USURY LAWS REPEAL BILL. (Hansard, 8 February 1825)

§ Mr. Serjeant Onslow
rose, in pursuance of notice, to submit to the consideration of the House, a subject which, in the course of the last session, had met with considerable support, the numbers in favour of the second reading of the measure being 120, and the amendment having only had the support of 23 hon. members. Recollecting the manner in which the Speech from the throne had approved of those liberal measures which the House had adopted, respecting free trade; recollecting the unanimous address of the House favouring the removal of all those absurd restrictions which had been heaped upon commerce, he could not but anticipate, in favour of his proposition, the strongest support. If ever there was a system of laws founded, he would not say in bad policy, but in no policy at all, it was the system of regulations respecting usury. But he had so often had occasion to enter into arguments on the subject, that he thought it unnecessary to fatigue the House at present. In the course of the discussion last year, no objection had been made to the principle of the measure, but they had heard many predictions of the evil consequences likely to arise therefrom. Now, in the first place, he would take leave to say, that the fear of some inconveniences was no answer to his argument. In legislation, we must look at the greater and the lesser evil; and it appeared to him, that there never was a period more suitable for such an alteration in the law as he proposed, than the present. No one could deduce an objection from the present state of the money market. Many contended that no alteration ought to be 151 made, because at present the law was inoperative; but, it seemed to him much wiser to make the change now, than to defer the improvement to a period of difficulty and danger. The learned serjeant then entered into the further objections urged against his measure, and concluded by moving, for leave to bring in a bill "to repeal the laws prohibiting the taking of Interest for Money, or limiting the rate thereof."

§ Mr. Davenport
opposed the motion, on the ground that it would involve the landed interest in ruin; and expressed his determination to take the sense of the House upon it.

§ Mr. John Smith
expressed his regret at the disposition he perceived to resist the introduction of this very beneficial measure. It was certainly in the hon. member's power to do so, though the practice was now extremely rare. Indeed, he looked upon this species of opposition as a triumphant proof of the excellence of his learned friend's bill, which had been supported by arguments which he had never heard answered. He trusted that his hon. and learned friend would not pursue the course which he did last year. That course—he spoke it without the slightest intention to blame his hon. and learned friend—had led to the ultimate defeat of his bill. His hon. and learned friend had deferred his measure, not once or twice, but a dozen times at least, to meet the convenience of the gentlemen who opposed it; and the result of his conciliatory conduct had been, that they had assembled one night, when no discussion was expected, in numbers sufficient to throw it out. He hoped that if his hon. and learned friend carried his motion that night, he would bring forward the second reading of his bill on a very early day, when there was certain to be a full attendance of members. He was convinced that the opposition which was threatened by the landed interest, originated entirely in mistaken notions on the subject.

§ Mr. Curwen
said, that he was one of those who had invariably opposed the measure, and with his views upon the question he did not think that he should have performed his duty if he had not stated, and acted upon, his sentiments. He thought that the present was a most injudicious period for bringing forward the subject, when the money market was so overstocked, and speculative theories 152 were so numerous. He would hold by the old laws, and would even propose to enact them, if they did not exist, in consequence of the numerous speculations now abroad, which were such as to stagger credibility. If he was rightly informed, these speculations would require a capital of 160 millions to carry them into effect.

§ Mr. Serjeant Onslow
considered the argument just advanced by the hon. member for Cumberland, to be the most extraordinary of all he had ever heard in support of the usury laws. If the hon. member for Cheshire thought fit to take the sense of the House upon his motion, it was, though not very courteous, certainly parliamentary for him to do so.