and he doubted not but they would still continue to do so as well as they had hitherto done. It was quite impossible for him to agree to the proposition for giving these two banks the privilege which they had not previously exercised; and he should, therefore, oppose the Motion of the hon. Baronet opposite.

possessed for sixty miles round Dublin, and when the people of Ireland expected to have the benefit of the abolition of those restrictions? He did not then mean to express any opinion as to whether it was or was not advisable to have only one bank of issue; that question was not raised in the present discussion; but he did think they ought not to shut out two solvent, and, as had been fully acknowledged, wellmanaged banks, from that competition which they ought to be allowed as banks of issue. Now that commercial enterprise was opening up in Ireland, and making fresh demands for facilities of monetary transactions, they ought not to create monopoly, but allow a free trade in banking as well as anything else.

Mr. P. M. Stewart supported the claims of the Royal and Hibernian Banks to the enjoyment of the advantages conferred by this Bill.

Mr. Hawes was disposed to support the Motion of the hon. Baronet behind him (Sir W. Somerville), on the principle of the general benefit that might accrue to Ireland, from extending to that country a sound system of joint-stock banking. It was said, that if they went to Scotland they would find a sound system there in operation, which was essentially beneficial | to the public. As to the reply of the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government with respect to the Banking Bill of last year, he (Mr. Hawes) should observe that he did not consider himself bound by that measure, some portions of which he Mr. Muntz supported the Resolutions had opposed at the time, and some modifi- proposed for the extension of the advancations of which he confessed he should tages of this Bill to Ireland. One great like to see introduced. Several of the great argument in favour of the Resolutions was, commercial towns of Ireland, such as Cork, that Ireland was a poor country, and had Limerick, Belfast, and Waterford, had ap-on this account a claim to particular conplied for accommodation to the Bank of sideration, in respect to the special matter England, in consequence of the existing under discussion. monopoly of the Bank of Ireland, and that Mr. Wyse supported the Amendment. having been refused to them, he considered, He thought that those Banks had the if it was supposed to be of service to Ire- fullest claim to the enjoyment of those land to have this power of issue sought for privileges. If those banks had had timely granted, that it ought to be conceded. notice that the Bank of Ireland was disThere was no reason to suppose that this posed to surrender its peculiar privileges, power would increase the present circula-there was no doubt that they would have tion-it might rather tend to diminish it. In conclusion, he had only to say, that however the present system might be viewed, he thought it was only good policy to extend to Ireland the benefit of a sound Mr. C. Wood thought that, in some system of joint-stock banking, and on that respects, the measure of the right hon. ground he was disposed to support the Mo-Baronet with regard to Ireland was in tion before the House.

Mr. Bellew considered the Hibernian Bank was especially entitled to consideration, inasmuch as for many years it had counteracted and resisted the stringent and imperious monopoly of the Bank of Ireland, at a period when that establishment was indisposed to afford accommodation to any persons except those of a particular line of political opinions.

Mr. E. B. Roche supported the Motion; and wished to know on what grounds it was that Ministers refused those banks the privilege of being banks of issue at a time when they were doing away with that monopoly which the Bank of Ireland long

come forward and established their claim. He felt bound to support the Motion for the extension of those privileges to those banks, convinced that it was just.

some of its enactments more liberal than the measure extended to Scotland. He did not think that any case had been made out for the extension of those privileges to those banks. It might be true that to confine the issues to existing banks was to give them a monopoly. No doubt it was. But the right hon. Baronet was anxious in these measures to preserve existing interests, and therefore he allowed existing banks to issue up to the amount they issued now. He did not think there was any fair ground for the complaint that parties had been taken by surprise, and that being so, he could not agree to this motion.

Mr. Sharman Crawford would appeal to the good feeling of Government on this question. They had recently been acting upon a very conciliatory policy towards Ireland; but this measure had a very unconciliatory tendency. It would excite a very unpleasant feeling in that country, if the Government carried this measure in opposition to the united remonstrances of the Irish Members-particularly as no advantage had been proved as likely to result from the change. He hoped, therefore, that, in some way or other, those banks would be allowed to issue notes.

Sir W. Somerville replied. The analogy between Scotland and Ireland did not hold, for in Scotland they had no monopoly to deal with; but that was not the case in Ireland. As the monopoly was now to be abolished, he contended that these banks whose case he had brought forward ought to share in the advantages. He agreed with those hon. Gentlemen who stated, that Ireland was now begin-i ning a career of prosperity. He believed that a career of prosperity was now opening upon them, of which no man could foretell the extent; and he trusted the right hon. Baronet would not, by this measure, interfere to check it.

The Committee divided on the Question, that the words be inserted :-Ayes 43; Noes 103: Majority 60.

On Clause 8 being proposed, Mr. M. J. O'Connell suggested that the average of the circulation should be taken, not, as proposed by the Bill, for twelve months previous to the 27th of April last, but, as in the English Bill, for twelve weeks preceding that period.

Mr. Redington complained that the Irish bankers had not been put upon the same footing as the English bankers.

Sir R. Peel said, no advantage had been taken of the Irish bankers, to whom twelve months had been given, which had not been given to the English bankers.

Mr. Redington asked why the right hon. Baronet did not give a reason for making a distinction between the two countries?

Mr. E. B. Roche said, his hon. Friend (Mr. Redington) was wrong in looking for a reason from the right hon. Baronet, who was not under any necessity for giving a reason, backed as he was by a majority who would support him. The Irish Members and the interests of Ireland were in fact treated with contempt, and he advised his hon. Friends to take no more trouble with the Bill.

Sir R. Peel said, he could not conceive how any Government could be supposed to have any motive in imposing a restriction upon the currency of Ireland, unless with a view of securing the welfare of the country. He had had long experience of the effects of an uncontrolled circulation in Ireland. He remembered the years 1819, 1820, and 1825, and the disasters which overtook numberless individuals, who in vain struggled against the misfortunes in which they were involved. So far from treating the Members from Ireland, or the interests of Ireland, with contempt or neglect, he had the strongest impression they were consulting the interests of Ireland, by putting some cheek to the undue increase of the paper circulation of the country.

Mr. M. J. O'Connell would not give the House the trouble of dividing on the question.

Clause agreed to.

On Clause 9 being read,

Mr. M. J. O'Connell proposed to leave out the words, "At the Head Office in Dublin." By the law as it at present stood, which they did not want to change, every bank was obliged to pay its notes at its branches as well as at the head office in Dublin. The effect of the clause in the Bill would be to embarrass commercial enterprise, by unnecessarily restricting the circulation, for the banks would be obliged to keep bullion to meet their notes, not only at their branches in the country, but at their head offices in Dublin.

Mr. Hawes said, that if any parties had a right to complain of the Bill, it was the English, not the Irish Members. There was a fairness and liberality towards Ireland in this Bill, which he had looked in vain for in the English measure. But, at the same time, he thought that the wish of the Irish Members might be acceded to on this point.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer regretted that he could not accede to the wishes of hon. Gentlemen opposite. The Bill provided sufficient margin for the expansion of the currency. He did not share in the apprehension of the hon. Member for Kerry, that the increased commerce and improved railway communication of Ireland would be injured by the restricted circulation of this Bill.

Mr. M. O'Ferrall was sorry that the right hon. Gentleman would not concede to the wishes of his hon. Friends. All that was required was to gain security for the

country, and that security would be insured, bank.
by having gold anywhere-whether at the
head office, or at any of its branches.
Mr. S. Wortley thought there was so
much reason in the objections against the
plan of the Government on this point, that
they ought to concede it. He quite con-
curred in the observation of the hon.
Member who had spoken last.

Mr. Ross assured the Government, that whatever other concessions were made, they would be quite useless, unless they conceded the present point. The people of Ireland would not be satisfied without it.

Mr Redington said, that the plan of the Government demanded from the Irish banker 21. in gold for every 17. in paper.

Mr. Trelawny assented to the general banking principles of the right hon. Baronet, which were founded upon the doc. trines of free trade; but, upon the present point, he agreed with the Irish Members; and, on the last division, had voted with the minority. Many English Members had done the same; and so it was not fair to charge them with indifference to Irish interests.

Mr. Wyse said, that he had anxiously waited for some reason from the Government for the course they were adopting, but no reason had been given. All the objection the Government could offer to the Amendment was a small inconvenience; whilst to their plan were opposed the general banking interests of Ireland.

Sir R. Peel said, that hon. Gentlemen seemed very much alarmed at the consequences which would follow from restriction. They thought that an increased currency was essential to the prosperity of a country, and they referred to Scotland. He would read the opinions of Scotchmen themselves. [The right hon. Baronet read a statement published by the Directors of the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce in 1841, which showed that the circulation of Scotland had diminished in late years, while the transactions of the country increased.] It was on the proper distribution of capital by banks, that the prosperity of a country depended, and not on the amount of its paper currency. It was far better that there should be a sound paper currency, than that there should be a short and delusive prosperity accompanied by a speedy reaction. He much preferred the system adopted in Ireland of making the notes payable on demand at the branch banks, to the system adopted in Scotland, of making them payable only at the head

But some of the Irish banks had so many as forty or fifty branches; and, without meaning in the least to depreciate the Irish banks, he thought it right that there should be some security. He would undertake to consider whether or not, without endangering the security which it was right to require, they could adopt some such a plan as would make bank notes payable at every branch to the holders of its notes, and yet, at the same time, not hold out any inducement to the head bank to collect its gold for the purpose of increasing its issues. If he could reconcile the two things, he would do so; but he should not be considered as giving any pledge.

Amendment withdrawn.
Clause agreed to.

On Clause 15, prohibiting the issue of notes for fractional parts of a pound, being proposed,

Sir W. Somerville hoped the right hon. Baronet would not prohibit the circulation of 25s. and 30s. notes, which were of the greatest convenience.

Sir R. Peel said, he believed the effect of prohibiting the issuing of such notes would be to increase the silver circulation; and he had so strong an impression of the advantage of this, that he could not agree to the suggestion of the hon. Member.

Mr. Redington said, that the right hon. Baronet had not proposed the clause in the first instance. He could not then have considered it of so much importance; and it looked very like inconsistency to propose it now.

Sir R. Peel said, it was impossible, in proposing a measure like the present, to foresee every case that might arise. It might look like inconsistency; but the question, after all, was, whether what was proposed in the clause would be for the advantage of Ireland; and he really believed it was.

Mr. M. O'Ferrall said, that the people, in making bargains at fairs, found great convenience in the 30s. notes. He, therefore, hoped, that if the right hon. Baronet was determined in abolishing all other fractional notes, he would not interfere with the 30s. notes.

Mr. C. Wood supported the clause. He thought it would be most beneficial to the country to bring silver into circulation; and he hoped the right hon. Baronet would not consent to the alteration.

Mr. Ross saw no objection to this clause ; but by another clause the bankers of Ire

Private.-1 West of London and Westminster Ceme reading.

tery; Trent Valley Railway; London and Greenwich Railway; Newcastle-upon-Tyne (Tynemouth Extension) Railway.

2. Sir Robert Keith Dick's Estate; York and North Midland Railway (Bridlington Branch); Dunstable, and Birmingham and London Railway; York and Scarbo rough Railway Deviation; Bedford and London Railway; Eastern Counties Railway (Ely and Whittlesea De

viation); Wilts, Somerset, and Weymouth Railway; Reported.-Whitby and Pickering Railway; Ely and Hun-off the lawn from the pleasure grounds of tingdon Railway; Lynn and Ely Railway; Shrewsbury,

leville, Marquess of Breadalbane, and by Lords Camp-approved of the discussion, as being bell, and Denman, from Clergy and others of Stottesden,