Star.
London, England, 1818-05-19 00:00:00

Fik

%.0" •
Ilong as the Restriction Act continued ; let the
House remove that, and he would be content never
to call on the Bank for any papers--(hear, hen.)—
If the House did-not at this moment interfere, they
would leave a system .in existence which had a ten-
dency to alter thi valie of the whole prOperty in the
country. The proposition with which he meant to
conclude, bound the Bank to nothing in particular,
except to recognize the necessity of a diminution of
their issues. They ought to begin with a large re-
duction of their 11. notes--(Hear, hear,)—as those
more directly interfered with a metallic currency.—
This would have the best effect, both in restoring
matters to a proper state, and also on a subject of
the highest importance—he meant the facility for
committing the crime of forgery, which grew with
the issue of these small notes—(hear, hear.)—Six
trials for forgery only took place before 1797-800
was the number since—(Hear, Agar.)—On the sub-
ject of seigniorage, all he shotlrd say was, that it
-would fall on the last holder. The general effect of
continuing the present system of currency must be
most injurious, both externally as well as internally—
it must skew other States that this country wail irre-
trievably entangled in financial difficulties. There
was, in the present moment of peace, an opportunity,
by courageously facing the evils in our finance
system, to remove this impression with far less dan-
ger than it could be effected in a time of war, when
the apparently helpless state of the country might
invite an attack which, from the present pacific state
of Europe, there could be no reason to expect. It
was in vain to hope that the next year would be more
favourable than this for entering upon the subject,
and it was foe these considerations that he was anxi-
ous to call upon the House to adopt the amendment
with which he meant to conclude. The Honourable
Gentleman then proposed that the words " unfore-
seen circumstances" should be omitted in the pre-
, amble of this Bill, and that after tha word " svhereas'
these words be inserted—" it is expedient that the re-
striction be further continued, for the purpose of ena-
bling the Bank to provide for the resumption of cash
payments, by such a gradual reduction in the issue
of their smaller notes, as would enable them, with as
little delay as possible, to revert to payments in specie."
Mr. CANNING said he followed his Honourable
Friend, because his Amendment contained precisely
the reason for which he would not have consented to
the Bill. That part of the Act which his Honourable
Friend proposed to displace contained the gebunds on
which he consented to the measure. He'held all the
principles that he had formerly held upon the subject;
and if the Honourable Gentleman would do him the

justice to examine hie conduct, he would find, that
whilst he had addressed himself with all his little
power to discover what he thought were false prin-
ciples, and to restore what he conceived to be true
ones, he had declared his dissent from those who,
from the statements made, would have deduced the
necessity of Parliamentary influence in any other way
than by fixing the period, and leaving the Bank
themselves to do what they could when the time
Came to bring about the resumption. He preserved
that opinion still, and on that ground it was that he
opposed the motion. It was not any part of the
question that the Bank should be provided for re•
snmption by July 5 ; it was their duty to be so. Par-
liament fixed the time, and when the time was fixed,
they ought to be ready to resume at that time. The
alteration proposed went a great way to assume that
there had been aft incapacity in the Bank to resume,
if the_ determination of Parliament had not been as it
was. To obvious probability, great part of the gold
in this country would find its way to other countries.
Then the question was started, how had France not
been impoverished? The answer was obvious—in
the accumulation of capital here, and the impossibi-
lity of Fiince to have furnished any thing like the
quantity of capital there was in this country.--
r. Frankland Lewis denied that he had used any
argument like that alluded to by the Right Honour-
able Gentleman.]—Mr. Canning begged the Honour-
able Gentleman's pardon, if he had misunderstood
him; but certainly he had supposed him to express
himself as he had described. It was the business of
the Bank to resume cash payments, and it would be
wrong of the Parliament to prescribe the mode, or
take upon them to prescribe, as it seemed implied
they should do. As they had proceeded so far with-
out interference, it was most fitting, in his opinion,
to leave them masters of their own concern., pre-
scribing the period at which the restriction should
cease. It was insinuated, that other circumstances
might take place that might furnish further grounds
of prolongation. lie knew of none, however; and
with regard to all the wishes and expectations that
were held out, far from cherishing and encouraging
them, lie knew of no language strong enough by
which they ought to be discouraged and depressed.
It was his opinion that the country would never be
rightly herself till she returned to her sound and pro-
per circulation. Circumstances had occurred that
had prevented the resumption—circumstances which
it was no shame to the sagacity of any man not to
have perceived. It was said, such might again take
place; but in his mind it was impossible to think that
circumstances equally unforeseen, equally unexpec.
ted, equally anantici2ated, should again rise. Many
circumstances had occurred, certainly ; but none with-
out the French loan would have fairly justified the
measure. He could not agree with the Amendment
tat the Honourable Member.
Mr. J. I'. GRANT said, there was not upon the
statute hook a preamble which set forth, as the ground
and reason of any measure, that unforeseen circum-
stances had rendered that necessary. The Right Ho-
nourable Gentleman had stated it as his own opinion,
that the French loan formed the whole reason for the
postponement of the resumption, and it had been
stated by others on the same side of the House ; now
why; if tl at were the case, did they not at once in-
sert that fact in the Bill? Either they were confi-
dent that that was the truth, or they were not confi-
dent of it. If they were confident, why did they not
state that as their opinion, and give the true reason
for the continuance of the restrictions? They said,
as it was, however, unforeseen circumstances had
happened which they would not detail, and then they
got up in their places and said the French loan was
the reason. It was said that the Bank had made pro-
vision. But if their issues be too great for the sup-
ply of the demand, their issues would, be depreciated,
and they would not be able to pay. That should
have bcea taken into consideration. With respect to
tic arzument of the loan, he could not tell what it