42] ANNUAL REGISTER, 1816. 



expressed how desirable it was 

 that cash payments should be re- 

 sumed, and the bill having allot- 

 ted a term sufficient for the neces- 

 sary preparations, on the expiring 

 of which the Bank wordd no 

 longer be protected or restricted, 

 he did not conceive that any other 

 clause was requisite, 



Mr. Horner argued on the differ- 

 ence between such security, and 

 a parliamentary assi:rance that 

 no farther renewal of the restric- 

 tion could be hoped for ; and he 

 said he would move a clause, that 

 after July 5th, 1818, the Bank 

 should be able to pay in specie, 

 and that no reneival of the re- 

 striction could be expected. 



The Chancellor of the Exchequer 

 then proposed adding a clause to 

 the preamble, which, however, 

 avoided any positive declaration 

 on the subject. 



Other members expressed their 

 dissatisfaction at leaving the matter 

 in this ambiguous state, and some 

 proposed the insertion of the 

 words " and no longer." \t 

 length the committee divided on 

 ]Mr. Horner's proposed amend- 

 ment, which was negatived by 

 133 votes against 57- 



The further consideration of 

 the report of the committee on 

 the Bank Restriction Bill being 

 the order of the day on May 

 Sth, Lord Folkstone, in conse- 

 quence of the want of a clause to 

 compel the directors to resume 

 cash payments at the end of two 

 years, moved that the report be 

 taken into cons' deration on that 

 day six months. 



The question upon this motion 

 being put, it was negatived Avith- 

 out a division. 



Mr. Horner then proposed a 



clause to provide that the Direc- 

 tors of the Bank should take 

 measures immediately in order 

 that cash payments might be re- 

 sumed at as early a period after 

 the passing of that act, as ap- 

 peared to them to be expedient. 



On a division the clause was 

 rejected by 135 to 32. 



The bill being introduced into 

 the House of Lords on May 17th, 

 the Earl of Liverpool moved the 

 order of the day for going into a 

 committee upon it. After ob- 

 serving, that no difference of 

 opinion could exist as to the im- 

 policy of rem.oving the restriction 

 on the Bank without the inter- 

 vention of some further .time foi 

 preparation, and stating that he 

 proposed to keep in view that the 

 Bank shovdd resume its payments 

 at the earliest period consistent 

 with the public interest, he gave 

 an account of the object and pur- 

 pose of the bill, to the same effect 

 as had been done in the other 

 House. In fine, he said, the se- 

 curity was in the parliament's 

 own hands : if it did not think fit 

 to continue the restrictions, the 

 Bank was bound to resume its 

 payments as a matter of coiu'se. 



The Earl of Lauderdale entered 

 into a train of argument to prove 

 that the time was unnecessai'ily 

 and hurtfuUy prolonged ; and he 

 moved as an amendment that 

 July 5 th, 1817, should be inserted 

 instead of July 5th, 1818. 



The amendment being put, and 

 negatived without a division, the 

 earl next moved the insertion, 

 after the time, the words "and 

 no longer." This was also ne- 

 gatived, and the bill having gone 

 through the committee, v>'as re- 

 ported without any amendment. 



A cir- 



