of attending to the interests of the community belonged to the Government; and because they had transferred it in a great measure to the Bank, let them not defer a moment longer to resume it. It was on that account that he recommended the repayment of L. 10,000,000 by the Government. Now, why should it be supposed that such a repayment by Government would lead to a contraction of the circulation? Why might not the managers of the Bank spend one-half of the sum repaid in buying bullion, and employ the other half in extending their trade? A contraction of the issues of the Bank was not a necessary consequence of this plan; but, on the contrary, the carrying of these resolutions into effect would be attended with an increase of its issues. The supporters of this measure were told, that their object was to make the Bank conform its issues to the price of gold. But the mere obligation of the Bank to pay their notes in ingots or bars of gold, let them be called by what ever name you please, made no difference. What did the Bank do from 1794 to 1797? They did during that period just what they now objected to do, and then gold was never at a higher price than L. 3:17:6. The Bank were then expressly under the same obligation to deliver bullion, as they would be under the present plan; and yet the price of gold was not affected by that regulation: the holder of their notes had a right to demand in exchange for that amount of notes 5 pounds or 60 ounces of stamped gold; and the House knew that, notwithstanding the prohibitory laws, the gold went out of the country. It was said the price of gold fluctuated, but he apprehended that the argument found ed on that assumed fact was a mere fallacy. When people talked of

gold rising in price, were they prepared to show that it had risen in intrinsic value? Let them not talk of its price in paper, but in any other commodity of a real and fixed value. Did a given quantity of gold at present command any more coin, or any more silver, than it would have done fifty years ago? Of corn, indeed, it might command a greater quantity, because it was a commodity that fluctuated in value; but of things which had a fixed and permanent value, it would actually command a smaller quantity than it would have done in England fifty years ago. We talked of the price of gold being raised by taxation, but this he could prove to be a fallacy; for if we looked at the prices of gold during different periods of our history, we should find that the price had been low when the amount of taxation had been high; and, vice versa, that the price had been high when the amount of taxation had been low. Again, it was said, that the amount of the revenue had increased, and that that increase rendered a greater amount of the circulating medium necessary; but that position he also denied. It not only did not follow, that the amount of the circulating medium varied in direct proportion with the amount of taxation: but he would show that they had varied in an inverse ratio and for this purpose he would compare the two periods of 1792 and 1809. The latter period was the year preceding the appointment of the Bullion Committee, when our trade was unusually extensive; and he chose the former period because the circulating medium was then very great. Did it not follow, then, according to the theory which he was combating, that the circulating medium ought to have been greater in 1809 than it was in 1792? And if it could be

shown that was not the case, was not that theory contradicted by fact? The late Lord Liverpool said, that in 1792 there were L. 30,000,000 of gold in circulation; but he (Mr Peel) should be contented to take the amount at L. 5,000,000 less. Then there were L. 11,000,000 of Bank notes in circulation, and consequently the whole circulating medium that year amounted to L. 36,000,000. In 1792, the interest of the national debt was L.9,000,000; the number of ships employed in commerce was 10,000; and the amount of official exports was L. 19,000,000. In 1808, the interest of the national debt was L. 31,000,000; the number of ships amounted to 15,000; and the official exports had increased one-half. According to this theory, then, there should in the latter year have been a corresponding increase of circulating medium. But gold did not remain in the market when it had risen to L.4, 18., and the amount of the circulating medium in 1809 was only L. 19,000,000; yet we had contrived to perform with that circulation all the transactions that had been performed in 1792, and even transactions to a much greater amount. In 1792 the average number of days that the L. 1,000 note remained in circulation, was 22; in 1818 only 13. In 1792, the L.10 note remained 236 days in circulation; and in 1818 only 147 days. In 1792, the total amount of notes of every denomination issued by the Bank was L.74,817,000; and in 1818 L.236,084,933. The inference to be drawn from this comparative statement was, that a much less circulation was necessary, and would perform transactions to a greater amount, at one time than at another; and, therefore, the doctrine against which he was arguing was absurd. Amongst the various propositions

which had been advanced on the subject, was one which at first appeared very plausible, and was made by those who admitted the advantage of reverting to a metallic standard of value. The argument they used was, that a variable standard exposed the country to great danger; but, at the same time, as we had now been twenty-two years without a metallic circulation, it would be extremely difficult and hazardous to revert to the ancient system. These persons maintained that we ought to regulate the value of gold by the market price; and their plan amounted to neither more nor less than this-we ought to extricate ourselves from our present difficulties, by depreciating the precious metals. This, however, would only be practising a fraud on individuals; it would have no effect on the price of gold, or in regulating the exchanges with foreign countries. The foreigner would detect the alloy in our coin when thus depreciated, nor would the plan afford any security against the exportation of gold. A contrary system had been long established in this country, and a deviation from that salutary system would only give an advantage to be obtained at any time by fraud. Those who would take the trouble to look back to the history of our coin, would find that it had been reformed at three different eras. The periods to which he referred were the reigns of Edward I., of Elizabeth, and of William III. These were periods of as great difficulty as any that we had encountered, and yet these difficulties bad been overcome. Edward found his coin debased, and although engaged in the conquest of Wales, and in the war with Scotland, he turned his attention to the reformation of the coin of his realm-a circumstance dwelt on with pleasure by historians, as presenting a noble instance of public

spirit and wisdom. The next period was in the reign of Elizabeth, the coin having been debased by Henry VIII. and Edward VI. nearly 400 per cent. In the second year of her reign she directed her attention to the reformation of the coin. Those who were hostile to such a measure represented to her that the Courts of Rome, of France, and of Spain, were all leagued against her, and asked her if that was the proper time to execute such a plan; but she was advised by Lord Burleigh that these were the very reasons why she should do it, and that by attending to the welfare of her own subjects, she would increase their attachment and command the respect even of her enemies. At a time when William III. was engaged in war, did he undertake the reformation of the silver currency; at a time, too, when parties ran so high, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not propose such a measure without anticipating the most formidable opposition. He found the silver currency clipped and debased in the same manner as it had been in the time of Elizabeth, and he heard the same arguments on the subject that had been used to her. If the House would look at the arguments on both sides,—at those advanced by Lowndes on the one side, and those by Locke on the other, they would see how analogous they were to those that were advanced at present. Lowndes complained that the value of silver was enhanced, and wished for the return of the good old times when silver was at 5s. 3d. per ounce, while then it was at 6s. 2d.; and also contended, that the shilling was the real standard of value. Locke, on the other hand, maintained, that the pound weight of silver was the standard of value, and that the coin was depreciated, and not the bullion raised. Silver in coin was the same

in value as silver in bullion. It was perfectly true, he said, that an ounce of silver, which the Mint regulations determined to be only 5s. 2d. in value, had risen to 6s. 3d.; but that was only because the silver coin had been clipped or reduced in value, by the difference between 5s. 2d. and 6s. 3d. Give me, said he, 5s. of standard weight and fineness, as originally coined, together with 2d., and I will with that sum purchase for you an ounce of silver for which you now pay 6s. 3d. He could frame no conception of an abstract standard of value, without reference to an existing substance; and was therefore obliged to put up with the vulgar idea, that a pound was a certain quantity of metal of a given weight and fineness. At the time of the new coinage at the period to which he alluded, prejudices in theory, and misconceptions in reasoning, were not only to be encountered, but the greatest financial and political difficulties were to be overcome. At a time when the future revenue was to be mortgaged for current charges, L.3,000,000 were to be raised for the expences of a new coinage. The important duty of carrying the measure into effect devolved on Mr Montague, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer. The reasons against calling in the deteriorated currency for the purpose of a re-coinage, were, that at that time a war raged, which required the undivided exertions of the country; that the public resources should not at such a time be wasted on an unnecessary object, or a doubtful experiment; that the expences incurred would be more than the nation at such a period could bear, and its discontents might be excited by fresh grie vances to acts of rebellion. The enemies of this expedient moreover argued, that should the silver coin be called in, it would be impossible to

carry on the war abroad, or to prosecute foreign trade, inasmuch as the merchant could not pay his bills of exchange, nor the soldier receive his subsistence. What, in reply to this reasoning, were the arguments of Mr Montague and the friends of the measure? They argued, that the mischief must be fatal, if a present remedy were not found out and applied; that by reason of the ill state of the coin, the change abroad was infinitely to the nation's prejudice; that the disease would every day take deeper root, infect the very vitals of the State, and if not remedied would soon become incurable; that the enemies of the nation must be mightily intimidated by so great an action, and would sooner be induced to a gree to honourable terms of peace, in case they saw us able to surmount this difficulty, by the retrieving of the ill state of the coin, on which their hopes of the nation's speedy ruin so much depended; and that it would partly create a mighty esteem abroad of the greatness and wisdom of the Parliament of England, which was able to conquer such an obstinate and almost insuperable evil in such a juncture of affairs. These arguments happily prevailed, and notwithstanding the expence, the project of the new coinage was carried into execution. Considering, then, that such an object had been accomplished at such a period, and in the midst of such difficulties, he would ask, was there any thing in the state or prospects of the country at present to deter us from the great work of improving our currency? Were we not a great nation before 1797? Were not our resources great and flourishing, our commerce extensive and prosperous, and our military and naval glory raised to the highest pinnacle of fame, before we were blessed with an inconvertible paper cir

culation? Let us recollect, that if we differed from other nations in having a paper currency, we likewise differed from them in another respect-the stability of our public faith; and that we ought to cherish the latter as much as we praised the former. Let us recollect, that from a regard to that good faith, we had respected, even in war, the properties of foreigners invested in our funds; and that by the confidence it inspired, we had been carried through our difficulties. Let us not, now that we have attained the objects for which we contended, weathered the storm which threatened to overwhelm us, and arrived in safety and triumph at the destined shore, discard the guide by which we were led and protected. Let us recollect, that the fluctuations of price which an inconvertible paper currency occasioned, were injurious to the labourer, who found no compensation in the rise of his wages at one time for the evils inflicted by a depression at another. He had thus discharged his duty in bringing the resolutions recommended by the Committee of which he was a member before the House. There were, however, still two topics on which he wished to say a few words, though it was not very necessary to his object to advert to them. A noble friend of his in the other house, (Lord Lauderdale,) whose acquaintance with the subject all were ready to acknowledge, entertained an opinion, that our Mint regulations would interfere with the return to a standard of gold, which it was the object of the Committee to recommend. It would be the less necessary for him (Mr Peel) to enter on a detailed examination of this question, as it had not come before the Committee of this House. It appeared to him, after the most mature delibera

tion that he could give to the subject, that the Mint regulations had no connexion with the question. By these regulations there were not two standards of value. Silver was merely a money of convenience for small sums, not coined like gold at the pleasure of individuals who brought it to the Mint, and without loss, but coined by order of the Government. Its depreciation there fore could not affect the price of gold, or drive it from circulation. When he recollected that from the year 1773 to 1797, a deteriorated silver currency existed, and that this currency was then a legal tender for L.25 instead of 40s. as now, without at all affecting the price of gold, he thought he might quote experience in support of his argument against the theory of the noble peer. The other topic to which he alluded, was a project which, he understood, would be brought forward to facilitate a return to cash payments, or as a substitute for them. That project consisted in requiring the Bank to pay their notes in gold at the market price of that metal. Such a plan could not, he thought, be entertained for a moment; it would postpone indefinitely the return to our former circulation; it would take from Parliament the right of regulating our currency, and place it at the discretion of a body of individuals to whom such a power ought not to belong; it would have the effect of making gold conform to the value of paper, and not paper to that of gold, and would not, in fact, afford any of that security that was contemplated by the establishment of a metallic standard. The House would see that he had to encounter the opposition of one to whose opinion, whenever he could conscientiously, he would always bow with the utmost respect. But having the solemn duty imposed upon him, of

YOL. XII. PARŢ I.

giving all his attention to a subject in which the interests of the country were so deeply involved, and having considered the evidence, not of theoretical men, but of men acquainted with business, he was led to believe in the principles which were laid down in the report before the House. He felt himself bound to declare that he had changed his opinions, and that he was a convert to the doctrines regarding our currency which he had once opposed.

The Chairman then proceeded to read the resolutions, which, with the exception of that relative to the expediency of repealing the laws against the melting and exportation of coin, were as follow: "That it is expedient to continue the restriction on payments in cash by the Bank of England beyond the time to which it is at present limited by law:""That it is expedient that a definite period should be fixed for the termination of the restriction on cash payments; and that preparatory measures should be taken, with a view to facilitate and ensure, on the arrival of that period, the payment of the promissory-notes of the Bank of England in the legal coin of the realm :" "That in order to give to the Bank a greater control over the issues of their notes than they at present possess, provision ought to be made for the gradual repayment to the Bank of the sum of L.10,000,000; being part of the sum due to the Bank, on account of advances made by them for the public service, and on account of the purchase of Exchequer-bills under the authority of acts of the Legislature: That it is expedient to provide, by law, that from the 1st of February 1820, the Bank should be liable to deliver, on demand, gold of standard fineness, having been assayed and stamped at his Majesty's Mint (a quantity of not less than 60

K