The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-14 00:00:00

POST-OFFICE.

Mr. T. DUNCOMI3E gave notice that, to-morrow, he
should preient a petition from certain parties, complain-
ing of ti►e opening of their letters at-the Post-office, and
praying for redress.
C ORN- L AWS.

Mr. P. BORTIIWICE presented nineteen petitions
from places in Worcestershire against any alteration in
the present system of corn laws.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
Air. C. BERICELEY wished to know from the Right
Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State for the Home De-
partment, what had been the cause of the delay with
r.-gard to the introduction of the Charitable Trusts Bill?
It would be in the recolleetion of the House, that the
Right llon. Baronet had promised that the Bill would be
introducel by the Lord Chancellor in another place.
Three wet ks had elapsed since then, and no steps had
been taken with regard to its introduction. If the Bill
were delayed till July, when the House was thin, he
should feel it his duty to throw every obstacle in the way
of its passing. He wished to know when the Bill would
be introshieCd.?

Sir J. GIiAIIAM said that the Lord Chancellor was
entrusti.d with the Bill, and he hid every reason to be-
lieve it wiaLld l e proceeded With forthwith.
Sir G. GREY. ,wished to know whether the Govern-
ment had any intention of passing the Bill ;. and, if so,
.at what time it ~vould come beore the House ?

Sir J. GRAB:AN' said that the power of introducing
Bills was in the hands of the Government; the power of
passing them re;ted with the House. It was impossible
for him to Will in What period the Bill would come on.
Mr. dIIItISTIE stticl that the Bight Hon. Gentleman
had not onli. realised that the Bill would.be introduced,
44t. intention of the GOvernment that it
glimild_he..passed :dtiring; the -Present session; And he
wished to know whether there was any;chauge in the in•
tentions of the Government .with respect to the passing
of the Bill 7. • _ _

Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the power of passing
Bills rested kith the House. If there was any change
in the intentions of the Government, it arose from the
cireurastalice of the delay in visaing the Ecclesiastical
Courts Bill.
Mr. T. DIiNCOMBE said the Right Hon. Baroriet
had told them• chat the Bill was to be introduced by the
Lord Chancellor in the House of Lords. Now, nothing
that occurred" in- that House could be a reason why .the
Bill should not he introduced before the House of Lords.
Sir GRAHAM could only repeat what he said
before. The Government were desirous that the Bill
should be passed,' but it was in the power of that House
to decide whether it should pass or not.
Mr. Cit A VEN BERKELEY asked when it was pro-
bable that:the Bill would be introduced.
Sir J. OR :MANI said that the matter was in the
hands of the Lord Chancellor, who had prepared a Bill
on the sub,;e:t, and who would introduce the Bill which
he had prepared into the House of Lords forthwith.
Mr, BRIGHT wished to know when. the return of the
ootiOctioas under the game-laws during the year. 1843,
which had been moved for at the beginning of the
session would be laid on the table,
Sir J, GRAHAM Oa 'Wo understood) replied that
the retupnl, would ho laid on the table without delay.
• hio G. GREY wished to state, with regard to the
Charitable Trusts Bill, that he had no wish to offer any
.obstruction :to the measures of the Ministry merely
for obstr‘:ctioa's sake ; bta it .be
.recol-,
leeteil that this was a Bill of very ..great import-
Lnee.' It • had not yet been. introduced into the
House t:f Lords, it could not by any.poc.sibility be in the
House or Commons before the latter end of 41 or the
beginniag of August, and 1-. q • •prat6ai,ed against the
Bill 'lnez. tqiirieti through at a late Period
of the session in a thin House ; and •if• it
should be necessary to propose amendments in
I that 80, he claimed to himself a right to propose thOae
amendincntsl and to discuss gle muttep fully without

being charged with offering wilful obstruction to the
measures of the Government.

SI-111-TING INTEREST.
Mr, L ABOUCHERE observed that there was a no-
tice on the paper of a motion of the Pres'clent of the
Board of Trade for a Committee on the subject of the
shir.ping interest. That motion must give rise to dis-
cussion:. He trusted it. would not be introduced at a
late hour.

Mr. GLADSTONE would not introduce it at too
latC an hour for discussion..
AMERICAN LOYALISTS.

Mr. HUME wished to know when it was the intention
of the Government to move for a Committee of Supply,
as on the motion that the Speaker do leave the Chair,
he intended to direct the attention of the House to the
case of Mr. Cooper.
Sir ROBERT PEEL thought that it would be better
for the lion. Gentleman to give notice of motion on the
subject, as he could not undertake to move the Com-
mittee of Supply for the purpose of affording the .lion.
Gentleman an opportunity of bringing forward his
motion.

Mr. lIUME would then give notice that he should,
to-morrow (this day), on the moving of the first Govern-
went order, bring the case of Mr. Cooper before the
House.

BANK CHARTER BILL.
The order of the day for the second reading of the
Bank Charter Bill having been read,
Mr. B. lIAWES rose to Move, that no sufficient evi-
dence has been laid before this House to justify the pro-
posed
_interference with banks of issue in the manage-
ment of -their .circulation. The question they had
to discuss wag one of such vast importance, and
involved such a number of- details, that he must
at onee ask for the consideration and indulgence
of the. House while he endeavoured to state the grounds
on which he .ventured to oppose the further progress of
this Bifl. It should be recollected that if-this plan should
be rejected by the House, the plan of 1819 for regu-
lating 'the currency, and the principle of the Bullion
Committee of 1910 would, still remain in force. , Against
these plans. he intended no opposition. All that tho
Right Honourable Baronet had stated with regard to
the standard of value, the necessity of having promissory
notes being payable, in gold, and of the necessity
of maintaining the convertibility of notes, he as cordially
agreed in as- the Right Hon. Gentleman himself. The
Right Hon. Baronet intended that the circulation of

paper should be governed by that of gold,—was it
to fluctuate as that fluctuated ? The Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman bad so clearly explained the
objects of his Bill that he need hardly refer to it ;
but it wad so important that he should not hesitate to

repeat the Hon. Baronet's .own words. (The Hon.
Member read an extract from the Right Hon.
Baronet's speech in reference to this point.)
He thought these things ought to be well considered
before they were adopted ; and if they were not
it was the fault of the parties and not his.—(Hear.)
He (Mr. Hawes) would he glad to know one single
authority of practical experience that the' Right Hon.
Gentleman (Sir R. Peel) could produce to contravene
the opinions he had Just quoted from Mr.
Deacon llume. But how did they attempt
to prove the existence of this excessive issue of paper,
upon which they laid the, blame of every evil, and which
they made the justification of their present measure?
For this asserted over issue had been made the ground
for chancre in 1811, and it had been made
the ground of the measure of 1819. What was the

prool(---where was the proof in these two years of the
depreciation of paper ? In his (Mr. Hawes's) opinion
they were bound to show that there had been an excessive
issue of paper, and that this had led to a depreciation of
the eurrency and to an increase of prices. Again, he
said he defied the Right Hon. Gentleman to show that

the paper currency had been depreciated by those issues,
and that the prices of commodities had been so
affected by this. In the evidence before the Bank Charter
Committee there was not a tittle of proof of this effect ;
nor did he believe that any valid expression in sup-
port of it would be discovered in the various
pamphlets and other publications upon the stibject.
They had had assertions in abundance, hut they had
had no facts. He, hewever, would not give them asser-
tion against assertion ; he would show them that the
amount of circulation had produced no direct
effect upon the variation of prices, and he
would defy any one to prove the contrary.
If it was asserted that the amount of circulation pro-
duced a direct effect upon prices, he asked them to show
the grounds upon which they rested that assertion.
Where was the evidence to prove that an increased cir-
culation had been invariably followed by high prices ?
He would refer to the work of Mr. Tooke on prices, to
show that such had not been the case. There was no
proof that the variation in prices was referable to the
variation in the circulation. Let them take the year
1838, when there was the highest amount of circu-
lation—there were thirty millions of local cir-
culation. The amount of bullion in the Bank was
ten millions, and the rate of discount was 24 per cent.
If this theory were correct, the rise in price !heu.l.,-.
have been coincident with the increase in the circula-
tion ; but, on a reference to Tooke. it would be
found that such was not the case. Then there was
the theory of Mr. Jones Loyd ; if that theory
were correct in the year 1984, the depreciation
of Bank paper as compared to bullion, ought to have
been 75 per cent. Such, however, had by no means been
the case, awl therefore the Right Hon. Gentleman was
mistaken in adopting that theory, for at that period the
circulation had been preserved safe from depreciation.
It should be recollected that the Right Hon. Baronet
did not deal with the paper credit contained in bills of
exchange to a small amount ; he limited bank notes
only, and left other securities untouched. He referred
to the rage for speculation that had prevailed in
the United States, the embarrassment caused by
which was remedied by compelling the banks
to resume cash payments—by in fact introducing the
principle of the Bill of 1819. The not limiting the
amount of the paper credit issued by the country banks
in the shape of bills of exchange and other
securities,, would leave Ahem free to issue what
would take the place of promissory notes, which
would be a much more dangerous state of things. In
point of fact, it was not correct to say that the coun-
try bankers did not regard the state of the ex-
changes in the management of their business more
than they did the snow upon the mountain.
The country bankers were governed in their dealings
primarily by the state and conduct of the London money
market, but ultimately by • the state of the ex-
changes. Now, what were the opinions once, and for
many years, upon this subject of the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman opposite (Sir J. Graham) ? That Right Hon.
Gentleman had been one of the most able advocates
of the small note system, and, therefore, he (Mr.
Hawes) thought he had a right to claim his vote upon
the present occasion,—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) That
Right Hon, Gentleman had said—" beware how you in-
terfere with the small note circulation—(Leud
laughter)—and in the Bank Committee he had

put leading questions to Mr. Rogers, with whose
opinions, the Right Hon. Gentleman then acknowledged
himself fully to concur, in order to draw from him
upholding testimony to the value of the country cir-
culation. One of these questions to which the anti-
cipated affirmitive response was given was this:—
Do you not think that any interference with the
small note circulation will cause a great shock to credit ;
affecting both bank er and cust omer?"—(Efear,and a laugh.)
These were distinctly the opinions of the Right Hon.
Gentleman, who now, however, was a supporter of the
scheme of the other Right Honourable Gentleman
(Sir Robert Peel), which was avowedly to end
in one bank of issue.—(Cheers and laughter.) He (Mr.
Hawes) had therefore now only to congratulate the
Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department on the
intrepidity with which he had forgotten his former
opinions, swallowed his intermediate scruples, and sub-
mitted himself to the wisdom and the will of his Right
Honourable Colleague.—(Loud laughter and cheers.)
There was no man who wished to adhere more strictly
to the principle of a metallic Currency, with a paper cur-
rency convertible at will than Mr. Tooke. For himself,
he stood by the Act of 1819. He thought no case had
been made out for any further interference with that
Act. No case of excessive issue had been shown.
An Hon. Friend of his, who had written on the subject,
was a warm supporter of the plan of the Right Hon.
Baronet. That Hon. Gentleman had alluded to the
assistance afforded by the Bank in the year 1839, and
had quoted that as an instance of increased circulation
and of increased amount of accommodation to the
public. Now the fact was, that it was rather a decrease
of accommodation to the public. The advance upon se-
curities had been increased certainly, from 9,600,0001. to
12,700,0001., showing an increase of 3,000,0004 but
that increase had, in fact, been a mere transfer to pri-
vate securities from the bill department. The discount
had been reduced to 3,400,0001., from 8,500,0001., so that
there was actually a decrease of accommodation to the pub
lie. By the present plan it .was intended to attempt to
lessen speculation ; this it was impossible to accomplish;
and when, under the proposed system, the pressure
did come, it would produce a most violent action on the
public credit. What had occurred in 1825 and 1839
was nothing to what mast occur under this system. If
this plan were adopted a pressure would be produced
upon securities which must produce a pressure upon de-
posits, which would necessarily counteract the action of
the. Bank upon securities. The Bank must necessarily
make a sale of its securities in order to get back its
builiOn, and thus create a greater degree of pressure
on the money market than existed before. The Bank
would thus, in the event of such a crisis occurring as had
occurred in 1825, be placed in a much more perilous
position than it ever yet had been placed. The Right
Hon. Gentleman was a great advocate of the corn-laws;
now if he adhered to this strict management of the cir-
culation--if they were to have no expansion—how could
they possibly maintain the corn-laws ?He would say
to the country gentlemen, that if this system of banking
was adopted it would create such a sense of the injus-
re
the.t h that theght alteration tßio
000 of the corn-laws, that it would be impossible to
os e wasd
bs sure con-
tinue
them.
proposed
cur-
rency lawsauroinnetthwould
inevitably lead to the repeal of the corn-laws ; and it
(ruCbn hdteeherer sto.
h)i
re
present
ah
tei
ono n
was
as ust
entmni Fwou
oa
sr ar uwe
Thse
e
uphgoerhatttri nal dti
noo
esdooir.sn—t
sarily a speculating trade. It was impossible to foresee
or to provide for contingencies. Whenever there was a
large 'import, as a present;the payment for that import
must kite provided for by bullion ; and the moment the
ianount of bullion in the Bank coffers was reduced, the
Bank_ would reduce its advances upon securities. As
long, therefore, as the corn-laws remained, they would
retain one great cause of the disturbance of the cur-
rency, and that would be an additional reason for press-
ing for the repeal of the corn-laws. He objected to
anything that tended to connect the trade of banking
with the State, and therefore he objected to the esta-
blishment of 'one single 'bank of issue. At present bank-
ing was unconnected with politics. No. one inquired whe-
ther a bank director was a Whig or a Tory, but if they
established a single bank of issue it would give such
power to the State that party politica would become con-