HC Deb 31 March 1824 vol 11 cc36-9
Mr. Ellis

presented a petition from the chamber of commerce in Dublin, setting forth,

"That the petitioners have observed with great satisfaction the bill now before the House to repeal the existing laws against usury; that the petitioners are convinced that very erroneous opinions have prevailed with respect to the operation of these laws, and that their real tendency is, to aggravate the evils they were designed to remedy; so far from regulating the relations between the lender and the borrower on just and salutary principles, they only serve to encourage a recourse to evasive expedients, ruinous in numberless instances to both parties; to the lender in the risks his cupidity tempts him to incur, and to the borrower, forced into circumstances which render him in a yet greater degree the victim of extortion; thus the law that affects to interpose for the benefit of the necessitous man, only tends to confirm his subjection, to deepen his difficulties, and by its fatal protection, to precipitate his ruin; that the usury laws, mischievous in their evasion, are also mischievous in their observance; to establish under penal sanctions a fixed standard for the use of money, which, like other commodities is liable to perpetual fluctuations in value, can have no other effect than to divert it from the beneficial purposes to which it would otherwise be certainly applied, and to prevent the intimate connexion between capital and industry so conducive to the advantage of both; on the one hand it tends to diminish the usefulness by obstructing the circulation of capital, and on the other, to deprive industry of pecuniary aids, which, if adapted to its exigencies, and acquired without undue sacrifices, could not fail to give new vigour, and a wider field for its operations, while they would in numerous instances be the means of averting the irremediable ruin of which a temporary pressure is the occasion; that the laws in question are directly at variance with the enlightened policy which the wisdom of the House has so distinctly recognized, and so beneficially applied, as the rule of legislation; the policy founded upon the principle, that to liberate private interests from legislative interference, and to leave them, as far as practicable, to the discriminative management of the individual, is the most effectual means of providing not only for their advancement, but their security; that the petitioners beg leave to add, that at a period when the market rate of interest is so much under the legal rate, an opportunity is presented for accomplishing all the objects of this great measure without the hazard of incurring even the temporary inconvenience which is sometimes found to attend the movements of improvement; may it therefore please the House to proceed to the total and immediate repeal of the existing laws against usury."

Sir H. Parnell

spoke to the respectability of the petitioners, and to their ability to judge upon this question. He hoped that the House would attend to the strong arguments which the petition contained.

Mr. Alderman Heygate

did not at all acquiesce in the doctrines of the petition. Among the landed interest the greatest alarm prevailed upon the question; and the further the bill proceeded, the more its opponents multiplied.

Mr. Curwen

said, he should oppose the measure.

Mr. Sykes

said, that the opposition to the measure must proceed upon the apprehension, that the rate of interest would be increased; but he was satisfied that any such fear was totally unfounded.

Sir T. Lethbridge

was of opinion, that the effect of the bill would be, to place borrowers at the mercy of lenders.

Mr. Philips

supported the change of the law, disputing the assertion of the hon. alderman, as to the increase of the opponents of the bill. There never had been such a coincidence of testimony among intelligent men, as upon this question. They all agreed that the existing laws were injurious both to borrowers and lenders.

Mr. Grenfell

was convinced that, even as the law now stood, money could never be obtained at a lower rate of interest than it was worth.

Mr. T. Wilson

argued, that such an alteration ought not to be made but at the request of the landed interest. Whenever other persons were paying 5 per cent, landed proprietors would be obliged to pay 7 per cent. The repeal of the present law would be beneficial to Ireland.

Mr. D. Gilbert

said, that the passing of the bill before the House would be highly advantageous to the landed interest.

Sir E. Knatchbull

observed, that money could not now be obtained on mortgage, at a less rate of interest than 4½ per cent.

Mr. Monck

remarked, that money on mortgage bore a higher rate of interest than money advanced on good bills, be- cause it was exposed to the risk of a chancery suit, and could not be obtained again immediately on its being wanted.

Ordered to lie on the table.