Sitting of 12 May 1825

ELECTIVE FRANCHISE IN IRELAND BILL.
Mr. Grattanrose to present a petition from the freeholders of the county of Monaghan, against the bill brought in by the hon. member for Staffordshire, which would have the effect of disfranchising the 40 s. freeholders of Ireland. The petitioners considered this bill to be contrary to justice, and to involve a direct violation of the constitution. In their sentiments he entirely concurred.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, that the opinion of the petitioners was founded on an entire misapprehension of the question. If what the petitioners stated were fact, he would at once agree with them: he would say, that the 40 s. freeholder ought not to be interfered with. But, this bill did not affect the 40 s. freeholder. What he, and those who approved of the measure, objected to was—the number of electors who were brought into the constituency, not as freeholders, but as leaseholders. So far from diminishing any right which existed at present in England, or which was valuable to the constituency of England, those who approved of this bill took a course which rather blended the rights of the real constituency of the two countries, by striking at a practice known unfortunately in Ireland, but not at all known on this side of the water. No desire existed to limit the exercise of the elective franchise. The great object was to introduce a better and more independent description of voters than was known in Ireland at present.
Mr. Grattancontended, that the petition spoke facts, and nothing but facts. When they raised the qualification of voters above 40 s., it was clearly a limitation of that right; and, he would say, one of the most enormous that was ever proposed. It was said, that the friends of this measure were anxious to assimilate
566
the law of Ireland to the law of England on this subject: but, he would maintain that, at present, the practice in England and in Wales was the same as the practice in Ireland.
Mr. Humewished his hon. friend, the member for Limerick, to show how it was possible to pass this bill, without depriving individuals, at a future period, of rights which they now expected to enjoy ultimately. By the practice of Ireland, every holder of a lease of 40 s. was entitled to a vote; and in all time to come, unless the law was altered, those who succeeded him in his property would be entitled to the same privilege. Now, it was intended by the bill of the hon. member for Stafford to take away from all future holders of leases the power to vote for members of parliament. This was the admitted object; and, if this was not taking away from the popular part of the community a right which they had long enjoyed, he knew not what to call it. If the practice was mischievous, let them put an end to it in some other way: let them introduce a measure by which the evil would be corrected. But, let them not, by one sweeping measure, deprive four millions of people of an established right. It had been reported, that because he was hostile to this bill, he had declined to vote on the Roman Catholic Relief bill; but it was perfectly well known to gentlemen around him, that he had formed one of the majority on that occasion; and sorry he was, that that majority was not ten times greater [hear].
Lord Althorpsaid, that the opponents of this bill objected to it because, in their opinion, the extent of popular election in Ireland would, if it were carried, be more limited than it was at present. Now, he would vote for it, because he thought it would give the popular interest greater force and power than it could now command. At the present moment, gentlemen of large property, by subdividing their estates, were enabled to overpower the middling and better-informed classes. But, by the operation of the bill now before the House, the weight of the independent freeholders would be greatly increased; and instead of lowering the right of popular election, it would place the counties of Ireland, which were now nothing but close boroughs, in the same free situation which they held in England.
Mr. Littletonsaid, that by the bill which

567
he had introduced, there was not one individual in Ireland, who at present had a right to vote, to whom that right would not be preserved. He really thought that the hon. member for Aberdeen, and the reformers in general, ought to be first and foremost, in supporting this measure. For the very same reason which induced the hon. member for Aberdeen to call for an increase of the elective franchise in Scotland, his object being to destroy corrupt influence—for that very reason the hon. member was bound to vote for a decrease of the elective franchise in Ireland; because, in that country, the fictitious voters overwhelmed the real freeholders. He could not conceive on what principle those who supported parliamentary reform could oppose this measure. He was astonished, how gentlemen who came into that House by the voluntary vote of independent English electors, could support a system under which, by dividing four or five estates into shreds and patches, the power of the real freeholder was completely overwhelmed! They ought to support a measure which would put an end to a system so vicious. Sooner or later, when the principle of the bill was understood by the public at large—when the opinions, so strongly and generally expressed in that House, were properly weighed—the measure would be successful. The misunderstanding which prevailed; the misrepresentation which had most unfairly been made in that House; and the inconsistency which he had observed in the conduct of various parties, with respect to this measure, would ultimately be corrected; and he had no doubt but that it would be eventually carried.
Sir J. Newportsaid, that as the practice now stood, men of real substance, of bona fide property, refused to attend at elections. In many instances, individuals of respectability would not qualify themselves to act as electors. They knew that they would be completely overpowered by those fictitious freeholders; ant therefore they viewed the elective franchise as a privilege not worth having. It was to him most extraordinary, that any man who had looked into the evidence given before the committee, or who was personally acquainted with the practice could oppose a measure which would put down an evil of such magnitude.
Mr. S. Bournesaid, that besides the strong ground—that of purifying the
568
elective franchise—there was another very powerful argument in support of the bill. It was admitted, that amongst the evils which oppressed Ireland, the subdivision of land was one of the greatest. It was impossible directly to interfere with property; and, while a motive existed for the subdivision of property, that subdivision would take place. Now, when the motive which led to that system was known, it was the duty of parliament to remove it and its accompanying evil together. Surely the increase of leaseholders—at rack-rent, in most instances, be it remembered—ought not to be continued, when it was clearly the means of perpetuating a generally admitted evil.
Mr. W. Becherspoke in favour of the bill, because he thought its tendency was to remedy existing evils in Ireland.
Mr. Moncksaid, he considered the 40 s. freeholds a great evil; but he did not like the remedy. The argument for the present bill was, that in consequence of the numbers of electors, the real sense of the county could not be taken, and that the independent voters were thereby nullified. Was it forgotten that in this country there were hundreds of boroughs? Could gentlemen discharge from their minds the pot-walloping boroughs? Could they forget the places where the mechanics, being freemen, destroyed by their numbers, all the independent voters? In England, boroughs and votes were sold openly and notoriously to the highest bidder; and yet the Irishman was to be deprived of his vote, on account of evils which were not of his own creating. At Southampton, the right of voting was in the inhabitants paying scot and lot, and individuals who purchased the right of the corporation. When George Rose stood for Southampton, and was hard run, and likely to lose his election, he was favoured by the corporation, and at one stroke, no less than sixty of these voters, all strangers to the town, were created; and he thereby succeeded in getting his election. If the evil was to be put down, let it be a general measure. The hon. member for Galway had given instances in which the 40 s. freeholders had acted with the greatest independence. He believed the present bill to be a contrivance, on the part of the Irish members, to secure their return to parliament. These members had created votes, which they expected to find dependent, but which they now discovered were too often indepen-

569
dent. They found the voters in a state of mutiny. They would not go with the landlord, as it was intended and expected they should; and they often went wth the priest, in direct opposition to the landlord. This was their real fault. It was not their general dependence, but occasional independence, which was struck at by this bill. For these reasons, though as yet he had voted for it, he should vote against its further progress.
Sir George Rosesaid, that the occurrence alluded to by the hon. member, could not have taken place at Southampton, as the voters must at least be made a year before the election.
Mr. Moncksaid, he would not vouch for the statement. He had read it in a newspaper: it might have been inserted for election purposes.
Lord Miltonadmitted that the bill deprived certain persons of a right to vote, but he was so fully convinced that that right gave rise to great evils, that he should vote in favour of the bill. He took that opportunity of asking the hon. member for Staffordshire whether it was his intention to proceed with this bill, or to postpone it until the final determination of another measure, on the success of which its operations must ultimately depend.
Mr. Littletonsaid, he was quite ready to comply with whatever might be the wish of the House on the subject. He would either wait the decision which might be come to in the House of Lords, or he would proceed that evening; but he was particularly desirous to avoid doing any thing which might be construed into a breach of faith. He was willing that the wishes of the members for Down and Armagh, both of whom he saw in the House, should be complied with relative to the postponement.
Colonel Fordesaid, he was indifferent whether the elective franchise bill should be disposed of now, or postponed to a future day, provided it was distinctly understood, that if the great measure of Catholic emancipation should be carried in another place, this bill should be persevered in aid pressed forward as rapidly as was consistent with the forms of House.
Mr. Brownlowrose to address the House, but was for some time wholly inaudible, owing to the subdued tone in which he spoke. He alluded to the opinion he had recently given on the subject of
570
Catholic claims, which opinion he saw no reason to retract. He particularly recommended the passing a measure of general conciliation; and he looked upon the bill which had been alluded to as a component part of that measure. The concession of the Roman Catholic claims, the increase of the qualification of electors, and the provision for the Roman Catholic clergy were called for by the present situation of Ireland. If any of these measures were not to be carried, still he should not regret the vote he had given. He was deeply anxious that the bill should be carried; but to its present postponement he could have no objection.
Mr. Littletonsaid, that it was his intention, if the Catholic Relief bill should be carried in another place, to proceed with all possible alacrity to press on the elective franchise bill. On the contrary, if the former bill should be lost, he would certainly abandon the latter.
Sir F. Burdettsaid, that he rose principally to express his admiration of the manly and candid course taken by the hon. member for Armagh. What that hon. gentleman had stated had had a considerable influence on his mind. In looking at the question of Catholic emancipation with a view to conciliate the minds of the people of Ireland, he could not put out of view, that a portion of that people was Protestant; and on their behalf he also felt a strong interest. It was fit, therefore, in conceding the claims, to grant them in such a way as would be acceptable to the Protestant mind; or the House would, in fact, be doing little more than changing the sides of the difficulty. The great object was, to consolidate the whole power of the empire; and that could not be attained without conciliation. With reference to the elective franchise bill, he should be prepared to defend it upon every principle—upon a principle of reform. He should be able to show that the same principle applied to particular parts of the elective franchise in this country would be beneficial, and tend much to the independence of parliament and the liberty of the subject. Having, however, accepted the support of several members on the great question, which support had been most honourably given, he should feel bound to support the minor bill, which had for its object to increase the qualification of voters in Ireland, even if he could not find reasons for it in all

571
respects satisfactory to his own mind. He looked at the bill for the provision of the Catholic clergy in the same light. He was bound to support it; for on that condition the support to the great question, which was not less than that of religious liberty in the country generally, had been given. He should, therefore, feel warranted in making even greater sacrifices on that subject, than he was in fact called upon to make. Standing as the measure did, he felt obliged to several hon. members for their assistance and votes in favour of a bill which seemed to him of paramount importance to the welfare of the empire.
Colonel Trenchwas desirous of expressing his regret, that by the loss of the present bill, Ireland would be deprived of the benefit of a measure of great importance [cries of "no, no"].
Mr. R. Martinthought that this bill would be one of the greatest visitations ever inflicted on Ireland, if it should pass into a law, without being accompanied by Catholic emancipation. He had no doubt that it would produce a commotion, perhaps a rebellion, in Ireland; and this he was ready to prove on a proper occasion.
Ordered to lie on the table.—The further consideration of the Elective Franchise bill was deferred till the 27th.

WAGES OF LABOURERS OUT OF THE POOR RATES.
Mr. Monckmoved for leave to bring in a bill to prohibit in certain cases, the payment of any part of the Wages of Labourers out of the Poor Rates. The hon. gentleman observed, that this practice of rendering every agricultural labourer partially a pauper, went not only to annihilate all independency of principle among the lower classes, but to incumber the country with a population which it had no means of providing for. The law, as it stood, amounted absolutely to a bounty upon idleness. A labourer who, by day-work, earned, say 8s. a-week, was unable, if he had a family, to live on this, and received, perhaps, 6s. therefore in aid from the parish. If he was a man industriously inclined, and by task-work or other extra exertion, raised his 8s. earnings to 12 s., what was the consequence? He had his toil for his pains: for then the parish gave him 2s. And even this was a slighter evil than the encouragement which this practice gave to early marriages. In his
572
natural state, the bachelor stood better off than the married man: his gains might be equal, and his burthens were less; and this comparative ease of condition formed the true and legitimate check to improvident unions. But our law now neutralized that check entirely; or rather, indeed, gave a bounty to a man for producing children which he could not maintain. The law said now, that a single man should not earn so much by his daily labour as a married man. While he was a bachelor, he must labour at so low a rate, that all hope of making any provision for matrimony was out of the question; bat he had only to marry at once, without thinking of consequences and the parish would at once increase his wages, and give a pauper's support, as fast as they were born, to his children. The hon. member, after commenting generally upon the oppressiveness as well as the impolicy of the existing system, sat down by moving for leave to bring in his bill.
Mr. J. Benettwas not disposed to oppose the bringing in of this bill, though he doubted much whether the good results would follow which the hon. member predicated of it. He always viewed with alarm any approach towards an alteration in the poor laws; as hitherto such alterations had been but rarely for the better. The complaint was not so much against the law as its administration; and the governors of the poor were charged with too much liberality in applying the funds destined for the use of the poor. But surely, when the agricultural people were themselves the largest contributors to the poor rates, nobody could quarrel with them for dispensing their own money too generously. The shop-keepers might contribute a portion; but they also gained by the better condition of the poor, in an increased sale of their goods. No man was more anxious than he was to see the poor of this country comfortably provided for; but, in his conscience, he believed it was not in the power of this House to legislate effectually upon the subject.
Sir George Chetwyndundertook to affirm that it was not legal to pay labourers' wages out of the poor's rates. He was aware that such a practice existed in some places; but he had never heard it justified by a lawyer in that House. It appeared to him, therefore, unnecessary to pronounce, by a new bill, upon the illegality of that which had never been defended.
Mr. Monckin reply, stated, that he was still of opinion that under the statute of Elizabeth, it was lawful to apply the poor rates in aid of wages. By that act the overseers were bound to provide for the poor, and of course to supply such deficiency in their wages as would enable them to subsist. He hoped the House would entertain the subject, as it appeared to him not inferior to that of Catholic emancipation, or any other that might be brought before that House.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.

ASSIMILATION OF THE CURRENCIES OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND.
The House having resolved itself into a committee,
Mr. Wallacerose. He stated his object to be, to do away one of the most important distinctions, remaining between Great Britain and Ireland, and, at the same time, to remove one of the greatest practical inconveniences Ireland was now subject to, by assimilating the currencies of the two parts of the United Kingdom. The object, he said, was neither new to the House nor to those who, by property, by commercial transactions, or even by official situations, were connected with Ireland—all had felt the inconvenience arising from the difference of the currencies, and all had been anxious that, whenever practicable, the removal of it should be effected. This, if any were necessary, was his apology for bringing forward the present motion, that concurring in that general feeling, he thought that the time was peculiarly favourable for such a measure. That although the evil was then most felt, it was not in periods of great fluctuation, but when the exchange was, as it had been for a considerable time, steady, when the currencies were bearing their due proportion to each other, that such a change could be undertaken with advantage and with safety.
When brought forward at one time, difficulties presented themselves from the restriction on money payments and the paper currency, which were thought insuperable; but on that occasion there was not one who did not concur in thinking the measure desirable at a more favourable season. When it was again brought forward it was rather postponed than objected to, on an understanding that it was to be brought forward by the government. The authority arising from what
574
passed on these occasions he stated to have been powerfully confirmed by passages, which he quoted from the report of a committee in the year 1804, of which lord Oriel was chairman. The difficulties then apprehended had vanished by our return to cash payments, and the measure was now confined to the mere equalization of the current monies of the two parts of the kingdom.
When the real and nominal exchanges was at par, that is, when the payments balance each other, and there is no depreciation in the currency of either country, the difference between the currency was 8⅓ per cent, this was, however, liable to be affected by different circumstances; and he held an account in his hand which showed the extent of its fluctuation to have been at one time as high as 19 per cent in favour of England, at another to have been as low as 1⅓. These fluctuations took place subsequently to the acts which permitted the free importation of corn and the transfer of stock, at a time too, when at Liverpool and Edinburgh the exchange was confined to the mere expense of the transmission of money commuted for bills at a fixed and known number of days. He did not say that this measure would destroy the exchange between the two countries, but he saw no reason why, when the only difference between them was removed by the assimilation of the currencies, that which occurred at the places he had mentioned, should not equally occur in Ireland, and the greatest part of the inconvenience of the exchange should not be removed by taking away all its uncertainty.
He then stated the effects of this uncertainty in the injury it produced, both to the individuals, and in the manner in which it affected all the commercial transactions between England and Ireland; which, however unavoidable in the intercourse between Foreign States, ought not to subsist in that between parts of the same kingdom, in which, if the currency was the same, no nominal exchange could exist. This, he said, was the case in respect to London, Liverpool, and Edinburgh; and the union could never be considered as complete, till it was so in respect to Ireland.
To obtain this, it was necessary to bring the money of account and the money of circulation to an equality, and to make such money as circulated in any part of the empire, of a value different from what

575
it bore in the other parts of it, the same.
At first sight, the change of that by which the prices of every thing were to be affected appeared formidable, and calculated to lead to great confusion: practically, however, it had not proved so. The history of the coin of every country showed the facility with which changes in its value had been affected; and perhaps no country had been more liable to changes than Ireland itself.
He then traced the state of the current money of Ireland from the remote periods of its history, to the difference that was first established between that and the currency of England in the reign of Edward the fourth; the different attempts that had been made to bring them to the same standard in the reign of Elizabeth, and during the administration of lord Strafford; the state of the coin preceding the arrival of James the second; the measures adopted by that monarch in raising both the gold and silver; to the act of George the second, by which both the gold and silver were brought to the nominal value at which they now stand, of 8⅓ per cent above the value of the same coins in England.
The same inconveniences, he said, had been felt from the difference of currencies between England and Scotland previously to the union between those parts of the kingdom; and by the 16th article it was expressly stipulated, the currencies should be in future the same; and a part of that money which was to be received as indemnification, was made applicable to compensate those who should suffer by this change. The effect expected was produced; the exchange fell, and, with the exception of a short period, has continued fixed since that time, and by bills at a certain number of days, notwithstanding all the shocks to which the public credit has been exposed.
The inconvenience of an uncertain exchange, as attaching to all commercial transactions, was, he stated, felt in proportion to the increase of those transactions, which, he was happy to believe, as it regarded Ireland, owing to the repeal of the Union duties, and other measures lately taken, was likely to be most rapid. He then stated the imports and exports at different periods, and observed how the capital of Great Britain had gradually absorbed the foreign trade of Ireland, which was now chiefly carried on through British ports.
576
The average of seven years exports from Ireland, according to official value,—

Ending January 1727:

&#x00A3;

&#x00A3;.

To Great Britain

504,492

Foreign Countries

540,051

1,044,543

Ending January 1792:

To Great Britain and Colonies,

4,180,000

Foreign Countries

1,207,000

5,387,000

Ending January 1823:

To Great Britain and Colonies,

7,850,000

Foreign Countries

302,547

8,152,547

The average of the first period made one-half the trade foreign.
Of the second ditto, nearly two-ninths.
Of the third ditto, not more than one twenty-seventh.
It was, however, less in respect to the policy of the measure on which he believed there was likely to be any doubt, than in respect to the mode in which it was to be carried into effect. This he proceeded to detail.
The actual currency or Ireland consisted in notes of the Bank of Ireland and of private Bankers, in bills of exchange, in sovereigns, guineas, and silver, of the different denominations used in England, and issued from the British Mint; in tokens issued at different periods, and under the authority of several acts of parliament (a great proportion of which had been called in), and partly of copper coined expressly for the use of Ireland, at the rate of thirteen-pence or twenty-six halfpennies to the shilling.
The Irish pounds and the Irish shilling, were therefore mere imaginary monies; the coin which was in circulation, with the exception of the copper, was British coin, passing according to the money of account, for nominally one-thirteenth more than its value as British currency. The copper coin, as was stated, being at one-thirteenth less than the copper money of Great Britain.
What he proposed was, to make the nominal money of account equal to the value of that of circulation, and raise the copper to the rate of that passing in England.
He admitted this latter, as affecting the lower orders, to be an important change; but argued, that the inconvenience arising from it could be only temporary, and that no real injury could be produced to them, either in their dealings or the value of their labour. If this change were the

577
whole, there would be no necessity for a legislative measure, the prerogative of the Crown was sufficient to effect it, either by raising the value of the coin actually current, or by calling it in and issuing a new and more valuable coin in its place; the latter, though attended with some expense, he thought on many accounts, the most desirable course. What created the necessity of a legislative measure was, the regulation of contracts, either actually subsisting or hereafter to be entered into. With respect to the first, he stated, that as currency bears the proportion of 12/13ths to the nominal value, and that in every payment made 12/13ths of the value in current British coin, was deemed equivalent to the sum stipulated in nominal currency; that is, that 100 l. British would be received as equal to 108 l. 6s. 8d. Irish; this was the rule he should adopt, and declare that every subsisting contract, having reference to Irish currency, should be taken to be satisfied by repayment of 12/13ths of the sum stipulated in the currency of Great Britain. This, it is true, would nominally reduce the amount due by 1/13th, but the value of what was due would be unaltered, and the sum received would, after the measure had taken place, be precisely the same as before.
With respect to contracts to be entered into, he proposed to enact, that after a day to be fixed in the bill, they should all have reference to British currency. No inconvenience should arise from this, except from the ignorance of one of the parties, and this he could propose to provide against by measures that might give the most general publicity to the provisions of the bill.
The debt of Ireland, which was now stated in Irish currency, he proposed should hereafter be reduced to its amount in British currency, and become nominally what it was in reality. No injury by this would be suffered by the public creditor, whose interests would continue to enjoy the same protection as before; the same sum in principal or interest would still be receivable, although the nominal amount of both would undergo a diminution.
He should propose that all books of account, in which the public had any interest, should be in future kept in British currency. The chief branches of the Revenue were already assessed in this currency; they were then converted into Irish,
578
and when the accounts were to be rendered to the treasury or to parliament, again converted into British. The inconvenience of this practice was obvious, and it would be removed by the provisions he had stated.
With respect to Bank notes which now circulated, and had been issued with reference to Irish currency, they consisted of those of the bank of Ireland, and those of private bankers. He should not propose the calling in either one description or the other, but that all notes that were issued in future, either by the Bank of Ireland or the private banks, should have reference to British currency. The Bank of Ireland, he understood, compounded for their stamp duties, and were not in the habit of re-issuing the notes that returned to them; to that body, therefore, the provision could produce no inconvenience. The private bankers were, however, in a different situation; they did not compound, and had the privilege of reissuing any note returned to them during three years from its date; the depriving them of this privilege without compensation, would be an injustice, and the compensation he should propose was, that for all notes returned to them within a year from their date, if sent to the stamp office, they should be allowed the full amount of the stamps; if during the second year, ¾ths of the amount; and if during the third, one half. This compensation he felt to be a very liberal one, and had reason to believe it would be perfectly satisfactory. There were minor details, with which he did not think it necessary to trouble the committee. These were the general principles and provisions of the measure he had to propose, and to these he did not anticipate any objection. He certainly had heard some fears expressed; among others, an apprehension that it might be the means of the money being at times drawn from Ireland to this country; this, he argued at some length, could not be the case; and even supposing the danger not to be as visionary as he believed, the remedy of an inferior currency was an evil that infinitely outweighed it.—He was aware of the prejudices that it was liable to, but these prejudices must always be encountered; if they were an argument now, they were so at all times, and he did not see that any period was likely to arise in which they might be encountered with less apprehension than at present.

579
He did not, he said, propose this as a measure of great political importance, but of considerable practical convenience. If it did not take away the exchange between the countries, it would settle and fix its rate; it would facilitate the transactions, and convert the trade between the two countries into a really home trade, with all the advantages belonging to it. Above all, and to which he attached the greatest moment, it would remove a great subsisting distinction, and by so doing tend to draw closer the bonds of union and encourage a diffusion of British capital throughout Ireland, and, by affording means of employment, probably have some share in alleviating the distress and poverty which had been the parent of all the crimes and disorders by which Ireland has been so long disgraced and afflicted.—The right hon. gentleman then moved the following resolutions:

"That the pound sterling in Great Britain and Ireland respectively is, according to the currency of each, divisible into twenty shillings; and that the shilling in Great Britain and Ireland respectively is, according to the said currency of each, divisible into twelve-pence; but that the silver coin which represents a shilling of the money of Great Britain, is paid, accepted and taken as representing one shilling and one penny of the currency of Ireland, and the pound sterling of the currency of Great Britain, is, at the par of exchange, paid, accepted and deemed as equivalent to one pound one shilling and eight pence of the currency of Ireland; and that any sum of British currency, is at the same par of exchange, paid accepted and deemed as equivalent to an amount of pounds shillings and pence of the currency of Ireland, greater by one-twelfth part than the amount of pounds shillings and pence, of the currency of Great Britain contained in such sum; and that any sum of Irish currency is, at the same par of exchange, paid, accepted and deemed as equivalent to an amount of pounds shillings and pence of the currency of Great Britain, less by one-thirteenth part than the amount of pounds shillings and pence of the currency of Ireland contained in such sum.

"That as great complexity of accounts between persons residing within the different parts of the same United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and other inconveniences, arise from the said difference of currency, it is the
580
opinion of this House, That it is desirable to assimilate the currency of Ireland to the currency of Great Britain, without disturbing the relation between debtor and creditor, and to make hereafter one uniform currency for the United Kingdom.

"That it is expedient that the values of the monies of account in Ireland, and monies of account in Great Britain, should in all cases whatever be assimilated to each other.

"That it is expedient that all duties constituting the public revenues of Ireland, should be calculated and received, by the several departments under which they are collected, in the currency of the United Kingdom; and that all books and accounts kept in relation to such duties, and all accounts in which the public have any interest, should be kept and stated in the said currency of the United Kingdom, and in no other.

"That it is expedient that the public debt in Ireland should cease to be estimated in Irish currency, and that in all accounts thereof the same shall be stated at its amount in the currency of the United Kingdom; and all sums payable for interest in respect of the said debt, should be calculated and paid in the said currency of the United Kingdom.

"That it is expedient that all existing salaries, allowances, pensions, duties and debts, and all contracts, agreements, and stipulations for the payment of money, having reference to Irish currency, shall be deemed to be fully discharged and satisfied by payment according to the amount in British currency, calculated at the rate of twelve thirteenth parts of the amount stipulated to be paid in Irish currency.

"That it is expedient, that from and after the period of assimilating the Irish to the British currency, all contracts, agreements, and stipulations, involving or implying the payment of money, should be held to be entered into in reference to money of the value arid description of that now circulating in Great Britain, unless the contrary be made to appear.

"That it is expedient, that in pursuance of any proclamation to be issued by his majesty, the several coins of Great Britain should circulate in Ireland at the same nominal as well as at the same real value as in other parts of the United Kingdom.

581

"That it is expedient that all copper coin of the currency of Ireland, be permitted to be brought to the Bank o Ireland, in pursuance of any proclamation to be issued by his majesty, and that there be deliverd at the said Bank of Ireland a sum in the current copper coin of Great Britain, after the rate of twelve-pence of the English copper coin for thirteen pence of the Irish copper coin."

Sir J. Newportexpressed his concurrence in the principle of the measure, though he feared it would be attended with considerable difficulty in the execution. It might certainly excite some degree of alarm, and ought therefore to be accompanied with such modifications as might allay any feelings of apprehension on the part of the people of Ireland.
Mr. L. Fosterapproved of the principle of the measure, and thought there would be no difficulty in getting over the obstacles opposed to it. He believed that in two months after it should pass into a law, it might be brought into practical operation.
Sir H. Parnellthanked the right hon. gentleman and the government for having brought before parliament a subject, which was so well calculated to facilitate the commercial intercourse between England and Ireland.
Mr. Grenfellapproved of the plan, and thought the present was the best time for carrying it into effect. The copper coin of Ireland was circulating, at nearly double the value of copper in the market; holding out the greatest temptation to counterfeit money. A new copper coinage would increase the size of the Irish pence and halfpence; and that alone would reconcile the lower orders in Ireland to the present measure.
Mr. M. Fitzgeraldreturned his thanks to the right hon. gentleman opposite for the very salutary measure of which he had just stated the outline to the committee. He did not anticipate any of those practical difficulties from it, which had been mentioned by some of his hon. friends. On the contrary, he was certain that it would tend much to the simplification of the present system; and by so doing, would greatly benefit the commerce of Ireland.
Mr. John Martinsuggested to the right hon. gentleman the expediency of issuing a coinage of silver threepences. We had formerly had silver pence and silver twopences; and the recurrence to such a
582
currency would be a measure of very great and very general convenience.
The resolutions were agreed to.