§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerrose, to postpone his motion relative to the re-appointment of the Committee on Joint Stock Banks till Monday.
§ Mr. Humewished to know how it was possible that this motion could be brought forward on Monday? He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would fix some day when the motion might be fully discussed, as he intended to move an amendment to the motion, extending the inquiry to the Bank of England.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas not aware that there would be any opposition to the re-appointment of the Committee. As, however, his hon. Friend intended to move an amendment, he would select an open day on which they could have a full discussion.
§ Sir R. Peelwould suggest, before the right hon. Gentleman committed himself to a renewal of the Committee, that it was a subject for his consideration whether its re-appointment was absolutely necessary. The evidence, if not complete, was pretty 704 nearly complete, and there would be an immense advantage in drawing the proceedings of the Committee to a close. At present, the banking interest was in a state of great uncertainty, and an advantage was given to the weaker establishments at the expense of the more wealthy and respectable. If, however, the Committee should be re-appointed, he should advise the immediate completion of certain branches of the evidence, in order that her Majesty's Government might be enabled to state at once how they were prepared to act.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequerthanked the right hon. Baronet for his suggestion, and observed, that that was the very course which he intended to pursue. The points which remained for inquiry were two—namely, what was the effect of the Bank of England's local circulation and country branches, and of the connexion between those branches and certain Joint-stock banks. There was, also, a question as to the Bank of Ireland, into which no inquiry had been made at all. He believed that these were the points which were still unnoticed. If they went over the points on which they had already taken evidence, they would not only undertake a very needless task but one full of inconvenience. Gentlemen would, therefore, understand that in proposing the revival of the Committee, it was only to consider those points on which no evidence had been taken, and not for the purpose of going over the grounds on which so much evidence had already been laid before the House.
§ Motion postponed.