A month afterwards, the Returns having been furnished, Mr. Hume returned to the charge. The accounts had more than borne him out in all particulars. He now again asked if the daily loss ought to be suffered in the financial state the country was in. The Act regulating Savings Banks ought to be repealed, and another passed in its place. His opinion was, decidedly, that Government should just give the interest which it realized by the Savings Bank money, and not add a farthing to it. "At a change in the price of Stock," added the reformer, "Government might very possibly lose three or four millions, and yet the depositors would not suffer the loss of a penny." Much as he wished for the progress and advancement of the poorer classes--and few, we think, worked harder to obtain it for them,--he contended that these classes ought to be placed precisely in the same situation as other people who had capital to invest. Another point which Mr. Hume dwelt upon was the _surplus money_ which managers of Savings Banks had in their possession untouched, after paying their depositors all the interest that was allowed them. At that time Mr. Hume stated that the surplus in the Newcastle Savings Bank, after paying the expenses of management, amounted to 4,810_l._ and in the Exeter and Devon Bank to a still larger sum; and this money which had been paid by Government and saved after the Trustees had given a liberal interest to depositors, was now turned into an invincible argument for some change in the law. Mr. Hume concluded with expressing a hope that Government would bring in a bill to amend the law relating to Savings Banks, or at any rate not throw any obstacles in the way of some private member doing it. The Secretary of the Treasury said, in reply, that Mr. Hume had stated the case fairly and correctly; and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer fully intended during the present session to bring in a bill with which he hoped _to satisfy all classes_.[37] The vicissitudes of party prevented this high Government functionary from carrying out his laudable, but very impossible design. In a few weeks the Chancellor is on the other side of the House, and another occupies his place. A bill, however, was introduced on the 5th of June, 1828, by Mr. Pallmer, which, supported by the new Administration, was passed through Parliament, and became law in the same year.[38] In introducing this bill, _Mr. Pallmer_ said it was quite obvious that the laws which affected Savings Banks ought to be as clear and as distinct as possible. Savings Banks were now very important institutions, and the welfare of thousands was connected with them. At that time there were no less than five Acts of Parliament regulating Savings Banks, and these Acts, which contained 150 clauses, involved an enormous amount of confusion and perplexity. He would in the place of these five Acts, propose an Act, simple and consolidated, of thirty or forty clauses.