The Sun.
London, England, 1829-05-09 00:00:00

it.o 0 Unt
\l\‘',o'
,IckSAV I
a. • , disorderly. beg your pardon,
vits.a . 1.1e7e1101-, that which it is more properly
tea °, - !. ts., But I repeat that such conduct is
psi „c`aris an insult to the House, and is alto-
'. c..tigavof the Legislature. I shall therefore
move that the debate be adjourned.—(Cries of " Go
one go no.")—lt is most vexatious, that Honourable
Gentlemen who do not wish to take any part in the
discussions, should prevent others from obtaining
those explanations, and eliciting those details, which the
nature of the question requires. I feel called upon to per-
severe in moving the adjournment.—(Cries of " Go on,
go ou.")—The Hon. Member proceeded to state, that he
was only anxious to know why this financial measure could
not be carried into effect without the boom to the country
'Which he had over and over again pointed out, in 1827,
f.4e then told the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer that the course he was pursuing was a dead loss
to the country. He borrowed 4,000,0001. wherewith to
remova such an amount of Exchequer Bills from the mar-
hait, as he (Mr. Hume) advised him to do; but instead of
doing so at par, the Right Hon. Gentleman adopted a
course similar to the present, by which a clear loss of half
a million was sustained to the country. And it appeared
he was still determined to go on without any fixed prin-
ciple of action in financial affairs.
'Mr. BERRIES said, the Hon. Member for Aberdeen
anistook the nature of the hardships which his Right Hon.
Friend pointed out with reference to the holders of these
Bills. How was he to say to one set of holders you shall
receive 1031. for your Bills, and to another set you must
be content to part with your Bills at par?
Mr. 3IABERLY again protested against the doctrine
laid down by the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer.
Mr. MARTIN said the uniet standing among merchants
in the city was, that the Bills might, at a given time, be
called in at par, and they expected no return of the pre-
mium advanced on them.
Mr. ATTWOOD thought it but fair that the holders
or such Bills should receive the 1031. on their being
called in.
Mr. HUME repeated his objection to this extravagant
expenditure of the public money, and said the House
would stultify itself if it agreed to any such stupid proposal.
—(Hear, and a laugh.)
'the CKANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
zan to justify the present system ; but it had been uni-
manly acted upon, and persons who took Exchequer Bills
took them under the impression that it would be conti-
nued. He thought that to take 103/. for an Exchequer
Bill, and call it back again at 1001. would be nothing less
than fraud upon the holder.
Mr. HUME never before heard such an argument used
by the head of a public department. Why, there was not
a clerk in the Right Ilon. Gentleman's office who could
not set him right on the subject. It was no longer ago
than 1826 that 2,500,000/. Stock was lost to the public
by this mode of funding 8,000,000/. of Exchequer Bills.
By the present course there would be upon these
3,000,000/. a loss of from 150,0001. to 200,000/., which
he pledged himself to prove, if the adjournment took place.
Mr. P. THONIESON contended that the Chancellor of
the Exchequer had no right to pay Exchequer Bills in
any other way but at par. An Exchequer Bill was like
any other bill, which was to be paid at a certain time
with the interest due upon it. Where then, lie asked,
was the fraud in the one case snore than in the other ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
tl ere might be a moral fraud as well as a legal fraud, and
this moral fraud Government would be guilty of if they
refused to pay to pay those Bills according to the under-
standing upon which they were taken. There might
have been a notice that such would not be the case, but it
was a question with him whether there had not been an
implied notice the other way.
Mr. MAIIERLY could never consent to pay the pub-
lic creditor a greater sum than had been stipulated for
with him. When those Exchequer Bills were taken, it
was with an express bargain that Government might call
them in after a certain period, at 1001. He did not wish
to use hard words, but he considered it as a profligate
waste of the public money. He again protested against
the measure, and begged to assure the Right Hon. Gentle-
man he should take every opportunity of opposing a mea-
sure so dangerous, so expensive, and so profligate.
Mr. ATTWOOD again contended that the bills were
taken by individuals with an understanding that they
were to be called in with the premium advanced upon
them, and that it would be a fraud on the part of Govern-
ment to act upon any other principle. There was, to be
mare, an agreement that they might be called in at par,
but the holder looked upon that as a remote contingency ;
it might happen tit it untoward circumstances might
occur, such as the sudden breaking out of a war, but in
ordinary cases the holder calculated upon the good faith of
Givernment.
Mr. HENRIES observed that if Government were de-
termined to act upon the principle of calling in Exchequer
Bills at p.m, they would require to be always prepared
with funds to meet them.
Mr. P. THOMPSO'es; said that the contingency which
was admitted by the Hon. Member for Callington was
sufficient to prove all that he (Mr. Thompson) contended
for, namely, that the person who took an Exchequer Bill
at 103/., did so with a perfect understanding that it might
be called in after a certain time at 100/. ; so that no fraud
could be said to be prsctised upon him.
The LORD MAYOR said that the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had been very improperly attacked, for that the
Bills had been sold in the market by a private broker, and
without being acknowledged to have been sold on the part
of the Govei nment ; for, if the fact had been known, the
premium they would have fetched would have been very
little. He mentioned this in justification of the Right
Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. HUME thought the fact alone was a proof that the
Government was ashamed of the transaction.
Mr. MA BERLY said that the loss on the transaction
mould amount to 400,000/.

The Resolution was then agreed to.
Alter some other Resolutions had been passed,

Mr. HUNIE wished to ask whether it was true that
Mr. Rothschild had drawn bills on the Treasury at eight
months' date.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was not
aware of the circumstance to which the Hon. Member
_ _ _

Mr. H UME s•tid the Bills were drawn by Mr. Roths-
child on the Treasury, and bad been circulated. He
wanted to have some information on this subject.
The House resumed, and the Report was ordered to be
received on Monday.
On the motion of Mr. V. FITZGERALD, the order of
the day for the third reading of the Silk Trade Bill was
read.

Mr. E. DAVENPORT, Mr. FYLER, Mr. ROBINSON, and
Mr. Alderman WAITHMA N opposed the Bill, but severally
acknowledged that their opposition was useless.
Mr. V. FITZGERALD could not suffer the Bill to
pass without complimenting the Honourable Member for
Coventry on the fair and manly opposition he had made to
the 8.11. _ _

The Bill was then read a third time and passed.

The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and
the House adjourned at Half-past Two o'clock, this morn-
ing, till Monday.

Captain WALLACE, Madras army, was pre-
,ented at the levee, on his return from India, by Lieutenant
Sir THOMAS BOWSER. _ - _

Captain and Lady AGNEs BYNG arrived in
town yesterday morning from England.—Dublin Free-
maa's Journal.

LADY AGNES BYNG.—The Observer states,
that an action for slander has been commenced against Mr.
GERALD CALLAGHAN, late M.P. for Dundalk, to whom
the slanderous rumour, affecting the character of this
amiable and accomplished young lady has been traced.
We understand that the letter written by Mr. CALLAGHAN
to a brother Brunswicker, which contains the calumny,
will be produced at the trial. The writ bas already issued.
We have learned that Mr. O'CONNELL has been specially
etai ned on the part of the plaintiff in this most important
case, which is to be tried in the present term.—Dublin
3.10rn ing Register.
Mn. O'CDNNELL.—On Tuesday it was men-
tioned that it was Mr. O'CoNNELL's intention to present
himself on Thursday evening to take his seat. The in-
tention of Mr. O'CONNELL was mentioned by Mr. PEEL
and others on Wednesday morning ; and, consequently, ar•
rangements were made for the reception of Mr. O'CONNELL.
Long before four on Thursday, the lobby was crowded,
and in the House there were not fewer than 150 Members,
an unusual number at so early an hour. However, Sir
N. Tv Nnar.r., the Solicitor-General, was down at the offices
about the House, on the subject, by two o'clock ; and he
then stated that he had just understood that it was not Mr.
O'CoNNELL's intention now to apply for his seat—a state-
ment that turned out to be true enough (notwithstanding
Mr. PEEL'S ezl•ectations on Wednesday), for neither Mr.
o'cos NELL. nor any of 'lda friends appeared, though the
SPEAKER was in the Chair some time before four o'clock,
to afford time for the application, if there were the inten-
tion of making it. It was confidently mentioned about the
House (but with what truth I know not) that the advice
sf Mr. O'CONNELL 'S legal and other friends prevented the
amutemplated attempt being made on Thursday.. It was
mentioned that it is to be made "next week."