as a personal object could weigh with him in such a struggle) for the crown of England, which had been placed upon his head by the Revolution of 1688? It was in order to procure the pecuniary means of sustaining that struggle, that in the spring of 1696, he had sent the Earl of Portland to England. After long consultations with the ministers, with the Bank, and with the monied interest, that noble person returned to the king, confirming the reports of his council, that no mode of extricating him from his difficulties could be suggested, except that which we have already seen described, namely, "the re-issuing of the clipt money, and the undoing all that has been done." Did King William listen to this suggestion, and dishonour his reign by lowering the standard of our money? No, Sir. He was a man that knew how to meet adversity. His life had been one continued struggle with difficulties; but it had been the fixed rule of that life to encounter them with an unshaken fortitude, and a rigid adherence to what he considered to be right. This was the quality of his mind, without which his other virtues would have lost all their lustre, a quality which did not forsake him on this most trying occasion.

Instead of re-dispatching the Earl of Portland to England to concert measures" for undoing all that had been done," he sent him privately to sound Louis XIV., and to endeavour to bring about a negotiation for peace; and coming himself to England, he met his parliament on the 20th of October, 1696. In his Speech from the Throne on that day, he earnestly called their attention to the state of the Currency, and the difficulties in which the country was, in consequence, involved. At that period, this subject agitated the country from one end to the other. The Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Lowndes, had recommended the lowering the standard from 5s. 2d. to 6s. 3d. the ounce of silver-an operation equivalent to the lowering of the

gold standard, at this time, from 31. 17s. 10d. to 4l. 14s. 6d., -a degree of depreciation which, to begin with, would, I believe, almost satisfy even the honourable member for Callington.

The popular feeling was all on the side of this advice. That feeling was manifested in petitions from several counties, and most of the great towns. But, did Parliament adopt this advice? Far from it. With true wisdom, on the very first day of the meeting, immediately after voting an Address in answer to the Speech from the Throne, on that same 20th of October, 1696, Mr. Montague, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, proposed, and Parliament adopted, the following resolution:-" That this House will not alter the Standard of the Gold and Silver Coins of this kingdom in fineness, weight, or denomination." The circumstance of coming to a resolution of this importance, on the very first day of the meeting, is the more remarkable, as in those times, the Address, in answer to the Speech, was sometimes not voted till some days after the opening; but the ministers of King William felt the great importance of removing all doubts, and of at once settling the public mind on this point.

We know what followed. The ancient standard was maintained; the difficulties gradually subsided; and every thing finding its proper level, all the transactions of the country were restored to their former facility. “The receiving, that is to say, the calling in, the silver money," says a writer of that period, "could not but occasion much hardship and many complaints among the people; yet the greatest part attributed this to the necessity of affairs, and began to hope, both from the prospect of a peace, and wisdom of those at the helm, that they should enjoy more favourable times."

We are now fortunately in the enjoyment of a peace dic

tated by ourselves, and I trust likely to be durable; but it must be admitted-indeed, the Shrewsbury Correspondence leaves no doubt upon the subject-that the peace of Ryswick, a peace by no means of the same lofty character, was hastened by the difficulties incident to the restoration of the currency. By that peace most of the objects of the war were either sacrificed or postponed. It was considered, at the time, as little better than a hollow truce, submitted to from necessity. But this only confirms the paramount importance which the government of King William attached to the restoration of the currency. Their view of the peace of Ryswick was certainly a just one; and we all know that, after a few years of a feverish armistice, it was followed by a long and arduous war. If I refer at all to that war, the war of the Succession, it is to recall the recollection of the great share and glorious exertions of England in that contest; and to satisfy the House, that whatever were the straights to which the country was reduced in 1696, the firm and wise resolution then adopted was not incompatible with the speedy restoration of prosperity and power. If, in 1696, this House, having then so recently restored the ancient landmarks of property, refused, under the strongest temptation, both from the state of the war on the continent, and from popular feeling at home, again to alter them; shall we, after those same land-marks have now been replaced for three years, adopt a measure, which would be as fatal to our national character, as it would to the security of individual possession, to the maintenance of credit in private dealings, and to the very existence of the public credit of the state?

When projects of this nature are afloat out of doors, and when they are now propounded to this House, shall we, with such mighty interests at stake, hesitate to manifest our firm determination to maintain the present standard of

value? Shall we shrink from the precedent of 1696? I am as little disposed as any man to call upon parliament to bind itself to any general or abstract principles, but I own this appears to me an occasion for such a proceeding. Under that impression, Sir, however conscious of the humble station which I hold in this House and in the country, and of its immeasurable distance from that held by the great man by whom the resolution of 1696 was moved; but with the same feelings for the honour and the best interests of my country, which actuated his bosom on that occasion; I shall conclude, thanking the House for their indulgence, by proposing to amend the motion of the honourable member, by substituting for it the resolution of 1696; namely, "That this House will not alter the Standard of Gold or Silver, in fineness, weight, or denomination."

The debate was adjourned till the following day, when the original motion was supported by Mr. Bennet, Alderman Heygate, Mr. H. Gurney, Mr. Attwood, and Mr. Brougham; and the amendment by Mr. Haldimand, Mr. Secretary Peel, the Marquis of Londonderry, and Mr. Ricardo, who maintained that the success of the motion would be attended with all the injurious effects which Mr. Huskisson had so ably pointed out. The House divided: For Mr. Western's Motion, 30. For Mr. Huskisson's Amendment, 194. Majority, 164.

IRISH BUTTER TRADE-PROPOSED DUTY ON
FOREIGN BUTTER.

June 20.

Sir Nicholas Colthurst moved, that the House should resolve itself into a committee on the Irish Butter Trade Act, with the intention of proposing, “that an additional duty of 10s. per cwt. be imposed on foreign butter imported into this country." Mr. Hudson Gurney opposed the motion, and declared that he would never consent to tax the people of England, in order to keep up the exorbitant rents of the Irish landlords. Mr. Ricardo said, that the application

was founded on a petition from Dublin, which falsely stated, that the trade in butter had fallen off considerably. Mr. Western thought it extraordinary that gentlemen should prefer a trade with foreign countries to a trade with Ireland, since the latter course would increase the consumption of our manufactures, and consequently promote the prosperity of the country.

Mr. HUSKISSON assured the House, that he was not one who preferred the interest of foreign countries to his own, and that if he thought this additional protection would be of real benefit to Ireland, and not occasion more injury to the empire at large, he would give it his support. In the present year more butter had been imported from Holland than in any preceding year since the peace. Why was this? The honourable member for Essex said it was because it was produced in Holland at less expense; but the real cause was, that it had fallen in price in Holland. The honourable gentleman had compared the means of Ireland with those of Holland, in the production of this article. Now the fact was, that Holland was the most taxed country in Europe, not even excepting England. He objected to the proposed measure, because it would operate no relief to Ireland, and the effect of it would be, not to increase consumption, but, by raising the price of a bad article, to draw it altogether out of consumption. In the present state of Europe, when every country was suf fering from low prices, it was peculiarly incumbent upon us not to set other nations the example of imposing additional restrictions on trade, but to convince them that it was our fixed determination to pursue that liberal system of commercial intercourse which had been so auspiciously commenced, and to let commerce be carried on for the mutual benefit of all.

The motion was negatived.