The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-07 00:00:00

BANK CHARTER.

Lord MONTEAG LE disclaimed all party motives in
bringing forward the subject of which he had given
notice. He was aware of the great difficulty in treating
of bankinz Affairs, and while the difficult task of treating
of those affairs had devolved upon him in the other House
of Parliament, he had received from the members of the
present Government such cordial assistance, that he
should be guilty of ingratitude were he to discuss this
subject with any degree of hasty feeling. At the time
his Noble Friend Earl Spencer had brought forward the
Bank Charter Renewal Act he had also introduced
another Bill on the subject of banking, which had un-
fortunately not passed into a law. Since that time
no very important ineacure on the subject
had been submitted to Parliament. He agreed that
premature discussion was unadvisable, but he also
thought that every possible information should be com-
municated to their Lordships. Their Lordships were'
already in possession of a vast deal of information on
the subject. He by no means recommended the ap-
pointment of a Select Committee to consider the subject,
but if it were the attention of the Government it cer-
tainly was advisable that the Committee should be ap-
pointed as speedily as possible. The first question he
had to ask was, whether it was the intention of her
Majesty's Government to institute any inquiry of that
description? The next was, in the event of an inquiry
of that description being instituted, whether it was the
intention of her Majesty's Government to lay before
Parliament any documents showing what negotiations
or what communications they had had on the subject
with the Bank of England? He would not ask that
question without a word of explanation. He thought
nothing could go further towards impeding the settle-
ment of this question than the production of any papers
which had only incidentally helped the Government to
arrive at this conclusion. On the other hand, he
thought any papers distinctly explanatory of the course
intended to be taken by the Government ought, as far as
consistent with the public service, to be laid before Pad*
ment. An impression had obtained ground that it was in-
tended to create a monopoly in banking. This was a most
erroneous impression, as nothing of the sort could be
intended. He thought the sooner the terms of the pro-
position agreed to by the Government and the Bank of
England were made public, the more likely was this
question soon to be settled. He did not wish to draw
from the Noble Duke what that proposition was, but he
hoped the Noble Duke would, as soon as convenient,
put the public in possession of it. The third question
he had to put was, whether the alteration of the law
contemplated on the subject of banking would apply to
Ireland as well as England?
The Duke of WELLINGTON was willing to give
the Noble Lord all the information in his power. The
first question was, whether it was the intention of the
Government to appoint a Committee on banking. He
thought there was no need for the appointment of such.
a Committee, as the House was already in pos-
session of sufficient information on the sub-
ject. Regarding the second question, he was not
aware that there was at present any document which
it would be desirable to lay before the House, but the
House might rely upon it that if there were any docu-
ments which it was requisite to lay before Parliament
they would be speedily laid before their Lordships.
Regarding the renewal of the charter of the Bank of
Ireland the Noble Lord must be aware that it depended
upon entirely different circumstances from the renewal
of the charter of the Bank of England.—(" Hear, hear"
from Lord Monteagle.) It was intended that when the
charter of the Bank of Ireland was renewed it should be
renewed on the same principle as the Bank of England.
A return of the assets and liabilities of the Bank of
England, as published in the London Gazette in the years
1842 and 1843, was then moved for.
Lord MONTE A GLE wished to know if it were the
intention of the Government to institute any inquiry re-
garding the Irish poor-laws during the present session?
The Duke of WELLINGTON said it was the in-
tention of the Government to institute such an inquiry,
but not until the Irish representatives had returned.
The Marquis of NORMANBY presented a petition
from" the Catholics of Belfast, complaining that Roman
Catholics were rejected from the jury appointed at the
State trials. He would not, however, for obvious
reasons, make any observations on the subject.
The House then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Feb. 6.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'Clock.

Mr. CRESSWELL presented a petition from the Mor-
peth Union against the Bastardy clause of the Poor-
law Bill.

Lord CLIVE presented a petition from the Berkshire
Lay Association, against the union of the sees of St.
Asaph and Bangor.
EXCLUSION OF CATHOLICS FROM JURIES.

Mr. ROSS presented a petition from the Catholic
inhabitants of Belfast, which was agreed to at a pub-
lic meeting, attended by persons of every principle
and politics, and signed on behalf of the meeting by the
chairman, who was an anti-repealer, complaining of the
recent proceedings in Ireland, by which Catholics had
been excluded from the jury panel, and which the peti-
tioners considered as inflicting a wanton insult on the
Catholics of that country, the result of which must lead
to the establishment of a rancorous-political ascendancy.
They considered such a course of proceedings as a viola-
tion of the Emancipation Act, and as tending to raise
the question whether Catholics were worthy of credit
on their oaths, or were capable of trying persons for
sedition. They prayed the interference of the House,
and besought the House to address her Majesty, praying
her to dismiss her Ministers, and to take steps
to secure them against the tyranny of a faction.
WINDOW-TAX.

Mr. WALKER presented a petition from 60 of the
licensed • ictuallers of Berwick, stating that other trades-
men were exempt from the window-tax on their shops
and warehouses, and praying that the same exemptions
might be extended to the licensed victuallers.
GRIEVANCES.

Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD presented petitions
from Dartmouth, Market Harborough, Brentwood, and
other places. The petitions stated that it was a princi-
ple of the British Constitution that grievances should be
investigated and redress atfordel before the supplies
were voted, and they prayed the House to carry out that
principle. Also a petition to the same effect from Cam-
bridge, signed by five hundred persons ' • and a
petition to the same effect,, signed by J. Macpherson, of
Aberdeen, on behalf of a public meeting.
Mr. HUME presented a petition from Buntingford,
complaining of the system of representation, and stating
that no purson ought to be taxed without having a voice
in the Legislature.
PROTECTION TO AGRICULTURE.

Mr. COBDEN gave notice that on this day fortnight
he would move for a Select Committee to inquire relat-
ing to the effects of import duties on the tenant-farmers
and farm-labourers of this country.

RAIL WAYk
Mr. WALLACE gave notice that on moving for the
appointment of the Committee on Railways, he would
move that no Member, being a director of railways, or
being a shareholder of any railway, should be appointed
thereon.