experience which the House had of their conduct, it would be the highest indiscretion in parliament not to take out of their hands the preparations for the resumption of cash payments. He did not think this a question only between the Bank and ministers, as it had been argued by his right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney), but rather one between ministers and the Bank on one side, and the country on the other. He was therefore disposed to concur with his right hon. friend in any measure which might be devised to keep the ministers also under control. One principle was clear, it was of the utmost importance in the consideration of this subject, it was this, that those who had the power of regulating the quantity of the circulating medium of the country, had the power of regulating the rate of the exchanges, and the price of every commodity. This power clearly resided in the hands of the directors of the Bank, and it was a most formidable one. It quite astonished him that Mr. Harman could imagine that it was in the power of an individual to influence the exchanges against the wish of the Bank; which was just as reasonable as to suppose that an individual, could regulate the price of corn or any other commodity of general consumption. This question was one of immense importance in principle, but in the manner of bringing it about was trivial, and not deserving half an hour's consideration of the House. The difficulty was only that of raising the currency 3 per cent in value [Hear, hear!]. And who could doubt that even in those states in which the currency was entirely metallic, it often suffered a variation equal to this, without inconvenience to the public [Hear!]. In this country we had nothing but paper in circulation, and therefore every variation in the value of our currency was shown by the price of gold, but where metal alone circulated, it could not be doubted that gold might, from various circumstances, become more or less valuable, and thus affect all contracts, though from their being no other standard to measure it by, its variations were less palpable. His particular reason for supporting the measure under consideration was this. By withdrawing paper, so as to restore the note to its bullion value (an alteration, by the bye, only of 3 per cent.), the House would have done all that was required [Hear, hear!]. But if the House adopted the proposition of the hon. gentleman

(Mr. Ellice), another variation in the value of the currency would take place, which it was his (Mr. R.'s) wish to guard against. If that amendment were agreed to, an extraordinary demand would take place for gold, for the purpose of coinage which would enhance the value of the currency 3 or 4 per cent in addition to the first enhancement [Hear, hear!].— As to the plan under the consideration of the House, it was that which the Bank directors, if they were wise, should wish for [hear!]. They should wish to fill the circulation with paper, and so long as they had the privilege of giving gold bullion for their notes, there would be no coin in circulation-they would have the monopoly. They had no real interest in the depreciation of the currency; it would be rather their interest to raise it, even to double the value. They were in the situation of creditors, not of debtors; their whole capital being in money or other securities representing money [Hear, hear!]. As to the resolution which bore that the government should repay the Bank a certain sum, he could not agree with it. The House having taken a security that the currency should be of a certain value, they had done enough, and should not farther interfere with the proceedings of the directors, who should answer to their proprietors only for the management of their concerns. The Bank might, if this resolution were agreed to, feel some difficulty in putting forth the amount of currency which was required. For though what the directors thought a check, namely, the rate of interest on money, was no check at all as to the amount of issues, as Adam Smith, Mr. Hume, and others had satisfactorily proved; yet as the Bank directors were governed by certain traditional limits, or something like limits, in discounting to individual merchants, they might have difficulty in keeping up the requisite amount of currency. A director, in his evidence before the committee, had said, that the Bank did not confine themselves to this limit where the individual's credit was undoubted; but it should be recollected that the Bank was a cautious and timid body, and if they had no other means of supplying the requisite amount of circulation but by discounting bills, he feared the public might suffer from a scarcity of money. He was certainly for leaving them to conduct all such transactions according to

their own discretion and pleasure, provided | only that such a check was established as should guard against a redundancy. The proposed mode of resuming cash payments appeared to him the easiest that could be imagined. The Bank would be placed under no restraint at first, nor any sudden necessity of reducing its issues. An opportunity would be afforded of effecting the object in the most gradual manner; and even when bullion payments should be made at the Mint price, the inconvenience would be but inconsiderable. Till October 1820, the Bank need make no reduction, and then a slight one [hear!]; and he had no doubt that if they were cautious they might arrive at cash pay. ments without giving out one guinea in gold. The Bank should reduce their issues cautiously; he only feared they would do it too rapidly [hear!]. If he might give them advice, he should recommend to them not to buy bullion, but even though they had but a few millions, if he had the management of their concerns, he should boldly sell. Every sale would improve the exchanges, and till gold fell to 31. 17s. 6d. there would be no necessity for the Bank to make any purchases. He was only sorry that the Bank was not to beobliged by the resolutions to buy all the bullionoffered to them at 31.17s. 6d. lest through excessive caution they might starve the circulation. The Mint, it was true, was to remain open to the public, who might coin the bullion which they obtained from the Bank. Mr. Mushett, whose evidence respecting the coinage was worthy of attention, from its accuracy and general ability, had stated, that with a capital of 300,000l. the Mint could supply the public with 12,000,000/. a year. Yet a year was a long time to wait for twelve millions, and it might easily happen, that in the interim between the reduction of the Bank issues and the supply afforded from the Mint, the country might seriously feel the deficiency. It was on that account that he should have wished a resolution inserted, to compel the Bank to give its notes for bullion (at 31. 17s. 6d.) on demand. With the exception of this omission, the plan was, in his opinion, perfectly safe and gentle.With regard to what had fallen from his 1 right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) respecting the graduated scale of payments not having been submitted to the directors, he referred him to the examination of Mr. Thornton before the Lords' committee

where he would see that that gentleman's evidence was wholly in favour of the plan. He was quite astonished that such an alarm prevailed at a reduction of perhaps one million in four years, and could only ascribe it to the indiscreet language of the Bank [Hear, hear!]. The hon. director had that night told them not to withdraw confidence from the Bank. The House did not withdraw its confidence from the Bank from any doubt of its wealth, or integrity but from a conviction of its total ignorance of the principles of political economy [hear, and a laugh]. The Bank had had ample time to reduce their issues, so as to lower the price of gold; yet, in spite of the times repeatedly fixed for the resumption of cash payments, they had never done so. It was not the business of the directors to consider the interest of the public. That was the business of his majesty's ministers; and when the hon. director told them, that the directors had lost so much on the purchase of gold, and so much on the issue of tokens, his question was, why had they done so? Their business was with the interest of the proprietors, for whom they were trustees, not with the interests of the public. The directors were answerable to the proprietors for these misapplications of their funds. He (Mr. R.) had been astonished that the undivided profits of the Bank had been so small, which he should have imagined, must have at least amounted to ten millions; but now, by the confession of the hon. gentleman, the matter was explained. The directors had scattered a million here and a million there according to their views of the wants of the ministry or the country, without any regard to the interest of the proprietors [Hear, hear!]. The hon. director had advised them not to cramp the currency, and had referred to their experience of 1797. But that was not a parallel case. It was a season of alarm and panic, when every man had wished to have gold in his house in fear of an invasion. His right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) had asked, what, under the plan proposed was the holder of 10l. to do, for he could not get bullion at the Bank. According to the amendment, the right hon. gentleman was in no great hurry to give this poor man either bullion or specie. But were they doing nothing by the plan for the holder of notes of 10%.? The holder of a 101. note would be improved in

which was expected to come before their lordships. He concluded by moving, that the judges be ordered to attend on Wednesday the 9th of June, and that the Lords be summoned for that day. Ordered.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Tuesday, May 25.

BANK OF ENGLAND-RESUMPTION OF CASH PAYMENTS.] The House having again resolved itself into a Committee on the Reports of the Secret Committee on the Resumption of Cash Payments by the Bank, the adjourned debate was resumed.

political or spiritual. Those who had most warmly opposed the motion of his noble friend near him (lord Donoughmore), had acknowledged the general good conduct of the Roman Catholics; and, confining their objections to the question of foreign supremacy, had expressed no disinclination to grant relief on any other point. He trusted therefore, that, consistently with the declarations made on that occasion, this bill would experience the general concurrence of their lordships. Its object, as he had said, was confined to points of faith, and touched in no way upon that question on which those who opposed the Catholic claims rested their objection. It tended only to relieve a respectable class of his majesty's subjects from the operation of laws, which, without even the pretence of necessity, cast an insulting stigma on their religious opinions. Their lordships were also aware, that in many instances Protestants had been very unwilling to take the oaths which it was his object to advocate. His lordship then presented a bill" for abrogating so much of the Acts of the 25th and 30th of Charles 2nd, as prescribes to all officers Civil and Military, and to Members of both Houses of Parliament, a Declaration against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, and the Invocation of

Saints."

The Bill was read a first time.

COIN OF THE REALM-LEGAL TENDER.] The Earl of Lauderdale was desirous that, at an early day after the recess, their lordships should have the opinion of the judges on the law relative to the coin of the realm considered as a legal tender and measure of value. The questions he wished to submit were-first, whether, after the passing of the act of 1774, thesilver coinage of this country, subject to a depreciation of 20 per cent, was a legal tender by tale? Secondly, whether, under the act of the 56th of the king, chapter 68, the silver or the gold coin is the legal measure of value in this country? It was necessary that these great questions should be finally set at rest, and the public mind relieved from all uncertainty on a subject of so much interest to the country. Much depended upon what their lordships should ur derstand to be the law with regard to the coin of the realm. If it should be decided, that the silver coin is a legal tender, that decision would have an important bearing on the measure

Mr. Alderman Heygate said, he should experience great embarrassment in opening the debate, did he not feel the vast importance of the subject to the comfort and subsistence of the people, and that on such a topic the fascinations of wit and eloquence served rather to bewilder, than to guide the judgment. The question was one of practical importance and on which practical men were most competent to give that information which the nature of the subject required. There was no man in that House, or throughout the country, who more deeply regretted the present state of our currency than himself; no one who more deeply regretted our de parture from its ancient standard. Had he sat in the House at the time that the Bank restriction act was first proposed, he should have opposed it, not only on account of the innovation which it constituted upon our former system, but on account also of the fatal consequences which he should have foreseen would inevitably follow. But that restriction was then the consequence, right or wrong, of a war which this country chose to wage, and which, had it continued one month longer would have been her ruin. On the sub ject before the House, he felt that the opinions he entertained, although they were lately those of parliament and of his majesty's ministers, were not such as were at present popular. He well knew that it was generally held, that our paper was depreciated to a certain extent. He could only say, that great as the authorities, and splendid as the names were, which were cited in the Bank report, as supporters of that opinion; yet his own research and inquiry, which had been extensive and unremitting, had convinced him, not only that no such depreciation did now exist, but that it never could