, where h 3 fell. To all
these officers and men the country owed much gratitude,
and it was with the greatest pleasure he found that Gene-
rals Wilson and Havelock were to have Delhi and Luck-
now added to their titles.
Mr. WHITE said the house had been addressed by mem-
bers of the military and naval profession, and ho would
address it as a merchant. It ill became the dignity of that
house to propose so small a pension, considering the great
obligations the country was under to General Havelock,
(Hear, hear.) General Havelock was now some 63 or 64
years of age, and saying nothing of the danger to which he
was exposed in the practice of his profession, he did not
think an insurance office would value his pension at more
than three years' purchase. He thought such a sum was
utterly inadequate to the services performed, and he be-
lieved that' would be the opinion of every man in the
country. General Havelock had not come from the Crimea,
from a campaign indifferently conducted under aristocra-
tic leaders, or he might have received a greater reward.
Lord PAL XtERSTON could not allow the expression of
the hon. member regarding the Crimea to pass unnoticed.
He thought the hon. member must be in a state of entire
ignorance of what passed in that campaign ; he must have
forgotten the battle of the Alma and the battle of Joker-
man. He must have forgotten those long months of pri-
vation, of danger, and of difficulty, to which the army was
subject in the trenches before the Sebastopol. He must,
have forgotten that the army, having landed at Old Fort,
and having undergone the privation for two or three
months of not having those ordinary conveniences which
even in a campaign attended the soldier—he must have
forgotten that the soldiers, without baggage, performed
their duty in a manner, honourable to the country. Our
army in the Crimea covered itself with honour, and he
disliked to hear an Englishman express himself as the bon.
member had done. (Cheers.) That army, which began with
difficulties unknown in war, ended in a state of perfect
discipline, and was the admiration of the other armies in
the field. (Hear, bear.)
Mr. WHITE—God forbid that I shoul/41 say one word
against the gallantry of the British army in the Crimea. I
quite concur in what the noble lord has said in its praise.
I should have been unworthy of the name of an English-
man to have expressed a contrary opinion. What I said I
meant in a strategtic point of view, and I was merely re-
peating the opinion of Germans and others woo have writ-
ten on that campaign.
Lord PALMERSTON said he too would look at the
campaign in a strategic point of view. The two armies,
French and English, besieged a fortress, in which there

something wholly independent of the rate charged on
mercantile bills. (Hear.) After this explanation, he (the
right hon. gentleman) hoped the committee would agree to
the clause as it,stood. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. SPOONER differed from the right hon. gentleman
with regard to what regulated the rate of interest. It was
a point upon which great difference of opinion prevailed
in the committee ; but he certainly thought himself that
the Bank rate regulated that charged by private dis-
counters, and not the yeverse. The object for which the
rate had in the present instance been raised had been ac-
complished. The exchanges had been corrected, bat in
doing so the general confidence of the country had been
shaken. lo restore that confidence it would be necessary
to continue a large amount of notes in circulation ; for
when the public confidence was impaired it took a larger
numerical amount of notes to do that for which a smaller
amount would be sufficient under more favourable circum-
stances. So far as the exchanges went they might safely
reduce the rate of interest ; but the Bank would be unable
to do that, because, as the clause stood, if the demand for
notes were renewed they would lobe the power of issuing
the extra two millions the moment they went below the
10 per cent. 'He thought that the whole matter ought to
be left in the discretion of the Bank.

—Mr. CAYLEY said that if the act had been relaxed
sooner it was quite possible that the pressure still existing
would not have been protracted so long. Probably the
reason why the relief afforded by the letter of the govern-
ment had not proved as successful as in 1817 was the fact
that it had been too long delayed. He thought that it
would be well, perhaps, to allow a rather greater latitude
to the Brink.
Sir C. WOOD said that in 1847 the minimum rate of 54
percent. was the rate at which the Bank discounted short
bills, while their averagg rate was 74 per cent. The hon
member (Mr. Matins) had, therefore, fallen into an error
upon this subject
Mr, MALINS said that if, when the minimum rate was
54 per cent. the average rate was 74 per cent., so at the
present time, when the minimum rate was 10 per cent.,
the average rate must be about 12 per cent.

The committee divided—
For the amendment
Against
Majority
The amendment was therefore, lost.
The remainder of the bill passed through committee,
and the house resumed.

18
100
----82

......
The bill was reported, and ordered to be read a third
time to-morrow. _

The house adjourned at a quarter to ton.

From the London Gazette of Last Night

HOME-OFFICE, DEC. 5.
The Leeds Reformatory School at 11,101, near Leeds, in
the West Riding of Yolk, has been certified by the Secro
tary of State as fit to be a Reformatory School, under the
provisions of the statute 17 and 18 Viet., 86.

ADMIRALTY, DEC. 5.
The following promotions, dated the 28th ult., conse-
quent on the death, on the 27th ult., of Admiral Thomas
Le Marchant Gosselin, nave this day taken place :
Admiral of the White Sir George Manly, K.C.8., to be
Admiral of the Red.
Admiral of the Blue John Ayscough to be Admiral of the

White.
Vice-Admiral William Croft, on the Reserved List, to
be an Admiral on the Reserved List.
Vice-Admiral of the Red William Bowles, C. 8., to be
Admiral of the Blue.
Vice-Admiral of the White Sir Barrington Reynolds,
K.C.8., to be Vice-Admiral of the Red.
Vice-Admiral of the Blue Sir Charles Sullivan, Bart., to

. , . _
be Vice-Admiral of the White.
Rear-Admirals on the Reserved List
Norwich Duff,
Sir Charles Christopher Parker, Bart.,
John Edward Walcott, and
The Right Hon. Frederick, Earl Spencer, K.G., C. 8.,
to be Vice-Admirals on the Reserve List.
Rear-Admiral of the Red Sir 1 ames Hanway Plumridge,
K.C.8., to be Vice-Admiral of the Blue.
Rear-Admiral of the White Williams Sandom to be Rear-
Admiial of the Red.
Rear-Admiral of the Blue the Right Hon. Lord Edward
Russell, C.B , to be Rear-Admiral of the White.
Captain Horatio Thomas Austin, C. 8., to be Rear-Admiral
of the Blue.

ADMIRALTY, DEC. 2.
First Lieutenant Edmund Henry Cox to be Captain,
vice M`Callum, to half-pay.
First Lieutenant Edmund Brighouse Snow to bo Cap
Lain, vice M`Carthy, to half-pay.
Second Lieutenant Horatio Guy Campbell to be Firsi
Lieutenant, vice Cox, promoted.
Second Lieutenant Thomas Meyrick Hewett to be Firsi
Lieutenant, vice Snow, promoted.
ADMIRALTY, Dec. 3.

THE ALLEGED FORGERY OF A WILL BY.

A PRESTON MAGISTRATE.

THE WRITER OF THE WILL DISCOVERED.
COMMITTAL OF THE ACCUSED.

PRESTON, TUESDAY.
To-day the adjourned hearing- of the charge
against Mr. Thomas Monk, surgeon, the oldest
alderman of the borough of Preston, a borough and
county magistrate, and a deputy-lieutenant of the
county, of forging the will of the late Edward Tur-
ner, reedmaker, of St. Paul's-road, Preston, was
resumed at the Town-hall.

Mr. Segar, barrister, instructed by Mr. R.
Arcroft, the town-clerk, appeared for the prosecu-
tion.

Mrs. Ann Edna Pipe, wife of John Wilkers
Pipe Fishergate, hairdresser, sworn, said--I have
resided in Preston for between five and six years.
I know the prisoner, Mr. Thos.• Monk.- Since I
have been in Preston he has been the medical at-
tendant of my family. I remember having occasion
to call one morning at his surgery to consult him.
It is between two and three months ago. It was
between tho hours of nine and ten in the morning.
don't remember the day of the week. I saw Mr.
Monk that morning at his surgery. He appeared
to be preparing to go out,' and asked me if I bas
time to copy a paper for him. He produced a
written paper. He also produced a blank sheet of
paper to make a copy of it upon, and gave me
some directions as to how I was to write it. He
told me to write it large, and I think he said like
a man. I did copy the document he gave to me
for that purpose. I copied the document in his
surgery. Mr. Monk was up and down the stairs
of his surgery while I was copying it. I cannot
say positively in whose handwriting the paper was
that I copied. The document produced by Mr.
Winder, clerk of the Consistory Court, last Friday,
and now put into my hands, is the copy I made.
The whole document is in nay handwriting, except
the signatures Joseph Wilkinson, Preston, and
Edward Farmer, Preston. The word "day," in
the last line but one of the body of the will, is my
handwriting. I think I discovered the omission
of the word " day" Myself: I made the bracket to
the attestation. After I had copied the document,
I left it with Mr. Monk. I cannot say whether the
name James Holden was upon the document when
I copied it. It was either upon the one I copiel or
I was directed to write it upon the document by
Mr. Monk. At that time, I had never heard of
Edward Turner. I did not Fee Edward Turner
sign the document I copied. When I left it with
Mr. Monk there was no o her writing upon it ex-
cept my own.

This closed the testimony for the prosecution.
After some remarks from the counsel on each
side, the bench committed Mr. Monk for trial,
refusing to take bail. The defence was reserved.
The prisoner was removed to the House of Cor-
rection.