HC Deb 09 April 1821 vol 5 cc148-50

On the order of the day for going into a committee on this bill,

Mr. Grenfell

wished to learn, whether there was any foundation for the rumour, that an application had been made by the bank of Ireland for a renewal of their charter. If such an application had been made, and ministers were to accede to it the bank of England would have a good right to demand a like privilege; and when the House considered the immense profits made by that establishment, it must strike them as being a subject well worthy of their attention.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

expressed himself unprepared to give an immediate answer. He trusted, however, that whatever measure might be brought forward upon this subject, would meet with the approbation of parliament.

Mr. Hume

said, that he would gratify his hon. friend with an answer. When they recollected the immense profits which the bank of England had made, and that that body was not disposed to take care of the national debt without being paid a large sum, they ought to take care that no proposition was acceded to without being brought regularly before that House.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

said, that the apprehension of the hon. gentleman was unfounded. No negotiation of this kind could be brought near its termination without the knowledge of parliament.

Sir H. Parnell

said, from the manner in which the right hon. gentleman had evaded the question, it might be inferred that some foundation existed for the ru- mour. The great question for the House to consider was the propriety of renewing the bank charter. As to the effect of the bill of 1819, it was comparatively of little consequence. He thought all the distresses since the year 1797 might be accounted for by a reference to their departure from the sound principles of political economy, by introducing a depreciated paper currency, and giving a monopoly to the Bank. He hoped the possibility of such an occurrence would be set at rest for ever by a motion to prevent the renewal of those charters.

Mr. Baring

did not know how a great country like this could go on without a national bank. At the same time he thought that to renew the charter of a bank, of which charter several years remained unexpired, was a question of very great importance.

Mr. Bennet

wished distinctly to know whether any negotiation had already commenced. He knew very well that if ministers came down to that House and stated that they had made an engagement with the bank, the House would at once sanction it; and therefore, when the right hon. gentleman spoke of an appeal to parliament, he begged leave to say that it was no appeal at all. In a poor country a national bank might be of great service; but in a rich and powerful country like this, he could see no necessity for such an overgrown etablishment, with their bonuses and their hangings. He traced all the evils which had afflicted the country for many years, to the proceedings adopted by the Bank and by the government. He must enter his protest against the negotiation.

Mr. Pearce

deprecated such observations as those that had fallen from the hon. member. With respect to bonuses, they had always operated beneficially for the public; and the Bank, it should not be forgotten, had on all occasions shown themselves most anxious to assist the country. As to the number of forgeries, it was certainly a most unfortunate circumstance; but could the hon. member suppose, that the Bank had any interest in multiplying prosecutions? They did all in their power to prevent the commission of the crime; but their object was not so easily effected as the hon. gentleman imagined.

Mr. F. Lewis

observed, that the question relative to the bank of Ireland was second to one other only, in its import- ance to the best interests of that country. The misery which Ireland had suffered, and the danger to which she had been exposed from the state of her currency, were too great to be allowed to press again upon any part of the united kingdom. It was time to put a termination to a system, under which nine out of twelve country banks had broken, and had involved in the severest distress the whole population of their respective neighbourhoods. He was disposed, therefore, to hail with gladness what he trusted would prove a return to the sound principles of currency—he meant the commencement of a negotiation for renewing the charter of the Bank of Ireland. If it was commenced upon a solid basis, and accompanied by salutary regulations, the greatest benefit might be conferred upon that country. It would be desirable to assimilate the law to that of Scotland, where there was no limit to the number of partners. In England and Ireland, banking was a monopoly, and to this circumstance might be traced much of the evil which they all alike deplored. But that comparative security which was enjoyed in Scotland was derived chiefly from the multitude of partners. If, in addition to this, Ireland were relieved from the circulation of one-pound notes, he should think the advantage materially increased. The House ought to reflect, that although paper was economical as a circulating medium, gold was secure, and that it was cruel to expose the poor, and those who carried about them their whole property, to the loss of their wretched pittance. Upon the whole view of this question at present, he did apprehend that the chancellor of the exchequer was now pursuing the just, the wise, and the high-minded course of policy.

The House then went into the committee.