eat measure from the necessity that existed
of constantly sending specie to the continent. During the preceding year
Mr. Horner had obtained the appointment of a committee to inquire into
the reason of the high price of gold bullion, and the state of the
circulating medium, and of the exchanges between Great Britain and
foreign parts. The report of this bullion committee was presented by Mr.
Horner on the 6th of May, on which occasion he addressed the house in
an elaborate speech, advocating a speedy return to cash-payments, as
the only means of saving the credit of the country. The report itself,
indeed, tended to recommend this measure to parliament. It stated,
that there was an excess in the paper circulation, of which the most
unequivocal symptom was the very high price of bullion, and, next to
that, the low state of the continental exchanges; that the cause of this
excess of bank-notes was to be found in the suspension of cash-payments;
there being no adequate provision against such an excess, except in the
convertibility of paper into specie; and that the unfavourable state of
the exchanges originated in the same cause, and was further increased
by the anti-commercial measures of the enemy. The report added, that
the committee could see no remedy for the present or security for the
future, except the repeal of the Suspension Act; that they thought this
could not safely be done at an earlier period than two years from the
time of their report; but that they recommended parliament to make early
provision for this purpose. This subject occupied the house four long
nights, but Mr. Horner's resolutions were all rejected. Subsequently,
however, a bill was carried in the lords, which declared that bank-notes
should be taken only at their professed value, and deprived the landlord
of a summary remedy by distress whenever tender had been made in
bank-notes. This bill was strongly opposed in the commons; but it was
eventually carried by majorities of about four to one. In the lords, the
bill was chiefly opposed by Lord King, who argued that it would create
additional mischiefs and inconveniences; that landlords would refuse
to grant leases; and that the bill could not effect the object which it
professed to have in view, or retard depreciation of bank-notes. Lord
King had recently issued a circular-letter to his tenants, that he would
no longer receive bank-notes at par, but that his rents must for the
future be paid either i