The Sun.
London, England, 1821-03-20 00:00:00

fore, would be of no use in foreign countries. the
Only species of gold tokens which he cbuld agree
to must be those which were as nearly as possible
of the standard value of the sovereigns. He
01ot/ea it would be difficult for' speculators and
robbers to alter the value of money if it had two
methods of paying in money,. lie saw ito facili-
ty offered for forgery in the plan of the Right
lion. Gent. At tint same time he believed that
the only security for preventing the' forgery of
Bank-notes, was by adopting a system of metal-
lic currency, such as existed previous to 1797.
All the issues of Bank paper. lately had been
made to ensure-to the Bank a quantity of bullion.
He should like now to seethe laws, as they re-
spected usury, to be repealed ; and in his opinion
no time could be more favourable for it than the
present. This he should like to see done on the
"part-of the Bank. •

Mr. PEAIiSE thought it extraordinary, that now
they were about to return to Cash Payments,
those who had so particularly advocated that sys-
tem should now be the first to object, or rather to
start objections to it. There was no other pur-
chaser of gold than the Bank of England ; and
was it fair, that the Bank, which was the sufferer
by the issue_ of Paper Currency during the last
few years, should not be allowed noW to pay in
Cash ? .

Mr. PEE-1, consitlered that it was evident that
this was the Ogle foe a return to a metallic cur-
rency ; because, since the Blink was liable to be
called on to pay in' gold, there had been a reduc-
tion in the'issne of Bank-notes; and a proof had
been shewn'that•the gold currency might now be
adopted without any -chance of the gold coin being
taken out of the country. lle thought Mr, Rica rdo's
plasi was the best, if a proper remedy ould be
found for the prevention of the forgery or.Blinlt"-
notes. Ile did not know what'the Committee on
Bank' notes had lately done bait he' understood
that. the' Bank.of Ireland had a method, by very
simple machinery. to prcnent forgeries by accu.-
rate, mathematical, globular figures. This plan;
:if effectual, would be 10 times snore effiraCions
than that Of the .-Bank of England. Ife'coutd
not agree to the adOption of a double standard of
currency ; even if it were protected.by the ideal.
unity, on the abstract nation of a Bank note. It
was very natural for n§, when in a state of dis-
tress, to throw out of sight the real causes of it. In
1814 the House came to a Resolution that in 1816
,CaSh Payments should be resumed ; the
same took place in 1818, and 1819 ;,anc! now,
.(after all the distress under which. the country
laboured), he did not regret-the conclusion to
which the Cash Payment Committee came
When that Committee, was-going through its la-
bours, they' found it impossittle,..to return to a
gold currency,-which' was at that time very much
depreciated in
.value. They found, that the pro-
positiOn. of returning to a metallic _standard
would have then deprived the Bank of the power
of being.of service• to the Public. by loans of, its
capital. But if foreign countries had begun to
improve their metallic currencies, w.e.must have
done the same, or else we must have gone still
further down' the stream. thought that it
would beimprudent to agree to the proposition
of the Host. Gentleman (Mr, Baring).
Mr. F. LKavas thought there' was no ground
for delaying any further the restresumption of Cash
Payments ; and lie hoped theylie would see the
necessity of 'establishing 'a standard for the Cur,
rency. He wished, however, that the present
standard of the currency should not be altered, '
because no one could tell' what might be the
consequence of it. 'He' had IM doubt but a note
could be framed to pievent'forgery its all notes'
of 51. and upwards ; llut not so with respect to
11. notes, considering the frequency of their cir-
culation, and among the lower orders. No one
119,4 yet'suggested a system .by which forgery
might be detected by, the working Classes. Ile
sincerely wished that a period should' tome for
the resumption of Cash Payments ; and that
therefore the issue of 11. notes should be with-I
drawn.

Mr. Cntnrs did not believe that'any evil had
arisen -from the. Bank issues., If there had been
an evil, it arose from apprehensiOn more- than
from reality. The Bank had been as cautious
its
in issues, in proportion to its extent (and much
more so) as Country .Banks. The Bank_ could
not otherwise have benefited the Public or indi-
viduals by discounting good- bills. He,however,
agreed' that now was the time to make a stand in
favour of Cash Payments. If this was not the
-time, he agreed .that he did not know -when -it
would come. The Honourable Member observ-
ed,. be saw nothing. to apprehend
_in resuming
Cash Payments„ The reduction of the circu-
lating Medium would have no ill effect, if the
price of commodities fell in proportion. If wheat
was 201. a load, a man ru-t have 201. to pay for
it ; hut if the' load of wheat was only lal., then
10/. -would go as far as 201. 'in the other case.
Under all the circumstances, he was ill favour of
resuming Cash•Paynents.
Mr.' EilLicr. had doubts that adopting the pro.,
'position for paying in 'two -metallic currencies
mould be• attended with very considerable 'diffi-
culties. Ile considered the present system as an
evil, but he thought the country were bound t 6
abide by this evil rather than fly to ills which
they knew not of. • JHe was of opinion, if
ever there could be a time fitted. for resum-
ing Cash- Payments in full, it must be a
time like the present, when we 'were: at peace
with: all the world. The estimate was. that
25,000,0001. metallic currency. Would • be
sufficient -for all purposes. The Bank were
already in possession of half 'that sum, and provi-
shin might be made for the other part. He trust-
ed, under all the circumstances, the amendment
of his Hon. Friend would be.' withdrawn, and
theiChancellOr of the EXchequer's motion agreed
to without a division.

Lord FOLIaStONE opposed the Bill going into
a Committee,. and defended " the proposition of
Mr. Baring, for an alteration in the standard.

Mr. IrtisKrssoN considered altering the stand-
ard under anrcirairnstances would be unjust to
the public creditor and impolitic to the State.
Mr. BARING replied, and do fended his propo-
sition; a 'double standard was,not new, it was
what had existed ''-from the reign of Elizabeth
down to 17(.37.