Sitting of 26 June 1828

COMMISSION ON THE LAW OF REAL PROPERTY—MR. HUMPHREYS.
Sir J. Mackintoshsaid, he hoped he should be allowed to say a few words. He confessed that he felt very great regret, in common with all those who took an earnest interest in improvements in the law, that the name of Mr. Humphreys did not appear in the Commission that had been appointed, to inquire into the law of real property. The merits of Mr. Humphreys were so great and so well known, that no name would have sooner occurred than his, to any person who was zealous for reform in this branch of the law. If there was a man who, to a profound knowledge of the principles of the law, joined an eminence for his skill in practice, he could not help considering it as a public misfortune, that Mr. Humphreys's name did not appear in the commission. In saying this, he did not mean to say any thing derogatory of the learned persons who formed that commission. Mr. Campbell, though he had hitherto applied his talents to a different part of the law, would, he was sure, execute his task with skill, integrity, and assiduity. So would Mr. Duckworth. Still, he regretted the absence of Mr. Humphreys's name in the commission; and he had the less hesitation in saying so, as those very persons had expressed their sor-

1525
row at being deprived of the valuable assistance of Mr. Humphreys. Mr. Humphreys, animated as he was by a public spirit, would, no doubt, give the commission all the assistance in his power; but that would be very little, compared to the assistance which he might have given, had he been one of the commission. After the valuable publication which Mr. Humphreys had put forth, he did think this omission a misfortune.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, he had been actuated by no personal feeling in the selection he had made. Nay, he had never even exchanged a word with any of the commissioners. Moreover, no one of the commissioners had made any application on the subject; they had each of them been invited to undertake the task; he believed that the proposal was totally unexpected by each of them; and it had been so made that they should consider themselves under obligation to no one for their appointment. As to Mr. Humphreys, the omission of that gentleman was, he would contend, perfectly consistent with the object of the commission. Mr. Humphreys had written a work which had provoked a controversy; and if Mr. Humphreys had been put upon the commission, so also must those who had engaged in the controversy against him. This would not have effected the object of the commission. It was much better that persons who had not committed themselves to any particular points should constitute the commission. If the commissioners thought proper to avail themselves of the services of Mr. Humphreys, they might do so.—They might receive both the evidence and the suggestions of Mr. Humphreys. It was thought that the commission should consist of no more than five; and that a common lawyer, two conveyancers, and two practitioners in a court of equity, were the most proper persons to make up that number.
Sir F. Burdettcould by no means agree in the rule, that persons who had showed a disposition to reform a part of the law, should be excluded from a commission appointed to inquire into that part of the law. Mr. Humphreys, a gentleman eminent in his profession, had performed the extraordinary task of producing a work on the subject of the law of real property, for the comprehension of which no technical knowledge was at all necessary. The omission of that gentleman's name in the
1526
commission reminded him of the old story of the play of Hamlet being performed, with the character of Hamlet omitted.—Mr. Humphreys had given up much of his time, and, of course, of his professional emoluments, to the investigation of the subject, to inquire into which the commission was constituted; and every body expected that his name would have appeared in it.
Mr. Batleythought, that if Mr. Humphreys had been appointed, so also must the learned gentleman who had opposed the doctrines laid down in his publication.
Mr. Broughamwas convinced that the undeviating honour and integrity which had characterized Mr. Humphreys, ought to have assured every body, that a more valuable gentleman could not have been placed upon the commission. He could not help thinking, that the omission would not only tend to diminish the confidence of the public in this commission, but to diminish the prospect of benefit which they had every right to expect from the inquiry. It was said, that Mr. Humphreys had carried reform too far, and that therefore, another gentleman, who differed totally from him, ought to be placed on the commission, if Mr. Humphreys was. Now, he would contend, that there was no sense in putting such extreme notions in such a situation. A learned person was reported to have said, that he would rather have his bowels torn out, than that the system of fines and recoveries should be abolished. Now, would it not be an absurdity, to place Mr. Humphreys and this learned person together on the commission?
Mr. Humesaid, there was a great difference between having the evidence of Mr. Humphreys, and his being on the commission, where he might originate improvements. It would seem, that any men of talent and information, who had ventured to give their opinions on subjects of importance, were less likely to be employed, than men whose minds were a blank sheet of paper.

BANKING SYSTEM—CURRENCY.
Mr. Humesaid, that as he considered the question of the currency to be one of vital importance to the country, he must again impress upon ministers the necessity of altering their policy. In the speech of his majesty, in February, 1826, they were recommended to take such measures as

1527
would prevent the fluctuations which had lately taken place; but instead of attending to this recommendation, ministers came down with a measure, which lessened the currency, and tended to increase those fluctuations. The object of his motion was, to ask leave to introduce a bill which would compel bankers to make quarterly returns of the amount of their notes in circulation. If that plan were adopted, not only would it prevent excessive speculation, but it would enable parliament to deal with the currency, upon any emergency, with greater safety than at present, when it was impossible to ascertain, with exactness, the amount of paper in circulation. The bankers with whom he had communicated on the subject had declared, that they had no objection to give publicity to their proceedings in the way he proposed. The hon. member then proceeded to repeat the opinions he had formerly expressed, as to the manner in which the system of banking should be conducted in this country. He thought that no bankers should be allowed to issue notes, until they had given full security for every farthing of the amount to be issued. That, combined with the plan of quarterly returns, would, he conceived, afford perfect security to the public. He disliked the air of secrecy which was observed with respect to all the proceedings of the Bank of England. The Bank of France was guided by a more liberal policy; for, in February last, it laid before the public a full statement of all its affairs. If the Bank of England had been in the habit of issuing similar statements, the lamentable events which distinguished the close of 1825 would not have occurred. He did not, however, mean to blame the Bank for what they did on that occasion; for he believed they thought they were acting in a way which would be beneficial to the country. He then referred to the United States of America, where, as he said, during the recent panic none of the banks formed on the principle of the Scotch banks (that of giving security) had failed, whilst most of those established upon the system prevailing in this country had become insolvent. That was a practical instance which ought not to be lost sight of. The hon. member then read several extracts from papers which had been laid before the local assemblies in the United States, but in so hurried and confused a manner that it was impossible to collect their pur-
1528
port. He did not scruple to call this a complete departure from consistency on the part of the ministry; indeed a total dereliction of all principle. He would not require at the hands of private bankers the same minute accounts as from chartered banks; but he thought these depositories of public money would never be safe until government required of them, in the first instance, securities, and next convertibility of their paper into gold, with a regular quarterly return of the amount of their issues. He concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill "to compel the Bank of England, and all country bankers, to make quarterly returns of the amount of their promissory notes outstanding."
Mr. Hudson Gurneyopposed the motion. At that late period of the session, and on the eve of the operation now about to take place, of calling in the one-pound notes, no conjuncture could be conceived, in which this species of legislation could be more ill-timed. Indeed, the hon. member's own views seemed to be singularly confused. He had mixed up joint-stock banks, and chartered banks, and private banks, and banking in England, and banking in Scotland, and banking in France, and banking in Massachusetts, in a manner which could not practically bear upon the present state of monied transaction in this country, whether the existing system be a good or an erroneous one.—He, however, should, at the present moment, deprecate any legislative measure. It had been put forth, in 1825, that the insolvency of many of the country bankers arose from their having gone into the bubbles and speculations of the day. It was, however, found that the contrary was the fact; and, whatever failures had then taken place, had, for the most part, arisen from their having made imprudent advances to their immediate neighbourhoods. Now, as the legislature had determined, that the circulation of one-pound notes should cease in April next, the real danger to be guarded against was, lest the bankers, anticipating a greater demand on them than might probably take place, in consequence of that measure hanging over them, should be too hastily withdrawing their credits, and might thus bring on, during the winter months, a greater pressure than the country could conveniently bear. A run on the bankers was a great grievance to them; but the real pressure was from that which necessarily followed

1529
it; namely, the run of the bankers on the country; and though in his (Mr. Gurney's) opinion, the looseness of credits given by bankers, had, at one time, gone to a very dangerous and injurious length; yet it must be obvious, that the bankers, having to supply their respective districts with the specie necessary to their circulation, would not be very ready to grant such credits now, and might be safely left to take their own measures, without being obnoxious to the suspicion of wishing unreasonably to extend their issues.—Here, Mr. Gurney said, he could not but remark on the most unfortunate examples which the hon. member had brought forward to sustain his motion. In America there was hardly any metallic currency. The notes of the banks in the different states circulated at different values; as calculated against the United States bank note, which went every where, and with them appeared to constitute the standard in use; whilst the very system of the Scotch circulation was issuing on joint securities, to be met by after returns of the sales of property, and not, as in England, real cash lodgments previously made. Under all these circumstances, he hoped the House would not concur in the motion of the hon. member, and that if the hon. member were to bring any motion forward in another session, he might see fit to have his plan a little more digested than it appeared to be at present.
Sir C. Colesupported the motion. He thought that the labouring classes had a right to ask, at the hands of the legislature, some security for the solvency of country banks, in which they must of necessity repose so much confidence.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerconcurred fully in what had fallen from the hon. member for Newton, and felt, that after his observations upon the motion, it was unnecessary to enter into the wide field of discussion which the hon. mover had thought it necessary to take. The question really was, ought parliament to compel all bankers to render a public account of their issues? To accomplish this object, it seemed, the hon. mover had no hesitation in prying into and revealing the secrets of their business; secrets on which not only their welfare but their ruin might depend. Admitting that in the estimate he (the chancellor of the Exchequer) had made of the issues of country bank paper, there had been some inaccuracy, was that
1530
a reason why private individuals should be compelled to go into a statement of this nature, and disclose what must so often prove injurious to their interests? He, for one, could not concur in the motion. That hereafter a mode might be struck out, of controlling those issues by some species of return of the issues, he thought not impossible; but he felt that, at present, circumstances connected with the currency, called on parliament not to be precipitate in legislating on the subject.
After a short conversation, Mr. Hume consented to withdraw his motion.

CORN BILL.
The Puke of Wellington

1519
moved, the Order of the day for the third reading of this bill.
The Marquis of Lansdownesaid, he concurred in much, if not in all, that had fallen from the noble duke upon a former evening, with the exception of his recommendation of the measure as a permanent regulation. Independent of the various considerations connected with the state of the currency, which so materially affected this measure, it was apparent from the nature of the bill, and from circumstances which might arise, that it would be necessary hereafter to reconsider this measure. The protection afforded by this bill was, in his opinion, less than that afforded to the agriculturist by the bill of last year at that part of the scale at which the agriculturist stood most in need of protection. Greater protection was afforded by the bill of last year between 52 s. and 58 s.; and the present bill afforded greater protectection when the price ranged from 62 s. to 68 s. He was of opinion, that the occasion might arise when so much foreign corn might be poured into the country, as to render it necessary for the legislature to interfere. Though he did not support the present bill as a permanent measure, he hailed it with satisfaction as evincing a disposition to approximate, and a manifestation of change of opinion in that House. Within a single year the minority for upholding the former state of the law upon this subject had been reduced to a fifth of what it was. He was glad to perceive also, that none of the calamities which had been predicted as attendant upon the warehousing system had been conjured up on this occasion. He saw in all this an indication of a favourable change of opinion in the House, and a disposition to meet the general feeling.
The Earl of Malmesburymaintained, that the change of opinion in that House had not been effected by any feeling manifested out of doors. There was a strong feeling throughout the country upon the subject; but it was one of decided opposition to the present measure. The noble marquis regarded this measure as any thing but a permanent one. Now, though opposed to this bill, he above all things deprecated temporary legislation upon the subject. Even if the measure were bad, he would say, for God's sake let it be permanent. It was impossible for landlords and tenants to come to any arrangements, while the subject continued in an unsettled
1520
state. It was thought there would be a deficiency in the wheat crop. In this event the measure would fail of the desired effect, in the districts where this scarcity prevailed; in fact, it would be fatal to them, for the moment wheat averaged 60 s., foreign grain would pour in. His opinion was, therefore, that they would have no possible check at 60 s. nominally, as a remunerating price. The landlords, besides, could not now reckon upon the capital of their tenants to bear up against the storm. That capital was nearly exhausted. He objected strongly to the exception made in favour of the Isle of Man, on account of the facility which it afforded to fraud and evasion. Why not, as the rights of sovereignty of that island had been purchased by the community, place it upon the same footing as the other parts of the kingdom?
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, that this equal annexation of the Isle of Man would take place as soon as the necessary arrangements could be effected. In the mean time, a plan of certificate had been provided by the officers of the Customs, which would prevent the perpetration of frauds and evasions. The noble marquis had assigned three reasons why this measure should not be deemed a permanent one. First, the state of the currency; and secondly, the situation of their foreign relations. Now, the latter reason, if applicable at all, would affect equally every other measure of general policy in which the country might be engaged: but he must say, that nothing was more unlikely than any occurrence in their foreign relations, which could affect the present arrangement. The third objection was against the descending scale of duties. This the noble lord defended, by a comparison of the provisions of the present bill with those of the bill of last year. The present bill went to supply the deficiency when the harvest was below the average; and as to its imputed want of permanency, what corn-bill could be called permanent, when the materials upon which the basis must rest were exposed to fluctuation, from a variety of uncontrollable causes.
The Earl of Darnleyapproved of the bill because it relinquished the principle of prohibition, and substituted a graduated scale of duty. He doubted, however, whether the descending scale under 58 s. would effect its intended purpose.
The Earl of Rosslyncondemned that

1521
spirit of excitement and calumny, which imputed corruption and selfish motives to the agriculturists who sought a reasonable protecting duty. The bill of last year appeared to be rather a measure forced upon the government of that time, than one emanating from them upon a dispassionate investigation of the subject. The proper protection of agriculture involved the well-being of the other classes of the community, and of course the ultimate advantage of the consumer. He was spared from demonstrating this fact, because he; saw in the conduct of government an assurance of their determination to act upon the same principle. In looking at the present bill, he objected to the graduation of the descending scale, and would propose that the price under 58 s. should descend by 2s. instead of 1s. He was very desirous that a scale of protection should be devised, which should secure the permanent employment of capital in agriculture, particularly in Ireland. It should always be recollected, that capital embarked in manufactures was liable to depredation by design or accident, far more than that employed in agriculture which always, be the speculation good or bad, tended to give to the land a permanent character of improvement. When the proper time arrived, he would move an amendment to the warehousing clause.
The Duke of Wellingtonimplicitly believed that this bill would put a stop to the impolitic speculations in foreign corn, which had so often taken place, and substitute in their room a dealing in British produce. The duty at 58 s. was higher than that provided in last year's bill. [Here his grace was reminded, that this particular duty was the same in both bills.] There was certainly a difference in the lowest scale of duty, speaking, as well as he remembered, from the information afforded by last year's committee, before whom it appeared that 31 s. was the importation cost of wheat from Dantzic, to which add the duty of 29 s.; and then the calculation was formed exclusive of any allowance for profit for the seller or importer. He admitted that corn could be imported into this country upon the same terms as into the port of Rotterdam; but the cost of transfer from Holland to London, would be 2s. 6d. or 3s.: nevertheless there would be a countervailing gain upon the descending scale of duty. It was this which weighed with him in not laying the
1522
duty at once upon corn introduced merely into the warehouses; for the effect would be to diminish the value of warehouse property in this country, without any adequate advantage.
Earl Stanhopeopposed the bill, though he thought it less objectionable than the bill of lust year, simply because it was not intended by government as a steppingstone to further spoliation. This, rather than any intrinsic merit in the measure, accounted for the diminished number of its opponents, which had excited the surprise of the noble marquis. He had opposed both, and could not be called on to explain the conduct of those who had supported this bill, after having opposed the former; but if he were to hazard an explanation, it would be that the government of last year was the object of general disgust and suspicion, and the government of the present day the object of general confidence and esteem. They ought however, if they passed this bill now, to accompany it with two other measures; one to change the value of the currency, and another to give to farmers throughout the country the option of cancelling their leases. He felt unbounded veneration for the government of the noble duke, and could not but contrast the state of things at present with that of last year; when the landed proprietors were made, in another place, the object of reproach, and their interests appeared to be devoted to spoliation.
Lord Goderichobserved, that the noble earl had said, that he placed confidence in the administration of the noble duke, and had gone on to draw a contrast between the present administration and its immediate predecessor, and the administration of lord Liverpool. But he begged to remind the noble earl, that the bill brought in last year, did not proceed from the administration preceding the noble duke's but from that of the earl of Liverpool, of which the noble duke was himself a member. As to the hostility to the agriculturists, said by the noble lord to be entertained by some persons, he appealed to their lordships whether he had ever betrayed such a feeling, and whether he did not rather, in bringing forward his bill last year, introduce it as a measure beneficial to all interests. He did not, on that occasion, make it a question of protection or no protection, but had argued it on the ground of its tendency to serve all classes

1523
of society; nor did he ever talk of the agricultural interest but as one that required especial protection from parliament. He must, therefore vindicate himself and the administration which had been so unjustly attacked by the noble earl, from the imputations which had been heaped on them.
Earl Stanhope, in explanation, said, he was justified in his language, when he remembered that a distinguished political economist had said in another place, that the agricultural interest must be put down, and that he would sound the tocsin of alarm, whenever protection should be demanded. Was he not right in imputing wild theories to that administration, when there were in it Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Grant and a host of other political economists? He would not only repeat his observations but defend them.
Lord Goderichdeclared, on his honour, that he not only had never heard any person use the words mentioned by the noble earl, but did not believe that any person was foolish enough to utter them.
Lord Redesdaleaccounted for the bill having proceeded from lord Liverpool's administration, on the ground that that noble lord was under the influence of those members of his government who represented him in the House of Commons; but that bill was not the only unwise measure which lord Liverpool was obliged to sanction. There was, for instance, the Canada bill. They had lately heard much of the word "resign" and he remembered, in Mr. Pitt's time, the word was much used by a certain triumvirate, who had established an undue influence over that minister; that triumvirate grew afterward into a decemvirate, and was overturned; and then he was told that Mr. Pitt resigned —Resigned ! no such thing; he was dragged out. The noble baron then proceeded to show that if the comparative value of money were taken into the account, corn was dearer in the reign of Charles 2nd than it was at present; and that no corn law could be permanent, that was not founded on the principle of the corn-law of that reign. That law forbade the importation of corn, unless there was a strong probability of scarcity: and the consequence was, that the country had risen into a high state of cultivation, and had been found capable of supporting three times the number of inhabitants, which it had in the reign of Charles 2nd. The present bill
1524
was particularly objectionable in principle; for it held out a premium to speculators to search where in the world they could get corn cheapest, and then, after making that discovery, to import it in the greatest quantities to this country. The effects of such a system must be ruinous to the agriculture of any nation, and particularly of a nation which had such heavy establishments as we had to support. The noble lord argued, that this measure could not be a permanent one owing to the fluctuations which were daily taking place in our currency, to the variations in the amount of our taxes, and to the increase of the poor-rates. He should oppose the bill, as wholely inadequate to its object, and calculated rather to produce mischief than good.
The bill was then read a third time, after which, several amendments, moved by the Earls of Rosslyn and Stanhope, were proposed, and negatived.