XXXIV V Whitehead v. Walker 556 Valpey v. Oaksey Van Casteel v. Booker Vanderzee v. Willis 565 Whitfield v. Lord Despencer 493 469 Whitfield v. Savage 497 453 Whitlock v. Underwood 486 Vandewall v. Tyrrell 587 Whitwell v. Bennett 510 Vanheath v. Turner i., 258 Whitworth v. Gaugain 456 Van Wart v. Woolley 565, 575, 577 Wickham v. Wickham 414 Vaughan v. Fuller 575 Wienholt v. Spitta 515 Vaughan v. Haliday 417 Wiffen v. Roberts 490 Veal v. Veal 492 Wilders v. Stevens 536, 555 Vere v. Ashby 546, 547 Wilkes v. Jacks 576 Vere v. Lewis 529, 542 Wilkins v. Jadis 491 Vernon v. Bouverie 502, 503 Wilkinson v. Casey 565 Vernon v. Hankey 416, 506, 518 Wilkinson v. Johnson 555 Wilkinson v. L'Eaugier 494 Wilks v. Jacks 575 W Williams v. Clarke 555 Williams v. Everett i., 257; ii., 497 Williams v. Griffith 414, 487 Walker v. Macdonald 553 Williams v. Jarrett 487, 510 Walker y. Neville 563 Williams v. Johnson 547 Walker v. Rostron i., 257; ii., 497 Williams v. Keates 548 Walmesley v. Cooper 563 Williams v. Seagrave 554 Walter v. Cubley 550 Williams v. Smith 505, 574 Walter v. Haynes 573 Williams v. Thorpe 494 Walter v. Hastings 549 Williams v. Williams i., 221; ii., 481 Walton v. Mascall 560 575 Williamson v. Bennett 528 Walwyn v. St. Quentin 576, 585 Williamson v. Rawlinson 414 Wankford v. Wankford 563 Willis v. Bank of England 558 Ward v. Evans 490, 502, 503, 5J4 Willis v. De Castro 563 Ward v. Turner 492 Wilson v. Kennedy 488 Warrington v. Early 549 Wilson v. Moore 517 Warrington v. Furbor 560, 575 Wilson v. Tummon 546 Warwick v. Noakes 493 Wilson v. Vysar 488 Waters v. Tomkins 413 Winch v. Keely i., 220 Watson v. Poulson 510 Winter v. Lord Anson 458 Watson v. Russell 515, 558 Witcher v. Hall 460 Watters v. Smith 567 Witt v. Amiss 492 Watton v. Hastings Watts v. Christie 549 Wittersheim v. Lady Carlisle 490 451, 506, 511 Wood v. Brown 575 Watts v. Jefferyes Waugh v. Wren Webb v. Hewitt Webb v. Spicer Webster v. Webster 513 Wood v. Mytton 529 413 Wood v. Priestner 461 563 Wood v. Rawcliffe 469 568 Woodhouse v. Murray 453 496 Woodland v. Fear 519, 575 Welby v. Drake 567 Woodthorpe v. Lawes 573 Wells v. Masterman 517, 548 Wookey v. Poole 297, 558 Wheatcroft v. Hickman 547 Whistler v. Forster 302, 487, 510, Worley v. Harrison Wright v. Hickling 528 414 558 Wright v. Laing Wright v. Riley Wright. Watson 414 487 Wright v. Showcross 574 449 Whitbread v. Jordan 458 Wylde v. Radford 449, 458 THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF BANKING CHAPTER X FROM THE RENEWAL OF THE BANK CHARTER IN 1800 TO THE ACT FOR THE RESUMPTION OF CASH PAYMENTS IN 1819 1. Soon after the year 1800 a remarkable phenomenon began to attract the notice of persons who had paid attention to the Currency. We have just seen how lamentably deficient the harvest of 1799 had been, and the enormous quantities of grain it became necessary to purchase. The autumn of 1799, and the ensuing winter, were equally unfavourable as the preceding had been to all descriptions of farming operations. The spring of 1800 was exceedingly wet; and, in the middle of the harvest, heavy and continuous rains set in. In consequence, the harvesttime was even more calamitous than the preceding one. In the north part of the island the crops were a total failure. standing that the unprecedented quantity of 1,242,507 quarters of wheat were imported, prices continued to rise to a famine scale. The public peace was with difficulty preserved, and in November, Notwith VOL. II B when Parliament met, the country was in a very alarming cordition. Parliament pursued the usual course, recommended the most stringent economy in the consumption of provisions, and offered to guarantee 100s. a quarter to all who imported wheat. In spite of all these measures, wheat rose in March, 1801, to 156s., barley to 90s., and oats to 47s. In the autumn of 1799, failures of great magnitude took place in Hamburg: 82 houses came down with liabilities amounting to £2,500,000. In consequence of these, discount rose to 15 per cent. Under the influence of the enormous sums of money that had to be sent abroad in purchase of grain, the attraction of this high rate of discount, and other causes, the exchange on Hamburg, which had stood so high for some years, fell in January, 1801, to 298, being upwards of 14 per cent. against England 2. We have already seen that, in the great monetary crisis of 1696-97, it was universally acknowledged by Parliament and the most eminent merchants, that it was the bad state of the coinage which produced the great rise in the market price of bullion, and the heavy fall in the Foreign Exchanges; and we have seen that the restoration of the coinage immediately rectified the Exchange. At that time Bank Notes were not a legal tender, and the language invariably applied to them, when their current value differed from their nominal value, was that they were at a discount. When the men of that day saw that the Bank Notes were a promise to pay so many "pounds" on demand, and when they saw that the persons who issued them were unable to pay that number of pounds, and that no one would give that number of pounds for them, they never used any other expression regarding these facts, than that the notes were at a discount. There is no trace of any one having thought of saying that it was the notes that denoted the pound sterling, and that bullion had risen. When the reform of the coinage took place, and the Exchanges were simultaneously rectified, it was said that the reform of the coinage caused the restoration of the Exchange, and numerous merchants had written pamphlets to combat a delusion which was rather prevalent among some persons, that Bullion, as a commodity, could have a different value to Bullion as Coin, except on account of the depreciation of the coinage |
