(NO. 221.) COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 25 August 1887)

§ THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (The Duke of BUCKINGHAM and CHANDOS)

said, he must take occasion to call attention to a few of its provisions which he deemed objectionable. In the first place, the Bill had come upon some of those who, like himself, were trustees of savings banks with considerable surprise. The Bill, which had not been 1791 circulated before it was read a second time, contained powers which were unusual; and although hg believed no trustees of savings banks would object to inquiry into the stability of the institutions with which they were connected, still, looking to the evils of panic unnecessarily excited, he urged that there should be some real provision that inquiry should not be demanded where it was not necessary. The Bill provided that the Treasury might issue a Commission of Inquiry if satisfied, on the representation of such a number of the depositors as they might consider sufficient, that an inquiry was reasonable. There should be some indication of the number of depositors who should have the power of claiming this inquiry; and also there should be some indication of the class of persons to whom the conduct of the inquiry should be intrusted.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HALSBURY)

said, he agreed to what the noble Duke had said as to the class of persons to be intrusted with this important duty, and. what he should propose in Committee was, that, instead of the ordering of the inquiry being in the absolute discretion of the Treasury, the function of the Treasury should be to make an application to a Judge of the High Court, who should, on being satisfied that there was reason for making an inquiry, delegate the power of making an inquiry to a Master of the Supreme Court of Judicature in England or Ireland, or an Advocate or Writer of the Signet selected by the Court of Session in Scotland. With those Amendments the difficulties felt by the noble Duke would, he thought, be in great part removed.