§ Mr. Hornerstated, that having understood, that his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Abercromby) had given a notice in his, absence of his intention on that day to fix the period and declare the mode in which; he proposed to bring forward this discussion, he now rose to state what appeared, to him to be the most expedient course of proceeding. In the first place, as to the mode, it had been his earlier intention to move for leave to bring in a bill for, the repeal of the Bank Restriction Act. He found since, on consulting with some gentlemen, to whose experience of parliamentary business he was bound to pay the greatest deference, that the most ad visable mode would be to submit some previous Resolutions, expressive of the general opinion, of the House on the question at issue, and which Resolutions might, lay a foundation for a subsequent and more conclusive, series of measures. He apprehended that this would be done in the best manner in a committee of the whole House; and if the fight hon. gent opposite should entertain a similar opinion, he was desirous of making it immediately an order of the day, that the House should go into a committee for this purpose on Monday the 29th of April. If there should be any objection to this suggestion he begged that he might now be considered as giving a general notice on the subject of his intention to bring on the discussion very soon after the recess. As to the consideration of time, he was extremely sorry that a delay of such duration had taken place; but he trusted that when the nature of the business in which parliament at its first assembling, had been engaged, was remembered; and the necessity he was under of attending his professional avocations in the country, he should stand acquitted of blame.—Indeed he could not help thinking that the interval which had thus been suffered to elapse would be far from proving productive of any injurious consequences to the discussion. It had been alledged, that the causes of the present condition of our paper currency were quite of a temporary nature, and it might therefore be well to allow the farce pf this argument to be fairly tried. He had hoped for an opportunity of introducing the question on some day before the recess; but as the present was certainly too late an hour, and there was no clear day before the holidays, he would propose, if the course he had was approved, 727 to move "That the Report of the Bullion Committee be referred to a Committee of the whole House on Monday the 20th of April."
Mr. Roseobserved, that he felt no objection to the mode proposed by the hon. gent. considering, as he did, that the question ought to be discussed in a Committee; but, at the Same time, he must remark, that in his opinion, there had been a great and unnecessary delay in bringing forward this motion. He knew that it would not have been regular in any member of 'he House to take the matter out of the hands of the hon. and learned member, who had acted as chairman of the Bullion Committee. Parliament had however, been sitting between nine and ten weeks, and this was the first intimation which the learned gent, had given of bringing that Report under consideration. He had, indeed, before given notice of a specific motion, but this he had thought proper to abandon. The Report had been published five months before the session of parliament, and two more had since passed, during all which time it had excited a deep interest, and had been the subject of very general discussion, and at length the hon. and learned gent, had named a distant day, which would likewise most probably be an inconvenient one, and one on which a full attendance could hardly be expected.
§ Mr. Hornertrusted that he should be excused in rising a second time, when it was for the purpose of vindicating himself from imputations, the application of which, if just, he should greatly deplore. Was he fealty deserving of blame for not bringing on such a discussion at ten o'clock at night? (No, no from the Treasury Bench!)—If such an accusation was disclaimed, was it meat to insinuate that he was not prepared for the consideration of the question on an earlier day, than that which he had named? He assured the right hon. gent. that he was perfectly ready to enter on the discussion either on Monday next, or even that might, if it should be deemed desirable by the House. As to the general charge of delay, how did it apply? The Report was published in August, and parliament assembled under peculiar circumstances some time before Christmas. When those circumstances were recollected he did not believe that any hon. member could candidly attribute to him any unnecessary or wilful procrastination. The right hon. 728 gent, had indeed himself moved, at a considerably subsequent period, for the production of several voluminous accounts, which he considered necessary to the elucidation of the question. He (Mr. Horner) had, in consequence of those motions, required some time properly to understand the nature and bearings of those accounts, at least to divine what possible connection they had with the object in view. He had not had it in his power to be in town at an earlier period, and his wish in now naming the 29th of April, was that the order should be some time on the book, in order that the House should have full notice, and come properly prepared for the discussion. He appealed, therefore, to the candour of the House, and to its justice, he would not say to its indulgence, which at other times he might have had occasion to claim, whether the right hon. gentleman's censure was not unfounded. Did the right hon. gent. believe that any such material alteration had taken place, or that the question presented itself in so new a shape and so different from that which it had first assumed, as to inspire him with any additional confidence or sentiment of triumph? Did he indeed believe that recent circumstances had so changed the state of the question, as to induce on his part or on that of his hon. friends any desire to re-cede from their former opinions? Was the late proceeding of the Bank calculated to procure from him a surrender of his sentiments, or to persuade him to shrink from the discussion? The impatience of the right hon. gent. might easily be traced to an apprehension that other and similar proceedings were about to follow, which would perhaps be much facilitated by previously dispatching the Report of the Bullion Committee. It would have been convenient, too, perhaps, if that discussion could have been terminated prior to the late operation of the Bank. Satisfied he was that upon the event of that discussion depended the recurrence of similar proceedings, and the consequent increase of all the mischief and calamity involved in it.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that he should not object to the course proposed by the hon. and learned gent. He thought that it might be useful that some interval should take place between the notice for the discussion, and the discussion itself. He had, however, experienced a very strong sentiment of regret at the length of the delay in bringing the 729 Report under parliamentary consideration. That Report had, he conceived, made a most erroneous and injurious impression on the public mind, and he should ever consider its publication as a great and serious evil. It had very strongly agitated the feelings of the country, and he was confident that when it was fully considered, it would not be found to be supported by facts.
§ Mr. Tierneyobserved, that his hon. friend had been most uncandidly and unjustly accused of wishing to delay the discussion. The right hon. gent, was certainly in more haste; he appeared to be very anxious for the argument, but to feel little care as to its being understood. He knew not whether this arose from his confidence in numbers, but the right hon. gent. who so strongly condemned the Report, should have objected to the appointment of the Committee, who had only obeyed the orders of the House in probing the matter to the bottom. The right hon. gent. seem ed to think that when this House had got rid of the Report, no matter how, public opinion would be perfectly settled. He questioned much whether the mere authority of the House would have the effect of setting the question at rest. He must however, do the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the justice to say, that he had not supported his right hon. friend (Mr. Rose) in his attack on the hon. chairman of the Bullion Committee. But he was quite as sanguine in his anticipations of success, and appeared to be elated at the prospect of this tremendous discussion, and a glorious victory on the 29th of April. The right hon. gent. had certainly not been inactive in circulating his own opinions on the subject, or in his endeavours to counteract the impression which the Report of the Committee might have made. Before he sat down he could not avoid saying, that the House and the country were greatly indebted to his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Horner) for the unremitting attention he had paid to a subject which, in its importance to the interests of this country, exceeded any which his parliamentary experience brought to his recollection.
§ The motion was then agreed to.