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

occurred they have duly digested those important maters,
(Hear.) - But a second volume Las been published; which it
is very probable they may not have read.. It is the most .
entertaining volume in the world—although ft appears under
the repulsive title of an appendix. Indeed it somewhat re-
sembled notes which were hoarded up by the Bank directors
—it was not put into circu/ation until every critical moment.
(A laugh) This volume contains the opinioni of, the ''ank
delivered in 1856, upon the Batik Charter Act. The Mau-
, calor of the Exchequer, wishing to obtain the best informa-
tion from the best quarters, addressed a circular to 'the 13ahk
directors, asking them to favour him with their opinion on
the merits of the Bank Csarter Act. I did not bring the
volume down with me, thinking it mi, ht weary -the house ;
but I cannot have mistaken the character of the circular ;
this was at least the cream of the communication. - There is
no doubt that the Bank directors, or a very large majority of
them, did express (with one exception) their opinions in
favour of this act. But the directors as a body were not
contented simply to agree in their adhesion to this measure.
They lifted up their voices and said—They were in favour of
the Act of 1844 ; they acknowledged that what occurred iu
1847 was a rather awkward fact in history, but their lan-
guage was that of undiluted panesyric, they were not the less
sanguine, because it was totally impossible that events like
that of 1847 could ever happen again. (Cheers.) And in the
saute simple, satisfactory, and all-convincing terms a gentle-
man--formerly a member of this house for Southampton; and
now, I rejoice to say,' a country
hamshire, Mr. Hubbard, a late governorgntlemofan
England—said that the rules of banking areunder-
stood. (Laughter.) "In 1847," hei
t hoof BBua enldk nogi
sasaid,„ w
nowe
didnot
understand our business; but
it now that we may dismiss 1847 front our -
hideous dream. Let 1847 no longer disturb the slumbers
as a
awaken the inquiries of a Chancellor of the Exchequer
thator
can never happen again ; we now understand thetrue;ns•
ciples of banking. _ The Chancellor of the Exchequer is -
goingm.
down to Parliament to propose a committee just to amuse
the country, but rest your confidence on the Act of 1844."
(Laughter.) Well, sir, it is a most remarkable thing—and I
think the Chancellor of the Exchequer owes an explanation
to the Bank directors of the circiunstance that these prophe-
sies were not published till after the suspension of the Bank
Act. It appea s that a book has been printed, which is a
folio volume, and that great expense has been ineurrcd ; but
think that even if the members of the Government had sub-
scribed amongst themselveis they ought to have paid the ex-
pense, and withdrawn the book from circulation, and thus
have spared their friends this act of malicious kindness. No:
thing, sir, but a high sense of public duty has induced me to
bring forward this subiect, and to call the attention of the
house to it. It is with great satisfaction that amongst the
other letters I do not remark the signature of a mentber of
this house, who, upon this subject, has frequently addressed
the house with that effect which his thorough knowledge of
the subject and his accomplished eloquence naturally pro-
duces. The hen. member for Huntingdon was, I believe, at
the Baths of Kissingen when thli circular was issued, and on
behalf of this house and the' 'Country ' I offer him the most
sincere congratulations. (L sughter ) In taking this objec-
tion respecting the Bank directors, I wish to make one remark
of a more serious character. As I hope that the
committee will receive its death-blow from this debate
—(hear, hear, and laughter)— I will venture to ex-
press my opinion that the three great conclusions to bo
drawn from the arguments and from the facts which I think
aro satisfactorily established by the evidence which we have
before us, aro these :—I think it is by the evidence conclu-
sive'y shown that in the first place the diiectors of the Bank
really exercise no more control over the circulation of their
notes than the members of this house do. (Hear.) I believe
what is called the manag- ment of the circulation of notes by
the Bank directors is a misnomer and a delusion. (Hear.)
Secondly, I think that the directors of the Bank of England
have a great duty to perform, not only to the nation, but to
themselves. The management of the Government securities
is a subject of more inflate importance than the circulation
of bank notes. The wealth of the nation is affected by the
regularity of the rate of discount, and in the d scretion in
which advances are made, so are benefits exercised over the
fortunes of this country. (Hear, hear.) Thirdly, it does
appear that it has become a national object, which statesmen
shall accomplish, that there shall be in the Bank of England
a great treasury, which shall be at the command of the
directors in moments of emergency like the: c which have
recently occurred, and when it shall be in their power not
only to assist commerce, but to insure sufficient currency
for circulation which shall be a med um of exchange, so
that those interested in the pnrsuits of commerce shall not
find themselves in that desolate position in which they have
lately been placed. I have endeavoured to-night to draw this
subject out of the limited sphere of select committees; and the
inquiry, I am convinced, will not be injurious to the community,
however injurious it may be to our characters, if we evade any
longer a statesmanlike settlement of this question. This
question is entirely exhausted by select committees, though
no man can esteem higher than I do toe select committees
of this hous). They contain a nest of information, a power
of research, and an irresistibility of argument, which no other
country can produce or attempt to rival. The question of
the currency is one which a select committee could alone en-
tertain ; it is one not only east° which they have to pursue
research, but to exercise judgment. They not only accumu-
late information, but they have the power of crass-examining
witnesses, which this house cannot exercise. It is therefore
of the highest importance, when questions relating to the
great institutions of the country—which aro of a complicated
character, and dealing with vast interests, and also in detail
—arise, that they should not be investigated by this house,
but referred to a select committee. But for a long and con-
siderable period I have thought that the question of the issue
of bank notes by the Bank of England has received a sufft-
clout and investigation, and all which it deserved. I
am not supposing that upon the principles which shall regu-
late the issue of bank notes this house will immediately come
to a unanimousopinion, or that that opinion will be carried
here by a large majority, but the way by which we shall
conic to an overwhelming opinion, if not unanimous, is by
a discussion in Parliament, for which I believe the question
is now ripe. (Hear, hear.) The labours of a committee of
inquiry, however valuable they may be, exercise no influence
over the feelings of the people out of doors. The questions
asked by the committee are so immense, and the variety
of detail is so great, and the authorities referred to so numer-
ous, that it requires men who have leisure time at command,
' and not only that, but penetrating minds, who can arrive at
a conclusion sufficient to guide public opinion. But the le-
-1 hours of a committee, though they have exercised no influ-
ence out of doors, they do so in this house. (Hear.) In my
opinion we shall be taking a course which will not only tend
to depreciate bank notes, but the character and influence of
Parliament if we, year after year, and convulsion after con:
vulsion, leave any longer the discussion and settlement of
this question. (Hear, hear.) I was surprised to hear that
Lord Overstone had declared, in his opinion, that discussion
upon this subject is inconvenient and injurious, and that Par-
liamentary debate upon it should not be encouraged, but
even, if possible, prevented, and that we should rest upon
the conclusions we have before us from the committee. I
am surprised that a man of so much eminence, and so cap-
able of maintaining his opinion, and, besides, a man who is
a Peer of Parliament, should give such an opinion upon the
proudest privilege of Englishmen, and, as I believe, one the
beneficial exercise of which cannot be over-estimated. (Hear.
hear.) Sir, I hope the time has arrived when we can come to
a safe and satisfactory solution of this question; but I am
sure, whatever may be the consequences, I am only acting
rightly when I recommend the house not to delegate their
functions to a select committee, but to show to the country
and our constituents who sent us hero that we are equal to
the fulfilment and discharge of those duties which are
brought before us. (Cheers.)
Mr. CARDWELL intended to vote for the inquiry asked
for by the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer. How stood the case ? In the course of last ses-
sion a committee of inquiry was appointed to investigate
the subject, and that committee had not as yet made its re-
port. And what had happened in the interval to render
it less desirable that the committee should continue its in-
vestigation. The committee, when they separated, were
about to inquire into the question of the country banks,
into the question of the issue of Scotch and Irish banks,
and into the interesting question of the relations be-
tween the Government and the Bank of England. Well,
what had occurred in the meanwhile, to render the investi-
gation of these questions oT less importance. (Hear.) They
had been told that the doctrines of the "bullion committee"
had laid the fouidation of most of the misfortunes that had
afflicted England within the last half century. Now, lie would
submit that the labours of Mr. Homer and Mr. Huskisson.
ought not to be overthrown quite so lightly. T.ie real diffi-
culty they had to consider was the new use of commercial
capital open to the public, as well as the new abuse of com-
mereial credit. lie alluded to the extraordinary amount of ,
money now held in single hands, not, as formeriy, as depo-
sits in the hands of bankers, to be availed of by them, but in
the hands of depositors, to be used in order to influence the
markets. Three charges had been urg d against the act of
1844. The first was that it created a limit and consequently
that it created a panic ; secondly, that it exposed the coun-
try to inconvenience in establishing the same fixed rule as
applicable to distress when caused by a foreign and when
caused by a domestic drain ; and, thirdly, that it imposed an
unnecessary fetter upon the commerce of the country. Cor-
thinly he would admit that the act of 1844 caused a limit ;
but then he was prepared to contend that it did not use so
I terrible a limit as the act in force in 1826, 1837, or 1839. No;
the simple effect of the act of 1844 was to compel the Bads
directors to take measures for curtailing their issues, while
the bullion was still in their coffers. Could anything, he
would ask, be more exemplary or remarkable than the
position of the Irish banks throughout the crisis ? (Hear,
hear.) Yet what was their position in the year 1826 1
Why, with the exception of three or four, every bank in -
Ireland failed. It would, indeed, require a committee to
sit many years to establish the doctrine that the converti-
bility of unlimited currency was incapable of mismanage-
ment. (Hear.) The universal failure of the banks of the
United States in 1837 and 1838 showed the direct connect:on
between an unlimited issue of paper and the horrible' catas-
trophes that then occurred. But it was asked, why not rest
a discretionary power in the hands of the directors them-
selves. Now, was it so certain that the bank directors would -
accept so great a responsibility ? Remember that the three-
tors of the Bank of. England were almost unanimous in sup-
porting the act of '44. What he was inclined to ask was
for this,l.he
ought not they to inquire how far it was possible
Bank of England to be responsible
for the advance of capital -
if it could exercise no control over its issues I He believed
that if they were rightly to assess public
opinion, they would
find there was but a very declining feeling in favour con-
vertible, unlimited '26,,, of a
currency, which in the years 3- 39,
was found to be comparable with so large an amount of com-
mercial suffering. The right hon, gentleman having reviewed
the circumstances of the present times, asked whether there
was any reason why they should not pursue the recommenda-
-1 tions of the committee of the last year, especially why those
investigation • s should not extend to Scotland ? If those re-
commendations were sot at nought, the inevitable result
would be the recurrence of further disasters. He trusted,
therefore, that the course which the house adopted would
lead to the alrmation of a principle from which the country
had derived inestimable advantages.
Mr. GLADSTONE said that. having heard the speech of
the right honourable gentleman who had just sat down, he
felt persuaded that this country would be adopting a retro-
spective step if het had followed out
the suggestions he
had offered. What was the doctrine propounded on tho
currency by him—a subject on which he was pure light
and reason ? He had stated that doctrines had been diffused
wwhich had thrown oven those of Huskissou and others, on
whom ' the greatest I elianee should be placed, and ho had
added that if the investigation were referred to a committee.
those propositions would bo negatived. "e
(Mr. Gladstone)
inverted his propositions, and thought that aeom
He
would in a very short sitting affirm all those doctrines.
the doe-
thought the right hon. gentleman was endangering.
trines of which he was ansosron
house to go back to a ratification
right hon. gentleman
He (Mr. Gladstone) being
system which prevailed
and dangerous, advocate, tu asking the
of theories of which the
d demonstrated the unsoundness.
he
therefore firmly convinced that the
before
very strong reason, to
thought,
proceed, for 1844 was radically unsound
of opinion that we ought was
return to that system. Th •
grounds not, without
me were, he
on which the house ought now to
specifiche believed the Parliament of England ought
now to tell the country plainly
1844.
what it thought of of
ought of the act
His reason for that was that he felt satisfied that the
act of 1844 could not stand as it was. That act, as experience
has shown, required alerations in order to obviate difficulties
and dangers which if left without a remedy would peril the
principles of the not itself. On two occasiont they had ass n