within the reach of their own exertions and industrious application, would be effectual. After a little further opposition, during which another member said that the bill would do more harm than good--that Savings Banks were going on extremely well without any Act of Parliament, _Mr. Wilberforce_, ready at all times to forward any measure which seemed likely to benefit the poorer and more defenceless portions of society, congratulated his friend on his proposals, and said that the system of Savings Banks pleased him most because it was so eminently adapted to teach the poor how much they might do for themselves by their own self-denying exertions. This was one of the class of things for which he, the House, and the country ought to be extremely indebted to all who had been instrumental in originating it and bringing it to greater perfection. "Whatever difference of opinion," continued Mr. Wilberforce, "there might exist as to the Poor Laws, it was of all things desirable to countenance and foster so sanative a principle as that on which Savings Banks were founded." The second and principal reading of the bill took place on the 15th of May, 1817, on which night many petitions were presented in its favour, and only three--viz., from Norwich, Hertford, and St. Paul's, Covent Garden--against it. All opposition, however, to the bill resolved itself into simply contesting one or two of its clauses. An attempt was made to throw out the clause which obliged the Trustees of Savings Banks to vest all moneys received by them in the Public Funds, several members contending that at any rate some of the money might be much better employed on mortgage, to the relief of many different interests in the immediate neighbourhood, and to the greater productiveness of the money so lent. The arguments used on this occasion were very similar to those occasionally used now in relation to the same subject, and they were then as unavailing as they have been subsequently: the preponderating opinion was that the _safety_ of the investments was, and ought to be, the first and greatest consideration. The clause, however, which proposed the giving of premiums out of the parish funds to those contributors who had done best in the way of saving money, fared worse, being rejected in committee almost unanimously. The growth of such principles could not be forced, and, if they grew at all, they would do better without the crutches eleemosynary aid. At the third reading, a spirited contest arose about the proviso that depositors in Savings Banks should not be disqualified from receiving parochial relief. _Mr. Rose_ contended that anything, which would have a tendency to make the poor think that the richer classes were legislating with ulterior objects in view, such as to get rid of poor-rates, would throw obstacles in the way of Savings Banks. There would be no need to think of such considerations in a few years, when Savings Banks were more firmly fixed amongst the