LONDON AND WESTMINSTER BANK. (Hansard, 16 June 1834)

The Lord Chancellor
then said, partly from the great number of persons, and from the extent of the interests involved in this concern or scheme—he did not wish to use an offensive term—partly (though there was not the least ground for an imputation of impropriety in this case) on account of the use that might be made of it, if the decision come to was not perfectly satisfactory to the mind of his Majesty's subjects, for this would probably not be the only application that would be made—knowing, too, that the opinions in Westminster Hall were not unanimous on the matter, inasmuch as several very eminent lawyers and other individuals, on whose opinions the public placed much reliance (and they certainly were entitled to great respect) disagreed as to the legality of this Bill; and partly, also, because he thought it would be better for the Bank of England itself, as well as more to be desired, with reference to the Legislature;—on these accounts, in his opinion, this question ought to be properly discussed, and once for all decided. With these views, he was about to suggest to their Lordships a course of proceeding which would give them little or no trouble, and, in his judgment, would lead to a satisfactory result. He proposed, that the Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench, who, in his absence, acted for him as Deputy Speaker of their Lordships' House, should be allowed to sit any morning that might be convenient to the learned Judges, and with them decide the question he would submit to them. He proposed merely to bring under their view the former Acts of Parliament, and the provisions of the present Act. Having looked at which, he would ask them whether it would be an infraction of the rights of the Bank of England, secured to them by the existing statutes, to pass the present Bill? If their answer was in the affirmative, that would put an end to all doubt on the subject. But he was not equally certain, if they were of opinion that it would be no infraction, regard being had to the understanding of the parties at the time the contract was made with the Bank; if they were of opinion that, legally and technically speaking, there would be no infraction, he was not, he repeated, equally certain that the parties interested in the London and Westminster Bank would 437 thereby acquire a right to demand a decision, which the passing of the Bill would certainly be in their favour. If their Lordships were sitting only judicially, the case would be very different; but if the parties had the law with them, it did not follow that their Lordships, as a legislative assembly, would decide in favour of the expediency of the measure. He had a strong opinion as to what was likely to be the result of the opinions of the Judges. He thought that, on the whole, this would be the most satisfactory mode. It would give their Lordships no trouble. One counsel could state what were the Acts, and then the Judges could deliver their opinions on the Act.

§ The Duke of Wellington
attached great importance to the statement of the noble Lord, that if the opinion of the Judges was, that legally there would be no infraction, that would not decide the question. He came down to the House to support his Majesty's Government in the bargain it had made with the Bank. An officer of the Government having stated, in another place, that it had made that bargain with the Bank, in his opinion it ought to be confirmed. He did not like any part of this transaction. He did not like, that the Bank of England should be placed in the hands of Government or Parliament, in order to have it determined whether its rights should be granted or not. He believed, the noble and learned Lord stated quite truly when he said, that, if the application now made to them were approved, it would not be the only application of the kind they would have. The difficulty they were now in was one of the consequences of the declaratory clause introduced in the Bill of last Session, and foreseen and foretold when that Bill was under discussion. He was sorry to see the Bank of England exposed to this description of discussion; because, on some future occasion, their Lordships might be influenced by it. He agreed, that the only way was, to refer the question to the Judges; but, after their opinion was given, if it was unfavourable to the Bank of England, he should be ready to come down to support his Majesty's Government in carrying into effect that bargain, to the full execution of which the Government was pledged.

The Lord Chancellor,
in order that there might be no doubt on the subject, 438 would express his full concurrence in the view taken by the noble Duke as to what ought to be their course, if it should be found that the law was not with the Bank of England. If, from any communication, or any correspondence between the Bank of England and the Government, it should appear to him that, to concede to the present applicants the legal right would be to involve a breach of confidence on the part of the Government, he would not call on them to act on the strict right, but would put the question to them on the higher ground of legislative expediency, and ask them to give that view of it the preference.

The Marquess of Bute
said, that the parties interested in the London and Westminster bank were anxious and ready to have the question decided. He had no private interest in this matter, but, if he had, he trusted, that none of their Lordships, nor, indeed, any individual in the country, would believe he would, on that account, endeavour to influence their Lordships in favour of the Bill. Unless, however, the Government should be able to show a specific contract with the Bank of England, or such a contract as would render it dishonest to pass the Bill, he hoped, that those who were interested would not be debarred from a commonlaw right.

§ The Earl of Eldon
said, he did not believe, that there was a more honest man in the kingdom than the noble Lord who had just sat down, but he, nevertheless, must dissent from the noble Lord's opinion on the present question. It would be impossible for him to give his consent to this measure, if it should turn out that there existed an understanding between the Bank and the Government that no such company as the one proposed should be established.

§ Earl Grey
was quite sure, that the noble Marquess was quite incapable of being influenced by any private interest he might have in the present question. For his own part, he had a strong opinion, that to grant the privileges sought by the London and Westminster Bank would be inconsistent with those exclusive privileges which the Bank of England by law possessed. Though he could not say, that any specific contract, such as that alluded to by the noble Marquess had been made, yet, no doubt, there was an understanding between Government and the Bank of 439 England, that those privileges which it had before possessed, should be preserved to it. In the first instance, he thought, it would be better to have the opinion of the Judges; nor could he conceive there could be any doubt of the Judges giving their opinion. The question was, whether the granting of certain privileges to this Joint Stock Company would be inconsistent with those privileges which were enjoyed under the existing laws by the Bank of England. He believed, that similar questions had been put to the Judges before; and he did not know any instance in which they had declined answering. If their Lordships would, in the first place, then, depend on the construction of the law, and next, on that general consideration of good faith arising out of the contract between the Government and the Bank, he had no difficulty in saying, that, in introducing the declaratory clause they had no idea whatever that any privileges, secured to the Bank under the existing laws, would be in any degree affected.