Star.
London, England, 1824-04-09 00:00:00

USURY LAWS.

Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW moved the Order of the Day
for the House going into a Committee on the Usury
Laws Bill.
Mr. B. COOPER opposed the Motion. He had paid
every attention to all he had beard and read on the
.nhject, but was not satisfied that the repeal of these
Laws would be beneficial. Laws of this nature had
been adopted, and were continued by most civilized
csrantries. Ile moved, as an amendment, That the 11,11
be committed that day six months.
Mr. DAVENPORT seconded the Amendment. He
considered that the repeal of the laws would be most
destructive to the landed interest. lie denied too that
the repeal would lower the rate of inter est in the market.
Alt-. LESLIE FOSTER said, if we were now about
to start as a commercial country, he would be willing
that money should be as free as any other article of
commerce ; and even at present, if only the commer-
cial interest was concerned, he uould not object to the
repeal; but it would, in fact, greatly affect the landed
interest, particularly in Ireland. If, thereto:et it was
thought right to enact it for England, he would, in
mercy to Ireland, beg that it might not be included in
the enactment, at least for some time—(Hear).•
Mr. ROBERTSON expressed his astonishment that
when so important a measure was to be discussed, there
should not be a Cabinet Minister pitsent.—EAll the
Ministers had left the Treasury Bench.]—He expressed
his disapprobation of the Bill. He contended that the
evidence which had been adduced heretofore on this
subject, u as wholly inadequate to support this measure;
it was founded on theory, and not on experience.
Sir H. PARNELL supported the Bill. lie admitted
that they ought to avail themselves of experience; and
he declared that experience had proved the usury laws
to be of a most pernicious tendency. He did not see
t;:e least reason for making any distinction between
Ireland and England. He considered that this measure
was calculated to produce general benefit, and he should
nn all occasions support it.
Mr. SYKES observed, that amongst all that had
been said, no one had ventured to contend for the jus-
ce of the Usury Laws—(Hear, heat). Men had emi-
r-A notions on this subject. They might double the
prices of their goods, they might double their rents,
but five per cent. was enough for money. He was as-
tonished at the course put sued by the Country Gentle-
men ; they did nut know what was good for them. It
was bad policy to fix the rate of interest.
3lr. LOCKHART contended, that the House ought to be well
assured that it saw the consequences of repealing these laws, before
it supported the Bill. With the greatest anxiety fur Agriculture,
be must oppose the Bill.
Aldermau HEY GATE observed, that the Bill was only sup-
ported by Lawyers and Capitalists. The National Debt would
have been much greater than it was, had it not been for the opera-
tion of the Usury Laws.
Mr. T. WI LSON had beard nothing to cause him to alter his
former opieitm. Ile should support the Amendment.
Dlr. :serjeanr ONSLOW did not consider it necessary to detain
the Holies a single moment by any Argument in support of the Bill
now before the House, since every argument which had been ad-
duced
r. against sABE
sgrl hadco u
could
been o
tfully r answered.agree
etoh,
t
old assertion of the
Learned seijeant, that All the arguments against the Bill had been
zr.swereel, and he conscientiously believed, that the Usury Laws
were necessary to restrain one of the worst passions of the human
mind, avarice.—The House then divided. TLe numbers were
Fur the Committee then - - - 74
Against it - - - - - - 58
Majority - - —l6
In the Committee Mr. Serjeant Oestow explained the first clause
of the Bill, which, he said, was to commence its operation on the
ist of January, 1825.
Mr. CA LCRAFT opposed it, and hoped the Learned Serjeant
would give a longer period; if not, he should fetlit his duty to give
it every opposition.
Dlr. ROBERTSON said it was a mistake to suppose there were
no restrictions on the sums taken fur money in France and Ilulland.
In those countries, and wherever the Code Napoleon had effect, the
interest of money lent on landed security was limited to 51 per cent.
Sir JOIIN W Ran' ESLEY moved, as an Amendment, that
the blank be filled up with the Ist of January, 1826, instead of 1825,
which he afterwards withdrew.
Another amendment was put, viz.—That the Chairman then
leave the Chair, and report progress. The numbers were—
For the amendment, 57 I Against it, 61 Majority, 4.
The Committee divided on the original motion, viz.—that the
blank in the clause be filled up with the Ist of January, 1625.
Fur the motion, 60 I Against it, 59 I Majority, 1.
0:: another division, viz.—that the Chairman report progress,
ae ask helve to sit again, the
Numbers for it were, 61 Against it, 65 I Majority, 4.
sin znwiler division on the same question, the numbers were—
For the motion, 72 I Against it, 59 I Majority, 13.
The question was then put on adjourning the Committee to
Tuesday next.
Mr. LITTLETON moved, as an Amendment, that the said
Committee do meet again this day six mum Its.
Upon this a division took place, when there appeared—
For the Amendment, 67 I Against it, e 3 I Majority, 4.
The Bill is therefore lost for the Sessio.s.
The House went into a Committee on the Sugar Bounties Bill,
w hen the Resolutions were agreed to, and the Itepc.rt ordered to be
•• ee;‘t:d to-morrow.