The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-30 00:00:00

THE SUN,

sufferers., fled. m.l.de lacause their fiet)osits were
taken to pay eff cl3'lr. (7. f the old rie.miitors
witch hnd br.,(.re 15;31. The trustees wished
the eceounts of the bole to b•• closed about, the vea.
1831, as would he proved by documentary evidence fran
the trustees teemaelves. In consequeace of the cornmu-
iecation of the trustees to Government, Mr. T. Pratt
went to Dublin, but, instead of closing the bank, he in-
duced the trustees to continue the business. lie itten-
reined that the Cafe-street Rank from 1831 bream.! vir-
tual,y a new b:% k, and the, went to s'rengthen the
charge of injustiei., by making the de.Josits of the new
depositors available for the claims of the old depositors.
Though there was only a surplus of 27,000/. in 1831,
they paid in 1836 claims arising previous to 1831 to the
amount of 50,000/., and this too with the full cognizance
of Government. He would ask whether this was not a
case which ought to have the attention of Government,
and he hoped when the Committee met again
that the case of the depositors would be taken into
consideration. It was on grounds of public policy
only that Government allowed the erroneous ac-
counts to pass in 1331, and the money of the
new depositors to be made use of in payment of the
claims of the old depositors. He would now refer to
the Killarney Savings Bank, as here again he thought
the Government had acted with gre,t injustice. The
I,gal opinio-1 of Sergeant Green was ti,w, the Commis-
sioners, when apprised of the neglect or refusal c f the
trustees to furnish accounts, ought to have token pos-
session of the balance, which amounted to 16.000/.,
which balance ought to have been appropriated t ) the
payment of depositors before 1844. It was wrong on
the part of the Government to part with that sum ;and,
therefore, Government, in this view of the case, were re-
sponsible fe• that amount. In the case of the Tralee
Savings Bank the accounts had not been furnished
for a number of years. Here was anothee case which
clearly entitled the depositors to the favourable consi-
deration of the Government. He trusted that on some
future occasion Government would announce their de-
termination to do something in favour of these unfortu-
nate depositors.
Mr. GROGAN would express his regret that the
Right Hon. Gentleman had omitted all allusion to the
gross injustice committed under the late Act by what he
must cell the public officers of the various savings banks
in those cases which had been referred to. He would
first call attention to one or two points in the Bill which
required some explanation. The Right Hon. Gentleman
did not state whether the present annual limit of 301.
was to be interfered with?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied,
it was not to be interfered with.

Mr. GROGAN wished to know who was to pay the
treasurer's salary ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied,
the Commissioners.

Mr. GROGAN—Was the old rate of interest to be
maintained for the present ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—No.
the Bill would not come int) operetion until the 20th
November next, and then the reduction would take place
of the interest and deposits.
Mr. GROGAN put these questions because it was im-
portant there should if no doubt existing on these
points. He wished to have balance-sheets prepared and
circulated at stated periods, showing the exact position
of the savings banks. This, he thought, would be
very acceptable to the public as well as to the deposi•
tors. He would now refer to the eases of those who
hid suffered from the defalcation of the savings banks'
efficers in the hope of eliciting something favourable
from Government. Tne Honourable Gentleman
here catered- into some further particulars connected
with the ease of the Cuffe-street Savings Bank's deposi-
t rs to show that the depositors had a welegri,unded
claim on the consideration of Government. The grossest
irregularity had prevailed at the Cuffe street Savings
Bank, the result of which had been the stoppage of the
bank, and the depositors had received nothing. If ever
there was a case calling for the merciful interference of
the House, that of the Cuffe-stn-et Batik was the
strongest. If the depositors had been aware that they
had not the security of the Government, but merely of a
few volunteers who were utterly irresponsible, the Right
Hon. Gentleman could not suppose that they would have
deposited their money. The question was of immense
importance to those who had lust all their money, and
he hoped, whenever it should come before the Commit-
tee, that a f evourable decision would be given.—(Hear.)
Mr. SLANEY said there could be no doubt that the
loss of the depositors was a matter of the greatest inte-
rest, but, as the Committee was to be appointed, be
thought it would be much better to communi-
cate the facts to the Committee than to state them
to the House. He hoped that in the Commit-
tee justice would be awarded to those parties, and if
the question should be at all doubtful, the benefit of
the doubt ought to be given in favour of the
humble depositors.— (Hear.) The number of persons
interested in the subject was extremely large, and he
thanked :the Right Hon. Gentleman for the attention
which he had paid to it. He wished, however, to make
one or two remarks, which he trusted the Right Hon.
Gentleman would not overlook. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman said most truly that the deposits of the working
classes were not in a state of security ; and he believed
the measure of the Right Hon. Gentleman would tend
considerably to improve that security ; but in doing so
he regretted to find that the depositors were to be made
to pay.—(Hear, hear.) Now, with respect to the
amount deposited. Formerly the sum was 150/., bat
now it was to be reduced to 1031., thus cutting off
one-third of the investments which the humble classes
might by enabled to make. It was true the Right Hon.
Gentleman proposed to give them facilities to become
stockholders ; and when their deposits should amount
to 100/„ they should receive stock of that value. Now,
he wished to know if the Right Honourable Gentle-
man would give them the option of lOU in Exchequer-
bills, instead of 1001. in stock ? If it were practicable
to make 501. Exchequer-bills, it would be a great stimu-
lus to a vast number of persons who were desirous of
investing in Government securities.—(Hear, hear.) Ho
congratuleeed the country upon the prospect of these
hucoLle parties being able, through the medium of Go-
vernment offices, to purchase into the funds, and receive
the interest close to their own doors; but he hoped that
a power of attorney would not be necessary in each case,
and also that the advantages of these investments would
be given to friendly societies in general.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir J. JOHNSTONE said, if he had understood the
Right Hon. Gentleman correctly, the Committee would
examine the cases of the bank at Scarborough, and other
banks in this country, as well as the Irish banks. He
hoped when all the circumstances connected with the
defalcation at Scarborough were considered, something
would be done to pay the depositors the small loss which
they must necessarily incur. The trustees asserted that
if any imputation could be fairly cast upon them of
having in any manner neglected their duty, they would
without a moment's consideration pay every sixpence of
the deficiency, although no legal responsibility rested
upon them.—(Hear.)
Mr. H. EIErtBER P said the Right Hon. Gentleman
having requetted Hon. Members to confine their obser-
vations to the Bill, instantly proceeded to vindicate the
conduct of the Government and the conduct of the offi-
cers connected with the National Debt Office, assuming
that none of the allegations which had been made were
founded on tact, and he thought after the example set
by the Right Hon. Gentleman, he (Mr. Herbert) might
be permitted t r make a few remarks. The Hun. Mem-
ber fir Shrewsbury thought it desirable not to go into
the matter, because a Committee was to be appointed.
Now he (Mr. Herbert) had no faith in the Committee
that would be appointed, because he had no doubt the
Right Hoc. Gentleman was about to appoint the Com-
mittee of last year. And he would state why he had no
faith in the proceedings of that Committee. Pt eviously
to its appointment a notice of motion placed on the paper
by the Hon. Member for Dublin, had been several times
postponed at the request of the Right Hon. Gentleman,
and when he (Mr. Herbert) afterwards gave a similar
notice, the Right Hon. Gentleman consented to the pro-
p isition, saying, " You may have your Committee, but
I must nominate it." He agreed to the proposition of
the Right 11. e. Gentleman, and was afterwards informed
by an sion. Member that he had been "done."—(Leugh-
ter). The following year that Committee, of which the
Right lion. Gentleman was chairman, made a short
report, stating that they had not been able to go fully
into the merits of the case, and recommending a
further inquiry into savings banks. The next
year when the Honourable Member for Dublin gave
notice of a motion for a Committee, it was met by a dis-
tinct negative, and on two occasions the Government
were in a minority on the appointment of the Com-
mittee. The Right Hon. Gentleman now proposed the
appointment of a Committee, and would probably delay
the nomination till one or two o'clock, when the House
was quite wearied. The Right Hon. Gentleman had
not told the House what the Committee was for.—(Hear,
hear.) He could not help adverting to one other cir-
cumstance connected with the appointment of that Com-
mittee. A wish was expressed by the Irish Members
generally that the lion. Member for the University of
Dublin (Mr. Napier) should be placed on the Committee,
on which occasion the Chancellor of the Exchequer ex-
pressed his regret that he could not consent, but that it
was his determination to stick to the Committee. The
Hon. Member; for Montrose, who was a member of the
Committee of 1848, declined to serve on that of 1849;
but instead of then appointing Mr. Napier, they nomi-
nated the Noble Lord the Member for Kildare (Lord
Naas). Now with respect to the treatment of the depn-
sitors, who, he contended, ought to be reimbursed, Mr.
Tidd Pratt, in his examination before the Committee,
stated that in his opinion a gross and grievous hardship
had been inflicted by the passing of the Act of 1844.
The Hon. Member for Cork said that, in the case of the
Killarney Bank, the claims amounted to 36,0001., and
the assets to only 16,0001. Now, how was that divided?
Why, 20s. in the pound was given to the depositors pre-
vious to 1846, and 3.. to the depositors subsequent to
that period.—(Hear, hear.) And what was the reason
for a decision so contrary to every principle of equity
and common sense but ihe passing of the Act of 1844?
Allusion had been made to a variety of irregularities
that had been permitted to take place by the Commis-
sioners of the National Debt. In almost every instance
in which the Act required their control for the protec-
tion of depositors they had neglected t exercise it. In
proof of this he would refer to the evidence of their
secretary, Mr. Byam, given before the C )mtnittee of
1848. In his examination Mr. Byam stated that.
strictly speaking, the Commissiouers ha I not acted in
the manner directed by the Act. He (Mr. Herbert)
had t ) prefer a charge against the Commissioner,,
which, he thought, would surpi int the House, and it
was that they
had passed and signed the accounts trans-
mitted to them without the slightest supervision. Mr.
Ryan admitted this in his examination. In fact, ever
since 1844 accounts had been passed by the Commis.
sionere with errors so gross that any school-boy might
have detected them. In the accounts of the Killarney
Bank, published in a 10C
newspaper in 1848, he him-
self bud detected an error to the amount of 4,0001.
On the face of one account, the aggregate amount of
forty-one' depositors of 100/ each was put down at
1,3014, instead of 4,1001. The opinion of Mr. Green,