institutions of the country; it was highly expedient, however, that they should now be allowed to have their weight. In a few years, argued he, the poor will have formed habits of saving, and so they will have become independent, and be above throwing themselves on the parish, at any rate with impunity. Mr. Wilberforce held and expressed the same view, which Lord Milton and others opposed; the clause was retained, notwithstanding, by a majority of thirty-three in a House of eighty-seven members. With this discussion the bill passed, and became law in August, 1817. As this bill[30] is the beginning of legislation on the subject of Savings Banks, we would here state in outline the principal objects with which it dealt. A sort of Supplementary Act, cap. 105, was passed to apply more particularly to Ireland, to suit the Irish members, who, when the matter was under discussion, argued that the same Act would not deal so well with Ireland, and who, therefore, wished the two countries treated separately. Both the acts required that the Rules of the proposed Bank for Savings should be deposited with the Clerk of the Peace of the county in which the bank should be situated, though no discretionary power was left with the magistrates in the matter. The Trustees and Managers were prohibited from receiving any profit from any transactions in these banks, and were empowered to pay over the moneys they received into the Bank of England, or Ireland (as the case might be), to the account of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, the latter being instructed and empowered to invest them in Three per Cent. Bank Annuities. Interest on money thus deposited in the hands of Government was guaranteed to the Trustees of Savings Banks at the rate of 3_d._ per cent. per day, or 4_l._ 11_s._ 3_d._ per annum. The Act restricted the amount which any one depositor could place in a Savings Bank in England to 100_l._ in the first year, and 50_l._ in any subsequent year. In Ireland the limitation was 50_l._ in any year, though why this distinction was agreed upon does not appear.