The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-22 00:00:00

_.:G. ~'/

scOri was taken, he wished fot it single—iiiOment to
advert to the opinion, and the conclusion derived from
that opinion, which had fallen from Lord Melville.
His Noble Friend had stated, with that candour which
always accompanied everything which falls from him,
that, in his judgment, the suppression of one pound
notes in the currency of Scotland would not be expe-
dient, and that it would be undesirable in Govern-
ment or Parliament to entertain such a question ; but
he proceeded to dwell at some length upon an im-
portant reason—indeed, upon the only great reason
against the resolutions—that it would be just and
necessary for Scotland to have always an amount of
coin, which he estimated at not less than 2,000,0001.,
in order to furnish the just proportion to the neces-
sities of the country in certain contingencies, when
there would be a drain on the bullion, which would
be called for from the kingdom generally. He (Lord
Rosebery) would only observe upon this, which he
was not prepared at present to prove, but
.what he
held to be an opinion not controvertible by his Noble
Friend, that, in sanctioning these two opinions, he
must contradict himself, for he (Lord Rosebery) held
it as an axiom almost, which former experience had
in a manner proved to demonstration, that if a one-
pound note currency was established in this country,
it was impossible that an amount of bullion equiva-
lent to the sum referred to could co-exist. The Noble
Lord then proceeded to state the grounds upon which
he should give his support to the resolutions and re-
port. He considered the question before the county at
present, and which agitated the whole of Scotland from
one end to the other, was a practical question entirely,
viz., whether the present circulation was suited to
the habits and wants of the people, and whether
it was attended with any injustice, or accompanied
with any danger to the country. When, therefore,
he saw that this country for a long number of years,
had attained a prosperity which she had reached under
great natural disadvantages—when he saw that this
was attributed, almost without contradiction, to the
system of banking in Scotland, and that there was
one inherent point in that system which had been
adhered to with great pertinacity by all classes of the
population, viz., the system of a one pound currency
—when he saw that no danger was alleged against it,
except that alluded to by his Noble Friend (Lord
Melville), and when he saw that it was the great in-
strument by which the transactions and enterprise of
the country had been long carried on, he must say
he would deprecate the attempt to shake or disturb
1 system such as this, with all the beneficial conse-
quences which undoubtedly had attended it for the
last 140 years.—(Hear, hear.) To do so, in his opi-
nion, would be to lead to consequences of a most
mischievous nature —to apprehension, perhaps to
panic, to uncertainty, to want of confidence through-
out the country, and probably to unseen consequences
which it would be impossible to predict the amount
of—(Hear, hear)—and which, if they did occur, it
would be impossible to arrest or control. Uni-
formity, he admitted, was an excellent thing in a
country, if established without counteracting effects
producing evil greater than the benefits arising from
it. In point of fact, instead of any mischief arising
f'rorn the one pound note currency, or the state of
the banks, on the very contrary, the confi-
dence and security derived from them had of
late years very much increased, and that in
consequence of many wise regulations on the
part of the banks themselves. The Legislature,
by their enactments for several years past, and
Mill more by the Act of the last session of Parlia-
ment, had insured in England such a vast basis of
metallic currency, that it was sufficient for the wants
of the whole kingdom. It should be recollected, too,
that in that part of the empire the < people had been
long accustomed to a metallic currency—never hav-
ing had a paper currency lower than 51., except from
1797 to the conclusion of the war. That country was
therefore accustomed to that mode of circulation, to
which, by its superior wealth and other reasons, it
was decidedly adapted. Having secured, then, this
large basis of metallic currency, which was sufficient
for the wants of the whole kingdom, combined with
the provisions made last year, and extended to Scot-
land, preventing the establishment of further banks
with respect to a paper currency, he held that every-
mhing in the shape of security had been obtained, and
'hat to tamper with the currency upon its original
principles was highly dangerous in these times, until
practical evil was adduced and a practical remedy'
Lord DUNFERMLINE said he appeared there that
lay to take a part in their proceedings, because it
might be thought he was shrinking from his duty, if
he failed upon an occasion when the opinions he en-
tertained appeared unpopular in Scotland to stand
forward and re-assert them. The principles which
he was now about to explain were those upon which
he had uniformly acted, and to which he now adhered
with increased confidence. It was impossible for him
concur in the resolutions now brought forward;
ind if the meeting would permit him, he would
also, while he stated the reasons which pre-
, vented him from concurring, state the grounds
' upon which he very seriously doubted the prudence
er the policy of the course which it was pro-
posed to pursue, 'and which had been pursued by so
-many of the counties of Scotland. Now, just let us
come (said his Lordship) to the real pith and sub-
stance of this question about the issue of one pound
motes ; and let us see what is Sir Robert Peel's posi-
tion in regard to the question. You are all aware
that in 1826 it was found necessary, on the principle
chat a one pound note and a sovereign cannot co-
exist, to put an end to small notes in England.
Scotland at that time made a vigorous resistance to
the attempt to apply the same measure there, and a
great shout was raised against it by the people of
this country, and they at length succeeded. A Par-
liamentary Committee was appointed, the Committee
met and heard certain evidence, and came to a cer-
tain conclusion, and that conclusion was ultimately
sanctioned by Government. With regard to that
Committee I shall not say one word, except that those
gentlemen had a good deal to say for themselves
ho said that if England had been allowed to pro-
duce her case as Scotland had produced hers, and
examined witnesses, the Committee would have come
to the same conclusion with regard to England as
they had done with regard to Scotland ; and that,
in point of fact, small notes would not have been
suppressed in England. Well, it appears from
what was stated to the Committee, that they came to
the conclusion that small notes should not be sup-
pressed in Scotland. Now, what was the course
which Sir Robert Peel took, from whom you appre-
hend so much danger ? He said—" I agree upon
general reasons that small notes ought to be sup-
pressedin Scotland as well as in England ; but I am
willing to make another experiment, to ascertain how
liar it is safe, practically, to allow the issue of small
notes in Scotland, having suppressed them in Eng-
land." That is the position in which Sir Robert
Peel now stands. I should say, in fairness, however,
that I did not concur with Sir Robert Peel in
that opinion. I did not think it enough to say that
general reasons required small notes suppressed in
Scotland as well as in England. I thought there
was more: than general reasoning in it, and that was
the two important ingredients of good faith and jus-
tice. I thought so, because, being a member of the
Bullion Committee of 1810, and of the second
Committee of 1818, I concurred in a measure for
the resumption of cash payments in England, being
quite aware at the time that taking so strong a mea-
sure was the only means of extricating the country
from the extensive embarrassments occasioned by the
orders in council in 1797. I knew that this could
not be done without inflicting a severe pressure upon
the whole of the country; but I felt bound in the fair,
and just, and honourable performance of my duty,
to lay the burden upon all parts of the country
equally. But when Parliament decided not to do so,
I felt personally very glad that Scotland was b
receive so great a boon from England, and recd el
never to open my mouth on the subject again, unless
I should feel myself compelled by a sense of duty
to do so. I had thought, however, till this moment,
that it was decorous and prudent, on the part of the
people of Scotland, to hold their peace, and enjoy the
boon in quietness, because that it is a great boon it is
impossible to deny. For what is it ? The Legisla-
ture were of opinion, and justly of opinion, that in
order to maintain a proper standard of value, there
should be a metallic currency, although this could not
be imposed without throwing a great burden some-
where ; and until this present time the whole of. the
burden has been thrown upon the people of England.
They pay every shilling of the expense of maintaining
a metallic currency, while Scotland benefits by the
e
stability of this standard, maintained at the exclusive
cost of England. That is the plain, naked truth.
Well, but Sir Robert Peel said he would abide by the
result of his experiment. Now, what has been the
result ? Has the currency been excessive during the
eighteen years that have elapsed ? I have had no
opportunity of inquiring, and do not know the fact,
but, if it had been so, the excess would speedily be
detected in the transaction of your ordinary business.
Go to Sir Robert Peel then, and tell him that the
experiment has been in favour of Scotland—that the
system had stood the test which he himself selected,
and that there is no ground to interfere with the
system. Therefore, so far from concurring in the
opinion that there is any cause of danger to the people
of Scotland from Sir Robert Peel, in point of fact
and of consistency, Sir Robert Peel is of all persons in
the world most
bound by the result of this experi-
ment. But this is not the whole case ; because he is
not the only person of whom you have cause to be
afraid. Are you not afraid that in stirring
this question the people of England may ask
what do these proceedings indicate? Do they in-
dicate fear or strength? And in looking for an
answer to this question, are you not afraid that they
may find out that the whole of the expense of the
metallic currency is borne by England, while Scot-
land equally shares in the benefit, and may demand
the suppression of your small notes as well as theirs ?
For myself, I have been strongly impressed with the