from a general knowledge of the character of his noble friend, which enabled him to reject the insinuation which had been made by the honourable and learned member as impossible. The honourable and learned member seemed to think-and the insinuation had given him (Mr. Canning) much pain-that the speech of his noble friend to which he had alluded, had been framed upon another speech, which the honourable and learned member had qualified with no very courteous terms, but to which he (Mr. Canning) would not even allude. His noble friend-he would tell the honourable and learned member and the House was ineapable of the conduct that had been thus imputed to him. If there lived a man in England who disdained to shape his opinion to the smile or the frown of any human creature, that man was his noble friend. Whatever his noble friend had spoken was, let the House be assured, his noble friend's sincere opinion-an opinion from which he (Mr. Canning) differed, but to the sincerity and disinterestedness of which he paid the most implicit homage. Indeed, if the honourable and learned member for Winchelsea had only looked to the whole context of his noble friend's speech, he would have seen the most marked, the most glaring discrepancy between it and the other speech to which he had endeavoured to assimilate it. Who, among all the persons who had spoken on the subject, who had disposed so summarily, so conclusively, so satisfactorily of the idle objection, that the Coronation Oath was an impediment to the removal of civil disabilities, as the very person whom the honourable and learned gentleman had represented as having framed his speech wholly in conformity to that doctrine? When the honourable and learned gentleman considered with how much more weight his noble friend's denial of this doctrine of the Coronation Oath came

from his noble friend, than it could possibly have come from any individual entertaining a favourable view of the Catholic Question, surely he ought not to have condemned so unequivocally a speech, which, in this respect at least, had done a signal service.

He would not trespass further on the patience of the House. He had risen with no purpose of arguing over again the general question. He would add no more, except his earnest recommendation to the honourable member for Limerick, not to press his motion to a division. The relative numbers on such a division would but tend to give the Catholics of Ireland a fallacious impression of the opinion of the House. It could not be supposed that, either personally or officially, he (Mr. Canning) undervalued the opinions of Lord Wellesley. As the personal friend of Lord Wellesley, he was perfectly satisfied that his opinions had been fairly and duly considered by the Government; and, as a member of that Government, he would say, that if the honourable member entertained suspicions of another kind, he could assure him that the production of the despatches for which he had called, would utterly falsify his conclusions. Under these circumstances, he trusted that the honourable gentleman would not press his motion to a division.

The Motion was withdrawn.

1

ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT THE OPENING OF THE SESSION.

FEBRUARY 2d, 1826.

MR. J. STUART WORTLEY moved the Address, which was seconded by Mr. Green.--Agreeably to long established usage, it was an echo of the King's speech. A protracted discussion took place on the various topics relating to the embarrassment which had occurred in the commercial transactions of the country since the close of the last session of Parliament. The recognition of South America-the successful mediation of England in the conclusion of a treaty between the crowns of Portugal and the Brazils-and the state of Ireland, were also touched upon in the course of this discussion.

MR. SECRETARY CANNING* said, that although he had not expected that any difference of opinion would have been excited by the speech of his right honourable friend, (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) still, as some strange misconception had arisen upon several of the topics contained in it, he was anxious to state to the House the manner in which he had himself understood them. The House had been addressed by two honourable members from different sides of the House, who had both evidently misconceived the meaning of his right honourable friend. The misconception of one of the honourable gentlemen (Mr. Hume) was perhaps natural, and at any rate might be accounted for; but, how the misconception of the other (Mr. Pearse) had arisen, it was impossible

for him to imagine. The honourable gentleman opposite seemed to apprehend that his right honourable friend had a plan for erecting joint-stock banking companies or corporations, which would swallow up all the existing establishments. Now, the plan of his right honourable friend went no further than to take off, with the consent of the Bank of England, a few years sooner than it would otherwise expire, a prohibition, of which the effect, by the concurrent opinion of all who had spoken upon the subject, was to make weakness, instead of strength, an inherent quality in the system of country banking. It required not the agency of his right honourable friend, that the evil which the honourable gentleman apprehended should take place in the year 1833; that there should then be no longer any privilege in the Bank of England to prevent more than six persons from becoming partners in the same banking concern; that that privilege should then cease with the existence of the bank charter; and that such corporations and joint-stock companies as the honourable gentleman appeared so much to dread, should then rise up in all parts of the country. But, under what circumstances, he would ask the honourable gentleman, would that evil occur, supposing the present law to remain unaltered? On the one hand, the privilege of the Bank of England, which prevented the spreading of a wider basis for the transactions of country banks, would continue to exist till the year 1833; and on the other, there was, by law, in the country banks an unlimited power to issue small notes up to precisely the same period. Now, if the undoing of the privilege of the Bank of England was so fraught with mischief as the honourable gentleman seemed to think, how would that mischief be aggravated, if it were to operate upon an unlimited and unrestricted issue of country bank notes? His right honourable friend had two objects in view in the measure which he proposed. The

first was, to accelerate the period at which the prohibition was to be removed, which, as he had before said, entailed weakness upon the country banks; and the second was, by limiting the issues of those banks, to make the new power given to them operate with less suddenness upon the existing establishments. Whether the consequence of withdrawing the privilege of the Bank of England would be that new banks would be created all over the country, or that the ancient and long established ones would widen their foundations by coalescing with new partners, he could not pretend to decide positively at present. The honourable gentleman seemed to assume that the latter consequence would take place, but, as appeared to him, without sufficient reason. He could see no reason why, when the power of widening the basis of country banks was given, it should not operate to add a seventh, or an eighth, or even a tenth partner to the existing establishments, rather than to create new establishments all over the country, to rival and extinguish the old ones. Surely, every establishment would have the power, either by an accession of strength, or a consolidation of interests, to guard against the evil which the honourable gentleman appeared to apprehend.

With respect to the idea of his right honourable friend pressing his measure unawares upon the country, he must say that nothing had fallen from him which indicated any such intention; and, if his right honourable friend had not dwelt more at large upon the details of his measure, it was, that it had been so often before Parliament, or at least so long before the public, that it was only necessary to refer to it, to bring it to the minds of gentlemen who were at all acquainted with the subject. There was another point which the honourable gentleman appeared to have overlooked in his view of the question. If it were an evil, it was one that the Bank could create at present on any day in the week; for it could create branch