Star.
London, England, 1818-05-02 00:00:00

'ranee as far as related to finance ; and yet it was
ingular that, while we talked of nothing but pro.pe-
isy at home, the Stocks should rise, and in krance,
there they so loudly complained of advers ty, they
should fall. But as to the French loan having any
influence on our payments, how could this be? while
`nit appeared in the shape of a loan would not be
d for eight or nine months to come and then
would come the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with
third edition of his preamble, and say, he was sure
Bank wanted still farther time. But what was
real amount of these loans ? If he understood
subject, the loan of this year for France might be
called' ten millions sterling, and a further sum, for
he indemnity of individuals, of about 20 millions,
taking the value of the Stocks at about 63. This
made the whole amount of the foreign loans altoge-
.her 30 millions. There was a very material point oes
which he wished for information. Was he or was ha
• to understand what might' liquidate the claim of
individual by compelling him to accept French
:k to the amount of his debt ? From the state•
ment which had appeared in the Papers he did not un-
derstand whether it was so or not, but he thought it
was. If in this he was right, the French Governineot
need give the claimant no money. They might sa-
- Ins claim by giving what they chose to consider
value in Stock. But supposing a man to have a
im on the French Government for 1001. and they
,e him 100/. in Stock, which might be valued at
. and so :such beside as should enable him to sell I
Stock for 1001. sterling, in that case the man
would have the money to which he was entitled, and I
here would arise one of the counteractions of the loan.
Another question of great importance arose on this
")ject, as to whether the loan would he advanced in
Id or in goods ? It was to be expected that those
advanced it would remit it in such a manner as
should be most convenient to themselves. It was
only under certain circumstances that it could silt
them to send gold. If such large remittances were
made as the Chancellor of the Exchequer calculated
upon, what would be the const-quence ? Why the
nice of bullion would rise, and then it would he the
merest of the parties to send goods, and thus the
heel would go round, and the evil correct itself.—
consequence of the state of things which he had
posed, Gould be, that gold must return or remain'.
this country, unless there was something in the
of England that made it impossible for gold to
rain in this country. In that which was urged as
. argument in favour of the renewal of the 4ank
Ilestnction Act, he could see good grounds for com-
pelling the Bank to. resume cash payments. If it
were likely that gold in the present situation of things
would be sent out of the country, let a large sum be
issued from their coffers, and the effect of this would
•to alter the exchanges. The Bank might then buy
bad; again. There would be ne difbculty in the
iy of their doing this, though the price at which
ley must purchase it would he higher than they
hiked to pay. But he called upon the House to con-
sider which of the two supposed inconveniencies -it
vas for them in the discharge of their duty to prefer.
'as it better that England should lose her charac-
for good faith, or that the Bank Company should
isgorge a part of their enormous gains ?—(Cries of
ir, ham, hear).—Ought the country to submit to
:h a disgrace to save a company of traders from
making a sacrifice of part of their profits, when it
was known that Company had never yet come for-
ward in one instance to do any thing for the good of
country? He repeated it, the circumstances un-
which the House was called upon to renew the
Bank Restriction Act, were such as to justify them
• calling on the Bank to return to cash payments,
the only loss that would be sustained on the occa-
sion must fall upon them, and they in common ho-
nesty ought to be ready to come forward to endure
Supposing the Bank to have tea millions in gold
.1 their coffers, and that by returning to cash pay-
ments they should sustain a loss of 1,000,0001. what
was there in this that should induce the House to
forbear to call upon them to pay in specie ? The
Bank had gained, it was to be remembered, twenty-
one millions from the country by the circulation of
their paper, yet the country was to be set -at nought
the present occasion, because the Bank Directors
would not lend themselves to any thing that would
detract in the smallest degree from their profits. On
these topics so many opinions were entertained by
different individuals, that no man saw them exactly
in the same light ; yet, on a question so intricate, the
:louse were called upon to decide without any in-
-iry, and to pass the Bill before them on the state-
ments made by eh/Chancellor of the Exchequer.—
thought it must be seen, that to take such a
course would be most improper. Before the mea-
ture before them was decided upon, he hoped a
mimittee would be granted, and whatever might
the result of their inquiries, he was sure of this,
)yr could not fail to do good. If through their la-
bours the Bank were compelled to resume cash pay-
ments, a great good would be accomplished, and if
'y should decide that it would be better to continue
.e. restriction, the House might take his word for it,
they would gain such an insight into the state of the.
currency of the country, and every thing connected'
-ith it, as would leave them no cause for regret that
.4e inquiry-had been undertaken. He did not say
that the Bank Company ought now to pay in cash.
Let no man think, in voting for the motion which he
vas about to make, that he would vote for compel
g them to do so. All he contended for was, that
sere were just grounds for going into a Committee
. the subject, even on the Chancellor of the Excise-
Tier's own she'ving. If the prescnt Bill were renewed
without a previous inquiry, those who voted for it
lust make up their minds to the Bank's net resum-

ing cash payments at all. The measure cow before
the House, though it was not proposed• to make it
permanent, if passed year after year As a matter of
course, would hereafter be annually brought in as a
natter of course. He was the more led to form this
)pinion from an answer which had been given to a
learned and deeply lamented Friend of his (Mr.
tiorner), whose loss he must always regret—whose
absence he never more severely felt than at that :to-
:lent, When, in 1816, that Gentleman, on its being
proposed to renew the Bank Restriction Act for two
years, wished a shorter period to be named, he was
answered—" No; if we say two years, it will look as
we were in earnest, but if you say the Bade shall
resume cash payments in one, nobody, will believe
that you mean what you say." Now he begged of
the House t,) recollect the words of the Right lion.