The bill was introduced into Committee on the 8th of April, 1861,[172] where trifling alterations were made in several of its clauses. _Mr. Slaney_, who had paid great attention to subjects of this nature, hoped that the deposits would not be restrained, as under the old system, he thought no limit should be placed upon the providence of the labouring classes. _Mr. Vance_, an Irish member, alluded, as he did on subsequent occasions, to what he considered the centralizing tendencies of the scheme. He thought Dublin ought to be the centre of operations for Ireland as under the Money Order system. The principal opponent of the measure on this occasion was _Mr. Ayrton_, the member for the Tower Hamlets, who in some quarters has been credited with the advocacy of the scheme before this period. In a long speech, Mr. Ayrton took exception to most of the details of the measure as they were now proposed, and to the principles of the measure as a whole. Mr. Ayrton held that data enough had not been presented to enable members to form an opinion as to whether the scheme would pay or not. "It was all very well to talk of subjects being self-sustaining, and even economical, but under such statements our expenses had gone on continually increasing." He adduced at length the case of the County Courts bill, and the Government Superannuation Allowances bill, which he said were introduced and passed under some such pretences. It would be the same with the Savings Banks; the Government would never be able to keep to the two and a half per cent., but would have to be guided by the rate allowed to other bankers. "The scheme of a national bank," continued the honourable member, "_however plausible_ it might look at the outset, would lead to the most serious consequences." The Committee which sat on the subject, and of which he, the speaker, was a member, came to the decided and unanimous conclusion that it was desirable to separate the operation of banking for the people from the National Treasury. It was thought that these national banks would act as a powerful inducement to the working men to entrust their money to the Government rather than to their own Benefit Societies, which were regarded as too much associated with Trade Societies. In his opinion Benefit Societies and Trade Societies had been the means of regenerating the people, and were eminently conservative; and it was not expedient to discourage these societies by means of the proposed banks. Nor was this all. It was desirable that the country gentlemen should take an interest in the welfare of the working people surrounding them; and to supersede their exertions by mere stipendiaries of the State would weaken that social system on which the liberties of the people were mainly founded. _Mr. Alderman Sidney_, "as one conversant with figures," ventured to say, that if the scheme were carried out, our national establishment must be greatly augmented; and if it proved successful, "the establishment