a remedy for the inconveniency resulting from the depreciation of those very Banknotes. It had been stated to the House by a right hon gentleman, that bank of Ireland paper was now at a regular discount, and that a guinea was currently at a premium of five shillings and sixpence; who could tell what further depreciation might take place in a short time, and what further losses this Bill might entail on the holders of ancient contracts? But those considerations had escaped the noble lord who had presented the petition alluded to. Perhaps, too, he had been actuated by motives far different to those alleged; and at the eve of an election he might have wished to enlist under his banners a large body of tenantry, who had before received his advances with abhorrence. He would ask, on what grounds the House could deny the enquiry which had been demanded? Anenquiry had taken place into the affairs of the bank of England, before its paper had been forced on the people of this country; how could they in justice refuse the same security to Ireland, and how could they continue to be styled the Imperial Parliament, when the interests of such a large portion of the empire as Ireland were constantly neglected?

Lord Castlereagh denied that the present measure rested merely on the petition which he had had the honour to present; but it appeared to him, that the hon. baronet had been extremely parsimonious in his arguments, and had laid no grounds what ever before the House for delaying the measure. He was glad to hear that the hon. baronet had himself no doubt of the solvency of the bank of Ireland; and as Irish bank restriction had hitherto been enacted pari passu, with the restrictions of the bank of England, and without any enquiry, he thought that there was no occasion for any in the present instance. The hon. baronet had stated that the House were yet without any information on their Journals, of the solvency of the bank of Ireland. This was an accusation against parliament; it was an accusation against the right hon. baronet himself, for having allowed the bank of Ireland to go on under the restrictions, without being assured of their solvency; for the right hon. baronet, though not a party to the restrictions, was yet accessory to the subsequent continuThe right hon. baronet had stated the whole of Ireland as in a different situation from England; and seemed, in the

that it was in fact in only three or four counties of the north of Ireland, that the custom of taking in gold prevailed, and that seven-eighths of the people would be unaffected by the proposed measure. It appeared to him that it was a most intolerable hardship upon the tenant to require him to lose 20 or 25 per cent. in order to procure gold to satisfy his contract. As to the report of the committee on Irish currency, however highly he respected many members of it, yet he differed from them at the time in their conclusions; and his opinion was since confirmed by events. At the time of their report, the exchange was very unfavourable to Ireland, being about 10 or 11 per cent. They attributed this to the depreciation of paper, and were of opinion that it must continue unfavourable. Nevertheless a very short time after they had published their report, the exchange rose to par, from circumstances totally unconnected with what some called the depreciation of paper, but which he should always call the premium upon gold; and from that time the exchange had continued steadily about par. The petition which he had presented, notwithstanding the insinuation of the right hon. baronet, he could assure the House had been signed by men of the highest respectability, and was meant to apprise parliament of the existence of evils; and not to direct their opinion. In short he had heard no real arguments against the Bill, nor against the statements he had formerly made to the House.

Mr. Ponsonby thought that his right hon. friend (sir J. Newport) did not merit the taunt of the noble lord, of not having used arguments applicable to the question, the fact being that his right hon. friend had spoken directly to the question, which was, whether a delay should be granted to enquire into the case of Ireland? while the noble lord had spoken to any thing else, and to the general principle of the Bill. The real question before the House was, whether they were justified in extending this measure to Ireland? The noble lord said that gold had risen in price, and that it was not paper that was depreciated; but if this was the case, it seemed to him most extraordinary, that notwithstanding the increase of gold in the European world within these late years, it should, in proportion to its greater abundance, become dearer, which was exactly the reverse of the case with regard to every other commodity. As for the return of the exchange in Ireland to par, as noticed by the noble lord, he would remind him that there were two ways in which things might meet: they might come together by the one thing standing still till the other came up to it, or they might come together, by both walking to a meeting. Was it then that the bank of Ireland paper had risen, which caused this coming to par after the depreciation? No; but the bank of England paper had

the landlord? He would ultimately be reduced, comparatively speaking, to starvation, while his tenant would enjoy a profitable estate. This, then, was the question, whether they were prepared to extend a measure of such sort to Ireland, without its being called for by that country, and without previous enquiry? If the sense of the House should decide on this, at least the period of the operation of the Bill ought to be limited. They ought to be aware, that they were setting aside spe

land paper was before. The noble lord had also told them that this Bill would make no alteration, except in three or four counties in Ireland, and that seveneighths of the country would be unaffected by it. If so, it was strange that these seven-eighths of the people had not sent in representations and petitions to them last year, praying for an extension of the measure then passing through parliament. But he contended, on the contrary, that it made a great and general alteration in the country; much more than the gentlemen of England were perhaps aware of. For the tenure of land in Ireland was very different from what it was in this country. Here the greater part of the soil was not let on lease, and much of the remainder on leases of from 7 to 14 years. In Ireland much of the soil was let for ever, or for terms of 99 years; and the common leases, till within these 20 years, were at the shortest for a term of three lives or

did this, why were they not to deal out an equal measure to this country, and interfere with those bargains, by which the tenant was bound to pay part of his rent in grain? The sense of justice in the House was too strong, not to administer to both countries the law in the same manner. On these grounds, he was in favour of the amendment. Much had been said of the bank of Ireland. He believed it to be in as good a state as any body of the same kind, and with as good pretensions to character, as it never had entered into engagements which it was not able to fulfil. But still he deemed enquiry necessary, in order to be able to make the measure bear less hard on individuals.

Mr. Wellesley Pole expressed himself happy to have heard the right hon. baronet (sir J. Newport), and the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Ponsonby) deliver their opinions on this subject, as it would thence be seen how they valued the interests of

measure was to afford relief to poor persons, or tenants at rack rent, was a misconception. The contrary was the fact; and, in many cases, the interest of the tenant in the land was more valuable, and could be sold for more money at market than the interest of the landlord. As for the hardship of calling on tenants to pay this great premium for gold, in order to fulfil their contracts, it should be remembered, that it was only an increased nominal value which they paid. But was it in nature to be supposed, that it would be the general practice of landlords to call on their tenants, in a manner to distress them, and ultimately render them unable to pay at all? This could not be imagined; and, on the other hand, ought not the landlord to have the real value for which he originally let his land? Suppose for instance, the depreciation went on, as, from all experience they were bound to believe it must do, what would be the situation of (VOL. XXII.)

tence of delay, for the sake of enquiry into the solvency of the Bank, which they all declared to be solvent, the whole of their arguments went to shew that the measure was not necessary to, and ought not to be extended to Ireland. They contended that the tenant in that country should be left without the guard against the demands of the landlord, which the legislature had thought necessary in England, and that it was the landlord who wanted protection. - But it was a gross fallacy to put upon the House that because no other petitions had come before them, the people of Ireland were not desirous of the extension of this measure. The greatest alarm had prevailed among the monied men and tenantry last session, when it was known that the Bill was not to be extended to Ireland, and application had been made to government on the subject. He firmly believed of the present Bill, that the greatest ferment and dissatisfaction would be (U)

land was acknowledged to be in the same state as England, and as the only dissimilarity existed in a few counties in the north, in the choice of difficulties before them he was of opinion that sound policy and justice required them to extend their protection to the major part. With regard to the principle of the measure, the House had been told, that it would lead us into the same gulph of calamity with other nations whose paper currency had gone to ruin. Now, if such reasoning was correct, and such was the tendency of the Bill, we ought to have seen, at least, part of those dangers and calamities produced by the similar act of last year. During the operation of that act, if the reasoning of the gentlemen opposite was correct, the country ought to have seen a multiplication of paper, a rise in the price of bullion, and a regular depression of the foreign exchanges. But instead of all this, the very reverse was the case. The quantity of paper now in circulation was rather smaller than it was in last April. The exchanges were considerably improved, instead of growing systematically worse. In April of last year they were 30 per cent. below par; in July 25 per cent. then again 30, but now they were only at 144. This improvement had not only taken place on the exchanges with Hamburgh, but also on those with Paris, which in this month were at 184, while in April of last year they were at 25. Instead of gold having risen, it had considerably fallen in price; all which circumstances shewed, that there was a complete distinction between the paper of the bank of England, as connected with the dealings of this House with regard to it, and the paper currency of other nations, which had been held up as a warning to this country. He had also the satisfaction of stating, that notwithstanding the distresses of our manufactures in various parts of the kingdom, the home consumption of excisable articles had rather increased than diminished. In the year ending the 5th of April, 1812, the excise had produced 17,950,000l., while last year the same branch of revenue was only 17,399,000l. This increase of 600,000l. might in part arise from some small additional taxation last year; but he believed he was justified in stating, that 400,000l. of it arose from an increased consumption of excisable articles. It was true the branch of customs bad suffered considerably; but he was now enabled to state, that the general

produce of the taxes for the year ending the 5th of April, 1812, amounted to 61,333,000l. The revenue amounted to 62,136,000/. on the 5th of April, 1811; and the defalcation this year would not exceed between 8 and 900,000l. which, considering the falling-off in the customs, afforded by no means an unsatisfactory view of the finances of the country. This information he had thought it right to communicate, as calculated to afford considerable satisfaction to the House, and, to shew that, whatever theories might be advanced, they had here the practice before them to prove that, with the circulation as established by law, they could support the revenue as it was. If his hon. friend's theory about paying in gold was right, they would be in no better situation by adopting it; but if erroneous, they would find they had been trying an experiment very fatal to the country. He trusted the House would therefore agree with him that there was not the slightest ground for alarm, and that they would not permit the extension of so beneficial a measure as the one now proposed to be retarded.

Mr. Thompson said, he differed entirely from all the opinions of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Johnstone). He had never known or heard of any bank that deserved to be compared to the bank of England, or whose credit had ever risen to any thing like an equality with the credit of the latter. He had heard much of depreciation arising from excess, but he confessed he saw no evidence of such excess. Gold indeed had risen in price as wheat had lately, from scarcity, and scarcity alone. The real wealth of a country, however did not consist in any amount of the precious metals, but in the amount of its effective labour, and if the export trade could but be re-opened, all our difficulties would disappear. The hon. gentleman had said, that the country bankers ought to be compelled to pay the twelve millions of small notes which they had issued, in cash; but it was rather hard to talk of forcing the country bankers to perform impossibilities. They had hitherto acted from a desire to accommodate, in the full confidence of the solvency and wealth of the Bank, and had first limited their issues far below the real amount of gold in their possession. He could not but be struck with the doleful tone in which the hon. member concluded. He had himself no such despondency, and considered the cases referred to as altogether inapplicable