the two and a half millions which you were now in arrear. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer had come forward and said we gave up the corn duties; they produced us 772,000l. in the year 1846; we want revenue; continue the corn duties for the sake of the revenue for two or three years more he did not believe the country would have been against such a measure as that; and he thought so the more because, upon looking at the state of prices, and the effect the corn duties had had upon prices on the one hand, and upon the revenue on the other, he could make it perfectly clear to the meanest understanding-and he might say to the most perverse understanding that the corn duties had not been paid by the consumer in this country. The average price of wheat in February was 51s. 4d. On the 1st March, the suspension of the Corn-Law Act expired, and the 7s. duty came into operation. According to the doctrine of the hon. Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire and his school, the consumer ought immediately to have paid 7s. more for his wheat; but what was the state of the case? No perceptible difference arose in the price of wheat; the difference, such as it was, tended rather to a decline. In the month of March, from 51s. 4d., the price of wheat fell so that it averaged 50s. 6d. Duties came in, and in the month of April, notwithstanding 78. was being paid in March, the price of wheat fell 3d. more upon the average of that month. Still, as the price fell, the duty rose. In the month of May, the average price of wheat was 48s. 11d., with a sliding-scale. As the price slipped down, the duty went up. The duty in May was, upon an average, about 9s. In June, still the price went down, and we had an average in June of 40s. in price, and of 10s. duty, by which, in the month of June alone, we were able to levy from the foreigner 56,000l. Had he not made it clear to the House, clear to the meanest and most perverse understanding, that, as far as these corn duties were concerned, they came out of the pocket of the foreigner, and they did not come out of the pocket of the English consumer? It was a revenue to the English Exchequer, at no cost whatever to the British consumer. He then said, with this example before us, do not let us have recourse to odious income taxes to fill the Exchequer; do not let us have recourse to this spendthrift mode of meeting present resources by entailing debts upon our posterity in the thirty-third year of peace; but let us look this question again manfully in the face, and let us not be misled by the delusions of those who told us that the repeal of the corn laws would at once make flour 1d. a pound, and would fill England with prosperity; would cause England to exchange her manufactures for the corn of foreign countries; that it would leave no loom standing still; that it would leave to every operative superfluity, and he would no longer be required to have higher wages, because he was to have cheaper bread, and the superfluity of his wages was to be spared from the purchase of bread to be expended upon tea and sugar; that it was to increase to a boundless extent the export of the British manufacturer. Let us learn the answer from our diminished exports of five millions sterling, in the first six months of 1848, when free trade had come into full operation. Let us not place confidence in these deluders of the public mind; let us have a care how we listen to those who denounce their opponents, and think they are alone the only true prophets; let us beware of the gentleman who decries all those who differ from him, and who thinks himself the only orator, and who exclaims, as Jack Cade did at another time to Lord Say, just before he ordered his head to be cut off, "I am the besom that must sweep the Court clean of such filth as thou art. LORD J. RUSSELL, after all he had heard, did not come to the conclusion that it was unwise in the Government to propose to increase the income-tax to meet the expenditure of the country. It was the opinion of Lord Ashburton, and one which that noble Lord pertinaciously held, and which deserved some attention, that, instead of keeping the expenditure equal to the income, it would be more prudent to keep 2,000,000l. or 3,000,000l. as a sinking fund, and then the Government would be prepared for any such emergencies as might happen. Now, he thought that a better plan than this was to give the public the benefit of the reduction of taxes; and successive Governments, acting on this principle when they had a surplus, had reduced the taxes to a great extent. He had shown on a former occasion that within the last few years taxes to the amount of 10,000,000l. a year had been taken off from articles of necessity and general consumption. The reduction of taxation had thus been very great; but the consequence was, that if there were an extraordinary nearly the whole of this year, there was no duty above 10s., and that corn merchants could bring in their corn without waiting until the price rose to 70s., which was a great advantage to the consumers, and a great security this year over the years 1841, 1842, and 1843, when the old duty was in existence. He would not enter further into the question, except to express his satisfaction that, by the wisdom of Parliament, they had the state of corn duties which now existed instead of those which existed previously, The House divided on the question that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question:-Ayes 66; Noes 15: Majority 51. List of the AYES. Abdy, T. N. Berkeley, hon. Capt. Boyle, hon. Col. Morris, D. O'Connell, J. deficiency in the revenue, or an extraordi- Campbell, hon. W. F. Dundas, Adm. Ebrington, Viset. Hobhouse, T. B. Lewis, G. C. Mahon, The O'Gorman Monsell, W. very much Goring, C. Scrope, G. P. Sheil, rt. hon. R. L. Somerville,rt. hn. SirW. Spearman, H. J. Spooner, R. Stanton, W. H. Talfourd, Serj. Tancred, H. W. Ward, H. G. Watkins, Col. Wilson, J. TELLERS. Hill, Lord M. List of the NOES. Renton, J. C. Thompson, Col. TELLERS. Hume, J. Bill went through Committee. SAVINGS BANKS BILL. strike out the whole of the words in the 7th On the Motion that the House resolve it- line after the word "at," and the whole of self into Committee, SIR H. WILLOUGHBY said, he had on a previous occasion presented a petition, signed by 41,000 depositors in various provident societies, representing a sum of 762,000l.; and he had now to present another petition, signed by 38,000 depositors in savings banks, representing a sum of 1,080,000l. against this Bill. They believed that its provisions would, when carried out, prove most dangerous to the interests of these institutions. And he must say, that they had not had the usual courtesy shown to them in reference to the intention of the Government to introduce this Bill, great as were their interests. They had not been favoured with such a notice as was invariably given even with respect to the commonest turnpike-road Bill. If the managers of some of the savings banks in Ireland had acted wrongfully, that was no reason why the management of English and Scotch savings banks should be interfered with. Although twenty-four witnesses were examined before the Committee with respect to the Irish savings banks, yet the Committee positively refused to hear a single witness with regard to the English and Scotch savings banks. Was it fair, then, at so advanced a period of the Session, to press this obnoxious measure forward without having given the English and Scotch depositors any notice of the intended alterations? The Chancellor of the Exchequer would recollect, that when leave was asked to introduce this Bill, he asked him whether it was intended to make any alteration in the existing law with regard to the liability of trustees and managers; to which the right hou. Gentleman's answer was, that it was intended to render them liable only to the extent of 1001. each, unless they expressed their willingness to extend their liability. But when the Bill came before the House, he found in it no such provision. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman that this question of the liability of trustees and managers was a most delicate and difficult the 8th, 9th, and 10th lines, as well as the words in the 11th line, as far as the word "Act." The effect of this alteration would be to place the trustees of savings banks in exactly the same position as that in which they were before the passing of the Act of 1844. He then proposed to insert such words as would limit the liability of a trustee to 100%. SIR H. WILLOUGHBY said, the proposed amendments of his right hon. Friend entirely altered the nature of the opposition which he should offer to the first clause of the Bill. A trustee, by the proposed alteration, would only be liable for such losses, &c., as should happen through his wilful neglect or default. His right hon. Friend simply proposed to repeal the 7th and 8th Vic., cap. 83, sec. 6. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER: Exactly.] So that to that extent the trustees and managers of savings banks in this country would be restored to the same condition as they were in before 1844. [The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER They will be exactly in their former condition in that respect.] The change of 1844 was made in the teeth of the expressed declarations and wishes of all parties interested in English and Scotch savings banks. But there was another great objection to the Bill, which, if not removed, would prove most fatal to the whole working of the Bill. He perceived that, by the third clause, auditors were to be appointed. Now, it was a very important matter to know how these auditors were to be paid. For his own part, he thought that the auditors were an excellent body of officers; but he was quite certain that, in consequence of the reduction of the rate of interest now payable on moneys in saving banks, he knew that small banks had no funds out of which they could be paid. With regard to the fifth clause, which was the most objectionable of all, it was quite impossible to ascertain in two days what were the feelings of the immense body of depositors who were scattered throughout the whole of this country, and many of them abroad. Many of them were servants. He felt persuaded that rather than run the risk which this Bill would entail upon the trustees, they would resign their trusteeship. He believed that the third clause could not be worked as it stood. He should really like to know what had occurred in the working of English and Scotch savings banks to induce the Go as everybody believed to have been the case here. If the Government were wise, they would engage at an early period next Session, to bring in a Bill to give Government security to the savings banks. LORD G. BENTINCK: Sir, as the Go vernment at this late period of the Session to interfere so objectionably with such large interests. He thought that the parties who were interested in this question had a right to complain of the manner in which the proceedings of these banks had been watched by the Commissioners for the Re-vernment seem determined to persevere, duction of the National Debt. An impression had gone abroad-and he believed it was perfectly true-that the savings bank money had been used for other purposes than those which related to the savings banks. He would not say whether or not the money had been used advantageously for national purposes; but, under the administration of those Commissioners, very great and serious losses had occurred. If any question was to arise as to any deficiency, they might feel assured that the trustees and managers in England and Scotland would not consider themselves responsible for any act done in relation to these trust moneys after they had passed out of their hands. He was glad to find that the right hon. Gentleman admitted that they ought not to be responsible after the money had got out of their hands; but still there was this obvious conclusion to be drawn, that the savings banks of this kingdom would have been in a much more flourishing condition in every respect had greater facilities been given by Parliament for their efficient management. and to have no regard for the just remonstrances of the independent Members of this House, I am necessitated to act in a manner which will at all events mark my disapproval of their conduct, and of the provisions of this most crude and undigested measure. Sir, I move that this Bill be committed this day three months. The evidence upon which this most important Bill is founded is that of four or five witnesses-men connected with Ireland exclusively, with the exception of Mr. Tidd Pratt, who is the Registrar General of Savings Banks. Their evidence is not published-the Committee sat but nine days-and yet it is upon such a foundation as this that a Bill, affecting an immenso number of the people of this country, and dealing with no less à sum than 26,000,000,, is brought before Parliament at the end of August. port itself is the most extraordinary that ever was presented to Parliament. It is as remarkable for its brevity as for its vacuity-as brief as it is worthless. But then, Sir, this Bill is meant to apply to MR. HENLEY concurred in the greater England. There was not a single Engpart of what had fallen from the hon. Ba- ligh witness examined, with the exception ronet who had just sat down, and thought I have stated, nor is there a syllable about the measure had not been well digested, England in the report. The report is and could not at this late period of the Ses- styled "The Report of the Select Comsion, be well considered. The only committee appointed to inquire into Savings plaint he had ever heard of the English savings banks was, the low rate of interest, arising from the expenses of audit. The Bill would cause panic and alarm, and he entreated the Government not to persevere with it. The re Banks in Ireland." All the evidence is kept back. Yet the Chancellor of the Exchequer asks the House of Commons to sanction this Bill. The report says— "Your Committee has proceeded with the inquiry entrusted to them by the House; but owing COLONEL THOMPSON desired to know to the late period of the Session they have found the amount of tendency in this Bill to in-clusion; and they are of opinion that it is advithemselves unable to bring it to a satisfactory concrease the security of the depositors in the savings banks. He supposed nothing was clearer than that if there were final defalcations, they must be made good out of the public purse. It would justify a jacquerie if they were not, and if after all the preaching to the industrious classes, exhorting them to confide their savings to the care of their aristocratic betters, it was found their money had been left to be run away with without resource. Things were better managed in France, where institutions of this kind had government security, sable that a further inquiry should take place, either during the recess or in the next Session of Parliament, into the existing system of savings banks. They are of opinion, however, that it is expedient that a Bill should be introduced in the present Session of Parliament, regulating the liability of trustees of savings banks, and providing for the appointment of auditors of savings banks." The Committee make no recommendation that the depositors should be subjected to any new regulations on the production of their books. But the Bill which the right hon. Gentleman brings in has the following provision: "And be it enacted, That the rules of every savings bank shall specify a number of days, not less than two in every year, ending on the 20th of November, on which the book of each depositor shall be produced at the office of the said savings bank for the purpose of being inspected, examined, and verified with the books of the institution by the auditor; and in case the said book shall not be produced on the second of the days mentioned in any one year ending as aforesaid, the said account shall be closed, and all interest shall cease to accrue on the sums deposited from the last day on which the said book should have been so produced; provided, nevertheless, that the trustees or managers shall have the power to reopen the said account, but only to allow interest thereon from the time when the same shall have been reopened; and an extract of this provision shall be enrolled as one of the rules of every savings bank." The Chancellor of the Exchequer comes down with this little-considered and illprepared Bill, and which he has shown he does not understand himself. The clause I have just read allots two days in each year for the production of depositors' books, that they may be inspected and verified, and awards as a penalty for their non-production the cessation of interest and the closing of their accounts. I have no hesitation in saying that the Chancellor of the Exchequer must be ignorant-perfectly ignorant of the nature of this provision. In the parish in which I reside, Marylebone, there is a savings bank in which there are no less than 18,700 depositors. The actuary waited upon me in reference to this most absurd Bill, and said that if 18,700 depositors were seen hurrying to the bank in two days it would cause a run upon the bank. The investigation into the present system of savings banks was, as far as England is concerned, a perfect Star Chamber business. Both the secrecretary of the Marylebone savings bank, and the secretary of the Bishopsgate savings bank, in which there is no less than one million sterling deposited, applied to the Committee for leave to watch its proceedings, but that leave was refused. Is the Government really serious in forcing on a measure like this almost on the last day of August—a measure of great importancea measure not sought for and not needed, at least in England, upon half-a-dozen lines of a report of a Committee who examined four or five witnesses. The First Minister of the Crown is not present this Bill ought not to be discussed in his absence. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer assured us on Friday night that he would bring in another measure next year, and which would effect a radical change in savings banks. What is the use of bringing in a Bill which is to have a four months' application? But let us see the practical working of the Bill. One of these savings banks has 48,000 depositors. How are all the books of the depositors to be verified and inspected in two days? I have been informed that the ordinary staff of a savings bank cannot, even if doubled, inspect and verify more than 500 in a day: they get through 1,000 in two days. remainder? But the right hon. Gentleman may say let the banks increase their staff of clerks. Well, but that will occasion increased expense, and by consequence diminish the interest of the depositors. Is it wise to do so? When, in 1844, an additional expense was imposed upon those savings banks of 11s. in the 100i. it caused a sensible falling-off in the depositors, who, seeing the interest lessened, invested their money in other modes, or kept it. It is all very well for the Government to say that they can carry this measure-they will be supported by their sleeping myrmidons who, aroused from sleep, and knowing nothing about the Bill, and hearing nothing of the discussion, instinctively find their way into the same lobby with the Government. Well, but then there will be another disadvantage entailed upon depositors in those banks by this meddling legislation-the fees will be increased. With the new "radical reform" of the Chancellor of the Exchequer will come new rules, which must be paid for. Surely a Government which has proposed so much and which has done so little, can refrain from doing harm, since they cannot do good, and will not press this most discreditable Bill through the House of Commons at the end of August, without necessity, and against the opinions of those best calculated to form a judgment on the subject. I move, Sir, that this Bill be committed this day three months. What is to be done with the MR. MONSELL understood that the argument of the noble Lord and the hon. Baronet against the Bill was founded upon the want of confidence which any change in the law would produce on the English depositors. Well, then, he could tell them that unless they produced some such Bill as the present, the want of confidence which at present existed with regard to the Irish savings banks would be continued, and the most injurious consequences would follow. He had no objections that it should not extend to England and Scot |