banking system in Scotland, and no- | sible that new banks could be estabbody was harmed by the monopoly that lished; and, on the other hand, every was complained of. If the Bill were bank that burst up diminished the conpassed they might have some extra- stituent members of the monopoly. Some ordinary experiments with finance, which years ago there was a much larger numthe country would not care for. The ber of banks than there was now; and banking system in Scotland had been it followed that in course of time the extraordinarily successful; and, though monopoly might be limited to one or there had been terrible panics and large two. Therefore, he thought some legisfailures of banks, the other banks had lation in regard to Scotch banking was sustained their position in a way which undoubtedly required. He understood did them infinite credit, and testified to that the Bill before the House was, to their high reputation. The idea that some extent, founded on the National underlay this Bill, that the country Banks of America. He knew there wanted more bank notes in order to were differences of opinion as to that do more business, was, in his opinion, system; but he thought, in the main, a pure fallacy. If any man had good it was a good one. With reference credit he did not need bank notes. His to the remarks of the hon. Member cheque would go anywhere. The truth for Cambridge (Mr. W. Fowler) as to was, the more complete their machinery credit and the use of cheques, speaking for business was, the less they wanted as a layman, he thought that the more bank notes, and the more they used a country could do without gold and credit. The people who cried out for silver, and could carry on its business more bank notes were very often those with paper, so much was there a saving who were deficient in currency at home. to the country. Therefore, it seemed He did not deny the importance of hav- to him that any system by which they ing a good issue of the right sort of could substitute the active use of paper note; but he thought they were gra- for the active use of gold and silver dually getting to a state of things in would be an advantage. which they were less dependent on that. He should certainly vote against the Bill. SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL said, he must honestly confess that he did not understand his hon. Friend's Bill; but, as a similar confession had been made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he failed in very good company. As a rule, he was rather given to praising Scottish institutions; but in this instance he was going to say something in depreciation. It seemed to him that they did want some legislation in respect of Scottish banking, because it was at this moment the closest possible monopoly. If any one doubted that, let him go to Scotland, and take up any newspaper, and he would find it advertised that the Scottish associated banks had fixed the rate of interest at so-and-so. Now, it was surely not a good state of things when a close body could fix the rate of interest, not with regard to the market value of money, but solely from its own views of what the rate should be. Not only was Scottish banking a close monopoly, but it became closer every day; for, having a privilege of issuing notes which no other association could obtain, it was quite impos MR. WEBSTER said, he did not think the speech of his hon. Friend (Sir George Campbell) had added very much to the information of the House on this question; and as he had frankly confessed at the outset what his speech proved, that he did not understand the Bill, which was the only subject of the debate, he (Mr. Webster) would not make further reference to his observations. He rose to say how much he, in common with other Scotch Representatives, felt obliged to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the admirable exposition he had made of the Bill, and for the decided opposition he had offered to it. He wished also to express his general concurrence with the hon. Member for Cambridge in his condemnation of the Bill. It was intolerable that a system which, whatever faults might be found with it, had been confessedly of immeasurable advantage to Scotland, should be dealt with summarily at the instance of one private Momber on a Wednesday afternoon, and in so thin a House as at present. The thinness of the House he could easily understand, as it was not expected the Bill would be reached today; but there was another reason why more attention was not given to the measure. He had received many com- | monopoly which the Scottish banks munications from banking, commercial, enjoy has to be taken absolutely as a and other bodies, as well as individuals proof that they are so excellent that in Scotland, regarding the Bill to the it is on account of their excellence that effect that it seemed so wild and so there could be no competition with them. absurd a conception that they did not No doubt, the present state of the law think they need give themselves any does give them a monopoly, which, howtrouble to explain by Petition to the ever excellent they are, they would House their views on the subject. There hardly dare to demand on account of was a strong and general opinion in Scot- their own merits alone. Everyone must land that the Bill was altogether a see that the monopoly they have of mistake, and that it proposed to dis- issue gives them a great power, and turb unnecessarily a system with which makes banking a monopoly; whereas the prosperity of Scotland had been in- the issue was not intended to be a monoterwoven for more than a century. He poly. I hope the House will come to hoped the House, therefore, by reject- the conclusion that the Bill had better ing it, would put an end, for a time at be laid aside. least, to any such uncalled-for and illadvised attempts to interfere with the banking system of Scotland. SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE: Sir, I am ready to confirm what has just been said by the hon. Member as to the unexpected discussion of this Bill. I came down to the House without the slightest idea that the Bill would come before us to-day; and I am ashamed to say that I have not even gone so far as to read, far less to understand, the proposals of the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson). But I think so large and important a question could not, with advantage, be taken up at the instance of a single Member upon a Wednesday afternoon; and that it would be a very great pity if some of the questions which the hon. Gentleman raises should be disposed of as summarily and suddenly as would necessarily be the case on an occasion like the present. I quite agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the Bill, as it stands, is one which we could not possibly take as the basis for an alteration of, or an experiment on, the banking system. I think it would be very unwise-though I do not say the Scottish system of banking stands in no need of reform-to take up this question on a Bill of this character; which, even if it were read a second time, could not be fully discussed during the present Session; and I entirely agree in the discretion of the Government in rejecting the Bill. I do not altogether deny that the observation of the hon. Member for Glasgow as to the monopoly which is now possessed by the Scottish banks is founded upon the truth, and is a very reasonable matter for our consideration. I do not think that the Mr. Webster MR. J. W. BARCLAY said, he thought the hon. Member for Glasgow was not so sanguine as to expect the second reading of his Bill to-day. The matter came on rather unexpectedly, and, no doubt, that accounted for the thinness of the House; but if his hon. Friend went to a Division he should certainly support him, not because he approved of the Bill, or the provisions. it made for the amendment of the present system, but as a protest against that system being thought satisfactory as it now stood. The subject was pretty fully discussed in the House five or six years ago, when a Bill was introduced for the purpose of preventing the Scottish banks doing business in London; and on that occasion the right hon. Gentleman who had just addressed the House, and the present Prime Minister, expressed themselves in favour of the principle of the State providing a paper currency, in the same way as it provided a metallic currency. He (Mr. J. W. Barclay) thought that was a sound principle to adopt in any reform which might take place in the supply of currency throughout the country. Both functions should be under the control of the State, very much as the Mint was under the control of the State. He thought this would be of great benefit to the country generally; there would be a great economy in the use of gold, and they would not have these panics which constantly arose when one or two millions of gold were taken out of the country. The great objection to the present system was the necessity for the note currency being supported by a stock of bullion. The arrangements of the Scottish banks were very absurd. Once or twice a year, two or three millions of gold were sent down to Scotland in boxes, and after lying in the banks for a month or two they were sent back again. He did not think the American system of note currency was the best that could be adopted, and that system was not working very satisfactorily. He thought, if they were going to make any change in the present system of banking, it should be in the direction of making the State responsible for the supply of the paper currency of the country, as it was for the metallic currency. They could both be worked on a similar basis. So long as paper money was only used for the purpose for which it was intendednamely, the supply of currency-no danger could arise to the country from an excess in its issue. The danger could only arise if the State attempted to make the paper currency take the place of capital, and that could be effectually prevented. His hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow had accomplished a consider. able part of his object in having the attention of the House and of the country called to this question of the issue of notes by the Scottish banks; and he thought he would do well to be satisfied with what he had accomplished at the present moment, in the hope that a reform would ultimately be made which would throw open the banking business in Scotland and England, but particularly in Scotland, to greater competi tion. actly brought the issue under the control Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. INFECTIOUS DISEASES NOTIFICATION (Mr. Hastings, Sir Trevor Lawrence, Dr. SECOND READING. Order for Second Reading read. MR. HASTINGS, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, the Bill embodied the recommendations of a Select Committee which had considered the subject, and also the provisions of a MR. ANDERSON, in reply, said, the number of Private Bills which had been Chancellor of the Exchequer taxed him passed from time to time for upwards of with not alluding to one of the principal 30 cities and boroughs in the United provisions of the Bill. He could return Kingdom. One-sixth of the annual numthe compliment. What he considered ber of deaths in this country were caused one of the principal provisions of the by zymotic diseases, such as small-pox Bill was, that the State should have a and scarlet fever; and the object of this profit from the national currency. That Bill was that such notification should be was never alluded to by the right hon. made as would enable the medical offiGentleman, and yet it was a matter cers of health, and parents and others, to within the right hon. Gentleman's own take measures to prevent the spread of province. There was another principle infection. In the cities and towns where of the Bill which was not alluded to by this means of communication had been the Chancellor of the Exchequer the adopted it was found that the measures breaking up of the monopoly of the taken resulted in a large reduction of Scottish banks. As to the other points, the amount of the disease and the numhe had no wish to go through the whole ber of deaths. Such a means of notifiof them; but there were one or two that cation would enable them to know where required a word. The right hon. Gen- a disease had arisen and where it had tleman repeated what the Treasury let-spread from, and, if approved of, would ters stated that the policy of the Government was to bring the issue under the control of the State. The Bill ex naturally save hundreds of thousands of valuable lives. The rich towns could afford to come to Parliament for Private Bills; but, in mercy to the poorer towns, | member of a family without regard to he asked the House to give them the the feelings or wishes of its other memopportunity of checking disease in their bers. midst. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."-(Mr. Hastings.) MR. HOPWOOD, in moving that the Bill be read a second time on that day three months, said, he should resolutely oppose the Bill. It would have been far better if the hon. Member, instead of proposing this measure, had brought one in for removing the dens of disease in our large towns. He believed the charge against those who opposed the Bill was that they were retarding the saving of life by this proposal; but if the nests of disease were destroyed that would be a far better system to follow. His belief was that in the cities and boroughs where these provisions had been adopted in Private Bills, the bulk of the people had no knowledge of what was being done when the Bills were passed. Several large towns had expressly repudiated the use of the powers which the Bill proposed to confer upon them; and he believed that if what lurked behind this measure-namely, compulsory isolation -were known, the whole population would be up in arms against it. He believed that in Edinburgh they so applied this system, that when the medical officer felt difficulty in effecting compulsory removal, he placed a policeman at the door of the householder to inform the world that there was this or that illness in the place. After a while the people came very helplessly, and said Oh, doctor, we cannot fight you. It is true that it breaks our heart to let our child go; but you are starving us out, and therefore our darling must go." ["Oh!"] That was, in effect, Dr. Littlejohn's own evidence, and what he rejoiced in as showing his own acuteness, and his own power of managing these cases. He hoped the House had not got to the position of their Northern friends, who rejoiced in such arbitrary power as that. The Bill might be characterized as one of those "fads" for interference with personal liberty which were aired at Social Science Congresses. It was a first step towards compulsory isolation, and would have the effect of empowering the medical officer and Inspector of a parish to enter a home and remove any sick Mr. Hastings Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members being found present, MR. HOPWOOD, resuming, said, the measure would be harsh and oppressive in its operation on the poor man, who, if one of the members of his family was attacked by disease, would have to inform the world of the fact, so that he would lose his employment, and would thus have starvation added to the other misery which invaded his humble home. The measure, moreover, would not really tend to check the spread of disease, because under it, in many instances, the poor man, when sickness visited his household, would not call in the medical officer, but would resort to the herbalist and botanist, who would keep faith with him, and would not make that disclosure of the case which would produce the injury to him that he dreaded. Again, the duty of notifying these diseases, if it was to be cast on anybody at all, ought to be thrown on the medical men; but the Medical Profession, in a Congress hardly less important than that over which the hon. Member for East Worcestershire (Mr. Hastings) so ably presided, objected to any such proposal. Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members not being present, House adjourned at half after MINUTES.]-PUBLIC BILLS-First Reading- PARLIAMENT PRIVATE BILLS- OBSERVATIONS. THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY said, he wished to call their Lordships' attention to the Minutes of the Proceedings of the House on the 26th instant, relating to the discussion on Standing Order No. 128. As regarded that discussion, his recollection of what passed was entirely at variance with the fact, as stated in the Minutes, that, at the conclusion of the debate, it was moved and agreed to by the House "That it is not desirable to alter Standing Order No. 128, or to substitute for Standing Order No. 128 a new Standing Order." THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, he entirely agreed in what had been said by the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) as to the inaccuracy of the record in question. EARL GRANVILLE said, that his recollection was entirely in accordance with that of the noble Marquess site (the Marquess of Salisbury). THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY said, he would give Notice that to-morrow he would move that the Resolution in ques that he felt he would be unduly trespassing upon their Lordships' attention if he were to endeavour to recapitulate any of the arguments that had been used in opposition to the measure, or go at any great length into the subject. But it was only fair to consider what had taken place since the second reading of the Bill. The Bill had been in Committee of the Whole House, and had there been subjected to a furbishing process at the hands of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Dalhousie), and altered in a variety of ways, especially in regard to its retrospective application. While, to some extent, it had assumed a new appearance, he could not say that it was improved in its character. In fact, he considered the Bill to be in its present form a monstrosity, and he was reminded by it of the words "Ut turpiter atrum Desinat in piscem mulier formosa supernè." Perhaps, before he went into the one or oppo-reference to the Bill as it stood, he two objections that he might take with might be allowed to say a few words, as he had not yet addressed their Lordships upon the subject-he wished to say a few words on what appeared to him to be the religious aspect of the question. He must admit, to a great extent, the force of the remarks which had fallen from noble Lords opposite, to the effect that it was difficult to discover, in exact terms, any definite and tion be struck out of the Minutes. THIRD READING. Order of the Day for the Third Read- express prohibition in the Scriptures ing read. Moved, "That the Bill be now read 31." -The Earl of Dalhousie.) THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH, in rising to move, as an Amendment, that the Bill be read a third time that day six months, said, he would not have been justified in taking up the time of their Lordships, in asking their attention to the subject once more, with a view to the reconsideration of the decision arrived at on a recent occasion, were it not for the narrowness of the division on the second reading, and the nearly equally divided opinion in their Lordships' House. When the question came before them on the second reading, the arguments that were used by his noble Friend behind him (Earl Beauchamp), in opposition to the measure, were of such a forcible, exhaustive character, against these marriages which the Bill was intended to legalize; and, although the subject had been treated in a very light and airy, and, indeed, jocose manner by the noble and learned Lord opposite (Lord Bramwell), who always attracted the House by the pungency of his remarks, yet, at the same time, he thought it was almost a pity that they, who were opposed to the Bill, should endeavour to rest the objections to it upon grounds that, to his mind, could not be clearly proved, and to which exception might be taken. It had always appeared to him that, if a marriage of this kind was expressly prohibited by Holy Scripture, the prohibition would have been in so direct and unmistakable terms that "he who runs may read." He must admit he could not convince himself that any prohibition could be found in any such unmistakable terms. But |