Commons Sitting of 6 February 1818

PETITIONS OF JOHN KNIGHT AND SAMUEL HAYNES COMPLAINING OF THE OPERATION OF THE SUSPENSION OF THE HABEAS CORPUS SUSPENSION ACT.
Lord Folkestonepresented a Petition from John Knight of Manchester, setting forth;
"That although the petitioner is unconscious of any crime or breach of law, by him committed, yet in the night between the 8th and 9th of March 1817, his house was forcibly entered, his family, which consists of a lame wife, five children, and a dependent niece, disturbed and terrified by a posse of police officers, who searched his house, and carried off such books and papers as they thought proper; that, after this nocturnal visit, the petitioner was prevailed upon to quit his home and family and retire to the house of a friend; that on the evening of the 29th of March, the petitioner was arrested by a constable of Sowerby, and by him taken to his, the constable's house; that this constable refused to show his warrant, and when urged thereto talked of his pistols, and shouted for his assistants; that about one o'clock in the morning of the 31st of March the petitioner was called out of bed by Mr. Naden, the deputy constable of Manchester, and by him was ordered to be handcuffed, and so conveyed to the New Bayley Manchester, where he was confined in a cell 8 feet by 6½ feet (in which were two beds) from Monday morning early until late on Saturday night, during which time he was not four hours out of doors; that his chief food was bread and cheese and a quart of beer per day; that his wife was not permitted to see him; that he wrote to the magistrates one day, and the next day to the boroughreeve and constables, requesting to be informed of what and by whom he was accused, but received no answer from either of them; that on Sunday morning the 6th of April the petitioner was heavily ironed, and so conveyed to London, 182 miles; that whilst in a public house in Bow-street, the landlord thereof said to the petitioner, that if he had any friend in town to whom he wished to write, his son should convey the letter; in consequence of this proposal the petitioner wrote two letters, one of which he addressed to sir F. Burdett, the other to the hon. H. G. Bennet, which letters he saw in the hands of the under secretary of state the same afternoon, when he was ordered to Tothill-fields bridewell until the ensuing Wednesday; that on Wednesday the 9th of April the petitioner was again brought to the secretary of state's office, where no questions were

193
asked him relative to his supposed offence, nor any thing stated to him on that subject, yet he was committed to close and solitary confinement on suspicion of high treason; that about 4 in the afternoon of the 10th of April the petitioner was taken from Tothill-fields, where he had been kindly treated, and was removed to Reading gaol: on the road the petitioner saw a newspaper, which mentioned his arrival at the secretary of state's office the day before, and added, that the papers found in his trunk were of a treasonable nature, although in fact the only papers therein at that time were a list of the articles of raiment it contained, and copies of two love-songs, which songs so pleased the keeper of Tothill-fields bridewell, that he requested the petitioner to give him copies of them, which he did; on showing this newspaper paragraph to Mr. Adkins, the Bow-street officer, and asking him how such a falsehood could get there? he said, "that a guinea might do such a thing as that;" the petitioner, astonished, then asked him if any body would get a guinea for writing such a downright lie? he replied, "he should not wonder if they did;" that, on the petitioner's arrival at Reading gaol, together with two other state prisoners, about half past 9 in the evening, it was with the utmost difficulty, and after much expostulation, that they obtained a supper, although they stated to the keeper that they had come about 40 miles without food; that on the following morning a turnkey came to the petitioner, and said the governor could only give them the county allowance, (i.e. bread and water), until he got farther orders; the petitioner then requested to have some coffee to breakfast, and also to see the governor: the three state prisoners were then conducted into a common prison-room, into the upper story of which were put for their use two beds stuffed with straw, and no bolsters whatever; in this manner they were lodged, and here they remained for 16 days; coffee was brought for breakfast, and in the course of the forenoon some mutton, potatoes, & c. & c. which they cooked for themselves: during these 16 days, the petitioner paid for some things, others they procured from (what is called in prisons) the shopman, and some others the keeper sent in; on the 16th of April they were informed, that their allowance was a guinea a week each, and which they might lay out as they pleased; then they
194
thought they could save some money towards clothing, or for their families; for 16 days they had nothing but water to drink, and never could obtain either reckoning or settlement with the governor, nor could the petitioner get reimbursed the money he had paid for the joint use of the three state prisoners, until the very moment he left that place; on the 27th of April, without their being consulted or their consent asked, they were informed, that in future they were to have dinners from the governor's table, and have a pint of beer per day, breakfast, & c. they must cook for themselves as heretofore; at this time they were separated, and put into different and better rooms, the sash-windows of which were previously and purposely nailed down, although they were well barricadoed on the outside with strong iron bars; for 18 days after the petitioner and his fellow prisoners were separated, they had only a pint of beer per day, afterwards they had two pints per day; here the petitioner never could obtain a candle, even at his own expense; that on the 9th of July the petitioner was removed to Salisbury gaol, where he was put into a small, gloomy, stinking felons cell, and surrounded by noisy, brutal prisoners of that description; that, on his arrival at this gaol, all his letters and papers, even to a roll of blank paper, were taken from him; here, for several days, he could obtain only water to drink, nor ever could procure either knife or fork to eat with; this place was soaill ventilated, that it ruined his health in a few hours; he spoke to the gaoler, and requested a better room; was told there was none to be had: on the 11th of July, the petitioner wrote to the secretary of state, informing him of the situation in which he was placed, and of the ruined state of his health, requesting also to be removed; which request was, on the 18th of the same month, complied with, when he was removed to Worcester; here again the petitioner was confined two nights and one day in a small cell, whilst a room was prepared for his reception in this room his health soon recovered, because it was much larger than the Salisbury cell, the air was good, and he could admit it at pleasure; here, however, he was never more than half an hour per day out of doors, and many days never out at all; here also the petitioner had to write four times to the governor before he could obtain a candle, and at last only obtained a

195
small one for each night, which would not burn three hours, even in the depth of winter; that a short time before the petitioner's liberation he wanted a garment made, and so rigorously strict were his keepers in keeping him from his fellow-creatures, that before a tailor could have access to him, it was deemed necessary to procure a justice's order for that purpose, and the petitioner was told that this delayed the tailor's visit more than a week, and whenever the petitioner mentioned his want of clothing to his keepers, he was told he might have the prison uniform whenever he pleased; that on the 3lst of December, after more than nine months close, and, generally, solitary confinement, the petitioner was informed, that his liberation was come, and that he would be instantly discharged on the same terms as others, that is, by giving his own recognizance for 100 l. to appear in the court of King's-bench next term, which condition he accepted; he was only allowed 2l. for his journey home, more than 100 miles, and which would not pay the inside fare of the coach, although it was in the depth of winter, and the petitioner advanced in years, and also after such a long and close confinement; that during the petitioner's confinement, several letters, which he addressed to his wife and children, and also several which they addressed to him, were never delivered according to their superscriptions; that on the 6th or 7th of January, 1818, the petitioner wrote to the secretary of state, requesting to be informed whether his attendance in the court of King's-bench would be required, but received no answer, therefore he deemed it necessary to hold himself in readiness to attend the said court; that about 12 o'clock on the 21st day of January, the first day of terra being the 23d, the petitioner was verbally informed, that the secretary of state had sent a letter to the police office, Manchester, which said, "that the state prisoners mentioned therein need not go to London, as they would not be called upon;" that in consequence of this information, although himself and three others had engaged a coach for London, the petitioner, with Samuel Drumraond, went to the police, and was again told he needed not to go to London; he then asked if the recognizances were set aside or nullified? they were then told that they would have printed copies of his lordship's letter that night; the petitioner and Drummond said,
196
"that would not do, as they had engaged coach for three o'clock, they must therefore be satisfied on that point immediately, or they would feel themselves obliged to go to London;" they were answered, "they might go to hell if they pleased," and ordered out of the room; they however staid whilst the letter was sent for and brought, but were not permitted to read it; however, it was read to them; after which the petitioner again inquired, if they, the magistrates, were authorized by that letter to set aside the recognizances? Mr. Evans, a magistrate and counsellor at law, in a rage replied, "We will not tell you, it is not our business to put any construction on his lordship's words;" having said so, he hurried out of the room; that therefore the petitioner, at a great and inconvenient expense, and at the great hazard of his health, came to London; that being arrived there, Mr. Johnstone, Mr. Bagguley, Mr. Drum-mond, and himself, addressed a note to lord Sidmouth, requesting an interview on the subject of their recognizances, but his lordship refused to see them; they therefore immediately went to the court of King's-bench, and individually claimed of the court either to be tried or to have their recognizances set aside and discharged; they were informed (to their astonishment) by the court, that they (the court) could neither do the one nor the other, having no charge against them, nor having the power to nullify their recognizances; that therefore, at a great expense, the petitioner felt it necessary to attend the said court from the 23d to the 3lst of January, 1818, when the attorney-general was prevailed upon to move for the discharge of all the state prisoners' recognizances; that the petitioner has been repeatedly, wantonly, and wickedly vilified, calumniated, and slandered in the public papers, his business quite deranged and ruined, his body vastly impaired by his long and close imprisonment, and his family and pecuniary affairs incalculably injured, and that this is the second time he has so suffered, and for the same cause, namely, the promotion of a reform in the House; that in the year 1812, the petitioner, when in company with more than thirty others, for the sole purpose of forwarding petitions to the Prince Regent and the House, were broke in upon, and seized by the police officers of Manchester, aided by armed soldiers, who conducted the whole to prison, and on the

197
deliberately wilful and false oath of an hired spy, they were committed to Lancaster, being 38 in number, most of them heads and fathers of families, and there stood a fourteen-hours' trial, on an ignominious but groundless charge; and, although' acquitted, the petitioner was thereby separated from his family twelve weeks, and also his affairs completely deranged; that the petitioner, therefore, earnestly prays, that the House will take his case into their serious and candid consideration, and not only refuse to pass the Indemnity Bill, but bring those ministers and magistrates to justice who have so wantonly and cruelly violated the liberties and privileges of Englishmen in the person of the petitioner.'
Lord Folkestonealso presented a petition from Samuel Haynes of Nottingham; setting forth,
"That the petitioner was on Thursday morning June 13th, 1817, without any provocation on his part, taken out of a bed of sickness, handcuffed and guarded to a prison, and locked up in a dreary damp and gloomy cell; what then must have been the surprise and astonishment of the petitioner when he was locked up in such a horrible den of misery and in a bad state of health, when at the same time he was conscious he had never done an injury to any man: on the Saturday following it was communicated to the petitioner that he was to go to London: the petitioner civilly asked when and what for, but received no answer, but on Saturday afternoon a chaise came to the prison door, when the prisoner was fetched out of his den of misery, and chained hand and foot to a person of the name of Francis Ward, and was conveyed to London to lord Sidmouth's office, when his lordship rose and addressed the prisoner in nearly the following words: 'You, Sa-muel Haynes, are brought here, charged upon oath of high treason; you will be taken from here into close confinement, and there kept till you are delivered by a due course of law, and you will have due notice to prepare for your trial, and you will have the names of evidence against you, &c: and if you have got any thing to say we will hear you;" the petitioner told his lordship he had nothing to say, for he knew nothing about any body's business but his own; his lordship then sat down, and the petitioner retired with a heart that leaped with gladness, for he fondly though vainly
198
thought he should soon be brought before some tribunal of justice where he would have proved his innocence as cicalas the noon-day sun: but on the Monday following, Mr. Atkins, keeper of Cold-bath-fields prison, informed the petitioner that he was to be sent to Lincoln castle; when the petitioner with two other state prisoners arrived at Lincoln-castle, the petitioner with his two fellow prisoners was ordered to strip, and was strictly searched by the turnkey; the turnkey took the petitioner's watch, though not without the petitioner remonstrating with him at such an arbitrary proceeding: the petitioner was, with his two unfortunatefel-low-prisoners, put in a dismal-looking little habitation; the petitioner and his two fellow prisoners gave the turnkey some money to get some bread and cheese and some beer; when the petitioner with his two fellow prisoners had got their bread and cheese and beer, and had just began to eat, the gaoler came in and said, the petitioner and his fellow prisoners must be separated immediately; the petitioner intreated the gaoler to let him and his unfortunate companions be together for half an hour while they partook of their refreshment; but no, the bread and cheese was pulled in three pieces and divided with the beer, while the petitioner with his two unfortunate companions gazed on each other with wonder and astonishment, and was instantly separated in three dreary apartments, and as it seemed then never to behold each other any more; what the petitioner felt at such merciless treatment the House can better conceive than he can describe to them; night soon came on, and the petitioner was taken from his dreary habitation to a cell to sleep; having passed a melancholy and sleepless night, the next morning the petitioner was taken to his daily den of misery again; the petitioner being in a bad state of health soon felt the pernicious effects of close and solitary imprisonment, for in five or six weeks he was reduced to a mere skeleton; it was then he began to contemplate his wretched situation, and could then perceive that lord Sidmouth's promise concerning a trial was a mere delusion; in that dreary habitation that the petitioner had to pass away his murdered hours by day in cruel solitude, there was nothing but a wooden block to sit on; the petitioner's debility had so increased that he became so weak he could not sit up, and he asked several times for a chair, but

199
he might as well have asked the winds for a chair; so the petitioner contrived to put his block in a corner of his den, and prop himself between the two walls; the petitioner requests the serious attention of the House to this point; now let them fancy for a moment they are peeping into the dismal habitation of the petitioner in Lincoln-castle, there beholding a poor forlorn and helpless fellow creature, brooding over his misfortunes in gloomy solitude; ah! cruel remembrance: the petitioner when in this deplorable situation, his death being daily expected, wrote a letter to lord Sidmouth, intreating his lordship to let his wife come and see him before he died, and at the same time solemnly declared his innocence to lord Sidmouth, and told his lordship, that that base charge that he charged him with would never be proved against him, no, neither on earth nor in Heaven; in a few days after the petitioner was liberated, and when he came home his ghastly appearance quite shocked his family and friends, and they all thought then that before this time be would have been sleeping in his grave; the petitioner has sent this petition to the House for their consideration, whether he must bear with such an outrageous, cruel, and unprovoked attack on his person, as to be savagely dragged out of his bed in the dead of the night, and sent to a prison from a comfortable home, from a wife and six helpless and unprotected children, in this our boasted land of liberty and Christianity: and the petitioner humbly requests leave to state to the Mouse, that he views with regret the conduct of his oppressors, men who pretend to be true followers in the faith of Him who expired on the cross in bitter agony by cruel torture on Mount Calvary; but whatever their pretensions may be to Christianity, could they have a Christian feeling when they coolly and deliberately ordered a fellow creature into solitary imprisonment, there to remain day after day and week after week, in a bad state of health, as was the case of the petitioner, though in that deplorable state, pent up in a miserable dungeon, and deprived of the dearest privilege of society and the felicity of friendship; under all this oppression the petitioner must confess that he had some pleasing reflections in contemplating his own innocence, trusting that a time would come when he would be at liberty to lay his case before the House for their humane and serious con-
200
sideration; the petitioner seeks not the punishment of his oppressors, though he has been distressed and brought to indigence by them, but he appeals to the humanity and protection of the House, to redress his injuries in being so wrongfully and cruelly persecuted; but if there are any members in the House who have a doubt on their minds as to the truth of this petition, then the petitioner most earnestly implores them to hear him at the bar of the House, as he is ready to prove every assertion contained in this petition."
Ordered to lie on the table.

SECRET COMMITTEE ON THE STATE OF THE NATION BALLOTTED FOR.
Lord Castlereaghmoved the order of the day for the balloting for the Secret Committee, to which the papers on the internal state of the country were to be referred.
Mr. Tierneysaid, that in ballotting for the Secret committee, they would have very little trouble, as the lists were all prepared by ministers themselves. He hoped, however, that no gentleman would be named who was not in the habit of attending the House, and on whose attendance in the committee they might therefore calculate.
The clerk proceeded in the usual way to call over the names of members alphabetically. The first ministerial members who came forward with their lists were cheered by the opposition members. The opposition members did not present any lists. The names of the members having been twice called over, scrutineers were appointed, who afterwards reported the names of the members chosen to be the Secret Committee; viz. Lord Milton, lord G. Cavendish, Mr. W. wynn, lord Castlereagh, lord Lascelles, Mr. Bathurst, Mr. Lam be, sir Arthur Piggott, sir W. Scott, sir John Nicholl, Mr. Solicitor General, Mr. Attorney Genera], Mr. Canning, Mr. Yorke, Mr. Egerton, Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Bootle Wilbraham, Mr. W. Dundas, Mr. Peel, sir W. Curtis, and admiral Frank.
Sir M. W. Ridleyremarked, that his noble friend, lord George Cavendish, was at a considerable distance from town, and under such circumstances made it impossible for him to attend. He wished to know whether there would be any objection felt to the nomination of Mr. Tierney in his place.
Lord Castlereaghapprehended that this

201
would be a proceeding perfectly inconsistent with the nature of a committee chosen by ballot. The noble lord, whose absence he regretted, was in every point of view a most proper person to be on the committee, and as such had been elected.
Upon the mention of lord Castlereagh's name,
Mr. Broughamrose, and disclaiming any thing invidious, protested against the attempt to constitute the noble lord a judge upon this question, whether the noble lord himself and his colleagues had behaved improperly towards individuals, who had perhaps already commenced actions against ministers, for depriving them of liberty, and stigmatizing their characters.
Lord Castlereaghobserved, that if the proposition of the learned gentleman were admitted, namely, that because he was a minister, he ought not to become a mem-ber of this committee, he wished to know to what functions he was competent in that House? For were he precluded from giving an opinion, or promoting an inquiry, upon any question in which the administration of the government was concerned, he hardly knew what business he could have to transact in parliament.
Mr. Broughamreferred to the noble lord's objection to the proposition for substituting another name for that of lord G. Cavendish, and asked how the House would proceed, in case persons were chosen by ballot to any committee who could not possibly attend? The House would, in such a case, no doubt, help itself out of the difficulty, by renewing the ballot; and as to nomination, he called to the recollection of the House, that the last committee of last session was chosen by nomination, and not by ballot. So much for precedent. But to return to the selection of a person by ballot, who was physically incapable of attendance, it appeared that pro tanto, such was the situation of Lord G. Cavendish. The attendance of the noble lord was, no doubt, peculiarly desirable, not only from his personal character, but from his acquaintance with the transactions in Derbyshire. But the noble lord, it appeared, could not attend; and was the committee to have no one in his place. Sir Arthur Piggott also was among the names returned; but it would be remembered, that his learned friend, when chosen upon the committee
202
of last session, declared his unwillingness and inability to attend. It was probable, therefore, that his learned friend would be equally unwilling and unable to attend upon the present occasion. Possibly that was calculated upon. Thus it appeared, that two of those members, who might be regarded as impartial, and whose names were inserted in the ministerial list, were likely to be absent from this committee, while the noble lord, with two other cabinet ministers, and the attorney and solicitor generals were sure to be present. How, then, was the country to regard this committee? They saw it composed of the very persons who were mixed in the transactions with respect to which it was appointed to inquire. Yet such was the committee on whose verdict the House would be called upon to legislate. Such was the committee that would no doubt recommend an act of indemnity to shelter ministers from any responsibility for the exercise of the powers with which they were invested by the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act. What a spectacle for the country, that a committee composed, by far the most part of ministers and ministerial adherents, should be appointed to decide upon the question, whether persons imprisoned by order of ministers should have their right of action at law—whether, for instance, such persons as the Messrs. Evans, Mr. Cliff, and others, who had already, he understood, commenced proceedings against ministers, should have an opportunity of seeking legal redress and vindicating their character, or whether all their proceedings should be quashed, while they themselves should be condemned to pay all the costs they had incurred !
Mr. Wilberforcethought it desirable, if any member returned upon the ballot was unable to attend, that another should be substituted for him, if such substitution could be made consistently with the usages of the House. To the principle of ballot he declared himself an advocate, because it afforded the best chance of escaping the influence of party, and of producing a fair selection. But even upon ballot, there must be some previous understanding in the House as to who were to be chosen, for otherwise the votes of many members must be entirely thrown away.
The Speakerstated, that with respect to the proposition for the substitution of one name for another, he believed there

203
would be found no precedent on the Journals of the House; indeed, that single and individual circumstance of putting one name in the room of another would be, in a manner, jumping over several of the principal orders; and first, that one, that the committee be appointed by ballot. Now, he submitted, that if one name was substituted for another, that would not be done by ballot. He was only stating to the House what he thought was the practice, and, in making such a statement, he thought he was only doing his duty. He could not find any trace of such having been the practice. He did not perceive that any member had been left out, except it was by absolute parliamentary disqualification, a physical impossibility of attendance. As to any other disqualification of attendance, there was, as far as his knowledge extended, no account of any case having arisen.
Mr. Calcraftthought, that without contradicting the orders of the House, it might be regular to fill up the places of the persons who it was supposed, would not attend. He wished to say a word or two with regard to the appointment of a committee by ballot. Of that method he could safely say, that the influence of ministers by means of it was greater than by any other mode. He had himself been a scrutineer upon the appointment of this committee by that method. He did not suppose there was any thing secret in what he was saying, but if there was he would not proceed. [Cries of No ! no.] He had not been sworn when he was appointed a scrutineer. There wore, upon this occasion, 108 persons who had put lists into the glass, and amongst those there were 97 not only identically the same, but in the same hand-writing. Whose hand it was, or whence the lists came, he would not presume to offer a conjecture. But if his hon. friend had considered for a moment, he was persuaded he would have inferred, that the quarter whence they came was not very doubtful. He thought some steps might be taken to supply the places of those gentlemen who would not attend, though he should be the last man to propose any member in the place of his noble friend; for he thought he was one of the best persons in that House to become a member of such a committee.
Mr. Wilberforcesaid, that if any member who had a list given him, thought any one was not a fit person for such a
204
committee, he might have scratched out the names, without its being suspected who made the alteration.
Mr. Canningsaid, that if it were necessary to take any step with respect to the list, there was one obvious course for the House to adopt. They could insist that any member, not prevented by a physical impossibility, should do his duty. For his own part, he should protest against the adoption of any other step.
The Speakerquoted the case of sir Joseph Jekyll, who was chosen by ballot to serve on a committee. An objection was made to his appointment, on the ground that he had not taken the usual oaths at the clerk's table, but the House, on a division, decided that he was qualified, and refused to substitute another name.
Sir W. Burroughsmaintained, that there might be a parliamentary disqualification to exclude a member from serving on such a committee. The case of the noble lord was one of those; there could be no reason why he should sit as judge of his own acts. The precedent just alluded to established this principle, that the House might review the ballot, in order to correct its own proceeding where it might be wrong. He begged to remind the House of the motion made by the noble lord yesterday, which determined that the committee should consist of 21 members. Suppose, then, that lord G. Cavendish could not attend, would not that vote be defeated? Suppose sir A. Piggott was also to absent himself, could it be said that the House was not competent to supply his place? In the last session, the name of the present solicitor-general was added to the committee. It would be desirable to know whether lord G. Cavendish was absent at the time he was nominated, or whether he had since left town. Perhaps the best course they could adopt, under the circumstances, would be to postpone the meeting of the committee until the noble lord could be personally present, as there was no urgent necessity for their meeting immediately. He trusted some steps would be taken to remedy so great an abuse as the appointment of a committee by ballot, which was the worst mode that could be employed. Had they been elected by nomination, the choice would then have been made from the members who were present, and the inconvenience now experienced would have been avoided.
Sir M. W. Ridleybegged to assure the House, that the absence of lord G. Cavendish was by no means voluntary. It was certainly not his own wish, but a real necessity that compelled his absence.
It was then ordered, that the committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records.

COMMITTEE OF WAYS AND MEANS— EXCHEQUER BILLS.
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means,
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he had already informed the House that it was not his intention to propose, at this early period of the session, the grant of any other sums than the taxes which the House had been in the habit of granting from year to year, for a great length of time back, and a grant of Exchequer Bills to replace other Exchequer Bills now outstanding. The House would recollect, that in a committee of supply, they had lately voted 24 millions to make good exchequer bills issued last session, and outstanding and unprovided for; nine millions to make good other exchequer bills, also issued last session, and outstanding and unprovided for: and six millions to pay off the loan of the Bank to the government in 1816. He should now, however, merely propose the grant of the land and malt tax, and an issue of 30 millions to replace the above 24 millions of outstanding exchequer bills, and to pay off the loan from the Bank in 1816, of six millions. It would not be necessary to trouble them with any other vote till a later period of the session, when all the different services would be before the House. He concluded with moving resolutions to the above effect.
Mr. Tierneysaid, it was desirable to know whether the 30 millions would be enough to cover the expenses of the public service, so that no farther application for money would be required before Easter. With respect to the amount for exchequer-bills, it was for services voted, and for other purposes. Bills outstanding and unprovided for were to be paid off; but if such bills came in, he wished to know whether they would absorb the sum proposed. Would the grant, when added to the land and malt be found sufficient for the purpose?
The Chancellor of the Exchequerunderstood the question of the right hon. gen-
206
tleman, but it was difficult and scarcely possible to give a precise answer. He could not exactly state what amount of exchequer bills might come in. They were liable to be paid off in four months.
Mr. Tierneywished to know whether it was intended to pay off the loan from the Bank in money, or with exchequer bills? The Bank would be precisely as they were now if they took exchequer bills. There was not any difference as to what the public derived from the Bank. The public gained merely by the difference between four per cent interest and the rate of interest on the exchequer bills. He was happy to see an hon. gentleman connected with the Bank in his place. He wished to inform him and the House, that from that day forward his object would be, to endeavour to ascertain what particular steps the Bank was taking to enable it to resume payments in cash. He was to presume this fact, that for any thing the Bank knew, cash payments might be resumed at the time specified in the act of parliament. Now, it appeared that no step had been taken for this purpose, but one, a very material one no doubt—the preparing themselves with gold. But if this was brought about by increased issues, then he denied that any preparation at all was made. He observed a smile upon the countenance of a number of gentlemen, some of them not very remarkable for their attention to, or knowledge of, financial subjects. The smile of these gentlemen seemed to say —What better preparation can you have than gold? He would tell them a much better—a reduction of the issues. This was the only thing that would look like sincerity on the part of the Bank. With respect to the payment of the Bank loan, if it was in exchequer bills, the only change would be a reduction of interest. Of this reduction he was still glad; but nothing would be done to enable the Bank to resume its payments, if it took payment in exchequer bills. He [wished to ask, whether any arrangement had been come to with the Bank, as to the mode of payment? He had a high opinion of the honour and character of the Bank. The first effect of the payment in money would be the Bank's not reissuing the notes paid in. But if the payment was to be in exchequer bills, the Bank could not draw in its issues. IF the debt to the Bank were paid, it would always be in the power of the Bank to

207
curtail their issues by not renewing discounts; but the moment they took exchequer bills, they could have no control over the re-issue of bank-notes, because it was a rule with the Bank never to sell exchequer bills. When in the possession of the Bank they were merely good to show what their debts and what their assets were; for, as he had said, it was a rule with the Bank, when exchequer bills once came into their possession, never to sell them again. Indeed it might be doubted whether they had a right to sell; for they were prohibited from "dealing in government securities." Unless he found that proper measures were taken, he should move for papers, from week to week, to see what were the issues of the Bank—simply with a view to ascertain, whether they were taking those steps which afforded the only security to the country for their returning to the wholesome state of things—of paying in cash, without which, all their finance committee reports would not be one whit more serviceable to them than the Arabian Nights Entertainments, or the story of Aladdin's Lamp. It was his sincere belief, that the Bank really desired to return to cash payments; but, on the other hand, he knew there was a powerful body, who cared nothing for the interests of the country—who wished merely the continuance of such a state of things as might be most favourable for their speculations—to whom nothing was so beneficial as the leaving every thing in a state of continued fluctuation. He called, however, on every man who was not a gambler or a speculator, to consider the consequences of a continuance of the present system, and to see, in the third year of peace, how the Bank might resume cash payments. It ought to be the object of the greatest anxiety and vigilance to see that the Bank trod in the steps likely to lead to cash payments. He begged pardon of the House, but this was one of the most important subjects to which its attention could be turned. Were we to be the only country in Europe to which the stigma attached?—for it was a great stigma on a country to remain in that state with respect to our currency in which we now were. He implored them not to consider this as a party question, or as having been taken up by him in a party spirit. Feeling so anxiously as he did on this subject, he was desirous that the attention of the House
208
should be called to it as early as possible.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that he had no objection to reply most explicitly to the question of the right hon. gentleman, and he was ready to admit that the House and the public were entitled to the fullest information which it was in his power and consistent with his duty to afford. With regard to the immediate subject of the right hon. gentleman's inquiry, he had not the smallest hesitation in declaring, that it was the intention of his majesty's ministers that the repayment to the Bank of the loan of six millions should be made in money, and not in exchequer bills [Hear, hear!]. Upon the other more-general subject which had been adverted to, although not now before the House, he was desirous of making one or two observations. If it should become necessary to propose to parliament the postponement of the resumption of cash payments, it would not be from any purpose of consulting the convenience of government, but would be submitted on grounds perfectly distinct. He could not agree that it was desirable at the present moment to reduce the issues of the notes of the Bank of England; and he considered the repayment of the six millions in money as expedient, not to enable the Bank to lessen their paper in that proportion, which appeared to be the view of the right hon. gentleman, but to enable them to extend accommodation to trade, and to support the commercial interests of the country. It was upon this consideration that he should probably feel it his duty to propose some arrangement for the final repayment of this loan. Much had been already saved by the arrangement made originally, and the present rate of interest would cause a saving to the country of not less than one million out of the six millions composing the loan. The right hon. gentleman, he believed, had done no more than justice to the Bank, in expressing his conviction that they were sincerely desirous of resuming their ordinary course of payments; but the interests of the public, and the security of commerce, might, in a particular state of things, form a very reasonable ground for the interference of parliament, to delay the period at which that resumption should take place. The subject was not, however, now under consideration, and he should not, therefore, enter into any argument upon the different points involved in it

209
with respect to which questions might be raised, but he begged leave to re-state, that whether the resumption of payments in cash on the part of the Bank of England should commence in the present year or be delayed till the ensuing, the measures of government would be equally directed to forward and encourage it.
Mr. Tierneythought the right hon. gentleman's explanation perfectly satisfactory as far as related to the repayment of the six millions in money to the Bank because it would enable the Bank to do what in his opinion they ought to do—reduce the amount of their issues; but he had witnessed, with great dismay, the sort of levity with which the right hon. gentleman treated the very serious question whether the Bank was to return to its regular payments this year or the next. He was glad to hear that it was not the convenience of government which it was intended to consult; but that the understood ground upon which the House might expect, that some measure for extending the time at which the currency was to be restored to its proper state, would be proposed, was, that great loans were to be advanced by individuals in this country to foreign powers. The nature of these loans was no secret to any body: and could the right hon. gentleman entertain a doubt that the money of which they consisted was at the present moment going out of the country, or that the contractors were not already availing themselves of the high price of stocks, in order to make large remittances at the most favourable rate? Without mentioning names, he might allude, by way of example, to a certain individual, with whom he had no doubt the right hon. gentleman was extremely well acquainted, and who would scarcely suffer the present opportunity to pass by him unobserved. He apprehended that this course of things would continue to go on, and that before the five months which still remained previous to the expiration of the present restriction had elapsed, the whole amount of the loans might be transferred. In that case, to postpone the resumption would be to provide against a danger that no longer existed. The right hon. gentleman shook his head; it was possible that the right hon. gentleman might be right, and that he himself might be deceived; but to take an instance which was notorious—the loan of three millions to Prussia—were he one of the lenders, he should be
210
strongly inclined to take advantage of the present state of the funds. What he understood from the declarations of the chancellor of the exchequer was, that nothing existed in the internal or external situation of political affairs which created any obstacle to the restoration of the old circulating medium. The whole question therefore became narrowed to this point, (for it was evident that there was no ground. for the appointment of a committee to inquire whether the Bank was or was not prepared to pay)—could a foreign loan operate of itself unfavourably on the price of gold in this country? He was satisfied that it could not, and his conviction was the stronger from looking at the operation of the two great loans to Austria in 1795 and 1798, which loans produced no such effect. What he desired to see was, the Bank liberal in their accommodation, but still cautious in their issue of paper: he desired to see the gold coinage again in circulation: and if in three months after that event, the Mint price of gold was not equal to its market price, he would pledge himself never again to trouble the House on this subject—a circumstance which he had no doubt would give them infinite satisfaction. [a laugh]
Mr. F. Lewissaid, he must avow himself to be extremely anxious to see the circulating medium of the country replaced as soon as possible on its only secure basis. The facts which had come with in his own knowledge had convinced him, that if there was any difficulty or inconvenience in resuming our ancient and natural currency, those difficulties would be enhanced, and not diminished, by any additional delay. In the discussion of this subject, he feared the operation of the country banks was not in general sufficiently attended to. It was not easy to discover the causes which regulated the extent of their issues. It would, however, be found, upon inquiry, that in as short a period as two years and a half twenty-five millions of country bank notes had been withdrawn from circulation. He would leave it to the House to judge of the effect which this must have produced upon individual credit, and upon all the transactions arising out of the internal commerce of the country. He called upon every member of the House to inquire in his own district and neighbourhood, and he would venture to say, that the result of that inquiry would correspond with his own, and would show that the paper so suddenly withdrawn

211
was now re-issuing with no less rapidity. Could it be doubted for a moment, that these transitions must have a most material influence upon the prices of all commodities, or that it was not of vast importance for the House to pause and deliberate well, before they adopted any measure which might favour the continuance of these fluctuations? He believed it impossible to point out any reason why the whole, or a much larger amount of country paper, would not be thrown into circulation, unless the Bank of England exercised its control over every other, by issuing no paper which was not immediately convertible into gold. The interest of commerce, no doubt, required an adequate circulation of paper, but the misfortune was, that as the circulation increased the depreciation of paper followed, and such must be the consequence while the restriction upon the Bank continued. Should this restriction continue for two years longer, he could not allow himself to describe the distress which was but too likely to ensue. He knew that, on the other hand, the issue of paper was necessary for the purposes of commercial accommodation and to facilitate the transfer of property: but, on the other hand, such an issue as that which he deprecated threatened to shake every other description of property it) the country, both landed and funded. To obviate such a menacing evil, he intreated the House and his majesty's ministers to consider seriously the necessity of removing the restriction upon cash payments by the Bank.
Lord Castlereaghsaid, he did not rise with a view to press the discussion of a question which could not, indeed, be fairly or fully entered into until his right hon. friend should bring forward the measure which would naturally raise that discussion. But in reference to some observations which had fallen from the right hon. gentleman, he thought it proper to assure the right hon. gentleman, as well as the House, that it was the anxious wish of his majesty's ministers that the Bank should resume its payments in cash, and that the country should return to its ordinary and wholesome circulation. But looking to the subject in the view taken by the right hon. gentleman himself, he would ask, whether it could be the wish of that right hon. gentleman, or of any of those who thought with him, to place the Bank, by a premature removal of the restriction, in such a predicament as might
212
suggest the necessity of again renewing that restriction, or of urging the Bank to withhold that degree of accommodation which was essential to the commercial interests of the country? Now, in case a foreign loan of such a magnitude should be contracted as would threaten the exportation of a considerable quantity of bullion, would not parliament owe it to the country to continue, or if discontinued, to renew the restriction, as a matter of paramount necessity? It was to be apprehended, that foreign loans of this nature might be contracted, over which the counsels of the country could have no control—with which, indeed, it would be highly improper in those counsels at all to interfere. He did not mean a loan of three or four millions to this or that particular power, but loans of such an extent as could not yet be ascertained, and therefore ministers were not yet prepared to open the case to parliament. That there was nothing in the internal situation or the foreign relations of the country to prevent the Bank from resuming its payments in cash, he was quite ready to admit. There was, indeed, nothing in our foreign relations which threatened, in the slightest degree, the disturbance of our pacific connexion; but yet it was material to provide, that the financial measures of foreign states should not be allowed to embarrass this country, by placing the Bank in such a situation as might compel it to refuse the usual facilities to our different commercial transactions. He denied that government in any degree inter posed to promote loans to foreign states. It was for the contractors for those loans to act according to their own discretion, but he hoped that the people of this country would deliberate with caution upon the investment of their capital in foreign funds. He did not mean that the discretion of individuals in the disposition of their property should in any degree be controlled, but it would be well for capitalists to consider what they were about. There was, no doubt, at present, a great temptation to British capitalists; for it was known, that while money could be had in this country on exchequer bills, at so low a rate of interest as two per cent, at least four times that rate of interest might be had in foreign states. It was to be apprehended, therefore, that capital, which naturally sought the most productive employment, would be transferred to a considerable amount; and it was for

213
parliament to guard against the consequences of that transfer upon the treasures of the Bank. From such transfer, indeed, should the apprehended loans take place, the exchange would rise against this country, and, in consequence, the transportation of the precious metals would naturally take place. Under such circumstances then, he put it to the House, whether it would be wise to remove the restriction upon the issue of cash by the Bank? But he would assure the right hon. gentleman and the House, that his majesty's ministers had no disposition to continue that restriction, unless a strong case were made out. He was ready to go along with the right hon. gentleman in deprecating the consequences of the increased issue of paper by the provincial banks; but, on the other hand, it was to be considered whether the Bank should be reduced to the necessity of starving the circulation of the country, or limiting that degree of accommodation which was essential to every branch of our commercial industry. Ministers would, in his view, be highly culpable, if they sought the triumph of clinging to a principle, without considering the case to which that principle was to be applied. They were, as they ought to be, highly solicitous for the removal of the restriction upon the Bank, but it was their duty to consider the circumstances under which that removal should take place. The noble lord concluded with assuring the House, that ministers were not at all disposed to continue the restriction upon the Bank, on any ground or principle of expediency from year to year, and that they would not propose or accede to the continuance of that restriction unless a' distinct and special case was made out to justify the measure.
Mr. Hammersleyexpressed a hope that ministers would not be found to have any intention of giving any encouragement to the proposed loans to foreign states, or to the investment of British capital in foreign funds. He was sorry to understand that such encouragement was inferred from certain provisions in the treaties of 1814 and 1815, as he himself had calculated at the time those treaties were concluded; he meant with regard to the reimbursement of British subjects who had lost the property they had vested in the French funds. A distinct declaration from the noble lords upon this subject, would be of considerable utility, especially if minis-
214
ters had not the intention to which he had alluded. If it should be declared, that the provisions in the treaties to which he had referred, were owing to special circumstances, not likely again to occur, and that the case was not to form a precedent upon future treaties, great good would be done. It was extremely desirable, indeed, to remove the delusion which prevailed on this point, for too many persons were at present disposed to conclude from the treaties alluded to, that the faith of government was pledged to procure the restoration of any property they might invest in foreign funds, and especially in the funds of that country with which we had been lately at war.
Lord Castlereaghsaid, that he had no difficulty in stating that the debts alluded to in the treaties of 1814 and 15, stood upon particular grounds, and that therefore they formed the subject of a special provision in those treaties. By the treaty with France in 1787, it was covenanted, that in the event of war, every British subject should be allowed one year for the removal of his property from that country, and it was in direct violation of this treaty that the debts alluded to were contracted. Therefore it was pledged by the treaty of Amiens, that those debts should be paid by the French government. The treaties, then, of 1814 and 15, only provided for that which originated with the treaty of 1787, and was sanctioned by the treaty of Amiens. Those claims were indeed of such a nature, that if provision were not made to secure their liquidation, the government which concluded the treaty of 1787, would be exposed to the charge of having entrapped British subjects to invest their property in France. But this formed a special case, and afforded no encouragement to British subjects to vest their property in foreign funds. He was ready, then, to go along with the hon. gentleman, that those who should make such investments had no claim whatever upon the British government, and that in the event of any war, or on the conclusion of any peace, no such transactions would be entitled to the consideration of the British government. It would, indeed, be an extraordinary principle to admit that the government of any nation should have its faith pledged, or its operations regulated, by the spontaneous transactions of individuals.
Mr. Hammersleyexpressed himself perfectly satisfied by the declaration of the

215
noble lord, which would, he had no doubt, serve to dissipate a great deal of mischievous delusion.
The Resolutions were then agreed to.