The Sun.
London, England, 1845-06-24 00:00:00

was that the probable reason for the visit of the Member for
Lancashire to the governor was, that the majority of his con-
stituents were in gaol.—(Lau.Oster.) Jesting apart, he would
suggest that the cording of the clause should be so altered, as
to allow the gaoler or deputy gaoler to administer the oath is
the absence of the justices in the neighbourhood. That would
be a compromise between the two plans.
Earl RADNOR said that he thought it was highly requi-
site that the alteration should be made, as he feared that this
Lxity in the administration of an oath not only in their minor
affairs, but also in, the courts of justice, was very rapidly under-
mining the morally of the people.
Lord BROUGHA NI would avail himself of the Noble
Duke's suggestion, and he would, therefore, alter the passage
in the clause so as to make it lawful for the governor of a gaol
to administer the oath unless the attendance of a visiting or
other justice could be obtained within 12 hours.
Alter some further discussion the Bill passed through Com-
mittee, and their Lordships having resumed the report was
brought up and received.
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
SCOTCH TOLL-1 AR BILL.
The Duke of RICHMOND moved the third reading of this

Lord POL WORTH moved the insertion of a clause em-
powering the justices of Scotland to license toll-bars, provided
there was not a public-house within two miles of the spot
where the toll-bar was situated.
The Duke of ROXBURGH opposed the clause, and sup-
ported the Bill as it stood. There were already too many
licensed public-houses in Scotland, and be was glad their Lord-
ships had entertained a Bill for restricting their number.
The Duke of MONTROSE supported the eau:P. lie
thought it was a great convenii•nee to travelers and ca-riers
that toll bare should be licensed, for they were mo-tly sittrted
in parts of the country where a house -of refreshment could not
be met with tor miles and miles round.
Lord CAMPBELL said the licensing of toll-bars only bene-
fited the road trustees, and as he thought the people of Scot•
land lad already been sufficiently demoralised by these houses,
he should oppose the clause.
The Duke of BUCCLEUCH reminded t} eir Lordships that,
under an existing Act of Parliament, no toll-house could be
licensed without the recommendation of the road trustees ; and,
acting upon this Act, they had recommended that almost every
toll-bar in the country should be licensed, because the toll of
itself was unable to pay the interest of the trust. The trustees
had thus been enabled to raise larger sums of money on the
tolls than they otherwise could have dune had there
been no such Act. The alteration in the law, he
' had no doubt, would be beneficial to the country at
large, but it would, at the same time, entail great
and serious difficulties upon many important trusts in Scotland.
With respect to the amendment he did not think the restric-
tion to a couple of miles was sufficient. He admitted that in
some parts of the country the traffic was not sufficient to main-
tain an inn, and it was highly desirable that some provision
should be made in the Bill to meet such cases as these. It was
not so much he thought the system of granting licences to toll
bars that had tended to demoralize the people as the system of
granting licences to small shop-keepers, and thus inducing ser-
vants and others to go and deal with them for the sake of the
dram.
After a few worda of explanation from Lord CAMPBELL and
Lord POLWORTH,
The Earl of HADDINGTON hardly knew how to vote, but
he thought under the circumstances the number of miles
mentioned in the clause ought to be increased.
Lord KINNAIRD should vote against the clause proposed
by his Noble Friend.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH did not. know much about
Scotland, but it appeared to him that the interest of all parties
would be consulted by allowing toll-bars to he licensed for the
sale of spirits, if the nearest public-house was not within five
miles.
Lord BEAUMONT said that was more than was sought by
the amendment. If they put " five miles " after the word
" to," he conceived that the object sought for would be gained,
as a toll-bar could not then be licensed for the sale of spirits,
if a public• house was within five miles of either side of it.
The Duke of RICHMOND considered that if they put in
any saving clauses, the trustees of the roads would be too
strong fir them, many of whom were desirous that their toll-
bars should be licensed in the way they were, that they might
obtain a larger revenue from them. If a clause were inserted
for the purpose of giving the trustees compensation, they
would not object to the Bill. For many miles, in some of the
most remote parts of Scotland, there were no toll-bars, bus
those that existed were opened during the whole of the Sab-
bath. and added greatly to its desecration. He considered
the Bill was of great importance to that country, and could
see no reason why there should be one law for England and
another for Scotland. For the purpose of giving time, he
should postpone the 3d reading until Friday.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
This Bill passed through Committee.
SCOTCH BANKING.
The Earl of RIPON moved the second reading of this Bill.
He said two measures had been passed for regulating joint-
stock and other banks in England, and that they were generally
admitted to be wise and just, and that the advantages expected
to result from them to th, public interests, considering the
short time that had elapsed since they were passed, had been
fully realised. The Government had, therefore, been induced
to propose a measure for regulating the banking of Scotland,
on a somewhat similar plan. He admitted that the present
system had not produced any prominent evils, but. as regarded
the general security of the banking estahliiihraents of
the United Kingdom, a more rationill assimilation
between the banking system of this country and Scotland
was exceedingly desirable. It was not proposed to de rice
the banks of Scotland of the privilege which they enjoyed of
issuing notes below 51., but simply to impose some limitation
on the amount of the issues. There were 19 bank* in Scot-
land, an average was to be taken of their whole monthly issue
separately, as well as collectively, for 13 months between the
lat of May 'Bl4 and the 31st of May 1845, and that the ave-
rage of the total issue in these 13 months should be the maxi-
mum amount of the future issue of each and all of these
banks ; but in order to give the greater accommodation they
were allowed to issue any quantity of notes they pleased, so
long as they were in pr- portion to the quantity -f coin which
might be in their possession for four consecutive woeks. The
average maximum circulation of Scotland was to be 3.363,000/.
in notes and in other securities. As he had said, they w.‘uld
be empowered to make a further issue to any extent, provided
they had coin to the amount in their possession. This
additional amount would be one- fifth of the regulated
issue or 60,0001., making a total of 3,663 0001.
This was a larger amount that, they had issued during any
stated time. For the year ending December their issue
amounted to 3486,000/., so that that sum gave, them the
power of materially increasing their issues. These were
briefly the main features of the Bill, which he was of opinion
would not cause any inconvenience to the monetary affairs of
Scotland.

Lord RADNOR said the measure was an unnecessary inter-
7ereuce with the banking system of Scotland. There was an
old maxim, that when anything was going on to the satisfac-
tion of all parties, that it should be left alone. He was, there-
fore, at a loss to know why the Government wished to inter-
fere with the banking sistem of that country. Lord Eldon
once complained of a modern practice which had grown
into use, of not stating in the preamble of a Bill,
the effects which it was intended to realize,
and the mischiefs which it was proposed to
remedy. This Bill was a remarkable instance of this remark.
The preamble stated that, " whereas it is expedielt to regulate
the banking system of Scotland," &c. It should have stated
the grievances which it was proposed to obviate in the banking
system of Scotland. The people of that country had not com-
plained of it—on the contrary ; they were very much annoyed
at the proposition. No inconvenience—no failure had resulted
from it. There were only two failures in 1842. In the report
of the Committee on the renewal of the Bank Charter, it was
stated that the failures of banks in England from 1808 to
1820, amounted to 113 ; but, in Scotland,-during that time,
there was not a single failure. Why, therefore, the system
was to be assimilated to that of England. he could not conceive.
The Committee which sat in 1826, on the expediency of abo-
lishing the 1/. note,bore testimor y to the excellenceof the aystem,
and was in favour of retaining the I/. note. From 17tr to
1812 there were only two cases of bankruptcy in the banking
establishments of Scotland. The Ccmmittee of the House of
Commons which sat on this subject, of which Sir. Robert Peel,
Mr. Huskisson, and others were members, was unwilling.
without any proof of the necessity--what proofs had the Noble
Lord given ?—to destroy a system so admirably calculated, in
their opinion, to economise the capital and improve
the condition of the people and promote industrt.
If the banks were so prudent as to keep so large a sum or gold
at present, where was the necessity of endeavouring to make
them act less prudently? He thought it very foolish to inter.
fern with a system which, it was admitted on all sides, was
already managed so admirably ; and he could not therefore
see what could induce the Noble Lord to interfere at all. It
was in evidence, that notwithstanding the increased population
—the increase in trade and commercial prosperity—and not-
withstanding the establishment of the branch banks, the paper
currency was diminished. He thought the substitution of
paper for gold was one of the most ingenious inventions of
modern times, and as he considered the present Bill was alto-
gether unnecessary, and was against the wishes of the people
of Scotland, he was bound to give it his most decided oppo-
sition. He therefore moved, as an amendment, that it be read
a second time that day three months.
Lord KINNAIRD expected that there would have been
a larger attendance of Scotch Peers on the present oc-
casion, as they all seemed to be of opinion that the Scottish
banking system, as it at present existed, did not require any
alteration. The largest average issue was 3,500,001)1., or
thereabouts, and as it was not proved that there existed any
abuses in connexion with the system, he would say " Not
Content" to the present Bid, believing as he did, with the
Noble Earl who had just sat down, that Legislative inter-
ference with the system was altogether unnecessary.
The Earl of DALHOUSIE said, that the Noble Lord op-
posite had protested aganst the Government for having intro-
duced the measure on the ground that the present system
worked well. For his part, he did not question that there had
been comparative safety and considerable advantage connected
with the present banking system in Scotland, and he would
not question the great advantage of the 11 system ; but it was
quite a mistaken notion that the present Bill would interfere
With any of those advantages. Her Majesty's Governmant
could not give a stronger appreciation of the value they at-
tached to them, or a greater desire to secure their permanency.
1 he sole object of the present Bill was, that if the banks of
Scotland hereafter exceeded their present. issues, they must do
so only in the quantity of gold and silver. If difficulties had
not been felt in times past, it was mainly owing to the readi-
ness with which they could make a run upon the Bank of Eng-
land ; and the present Bill was intended to meet an emergency
of that sort, and to provide that the banks shall not exceed
their present circulation without a corresponding amount of
gold and silver. Under these circumstances, he considered
the present Bill was an improvement upon the present sy-tem.
After a few words in explanation from the Earl of RADNOR,
The amendment was negatived without a division, and the
Bill was ordered to be committed on Thursday.
NEWCASTLE AND CARLISLE RAILWAY.
This Bill was read a second time.
HULL AND SELBY RAILWAY ALTERATION.
This Rill was read a third time and passed,
LANCASTER AND CARLISLE RAILWAY EXTEN-

SION.

This Bill was read a third time and passed.
The House adjourned shortly after Eight o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 23

The Speaker took the chair shortly before Four o'clock.
The Dublin and Belfast Junction Railway Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The Ulster Extension Railway Bill was read a third time
and passed.
The Manchester South Junction and Altrincham Railway
Bill was read a third time and passed.
Lord H. VANE brought up the report of the Erewash
Va:ley Railway Bill, which was agreed to.
This Lords' amendments to the Lowestoft Railway and
Harbour Bill were agreed to.

On the motion of Sir C. LENIAN, the Cornwall Railway
Bill was read a third time, after same observations from Cap-
tain Plumridge in opposition to the motion.
The report on the Bermondsey Improvement Bill was brought
up and agreed to.
The Manchester, Bury, and Rossendale Railway Bill was
read a third time, and passed.
The report was brought up on the North Union and Ribble
Navigation Bill, and agreed to.
GLASGOW JUNCTION RAILWAY.
The report on the Glasgow Junction Railway Bill was brought
up, and agreed to.