Sitting of 8 March 1826

DEPOSITS WITH THE BANK BILL.
Mr. Huskissonsaid, the House would recollect, that when his right hon. friend, the chancellor of the Exchequer, communicated to them that the Bank had agreed to advance money on goods and merchandise pledged to them as security, he at the same time stated that the Bank had signified an expectation, that the law of Merchant and Factor or rather the alteration of that law, which took place last session, and would not take effect until the 1st of October, would be extended to them. He would therefore move for leave to bring in a bill to effect that object, which was simply to provide that any goods or pledges upon which the Bank advanced money, should be considered as a security to the Bank, notwithstanding any supposed power or control which others might attempt to exercise over them. This was conformable to the alteration in the late law, which declared, that notwithstanding the symbols of property exercised by the owner, goods should be held to be the property of the person in whose possession they were, and that his acts over them should be held binding, in preference to the claims of any other person. When Exchequer-bills were advanced, in 1811, for the relief of the distress then existing, on the same sort of security, a provision to the same effect was introduced, which was, in fact,

1199
a departure from the law of the land as it then stood, and goods pledged under the act were made pledges to which the Crown had a claim in preference to any other lien whatever. He would now move, "That leave be given to bring in a bill, to facilitate the advance of money by the Bank of England upon deposits, or pledges."
Mr. J. Smithsaid, that he approved of the original alteration of the law, and only regretted that it was not carried into effect instantly. It was a mistake to suppose that foreigners entertained any jealousy of the bill.
Mr. Baringsaid, though he regarded this bill as an important improvement in the commercial law of the country, he had objected to it when it was introduced last session, because he saw no reason why it should hot have taken effect immediately oh its enactment. He knew of no foreigner having objected to it; nor, indeed, did he see upon what ground any foreigner could object to it, since it only assimilated the law of this country in that respect to the law of every civilized country in Europe. He admitted that an unnecessary delay to the operation of this act bad been agreed upon; but as the legislature had decreed, that a certain time should elapse before its operation, he did hot think it a sound practice to sacrifice a principle to this particular case. The commissioners of 1811 preferred advancing money on personal security, instead of on deposits of goods; and he hoped the Bank would follow that example. He believed the measure adopted by the Bank, under the suggestion of his right hon. friend, had been productive of the greatest good already; and that the manner in which the Bank was acting was deserving of general commendation. That body was taking the best steps, in the must delicate manner, and with as much rapidity as the nature of the case would admit; and he was happy to say, that there was already in London a renewed confidence, and a freedom of commercial intercourse within a few days, which he believed to be Wholly attributable to this measure.
Mr. Bernalobjected to the measure, and considered it a very dangerous precedent.
Mr. Grenfellconsidered the precedent a good one, and he thought the mode adopted much better than an issue of Exchequer-bills.
Mr. Abercrombysaid, that nothing that had been done by ministers had so much met with his approbation, as their determination to refuse an issue of Exchequer bills.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.