The Sun.
London, England, 1827-06-08 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, THURSDAY, JUNE 7.

The House proceeded to business a few minutes before
Four o'Clock.
TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS.

Mr. Sergeant ONSLOW presented a petition from
Guildford, praying for the repeal of the Corporation and
Test Acts.

Sir THOMAS bIOSTYN presented a similar Petition
from the County of Flint.
Mr. CORBETT presented similar Petitions from
Shrewsbury and Dorrington.
Similar Petitions were presented from Hereford, by Mr.
LOCH; from Ware and two parishes in Herts, by Mr.
N. CALVERT. The Hon. Member said, that the Peti-
tions on this subject were so numerous that he would not
move for the printing, as the expellees of printing so large
a number of petitions must be a great burthen to the
country.

Mr. Lyrurrox and Mr. HARVEY, concurred with the
Hon. Member in the necessity of some controul on the ex-
pences arising from the printing of petitions.
Sir J. GRAHAM presented petitions from the Inde-
pendents of Carlisle, and the Presbyterians of the same
town, in favour of the repeal of the Test and Corporation
Acts.

Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition from the Dis-
senters of Cockermouth, for the repeal of the Test Act,
and Catholic Emancipation.
Mr. CHAPLIN presented a similar petition from
Gainaborough.
Similar petitions were presented from the Dissenters of
Handley and Shelton, in Staffordshire, by Mr. Lyttleton;
from Woodbridge, Suffolk, by Sir W. Rowley; from a
Congregation in York-street, Walworth, and Farnham, by
Mr. C. Pallmer ; from the Congregation of King-street,
Bristol, by Mr. Bright; from Peterchurch, in Hereford,
and a parish in Denbigh, by Mr. Wilke ; from Chippen-
ham, by Mr. Guy; from Hitchin, Herta, by Sir J. Sea-
bright ; from Duckswortli, Ely, Isleharn, and several
other places in Cambridgeshire; from Harborough and
Horncastle, by Mr. Fazakerly; from Colchester and other
places in Essex, by Mr. W. Harvey ; from Ridgmount,
Worcester, and several places in the county of Norfolk, by
Mr. Coke; from Northampton, by Sir G. Robinson ;
from Norwich, by Mr. W. Smith.
PARISH OF ST. GEORGE'S, DUBLIN.

Sir JOHN NEWPORT presented a petition from the
inhabitants of the parish of St. George, Dublin, complain-
ing of the misapplication of the parish money. The peti-
tion stated that 57,000/. had been expended on the build-
ing of the church, though the greatest distress was known
to exist in the district in which the church was situated.
The trustees of the church claimed an exemption under an
Act of Parliament from giving any account of the expense
which had been incurred, and, under those circumstances,
the petitioners prayed the House to order an account to be
taken.—. The petition was ordered to be printed.
Sir THOMAS MOSTYN presented a petition from
the Coro:,ers of Flint, praying for extra allowances —Laid
on the table.

Sir W. ROWLEY presented a petition from Wood-
bridge, Suffolk, praying for protection to the wool-growers.
—Laid on the table. _

Lord LOWTHER presented a petition from the Clergy
of the Archdeaconry of Richmond, in the Diocese of Ches-
ter, against any further concession to the Roman Catholics.
—Laid on the table.

Lord F. OSBORNE presented a petition from the retail
Brewers of Cambridge, against the existing laws:
Lord BELFAST presented a petition from the Gover-
nor and Magistrates of the county of Antrim, respecting
the Constabulary Act.

Mr. HEATHCOTE presented a petition from the
weavers, artizans, and inhabitants of Coventry, against the
Coventry Election Bill. The Hon. Member said, that the
petition was signed by 9,000 persons belonging to the
labouring classes, and this he contended was a strong evi-
dence as to the opinion of the inhabitants on the conduct
of the Magistrates of Coventry.
Sir J. WROTTESLEY said, the Corporation had taken
a decided part in the last Election, in favour of the masters
and against the workmen. Magistrates who had taken a
decided part for or against, ought not to he left as sole
judges of all disputes between masters and men.
A Message from the Lords, announced their Lordships
assent to several Private Bills.
MESSAGE FROM THE THRONE.

Mr. CANNING appeared at the bar with a Message
from the Throne, which was brought up and read. It was
to the following effect :—.

" G. R.

" His Majesty, deeming it expedient to provide for any
additional expenses which may arise on account of the con-
tinuance of his Majesty's forces in Portugal, and relying on
his experience of the zeal and affection of his faithful Com-
mons, trusts they will make provision accordingly."

Mr. CANNING observed, that this communication
from the Throne referred to a subject to which he had ad-
verted in the statement of the Budget on Friday—the ne-
cessity of having a vote of credit on account of our forces
in Portugal. He would therefore move, that his Majesty's
gracious Message be taken into consideration in a Com-
mittee of Supply to-morrow.—Ordered.
WESTMINSTER IMPROVEMENTS.

Mr. HOBHOUSE said, he had another petition to pre-
sent, to which he particularly requested the attention of
the Secretary to the Treasury. The petitioners who re•
sided in the immediate vicinity of St. James's Park, were
extremely anxious to know the nature and extent of the
improvements which were intended to be made there, and
they hoped that a decided answer would at once be given
them on that subject. The effeet of the contemplated hn-
provements would be, to shut out the petitioners from all
view of St. James's park, and if that supposition were cor-
rect, he (Mr. Hobhouse) need not :say how extremely hard
it would he on the petitioners to be shut out by such
changes from the view which they had heretofore enjoyed.
Indeed, he (Mr. Hobhouse) was of opinion, that it was not
exactly proper to encroach upon the park at all. He beg-
ged leave also to ask the Hon. Secretary, whether it was
intended to cut down certain trees in St. James's park ;
and he could not help adding, that no measure connected
with those improvements was so justly complained of by the
public, as that of cutting down the trees in question. He
hoped that the comfort, convenience, and even the health of
the citizens would not thus be sacrificed to any plan which
Mr. Nash might think proper to propose for the purpose of
beautifying the park. When he (Mr. H.) applied to the
Treasury on the subject, Mr. Arbuthnot was kind enough
to assure him that no steps would he taken by which the
rights of the petitioners could be affected, without an inti-
mation either to his Hon. Colleague (Sir P. Burdett) or
himself. While he placed the fullest reliance on this pro-
mise, he could not help observing, that if the House ad-
journed before an arrangement could be effected, it might
be too late when Parliament met again to arrest the pro-
gress of those improvements and remedy the grievance of
which the petitioners complained. An assurance had been
given to the House, that no trees should be cut down on the
Carlton-house side of the park, and also that whatever im-
provements should take place in that direction, the rights
of the petitioners should not be invaded. If, however, the
improvements went on without the power to check them,
it was obvious that it would be a task of considerable diffi-
culty to repair the mischief; and if those trees were to be
cut down according to report, he need not say that it would
he no easy matter to raise them up again. With respect
to the contemplated improvements in the Strand, he beg-
ged also to ask the Hon. Secretary what was intended to
be done, and when ? In consequence of the rumoured im-
provements in that quarter, a great deal of mischief was oc-
casioned, and several of the inhabitants of the Strand were
losing from 201. to 301. per week, in consequence of the
unsettled state into which they were thrown, arising from

their being unable to determine When the improvements
should commence.

Mr. HERRIES said, he should answer the last question
of the Hon. Gentleman first. The Hon. Gentleman asked
what progress was making in the improvements in the
Strand. On a former occasion, when the Hon. Gentle-
man proposed the same question, he (Mr. Herries) an-
swered generally, that the Commissioners had not been idle,
and that they were proceeding with due care. Such was
the general answer which the Hon. Gentleman received on
that occasion; but he (Mr. Herries) was now enabled to
state mme paiticiilarly the progress of the Commissioners,
by referring in detail to what they had done. He was
enabled to state that 339 houses had been purchased, which
led to a correspondence embracing no less than 1,000 let-
ters. He mentioned this to show the attention which must
have been bestowed upon the different cases that came be-
fore the Commissioners, and also to account for any delay
which might have occurred. It was an important fact
that spoke highly to the zeal and diligence of the Commis-
sioners, that upwards of 75 houses had been under arbitra-
tion; 53 houses of that number were as yet undecided ;
and the claims set up by the owners of 182 houses were
now under the consideration of the Commissioners. He left
the House to judge from this statement, that the business
in which the Commissioners were engaged was of no small
magnitude. Although he believed that many individuals
had ground of complaint that their interests had se long
been kept in suspense, yet, on the other hand, there
might be other permits whose claims, perhaps, were not
so justly founded, who would endeavour to press the
Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hobhouse) to bring the subject
forward, in order to profit by any undue speed with which
the purchases might be effected.—(Hear.)--The Commis-
sioners were doing all in their power to expedite the im-
provements, and they hoped that early in the ensuing
spring the work of demolition would be commenced.
With respect to another part of the Honourable Member's
inquiry—namely, the encroachments on St. James's Park
—he (Mr. Herries) was sure, that, when the plan of the
intended improvements should be submitted to the House,
the Honourable Member (Mr. HobliOuse) would at once
perceive what little ground there was for such a rumour.
The House must be aware that several improvements had'
lately taken place in the Park, and he was quite sure that;
in all the alterations that had taken place, nothing had
been done to take away from the just rights of the public.
—(Hear, hear.)—All he would now ask was, that the pre-
sent Commissioners should be judged by their acts ; and
he felt persuaded that, in all the changes which they
might think proper to sanction, they would feel a just
regard for the interests of the public. With respect to St.
James's Park, he had to communicate to the House that
his Majesty had been graciously pleased to allow a road to
be constructed in the Green Park, so as to connect an
improving part of the town with the city of Westminster.
--(Hear, hear.)—He had also to state that his Majesty
had further been graciously pleased to intimate that
the interior area in St. James's Park, where the
grass now grew, and which was confined by a paling,
should be thrown open to the public. (Hear, hear,
hear.) When he stated that such improvements were in
contemplation, he was sure that the House would at
once see the spirit in which they were undertaken. With
respect to another part of the Hon. Member's inquiry, it
was certainly intended to build a line of houses at the bask
of the Bird-cage-walk ; but he (Mr. Herries) could not see
that the petitioners were at all affected by that measure.
Certainly every pains had been taken not to injure their
property; and so far from the intended improvements
having an injurious effect, he was sure that the contrary
would be the result, and that the houses in question would
be benefitted rather than injured. With respect to the
plan of the improvements, an order had been issued from
the Treasury, that only such parts of it as no one could ob-
ject to should be proceeded with ; so that parties who
might be dissatisfied would have ample time to forward their
complaints to the proper quarter, and obtain the redress
which they sought, in case their claims were founded in
justice. There was one more topic to which the Hon,
Gentleman alluded—namely, the trees, which he seemed
to suppose it was the intention of the Commissioners to de-
molish. It was no part of the plan to cut down the trees
in question ; and he was not aware that any such intention
existed at the Treasury.
Lord MILTON expressed a hope that any alterations
which might be made in the park, would not be such as
to interfere with the advantages enjoyed by the public in
that .quarter. He did not know what was intended to be
done with the site of Carlton Palace and gardens ; but he
trusted that any building to be erected on them would rant
be extended beyond the line of the garden wall.
After a few words from Mr. HUME, Mr. HERRIES, and
Mr. HOBHOUSE, the petition was brought up, read, and
ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. HEATHCOTE presented a petition from the Pro-
testant Dissenters•of Rumsey, for a repeal of the Corpora-
tion and Test Acts.

Similar petitions were presented from the Dissecting
Congregations of two places in Bedfordshire, by Mr. S.
WHITBREAD.

TEST AND CORPORATION ACTS.

Lord J. RUSSELL said, that having to present several
petitions for a repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, he
felt it necessary to say a few words in explanation of the
unusual course he was about to take with respect to the
motion of which he had g:ven notice on that subject. He
had on all occasions voted for the repeal of the laws affect-
ing the Roman Catholics. He had done so on the broad
ground of general religious liberty. If on this principle he
had voted in favour of the Catholics, whose religion, even
at the present day, was mixed up by many of its pro-
fessors with the most objectionable and slavish doctrines, lie
could not refuse to give his support to the removal of the
laws affecting the Protestant Dissenters, who had, on all
occasions, proved themselves the steady friends of civil and
religious liberty. If he had voted in favour of the Ca-
tholics, who.had, in the course of the last century, been the
active partisans of the House of Stuart, lie could not con-
sistently refuse his vote to those who had in every instance
proved themselves the strenuous supporters of the House of
Hanover.—(Hear, hear.).---Had he brought the question
before the House, as it was his intention to have done, he
trusted he should have been able to make out a good case
to the House, to show why they should erase from the Sta-
tute Book those laws which were the dregs of that Penal
Code which evinced the illiberal spirit of the times that
gave it birth. Since he had given notice of a motion on
this subject, a change of Government had taken place,
which, it was unnecessary to add, had become the subject
of much conversation in public and private. This had pro-
duced a considerable change in the intentions of the great
body of Protestant Dissenters. It was admitted on all hands,
that the present Administration were more favourable to the
repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts than any which existed
for the 37 years during which the subject had been allowed
to rest; but there were very many amongst the dissenting
body who doubted the propriety of urging that measure
upon the present Government so soon after its formation,
and who were therefore for delaying the discussion of the
question until the next Session. Others of that bcdy were,
however, of a different opinion (and in that opinion lie
concurred), and thought the present the most favourable
opportunity for the discussion of the question of repeal. He
however could not act of his own mere will, but felt it
necessary to consult those who took a lead in the affairs of
the Protestant Dissenters, and amongst others, of his Hon.
Friend the Member for Norwich (Mr. W. Smith), who by
common consent was admitted to be the organ of that body.
On consideration of the question amongst themselves, it did
appear that the majority were in favour of postponing the
discussion of the question for the present, and a request was
made to him (Lord J. Russell) not to bring it foi ward.
With that request he found it necessary to comply. He
was aware that by the course he was pursuing, he had
placed himself in the unpleasant situation of one having
the appearance of acting with a view to party interests;
but he should be ashamed of himself if to avoid a personal
imputation, he consented to a course which would be in-
jurious to that cause of which he was the conscientious
advocate.—(Hear, hear.)—ln discharging a duty to those
most interested, be could not therefore bring forward
the motion this season. It was, however, the inten-
tion of the whole body, that the subject should be
brought forward early in the next Session, and if
then unsuccessful, to he continued on from year to year.
He would observe with respect to the petitions in favour
of the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, that on the
present occasion they were numerous beyond precedent.—
There was, however, a difference between some of the pe-
titions from others. They all concurred in praying for the
repeal of those acts, but some of them prayed also for a re-
peal of religious disabilities of every kind. He had had to
present many of that description, and from his knowledge
of the parties, he believed that the most enlightened of that
body viewed every kind of civil disabilities on account of
religion amounting to persecution. Amongst the petitions
which he had now to present, was one signed by clergymen
and other members of the Church of England, calling
themselves the friends of religious liberty, who stated that
they valued the repeal of those Test Acts only as one step
i gßi
headsoua
rs
oliberty.
Roman
13Taynhoetricleearttvhaos Catholic
highlys o one
Establish_
respecta-
ble
nt o peti-
tionewn
membersat towards
signed
ae
1r
of
ayfl
ttrhhe Catholicael
t communion. They prayed for a re-
peal of the Test and Corporation Acts. What he (Lord J.
Russell) was anxious to see, was a co-operation of all par-
hose disgraceful acts. When they
should i
accomplished this;—that religion should no
t par-
ties
longerutlod
have
bpue consideredtan d to
qualification for office,---they would

have achieved a triumph important not only to England
but to the world in general. By such means they would
strengthen the State, give stability to the Church, and pu-
rify religion itself.—(Hoar, hear, hear.)—He would con-
clude by moving the petition he held in his hand be
brought up.
Mr. W. SMITH said, it would be unfair of any parties
connected with the Protestant Dissenters, if they refused
to thank the Noble Lord for his general advocacy of their
cause, and for the part be had acted on the' present occa-
sion. The Hon. Member then proceeded to show, that it
was a gross fallacy to suppose that the grievances of the
Protestant Dissenters were only theoretical. Was it not a
practical grievance, that a Dissenter could not be a mem-
ber of Oxford without declaring his assent to the 39 arti-
cles ?—that he could not take his seat as a magistrate,
without the sacramental test, if any person chose to insist
on it ? (and this was done in some counties, and might be
done in all) He trusted that the justice of Parliament
would soon put an end to those practical disabilities.
Mr. J. WOOD expressed himself favourable to the repeal
of the Test and Corporation Acts, and contended that their
existence were practical grievances to the Dissenters.
General GASGOYNE hoped that the question would
be brought forward early next session, though lie could not
see why it was not brought on at present. From what fell
recently from an Hon. Member, it appeared as if there was
a kind of compromise, and that the question of the Catho•
lies was not to be brought forward without that of• the
Dissenters.—(Cries of " No, no.")----He should protest
against any such course.

Mr. CURTEIS wished to ask the Noble Lord whether
he intended to mix up the two questions ? if they were
united, it would be doing a serious injury to the cause of
the Dissenters.
Lord J. RUSSELL was not aware of the usolu!:,-41 of
the Protestant Dissenters (as we understood) until last
Wednesday. He denied any intention of compromise in
the course he pursued. In answer to the Hon. Member
(Mr. Curteis) he begged to say, that there was no intention
of uniting the questions of Catholic emancipation and that
of the repeal of the Test Acts. He would bring on the
latter motion as a separate question.
The petitions were then read. They were from several
congregations of Protestant Dissenters ; one from some
Protestant Clergymen and other members of the Church of
England ; and one from several Roman Catholics, praying
for a repeal of the Test Acts.

Ordered to lie on the table.
TURNPIKE BILLS.

Mr. LITTLETON, after pointing out the great expense
to which parties were put in. carrying Turnpike Bills
through the House, moved the following resolution :
" That all Bills and other matters containing petitions for
the repeal or renewal of any act or acts of Parliament rela-
tive to Turnpike Roads, be exempted from all fees and Par-
liamental y charges altogether."
Mr. HUME thought that the fees demanded by both
Houses of Parliament on proceedings which came before
them ought to undergo revision.-- He concluded by recom.
mending his Hon. Friend to postpone the consideration of
his resolution to the next Session, at which time the whole
system of Parliamentiary fees might be submitted to a
complete investigation.
Mr. CANNING did not think it right that all at once
the expenies of passing Turnpike Bills through the Muse
should be shifted from the shoulders of private individuals
to those of the public. He was not inclined to oppose the
introduction of this resolution, but he wished not to be
understood as pledging himself to agree to it. He sug-
gested the adjournment of the debate to another day.
After a desultory conversation on the subject, in which
Sir J. NwHoLL, Sir C. COLA, Mr. BENNETT, and Mr.
MA SEALY joined,

Mr. LITTLETON agreed to postpone the further con
sideration of this resolution to Friday the 15th inst.

ALLEGED CIRCULAR OF THE BANK OF
ENGLAND.

Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY said, that in rising in pur-
suance of the notice of motion which he had given, the
House would perhaps think that he ought to have been sa-
tisfied with the unequivocal denial which an Hon. Gentle-
man, who was a Director of the Bank of England, had
given to the authenticity of a very important letter which
had recently appeared in the public newspapers, and which
purported to come from that' distinguished body. If he
had had any other reason, save the declaration of the Hon.
Director, to believe that the letter to which he alluded was
a spurious production, he should have abandoned his
present motion ; but there was, unfortunately, a connec-
tion between that letter and other events which led him to
conjecture, that though that letter was not the result of
any consultations of the whole body of Bank Directors,
it was still written and circulated with their knowledge
by one of their number. To say positively that this was
the fact, he was not altogether prepared ; but he had
little doubt in his own mind that the letter had origi-
nated from some gentleman in the direction, who having
been employed to inspect the branch banks in the country,
had shown it to several persons in his travels, and that
it had thus, rather unexpectedly, found its way before
its due time to the public. Under the present circum-
stances of the country, he hoped that the House would
he 'prevailed upon to examine closely into the motives
which had produced that letter, for he could not con-
ceive that at a time when there was every hope of a
progressive amelioration in the prospects of the industrious
classes a more mischievous event could have happened than
the publication of a letter, which tended to cast discredit
upon a class of persons on whom the manufacturing opera-
tives must depend for the advance of those wages which
the promising condition of trade would soon enable them
to earn. One of his reasons for bringing forward his mo-
tion was, that the extraordinary conduct of the Bank of
England was not confined to the production of this solitary
letter. There appeared in their proceedings a rooted deli-
beration to keep up a circulation of their notes equal to that
which prevailed during the war. It had been difficult—
nay, almost impossible, for thens to accomplish that object;
but, because they could not keep up their circulation to its
former extent, and because they could no longer realize the
large profits which they formerly enjoyed, it was not justi-
fiable in them to attempt to bring into disrepute other esta-
blishments similar to their own, and to build their own
credit upon the ruin of that of their competitors. In
the course of last Session lie had endeavoured to bring the
condition of country bankers under the notice of the
House ; but at that time such irritation prevailed through-
out the country respecting them, that they had no
chance of meeting that fair play from the House to
which they were entitled, and which every other interest
enjoyed. The attack made upon the country bankers last
year was founded on the power which 'they possessed to
issue and circulate 11. notes. In order to show the House
how unfounded that attack was, he thought it right
to state the grounds on which those notes were first intro-
duced into the circulation of the country. The country
bankers had certainly no right to expect that any such in-
dulgence would be extended to them. Previously to the
Bank Restriction Act in 1797, they issued nothing but 51.
notes. It was not in consequence of any solicitation on
their part, but in consequence of the misconduct of the
Bank of England at that time with respect to the amount
of its issues, that the country bankers were allowed to
issue 1/. notes. Temporary Acts were passed from time
to time to continue to the country banks the privilege thus
obtained ; and for this reason, that the Bank of England
continued to issue similar notes, and there was no other cur-
rency. At the end of the war the country Bankers natu-
rally expected to be called upon to pay their IL notes in
cash. The House, however, continued the Bank Restric-
tion Act for some years after the termination of the war.
The country bankers were at that time prepared to meet
their 1/. notes by payments in cash, and had no wish to
continue them in circulation beyond the period allotted
to the Bank of England. If they had any difficulty
upon the point, it was completely removed by the Bill
which the late Marquis of Londonderry carried through
Parliament in the Session of 1822. In the course
of that Session, the House agreed to many whole-
some and salutary laws. In consequence of the agricul-
tural distress which then pervaded the country, many peti-
tions were presented to Parliament ; and it was found ne-
cessary to reduce our establishments, and take other mea-
sures of a similar nature, to give relief to the suffering
agriculturists. If Hon. Gentlemen would take the trouble
to refer back to the speech which the late Marquis of Lon-
donderry made in May, 1922, they would find that one of
the modes of relief suggested for the agricultural distress was
the continuance to country banks for ten years longer, of
the permission to issue 1/. notes. Now, if the country
bankers were prepared to give up the circulation of their
I/. notes at the close of the war, and were then permitted
to carry it on for three years longer, and were then again
at the end of that time led to believe, by the sanction
which the House gave to the proposal, that they should be
permitted to issue their 1/. notes for ten years longer, was it
either fair or just to call upon them on a sudden to give up
that which had not been solicited by, but offered to them,
and to give it up at a tints when considerable irritation was
excited against them, and when doubts prevailed as to their
solvency? There was another very strong reason why he
wished the House to look with attention to this part of the
subject. On the first day of the session of 1826, the Mi-
nisters proposed to abolish the circulation of 1/. notes.
They never deigned to make any inquiries into the
manner in which it was carried on, and in which it
operated upon the various classes of the community. They
carried their proposition...such were the prejudices of the

House against the system—by the largest majority Wll4
was • ever known upon any question. What, hoWn
was the course which they pursued with respect to Seur_,
land ? As soon as the determination of the Governor'
was known in that country, the table of the Houss-1
loaded with petitions from it against the measure whi,:i
they proposed. A Committee was appointed to exitan.:j
into the allegations of the petitioners. The petitioners
a fair hearing; and subsequently to it no proceedings tyP7
taken—a circumstance from which he inferred that the;
had made out a case, which prevailed on the House Holt!
alter the system of banking which then existed in Scotian
Now, if such an inquiry was granted to the bankers '"f
Scotland, it was rather a hard case upon the bankenlZ
England that no such inquiry was granted to them. ,°0
would venture to say, that if any gentleman wished'
know the system of banking in England, he had onit
to
look to the evidence given by the Scotch bankers, idol
change the word Scotland for England wherever he f°.
it. There was, however, a strong exception in favour
the English bankers ; their systerh was much more cauti°l9;
than that of their Scottish rivals ; they never dared to slati,
vance so far as the bankers of Scotland.—(Hear.)---111
regard to this particular letter, he would only observe trt;
if the Bank of England had confined itself to proposiagob;
the country banks to take its notes, he could have no
,j
jection to make to such conduct. Even if the letter PPT,
been private, no one would have bad a right to interfere%'-a
The reason why he complained of it was, that it ten °7l
to throw great and undeserved discredit on the coupri
banks. The proposal contained in the letter was fours
upon certain doubts which it appeared to entertain of tti
solidity and credit. Now, as twelve months had ear;
since the existence of the panic, during which time not
surmise had been made to the discredit of the 600 count
;
banks which existed at present, it was most unfair and for
justifiable in the Bank of England to scatter doubts in
public mind as to the solvency of such establislnen9
There were two or three extracts from that letter which
would take the liberty of reading to the House. It
as follows Assuming it to be desirable to retaiareo
paper-money currency convertible on demand, the g
question for consideration is, how that paper money caul*
so regulated as to afford the greatest security for recelfre
both as regards the solidity of the issues and the Pr 4,is be
obtaining coin for the same on demand." Now, i""'"
ed
the real object to be attained in a raper currency,
the House to consider narrowly the transactions oft
Bank of England itself, inasmuch as the great mass of rir
hair
which is now in the country originated from that
The circular then proceeds :—" In order to obtain thE
objects, it is necessary, in the first instance, to free
paper-money as far as may be possible from the etteE,
of what has been termed panic." It therefore rot
came necessary to consider what was the catge
that panic. The first intimation which led to
proceeded from the President of the Board of Trig;
who gave a caution to the Bank of England as to 4,
way in which it was then going on with respect t°
issues. The Bank then being in possession of ane
quantity of Exchequer Bills, felt themselves obligea
bring them into the market, which, being an non6o.
thing, caused considerable dismay amongst monied pD
This he looked upon to have been the origin of the pallo,
One or two private banking-houses failed in the fleet
ti
stance, which spread the alarm ; and, consequently, ever
person who had placed his money in bankers' hands bibs
it behovo
tened to call it in, and thereby a run was created on to
Bank of England. It was, he believed, in referenced
that event that the letter from the Bank of England,_
been published. Before the holydays he had taken tue,,,
berty to caution a Noble Lord, then Chancellor of thee,,
it chequer, of the danger of increasing the unfunded
he warned him, that, on the first moment of alarm o'l_,
should arise), the Government would be called on fill;
ment of its securities. He did not mean to say that, a
forming the financial plan of the year, it would be wre
to resort to an issue of Exchequer Bills. On the coat 'r
he thought it might be very useful to adopt such a P
ceeding ; but what he objected to might be mere proPelble
called a permanent increase of the unfunded debt. la the
last financial statement which the late Chancellor 0' big
Exchequer made to the House, he seemed to enter into „a
(Sir John Wrottesley's) views on this subject, ,an-d
expressed a wish that a portion of the Sinking ftiso,
should be made available for the reduction of the
funded debt. He (Sir John Wrottesley) regr.ti,
that circumstances should have occurred to induce kid
Government to augment the unfunded debt. S° be-
es the Bank continued to be a larger holder of Elc be
quer bills, the currency must, in case of any panic' rem bs
in an insecure state. He might be asked what w,i;
remedy he proposed ? He would answer " IC°°e'
outhad theseno
s
y st
hintsem offothis h
the consideration
to advo c t t
oe ,f
others.bu t
The P.
posed issue of Exchequer bills, although he regretted
the
was after all only a temporary measure, and
circumstances in which Government was placed was Y"/
haps the best that could be resorted to. He was orris ;15
prehensive that some of those untoward events (whi
all human calculations at defiance) might arise, Wyitbe
would cause a sudden and inconvenient demand for 'Ol
payment of the Government securities. He was deeds
of seeing the Bank free itself from all the trarnlloo-,
which it was at present placed with regard to the Glee
tnent. He would have it recur to the principle whicn_mt
verned its proceedings in 1797, a declaration of which lias
who heard him carried in their pockets, in these P
words—" I promise to pay on demand," so and snisd
The Bank must know the quantity of notes which- itniaa
-out, and ought to keep in its hands a sufficiency of bilitiet
merely direr
to satisfy the demands which might be made on an‘-bst
of those notes. If the Bank would confine itself 03 be
plain line of conduct, he ventured to say that it w°ol The
infinitely more respected than it was at present. .
Bank had become so intimately connected with 0°!,,, „
merit, that it was now no longer satisfied witli,fter
ducting its own affairs, but had a great itching at
managing those of other persons. So long !eyed
Bank confined itself to its own affairs, it was all ;fit
well ; but when it travelled out of its sphere toet
the affairs of other people, it seldom exhibited awes
degree of enlightenment. He was desirous that
,;,0
measure should be adopted by the House which w"10,
restore confidence to those persons who, he knew by weer
inunications which lie had received from various (it 00
had taken great alarm at the paper put forth "la, to
Bank. In his opinion, it would be extremely un‘gl'o,- iii
stop the circulation of country bank paper, which Avionief
most instances the representative of houses, land, an";,eo
valuable and available property. That, he kneWr tech
sentiment in which most country gentlemen particle' the
—lt was well known that the Bank already possessea9
power (which it had exercised on several occasions w dop
the last 10 or 12 years), by its operations on the cll9 of
of diminishing or augmenting the value of propertY,sbaa
SO per cent. He knew many instances of persons lest too
purchased estates being completely ruined by an altetlkea
of the currency. If these mischievous effects bad rot
place whilst the Bank of England paper formed onlcbst
of the circulation of the country, be asked the House vet°
evils might not be anticipated, if the whole circulatiel.aar
placed under its controul ? The iropei ty of the gra
rists and manufacturers would thus be placed entirelyeato
mercy of the twenty-four Bank Directors whenever it War,
please them to contract or extend their issues. It apes
ed to him, that there existed a determination on the
er,:r,
of the Bank to get rid of all competitors. He, hesf,.b $
acquitted the Government of all paiileipation in 811-fot
scheme. He would take this opportunity of saying glory
words with respect to the recent change in the o°oo
ment. His Majesty could not have appointed any Pfa feel
°"
to be his Cabinet Ministers, towards whom he cold od
more regard than to the persons who now held to°-
fives. He represented a large manufacturing countY' ore
in giving his support to the Administration, he wm/0.'...•
lie should be acting up to the wishes of his constituent ‘,/t
The Hon. Baronet concluded with moving, the 00,
Select Committee be appointed to inquire whether yOf
vernor and Company of the Bank of England, or 91;0'
the Directors of that Bank, have circulated a letteT/ circa'
ing to cast doubts on the solidity a private baiiikrAtie
lating paper, and thereby injuring the commercial an
9
nuf
Macturing interests of the country." loar
r. PEARSE addressed the House, but in so fol,
tone as to be scarcely audible. We understood him lion
that the author of the letter or paper to which t 13s01‘1.
Baronet's observations referred was a Director of the ,
Be was certain that individual would be extremely 9."i9 pre
any mischief had resulted from the publication oii
per. A more honest or well-intentioned person '1; tlf
individual in question did not exist. With resPect
plan itself, when its author asked his (Mr. Pearse, 00.!
nion of it; he told him lie thought it a very fooliT4,
(A laugh.)—The manner in which the plan got !lea the
culation was this—the person who drew it UP 7,tilelt
opinions of some confidential friends respecting: vet it
answered, that they could not pronounce judgmen;soreli•
till they had had an opportunity of considering it te_r to tie
He therefore caused about twelve copies of his paPetie,olol
made, for the purpose of giving it to his part colic
.Ittroal;
and one of these copies found its way into a publ.
eel,. 1,1:
ftrhoem Htohues e
Directors,that
itt
ties,
hear. )_The Hon. Member had charged the
tn tos
being desirous of accumulating profits witbou r take
He con., •
the means resorted to for that purpose. to,
vir heel, ac fer
upon himself to say that the Bank' hail ne ic
H
submitted in any shape whatever.l:-ik with
biya edcuneuhvlencouragement aBselfishb sue
nr e
feeling. Upon this point he Wiwi.

the Ranee tb.tlie testimony of the late Mr. Horner, who,
though he disapproved of the power possessed by the Bank,
(declared himself satisfied with the discretion and prudence
with which it had been exercised. In conclusion he ob-
served, that the appointment of a Committee would be per-
fectly useless, 58 it would be impossible to obtain any other
infornittio.n than that which he had given without any re-
servation whatever.—(Hear).
Mr. CANNING said, that after the explanation given
by the Hon. Bank Director (Mr. Pearse), lie felt it unne-
cessary to do more than to state that the plan of which the
Hon. Baronet complained had not proceeded from any sug-
gestion of Government.
Mr. MABERLY thought that the Bank ought to have
denied, in'the public papers, that the plan emanated from
them. He was of opinion that the Director who had cir-
culated the plan had acted extremely wring.
Mr. BARING thought that the Director in question
was being dealt rather hard by.
Sir H. PARNELL expressed a hope that the currency
would be placed upon a permanent basis.
Lord MILTON anticipated only a renewal of the disas-
ters of the last few years, from any tampering with the
currency at the present moment.
Mr. HUME strongly advocated the formation of a na-
tional Bank. His opinion was, that the country ought to
be saturated with paper ; that paper being always converti-
ble into gold, and by a summary legal process, as in Scot-
land.i Under every circumstance he wished that the Right
Hon, Chancellor of the Exchequer would make up his
tribal to shake off the Bank of England, and to have no
further dealings with that body, but such as due and formal
notice should appear of upon the table of the House.
Sir J. WRC PTESLEY shortly replied. He bad thought
it right that the matter should be explained, but would not
now press his motion.
The motion was then withdiawn by consent.
LOAN. FUND IN DUBLIN.
Mr. MOORE presented a petitiGn from the working ar-
tisans Of Dublin, praying the establishment of a fund in
that city from which small loans might be made, (under
fit direction) from time to time, to needy artificers of good
chatacter. The Hon. Member dwelt at considerable length
upon the sufferings of the working classes in Ireland, and
concluded by moving that the petition should be referred to
a Committee.

Mr. W. LAMB doubted the a6antage of instituting
such funds as that describing by the Hon. Gentleman. Any
public grant for such a purpose would be ao dangerous a
precedent that he was compelled to oppose it.
Mr. H. GRATTAN said that the manufactures of Dublin
were annihilated.

Mr. MOORE declined pressing his motion to a division.
LAW COURTS OF IRELAND.
Mr. MOORE moved for leave to bring in two Bills—
one to amend the jurisdiction of Courts of Equity in Ire-
land, and the other to protect the purchasers of property
in Ireland against judgments not recovered within a limited
time after they were sued out. The Hon. Member did not
mean to press his Bills during the present Session, but
wished to have them printed pro forma, that they might
be in the hands of Members against the next:.
A re
fter a few words from the Am•roaET-GENERAL, leave
was given to bring in the Bills.
Mr. IL GRATTAN moved for certain Returns con-
nected With the local government and administration of
the City of Dublin.
The motions were agreed to.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved for leave to bring in a Bill
for the better taking of polls in cities and boroughs send-
'°ff Members to. Parliament.—Leave was given.
BRIEFS IN CHURCHES.
kr. PEEL stated that, agreeably to notice, he bad
meant to call the attention of the House towards a remo-
"lll,_ lig of the law respecting money collected by Briefs in
le;nrehes ; but he despaired of being able to introduce a
which could pass into a law during the present Ses-
sin
-n• He wished, however, that the country should have
notice, that if no other individual took up the subject, he
Would bring forward a Bill next Session himself fcr the pur-
pose he had mentioned. Very considerable sums had been
raised by Briefs for two objects—first, the repair and
rebuilding of Churches ; secondly, for compensation to
individuals suffering by fire, or other causes. It was
itnPOssibl to lookthe of
b • at returns the sums received. on
Ile% without being forcibly struck with the necessity for
toliae alteration.' With respect to raising sums in churches
on account of fires, it seemed to him (Mr. Peel) requisite
to put a stop to it altogether.—(Hear, hear.)--Wheu the
practice was introduced, no insurance offices were establish-
but now, what reasons existed why an individual who
7" neglected to insure, should have recourse to persons
''S'tl'ainneee at a digence, and ignorant of all the true eircum-
laised
foorf the case?—(Hear.)—It appeared that the sum
an individual loss, whatever the amount might
b.
lel? was from 7001. to 800/. ; that for the repair of a
e Wit Was from 400/. to 500/., no matter what the
zetno_unt
.required ; so that where an individual had lost 50/.
received more than he ought ; but in a case where
1,200/. do was lost, the individual received less. The reduc-
ns in the amount of the aims raised, furnished a ground
for discontinuing the practice. In a case where 340/. had
been lost, the sum raised was 705/., of which 86/. was the
experice of the warrant, and 327/. the salary of the collec-
tor. The sums raised for the repairs of churches were
really so small, that no injury could accrue to the church
by abolishing the practice. He proposed, therefore, to
abolish briefs for this purpose also, and to substitute a col-
lection at the church door, on one Sunday, and that the
sums thus voluntarily given should be paid over:to the so-
Clety for building chinches ; such an appropriation would
!be more for the advantage of the church. He would con-
ae. his present motion to the obtaining of further informa-
'.4)ll; and accordingly moved for an account of all briefs
sior rebuilding and repairing of churches and chapels, from
the 15th of May, 1819, to June 1827, comprehending
Places, dates, and estimates, the sums contributed, the
anloMit of the expenses, and the net proceeds.
Mr. STURGES BOURNE seconded the motion, and
concurred entirely in the view taken of this subject by his
7Right Hon. Friend. He would advert to one point unno-
t'eed by his Right Hon. Friend, which was, the unseemly
interruption or divine sen ice occasioned by collections on
ride. There was auother consideration of importancesuch :
collections encouraged parishioners; who were
repair their own churches, to beg all over the kingdom.
t--(Rear, hear.) In some of the cases, the Magistrates
twho •
signed the application, he thought, were censurable;
Were bound to see that the churches were repaired by
racyl, in the parish, if practicable. He begged to express
Kit thanks to his Right Hon. Friend for his proposed mea-
'4ul',..alnl hoped h would persevere in it.
rr -"ter a fiw reme arks.from Sir W. W. WYNN and Mr.
‘ENNYSON, the motion was agreed to.
NAVY PROMOTIONS.
Rol‘Tik,.'lMlE moved far a return of all promotions in the
-Ya. oaavy, from the Midshipman up to the Admiral, from the
Ist of January,
Ord to the present day. During
I.ast year, the promotions had been 220. This was keep-
°g up up the dead weight indeed ! It was his intention, when
the return Ives laid upon the table, which he thought might
he done in eight and forty hours, to submit a motion to the
Rouse, to limit the exercise of the prerogative of the Ad-
miralty in regard to promotions.
Mr. CROKER observed, that although the return could
not be prepared in the short space of 48 hours, yet the
Admiralty would be able even in that time to demonstrate
that the public good was the only ground and object of the
promotions. An alteration so important as that proposed
by the Hon. Member, must be looked at in a variety of
views.
The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. W•
.LAMB moved for leave to bring in a Bill for
cousolidatiog and amending
.•
and
juries in Ireland: also the laws relative to jurors
a Bill for lighting, cleansing,
_and
watching cities, towns cor
land.—Leave given. !'orate, and market towns in lie-

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF WAYS AND
- MEANS.
On the Report of the Conunittee of Ways and Means
being brought up,
Mr. MABERLY stated, that he had intended to make
some observations upon one of the resolutions, but should
reserve them till the Committee of Supply.
The Resolutions were then read, and agreed, to .
TURNER'S NULLITY OF MARRIAGE BILL.
On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Turner's
of Marriage Bill was read a second time, and ordered
to be committed to-morrow.

PENRYN ELECTION BILL.
On the motion for the third reading of the Penryn
Election Bill,
Mr. C. BARCLAY stated, that upon a former night he
'41,4
not
misunderstood the object of the present
-4e had not understood that the question on that occasion
Wfte, whether Penryn should be disfranchised or not, but
Zhether the franchise should be transferred to 'Manchester.
ie „thought the present Bill was unjust to that borough.
b":,_ou'rner eases' of disfranchisement there had been gross
of the
throughout the places ; in Penryn only a portion
briber electors was suspected. There had been no general
upon hberY Proved in 1826. Much of tht evidence given was
44L'uearsay.. The President of the Board of Controul
11141 other Members of the Administration had declared
Mt it was necessary to hear further evidence. The Hon.
oreetulrer then entered into an examination of some parts of
per"idence given before the Committee. Mr. Adey (Lord
t Raa e"a.
_l's
that of being told to " call again," and
14ferred this was a proof of corrupt iptentiop,

. .
But he Would ask Whether it was not very usual in electioni
especially in the first canvass, for candidates to be told to
call again?—(Laughter.)—He could say, that in South-
wark, which he had represented, and which was as free
from corruption as any place, he had often been told to call
agaiu—(a laugh)—and he would appeal to his former col.
league (Mr. Calvert) whether he had not experienced a si-
milar reception. The remark implied merely "we have
not made up our minds." Taking the facts from the
Committee's Report, and from the evidence before the
House, and separating the facts from hearsay, there were
no grounds for disfranchising Penryn. If the question was
fairly put whether a case had been made out against Pen-
ryn, the Bill would not pass. There had been no general
corruption, as in the cases of Aylesbury, Shoreham, Crick -
lade, and Grampound, and there had been A. considerable
improvement since 1819, and especially since 1807. '
He
moved as an amendment, that the Bill be read a third time
this day three months.
Mr. MANNING seconded the amendment.
Mr. C. CALVERT rose chiefly to vindicate the charac-
ter of the place he represented (Southwark), where be
was returned without being put to one farthing of expense;
he wished every other Member in the House could say so.
(A laugh.)—The lion. Member (Mr. Barclay) had ap-
pealed to him whether he bad not been told to " call
again?" He (Mr. Calvert) had never been so told. On
the contrary, the usual reply was, " All's right"—(A
laugh)—or, sometimes, " Strong beer for ever."—(Loud
laughter. ).--With regard to Penryn, lie totally differed
from the Hon. Member (Mr. Barclay.) He had never
heard.of a grosser case than that of Penryn—(Hear, hear)
—and the Noble Lord should have his vote.—(Hear,
hear.)
Mr. FERGUSON observed, that such a mistake as that
committed by the Honourable Member (Mr. Barclay) had
never before been committed. The proposition had been
distinctly put from the chair that Penryn should be dis-
franchise'► ? Could the House decide who were to have the
spoils of Penryn, before it had decided whether the borough
should be disfranchised ? He (Mr. F.) had thought, on the
former reading, that the evidence was not sufficiently
strong to warrant disfranchisement, but he had not then
seen the reports of 1807 and 1819. Taking all the three
reports together, as one entire adjudication, the borough
had been convicted of gross bribery. The House could
not, for decency's sake, forbear to vote in favour of disfran-
chisement.—( Hear.)
Mr. PALLMER (Surrey) was as great an enemy to
corruption as the Noble Lord could be, but he would not
get at it through injustice. A case of corruption proved
against fifteen or sixteen individuals was not sufficient -rea-
son to warrant the disfranchising of a whole borough.
Lord MILTON contended, that Penryn ought to be
treated as a community, and not as a borough, limited to a
few corrupt individuals.
Sir E. CARRINGTON re-stated his former arguments
in opposition to the Bill.
Mr. G. ROBINSON spoke in favour of the Bill.
Mr. STURGES BOURNE felt it his duty to oppose
the second reading of the Bill, although friendly to its
principle.
Lo'A PALMERSTON was exactly in the same situa-
tion with his Right Hon. Friend, having voted against
this Bill on a former occasion for the reasons which his
Hon. Friend had just stated. He was now fully prepared
to give his vote for the third reading.—(Hear.)
Mr." GOULBURN—If he had to decide between two
questions--whether he should vote for extending the elec-
tive franchise to the neighbouring hundreds of Penryn, or
vote for this Bill, he should, perhaps, be inclined to vote
for the former question. As it was, he should vote for the
third reading.
Lord BINNING could not help considering this ques-
tion judicially, and he was therefore inclined to come to
this decision—that the great majority of voters at Penryn,
not having been found guilty of any crime, should not be
visited with a punishment due only to a guilty few.
;kir. LEGH-KECK should vote for the third reading of
this Bill.
Lord J. RUSSELL said a few words in explanation, as
did Mr. C. BARCLAY.
Sir C. FORBES had always voted against Bills of this
description, and he saw no reason why he should vote for
this Bill. A great deal had been said about the guilt of
this borough, just as if, forsooth, those who sat in this
House were immaculate.--(Hear, hear, and laughter.)
Mr. BARCLAY (Penryn) was convinced the majority
of the voters of Penryn were not the corrupt set of men
described.
Mr. VAN HOMRIGH thought that the total disfran-
chisement of the borough of Penryn would be a great hard-
ship on the majority of voters, and still greater-on the
sitting Members.
The cry of " Question" now became general, when
strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House divided.
There appeared—
For the third reading, 145 I Against it, SI I Majority, 114.