The Sun.
London, England, 1857-05-12 00:00:00

rilE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 12, 1857\

SAVINGS BANKS.

The house went into committee on savings banks,
when

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
the folio Wing resolution :—That it is expedient to amend
the laws relating to savings banks, and to provide for
the establishment of savings banks with the security of
the Government. He said that this resolution was ne-
cessary for the introduction of a bill similar to that of last
session. Daring the recess the bill had been sent to all the
savings banks, and the great majority of them were of
opinion that the principle of the bill should be adopted
by the house. They objected to the limitation of the
amount of deposit from 2001. toloo/., and he intended
to omit that clause from the bill. After stating some
minor details in connection with the bill, the right hon.
gentleman said that he intended to alter the present
mode of investment in Exchequer Bills. By the old bill
the commissioners invested their money on an average of
prices during the quarter, but by this bill it would be
made on the price of the day of the investment. He
proposed to introduce a bill prohibiting private persons
and companies from establishing banks under the title of
savings backs, to prevent the public from being imposed
on.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, in the course of his remarks
on the question, said there was now a deficiency of the
savings banks funds amounting to 5,280,0001., which he
said arose from the inconvenient, he would say the mis-
chievous, system of allowing the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer to use the stocks of savings banks for the purposes
of the State in carrying on his operations of finance
and thereby working out his own projects and not those
that would be for the advantage of the savings bank
funds. He contended that the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer had no right to deal with one farthing of this
fund as they had done, and he objected to their plaMng
the money of the savings banks under the control
of individual officers of the National Debt Office. He
asked the Government to have the whole matter re-
ferred to a select committee. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. HERBERT expressed a hope that the right
hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would
press the clause relative to Government taking the re-
sponsibility, instead of the present law, which absolved
the trustees and manager from all responsibility, and
held out a false inducement to the people to part with
their money.
Mr. SOTHERAN ESCOTT said this bill proposed
tceintroduce a new system of savings banks, and he was
of opinion the subject should be referred to a select com-
mittee. He, however, expressed his approval of the
principles of the bill.
Lord GODERICH urged the appointment of a select
committee on the subject.
Mr. T. BARING was also in favour of a select corn-
mittee. He did not believe that the managers of the
savings banks objected to any checks being imposed upon
their action, but they wished those cheeks to be well
defined and inserted in the bill. They objected to the
power of imposing checks being lodged in any one indi-
vidual, however respectable. He also thought that the
power which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had of
dealing with the savings hank funds in such a way as to
increase the National Debt, was a very objectionable
one, and deserved the serious attention of the house.
Mr. SLANEY strongly supported the bill, and was
unwilling to send the measure to a select committee, as
that might endanger the passing of the bill during the
present session.
Mr. HENLEY supported the select committee. He
also thought the checks to be placed upon the local
managers of the banks should he defined and inserted in
the bill. He had no confidence in Government inspec-
tion, snd reminded the house that a Government inspec-
tor sent over to examine a suspicious bank in Ireland
proved it to be in an insolvent condition, but recom-
mended it to go on, in the hope that times would mend.
Tee bank went on, but times did not mend; a failure
took place, and the Government was otliged, on account
of its inspector's advice, to refund to the depositors 158.
in the pound.
Mr. CROSSLEY was also in favour of a select corn
mittee, and complained that Government did not make
enough of the money deposited in savings banks.
Mr. FAGAN supported the bill, and urged its imme-
diate adoption.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said be
had heard with much satisfaction that the bill he sought
to introduce had met with the approbation of the various
members on both sides of the house, who were well ac-
' quainted with the subject. The objections that had been
made to the measure were of a two-fold character—one
of a practical nature, and the other, though bearing on
savings banks, having little reference to the bill. The
practical part of the question was that stated by the
right hon. gentleman the member for Oxfordshire (Mr.
Henley), and on that the fate of the bill mainly turned.
The object of the bill gas not so much to introduce a
new class of savings banks as to suggest means by which
the present savings banks might be brought within the
benefit of the Government security. He concurred with
theright hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Henley) that their
admission must turn on the conditions prescribed for
their union, and that the house was entitled to ask what
those conditions were to be. From the difficulties there
appeared to be in the way of laying down any impera-
tive rules in a bill for the regulations of these banks—
from the great variety of circumstances connected with
them, he had omitted them from the bill from a desire to
avoid any unnecessary restrictions which the inflexible
words of an act of Parliament enforced, and leaving it to
a discretionary proceeding on the part of Government.
The only condition Government sought to enforce was
their satisfaction of the bank's solvency, and then the
creation how was that solvency to be ascertained. The
most conclusive and complete means of ascertaining that
was by obtaining a sight of the deposit books, but then
the right hon. gentleman opposite said that was impossi-
ble. It might not be right to enforce such a condition,but
then were they justified by experience in laying down
that it was impossible to get a large proportion sufficient
to guide them as to the bank's solvency? In Ireland, a
few years since, the law required the production of the
depositors' books; and in the first year out of 21,000 to
be brought in to be examined but 45 per cent—not one-
ha f—sere brought in. In the last year, out of 39,000
books, 72 per cent. were brought in, being equal to three
fourths. One hank, in 1855, gave in 94 per cent. ; ano-
ther 83; one 78, and another 99 per cent, of the whole.
That was the result of actual experience in Ireland, and
he saw no reason to think he was asking an unreason.
able thing for the English depositors to produce their
books. Before the second reading of the bill he would
endeavour to put it into as distinct terms as possible, the
conditions which he deemed it necessary should be com-
plied with for a bank's admission within the provisions
of this act. One other practical objection to the bill was
the proposal for sending it to a select committee, which
he thought would have the effect of shelving it for the '
session, and therefore be could not accede to thatrequest.
If hon. gentlemen wished to throw out the bill, let them
resort to the fair and direct course of doing it on the se-
enrol reading, and not by indirect means, by referring it to
a select committee. With regard toa consolidation of the
laws, he begged to remind the house that it was not his
proposition, and 'ee thought, if it were desirable, that it
could be better done after the passing of the bill. In reply
to observations that had been made relative to the ma-
nagement of the fund by the Commissioners of the Na-
tional Debt, he begged to remind the house that; the re-
sponsible official was the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
the same as the Vi,:.e•President of the Board of Control
and the Vice-President of the Board of Trade in their re-
spective departments, and therefore he back not thought
it necessary to propose any alteration in, the existing law
with reference to that. With regarrl to what bad been
said with reference to the large stun the Government veal
indebted to 'these banks, no loss could accrue to either
party unless a demand was to h,e made on all these banks
in one day for the amounts tteerein deposited. •That was
an improbable event, and a'e long as they went on in their
present state the Government deficiency was a mere
matter of account, and earl no practical bearing on :sav-
ings banks. No los., had as yet accrued to any deposi-
tor. No depositor tied failed to obtain the full amount
of his dep rains wi .h interest, and any loss that by possi-
bility could accrue could only be to Government, sup-
posing the wb ole amount of deposits to be required by a
given day. TA had been said that there was an improper
power vested in the Chancellor of the Exchequer of vary.
ing the securities, and that a Chancellor of the Exche-
quer had the power of playing with the funds which
ought to be restricted. He could only say that so far as
he was concerned, he had not on any occasion exercised
the power of funding Exchequer bills. (Hear.) Exche-
quer-hills were as much a Government debt as Three per
Cent. Consols. The annual fiction of paying off Exche-
queiebille was now neither more nor less than a fiction.
They had become part of the permanent debt of the
country. If the hone thought any further restrictions
necessary they would deprive the Government of the
power, under emergencies, of sustaining the public funds.
He did not believe that any Chancellor of the Exchequer
would use his power for any.private or personal object.
Still if Parliament thought right to impose more strin-
gent regulations the Government would not he to blame
if it did not make the best possible bargain for the advan-
tage of the public. lie would before he sat down advert
to the observations made on the conduct of Mr. Tidd
Pratt when he was sent over to investigate the affairs of
the Cuffe-street Bank ; he had been blamed because
when he discovered the bank to be in an insolvent state,
he advised it to go on. Now this was correct, with one
important exception. Mr. Pratt advised it to go on, only
if it complied with a certain mode of procedure. The
bank took one part of the advice, but disregarded the
other. (Laughter.) He trusted the house would allow
the resolution to he read.

Mr. HENLEY said that the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, when he had admitted that a large sum of money
had been lost on tho savings bank account, yet said it
was no less if the savings bank had not asked for their
money, had enunciated a roost extraordinary doctrine.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that the proposal of the
right hon. gentleman with regard to the management of
the savii.gs banke wa+ that three should form a quorum,
but the Chancellor of the Exchequer was to have the
control of the funds. now could the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer be three pergons at once. (A. laugh.) The result
was to make the Chancellor of the Exchequer the sole
con!rollir of the bank. Now the sums invested in the
savings banks amounted to ino less than 34,000,0001.
He (Sir H. Willoughby) would trust no man living with
34 millions of money, least of all a Chancellor of the
E. xchequer, who has so many temptations to play with
it. He must observe as to the affair of the Cutfe-street
bank. Teat bank had gone on in a state of insolvency
for 10 years--fruin 1833 to 1849—it had declared at last
a deficiei,cy of 60,0001, and yet the Government official
had advised its going on, in spite of the law, which
ordered teat when a savings bank was insolyent the k

books should he closed. Yet it was to these officials
that they were to entrust the management of the banks
under the proposed system.
SECONDARY PUNISHMENTS.
Sir G. GREY rose to move the second reading of the
Transportation and Penal Servitude Bill. He hoped
that it would not be necessary now to repeat the argu-
ments which be had used last session. He had then
stated that the first object of the bill was to amend the
act passed in 1833, which act had been passed in conse-
quence
of the difficulty which arose in carrying out sen-
tences of transportation. By that act all sentences of
transportation under 14 years were abolished, and an
option was left to the judges of passing sentence either
of transportation or penal servitude. By the present
law he proposed to abolish sentence of transportation
altogether. But it was not intended to forego the ad-
vantage of the system as to the convictions lately adopted
by the country. The bill would give facilities for send-
ing them out of the country which did not now exist.
The next provision of the bill had been introduced in
consequence of the recommendation of the committee of
the House of Commons, according to which recom-
mendation sentences of penal servitude, instead of
being shorter than those of transportation, were to
be co-extensive. One difficulty that had arisen
arose from this, that there was no medium
between the old term of imprisonment for two
years and the term of transportation for seven years. By
the law sentences might be passed for four, five, or six
years. But the most important provision was that which
removed the difficulty of carrying into effect penal servi-
tude in the colonies. According to the Act of 1853, as
it was received, it was doubtful whether Parliament bad
intended to allow the power of exercising penal servitude
in the colonies. In consequence of a demand for convicts
in Western Australia, the law officers of the Crown bad
been consulted, and they took some time before they aes
rived at the conclusion that the Government had not the
power to send convicts to Western Australia. The pre-
sent law was this—that every person sentenced to penal
servitude might be confined in any part of this kingdom,
in any fortress or harbour thereof, or in any part of her
Majesty's dominions beyond the,seas, or in any fortress
or harbour thereof, there to be kept to hard labour. The
law officers did not think that under this act Govern-
ment could send prisoners to Western Australia. The
Government no doubt could send prisoners out there,
but only as they sent them to Portsmouth or any other
place of confinement in the kingdom ; but as soon as
they were there, they would have to be confined, and
could not be set at liberty in the colonies ; and the pro-
vision of the act would then cease to apply, and the ad-
vantages of the measure would be altogether lost. There
were abundant means now of employing convicts in this
country in public works—at Portsmouth and Dart-
moor—to say nothing of Gibraltar and Malta. The fact
was, that there was not enough of convicts fit for labour
to meet the demand called for by the Admiralty. The
difficulty was, what to do with the convicts when relaxa-
tion of strict discipline became expedient. This was the
object of the provisions of the bill which he asked the
house to allow to be read a second time. It was to re-
move the present obstacles tosendingconvicts sentenced
to penal servitude to Western Australia or any otber
colonies where it might be found expedient, and which
were willing to receive them. A committee of the
House of Lords had recommended them to revert to the
old system of transportation, by taking out those who
would be useful to the colonies. But that was impos-
sible, as they could only take those who were sentenced
to long terms of transportation, and who had been
guilty of serious crimes. After the passing of the Act of
1853, the number of sentences of transportation had
greatly diminished, and from these they must deduct(
persons in a weak state of health, and who would be of
no use to the colony. The provisions contained in the
bill would enable Government, out of the convicts sen-
tenced to penal servitude, to select as they thought right
in respect of these persons, and with a thee regard to the
nature of the crimes committed by them, in order to
send them to Western Australia, that they might there
undergo the rest of the sentence, and obtain any relaxa-
tion of their sentence, or a modification of its terms as
might put them into a condition to become more useful
members of society. The objection to this system was
that it produced an uncertainty and doubt in the carry-
ing out of the sentence, an element which it was desir-
able to avoid. Now he (Sir G. Grey) admitted the fact of
the uncertainty ; but if they desired absolute certainty,
they must forego altogether the existing system of trans-
portation. That could only be carried into effect by
selection, with regard to the man himself, or to the
facilities of employment in the colony. The objection was
not a new one. He should be glad to get rid of it, if he
could do so without sacrificing all the advantages of
transportation. It was an objection which applied as
fully to former systems of transportation as to the one
which would be in force if Parliament gave its sanction
to the bill which he introduced. The old system was to
detain the convict for some time in the hulks, and well-
conducted men were retained in this country. The House
of Commons had passed a resolution condemning this
practice, and in consequence such a number of convicts
were sent out that they deluged the land, and the result
was that the colonies became overwhelmed with convicts,
and the whole system broke down. He would take the
ten years from 1843 to 1852 inclusive, because there
were the years immediately preceding the bill of 1853.
During these ten years the number of convicts actually
sentenced was 31,020, while the numbers actually trans-
ported were 22,322, making 8,693 which were sentenced
and not transported. So that the uncertainty prevailed
in former times to the same extent as at present. Sen-
tences of transportation could not always be carried into
effect, while sentences of penal servitude could be carried
into effect at any time. It was impossible to know how
far it was possible to carry out sentences of transporta-
tion unless the man stood actually before you, and you
could know his physical capacity. The judge could not
tell what demand there might be for labour in the colo-
nies. It was, therefore, out of no distrust of the judge
that he was not allowed full di-cretion. The judge might
let the criminal know what he had to expect, but there
would be always some uncertainty as to the details. He
would not then enter into the ticket-of leave system.
The bill left the law as it found it on that subject. Thera
were now only a few convicts left with whom the sys-
tem was at present in operation. They had adopted the
spirit of the recommendation of the committee of that
house, which considers it desirable that a stimulus to good
conduct should be held out in shortening the terms of a
long sentence. In retaining the ticket-of leave system,
he felt that as a general rule an absolute remission of the
sentence should be observed rather than a qualified re-
mission. (Bear.) He would advert to a few matters of
detail. By the bill power was expressly given to the
courts of passing sentence of penal servitude for more
than two years. Again, certain penalties were imposed
by the present law on those who threatened to charge
others with crimes punishable by transportation. The
same penalties were extended by the bill to those who
should threaten to charge others with crimes punishable
with penal servitude. After these explanations, he
begged leave to move the second reading of the bill.
Mr. BENTINCK opposed the bill because he was
opposed to transportation altogether. It was only a
source of additional crime and demoralisation. In place
of transportation he would provide penal settlements at
home, and make the system of penal sentences self-sup-
porting, by the erection of harbours of refuge on different
pasts of the coast, which could never be undertaken ex-
cept on some such plan as that he proposed. He moved
that the bill he read a second time that day six months.
Mr. ROEBUCK thought Sir G. Grey had not touched
the real difficulty of the case. The great cause of crime
in this country was want of employment. Labourers
were plentiful, and the labourer tainted with crime was
shunned by everybody. The man must starve or steal.
They all know which alternative the man would prefer.
It was impossible to send them to our colonies, for with
few exceptions the colonies would not have them. The
only course to which the house was stint up therefore
was, that in every case transportation, whenever it
was inflicted, should be for life ; and that a new penal
colony should be founded for them in some uninhabited
island in the South Sea. Of course that punishment
would only be inflicted on hardened offenders. After a
course of penal servitude in some existing colony, he
would remove them to this new colony ; and to preserve
an equality between the sexes, he would send out every
woman that was sentenced to transportation.
Sir JOHN PAKINGTON believed that the two
great causes of crime in this country were ignorance and
drunkenness_not want of work. As to the estab-
lishment of a new penal setflement, he confessed he was
once of that opinion himself ; but the more he con-
sidered the subject the more hopeless he considered the
subject to be. He approved generally of the bill ; but
he lamented that the uncertainty of punishment was
still to be allowed to a great extent. He defended the
principle involved in tickets of leave, and the Govern-
ment did not mean to exclude the element of hops froth
a convict by carrying out every sentence to the letter.
Mr. COLLIER reminded the house that transporta-
tion had always succeeded when they were bent to colonies
where there was a demand for labour ; it bad failed
only when the convicts were sent merely to a prison
at ihe other end of the world. Now, the object of the
bill was to send convicts across the seas only in cases
where the colonies required their labour. If there was
no such colony to receive them, it was proposed to
retain them at home. He supported the general pro-
visions of the bill.
Mr. DRUMMOND said if gentlemen would take
any ordinary map of the world they would discover
at least 1,000 places where they might transport
their criminals. All these difficulties arose from breaking
up a system which they had established to their hands,
only because of the abuses which they found attaching
to it. He contended that Government had nothing te
do with the reformation of criminals, their business was
to protect society. On these grounds he would be glad
to see the bill pass.
Mr. Phillips also supported the bill ; as did Mr. Byng,
Mr. NeEtwdNgaLutpEeo,nyMtchro.isnaJoqphillanerisrEiteiodvvnaift, and Mr. Liddell.
Government ir
atthoeneraticmilelataiobnoloisfhitnhge
transportation altogether, and then reviving it again.
For his own part ho condemned the systerd of tickets-of-
leave, and thought the more convicts 'were transported
the better.
by the Government
Mr. BAINES defended the Government, and con-
tended that the experiment initiated had failed, and it was now-
rery, therefore, to legis-
neceso
After some observations fr,
late in another direction.
Keating, and Mr. Pack°, Jm Mr. Whiteside, Mr.
Lord STANLEY said the. re •
Atantly to continue transporta-
tional question was, whether
must necessaril
air whether the time had not ar-
rived would be possible permr
ect, and had convYZed With many
beyond the seas
t' d with the subject, and he felt satis-
fied He had
readrivedmwohoehn Zethpersauctii)r
p r practically caatl laynayc
aqtutaeirrn
pt to found a now penal settlement
would be an experiment necessarily ending in disappoint.
ment. The or.iy places likely for such establishments
were the YAlltland Islands, Vancouver's Island, the
northern anal southern ports of Hudson's B ay, and the
north Fort of Australis, the objections to whia he sever.