The Sun.
London, England, 1828-06-06 00:00:00

the system of banking were better regulatexl, he would
vote for again allowing small bank notes to be issued.—
The Government did not look the whole question full in
the face. We had one gigantic bank in the metropolis,
and several weak banks in the country. The law pro-
hibiting more than six partners in a banking house
was a prohibition against a sound system of banking.—
The system was what he wished to see altered. There
had been no less than 382 commissions of bankruptcy
issued against country bankers since 1793. He knew
that the Bank Charter was an impediment to a better
system, but why not negotiate with the Bank to do away
with the Charter? Other means might be adopted to in-
fluence the Bank of England ; and if the Government
were to say to the Bank—lf you do not consent to an alte-
ration of your Charter, we will select other persons to do
our business—be was sure the Bank would consent, and a
sound system of banking might be speedily introduced. But
even if this could not be done, he thought it would be
better for the country to purchase the privileges of the
Bank of England than go on as at present. They caused
such fluctuations in the currency, and such general mischief,
that we should be benefitted by buying them. He stated
these views because they were seldom stated in that House.
The whole mischief arose from legislation. If there were

no laws regulating banking, we should have a sound system.
Jo Scotland the trade of banking was free, and it had been
carried oa advantageously and safely. The practical opera-
tion was such that no bank of doubtful character could
stand in that country. A weak bank was crushed by the
combination of the strong ones. Only two banks had
failed in Scotland for many years; and only 32,000/. lost
in debts. He wished to see a sound paper currency esta-
blished. Though he did not agree with many of the ob-
servations of the Hon. Member for Carlisle, nor with many
of the observations by which other Hon. Members had
supported that motion, if it were to be confined to an in-
quiry into our system of banking, he would support it.
As to the Bill of the Right Hon. Gentleman, it was the
most uncalled for piece of legislation that was ever intro-
duced into that House. The Bill would commence by
doing harm, and he would not vote for it.
Mr. Secretary PEEL cordially concurred with one
observation made by the Mon. Gentleman who spoke last,
that it did not become them in that House to be very con-
fident in matters of that description. The facts were so
numerous, they were spread over so wide a surface, the in-
terests likely to be affected were so important, and the ele-
ments to be taken into consideration were so many, that it
was impossible for the Members to use too much caution
in making up their minds on such a subject. The Hon.
Member had appealed to former Resolutions of that House,
and to its subsequent acts, to justify his assertion, that they
ought not to be confident. He concurred also with the
justice of that observation, that practically no greater in-
convenience could arise, no greater detriment could ensue
to the interests of the country, than those which were oc-
casioned by a currency continually changing. If at that
period, in the month of June, when the law was to come
into operation is April next, they were to set about re-
tracing their steps ; if they were then not to make up their
minds to continue in the course they had already entered,
the inevitable consequence would be, that the country
would not know what to do, and could never place any
confidence in the continuance of their laws. The House
ought not, however, to be determined not to alter the laws
by any regard to their own consistency; they ought to
take higher ground than their own consistency, and resist
any further change on the ground of expediency. If the
Bill to bring back the currency to a sound state—if
1819 settled that the small notes were to he suppressed
in 18.24—if in the vear 1622 the House consented to allow
the small notes to be continued in circulation till 1633

if in 1826 it waa again resolved that they should expire
in 1829—if it were now asked to continue them for some

time longer, let the House refuse, unless it were dearly
shewn to be necessary—unless the expediency of continuing
them were dearly demonstrated, let it not be granted ; but
if it were demonstrated, then he should say let them not
consider their own consistency so much as the force of the
demonstration. Pi would not argue the question as to
the consistency of the House, but in that impartial calm
manner which such an important question reqaired ; and
be hoped he should show the House, that whatever incon-
sistency there might be in retracing their steps, that more
confusion would result than good, and that it would he
more expedient even than inconsistent. The first argu-
ment to which he would advert had been urged on a
former evening by the Hon. Member for CaUington, in
presenting a petition. That Hon. Member had stated that
the country was reduced to much a state of distress, that
she could not maintain her dignity in relation to foreign
countries ; that her resources were impaired, her produc-
tive energies suspended, that she looked as if she were only
a ruin, or was in a state of dissolution, and that her fu-

• ture restoration to prosperity must be despaired of. There
wag nothing more unpleasant, more unwise, than to in-
dulge in such gloomy descriptions of the prosperity of the
country. He admitted, however, that gentlemen ought
to be cautious bow they prophecied in future wealth and
prosperity ; aud be remembered that on former occasions
some persons, sitting where he was then sitting, has' been
blamed for having indulged in too dazzling descriptions of
our prosperity ; but the other extreme was also to be care-
fully avoided, and the state of the country was not to be
described under the influence of hypochondriacal feelings.
He admitted that there might be some local distress, some
dist-ie., in which trade was not. flourishing—but he hoped
to convince the lion. Member and the House that the
country was not in that destitute and desperate condition
he had represented. He could not admit that the industry
of the country was paralyzed by the withdrawal of the
one pound notes from circulation, and he could not ad-
mit this, because he saw no signs of it ia our manufac-
tures or in the revenue. He thought, if necessity were to
arise for war, that the House might not despair of the se-
curity of the country, or that they should not be able to
maintain that high character it had long enjoyed.—(Hear,
hear.)—He would decide the question by facts, but by
general facts, for he would not deny that there were no
districts in which the demand for labour were not less
than in others, and in which distress might be felt.
But by a reference to general facts, if there were that
general distress and general impaired energies, there would
be a falling off in consumption, a reduction of work,
and a general diminution in the quantities of those articles
which supplied the wants of the people. Since the Ist
of February, 1826, not one single country bank note had
been stamped at the Stamping Office. Since 18516, then,
they had been gradually reduced; and if the ultimate re-
duction of them were to produce such evils as had been
predicted by the Hon. Member, it was only reasonable to
suppose that the partial reduction which had already taken
should be attended with a diminution of
production sinceetion 2alnBdcsOnsumption. A part of those evils pointed
out by the Hon. Member ought now to be felt. But
what was the fact ? Had this diminution been felt in the
Revenue ? He would not refer to that, however, because
Members might say that its amount was only a proof of
the great pressure the country war labouring 'leder. He
would refer them to articles of general consumption; and
he should he able, by them, to shew that no diminution
whatever had taken place, and that nothing like what the
Honourable Member had stated would be found justified
by public documents. lie would compare the year end-
ing on the sth of April, 1625, with the year ending on
the sth of April, 1827. This was favourable to his view ;
for half of the year 1825 was a time of excitement, when
the country was in a state of what the Hon. Member would,
probably call great prosperity. He proposed to take for
the illustration such articles as strong ',ter, table beer, tal-
low candles, wax candles, cyder, perry, malt, paper, glass,
British spirits, and tea. He meant to compare the ac-
count of these articles consumed in t'ne year ending April,
1625, with the amount of the same articles consumed in
the year ending April, 1827 ; and the result would show
the House that they were not justified in taking that
gloomy view in which the Hon. Gentleman had—he
ged, fer it could not be indulgence to
him, but notliti Bnlinl
taking that gloomy view the lion. Gentleman
thought himself justified in taking. In the year ending
April 5, 1825, the quantity of strong beer consumed was
653,000 barrels ; in the year. ending April 5, 1827, the
qauntity consumed was 654,000 barrels. The table beer
consumed in the former Year was 1,480,000 barrels; in
the latter year it was 1,539,000 barrels. The amount of
tallow candles consumed in the former year wxa
104,900,000 pounds ; in the latter 110,718,000 pomade.
Of wax candles, the amount consumed in 1825 was
959,000 pounds ; in 1827 it was 923,000 pounds. Here
there was a small diminution, but in the intermediate year
the diminution had been greater. In the former year
the quantity of cyder and perry consumed was 22,000
hogsheads; in the latter year it was 51,000, being more
than doubled.--(Hear.)—The consumption of paper in
the former year was 51,452 ; in the latter it was 5t,000.
24,000,0001 b. of tea had seen consumed in the first year,
and 26,000,0001 b. in the second year. The Right Hon.
Gentleman also enumerated some other articles, and among
them printed goods ; and lie observed, that in all these
there had been between the two periods, a considerable in-
crease in consumption, with the single exception of wax
candles. He found in this no proof of a decreased
production ; and he could not conceive, with this increased
consumption, that there had been any decrease in the de-
mand for labour. The things must have been produced.
The same fact was illustrated by the number of ships en-
tered inwards. In the year ending the sth of January,
1826, the amount of tonnage entered inwards, was
2,600,000 tons; in the year ending Jan. 5, ISees the