This Column may be divided into

(a) Stock created for Reproductive Expenditure, i.e, for the "Acquisition of the Telegraphs." (b) Stock created for Non-productive Expenditure.-Fortifications and Army Localization.

+ The Bonds for the money raised to purchase the Suez Canal Shares were all dated the 20th March, e entire sum has therefore been included in the amount of debt created in 1875-6. The money was it different dates in March and April, 1876, the 20th March being the mean date.

(c) Includes £3,945,349 Stock cancelled on account of Unclaimed Dividends and Donations and Bequests, and £2,554,800 Exchequer Bills paid off.

(d) Includes £5,871,488 Stock cancelled on account of Courts of Chancery and Bankruptcy, and £2,134,600 Exchequer Bonds and Bills, and £1,000,000 Ways and Means Advances paid off.

(e) Also, not taking into account-Net Debt created for the purchase of Suez Canal Shares, and for Public Works Loans, £18,951,100.

Treasury Chambers, 16th August, 1882.

LEONARD COURTNEY.

QUESTIONS ON POINTS OF PRACTICAL INTEREST.

THE COUNCIL desire to express their readiness to receive at all times questions which are of general interest, and in regard to which it would appear desirable to assimilate the practice of bankers.

The following questions have been received, and answers are appended, which, after careful deliberation, the Council have approved :

QUESTION I.-A. B. has a current account, and is allowed to overdraw to the extent of £500 at any time, for which he has deposited freehold security with his bankers, who hold the same on the usual equitable charge. The bankers fail, and at the time A. B. is only overdrawn £100 (or perhaps nothing). Would not the liquidators be obliged to hand A. B. his security on his payment of the debt, if any? or would the bank having stopped payment be able to hold the security and dispose of the same to pay their obligations?

ANSWER: A banker holding securities, which have been deposited with him by way of equitable mortgage, must deliver up the securities upon being paid the amount covered by the deposit.Grant's Law of Banking, Third Edition, p. 220.

QUESTION II.--Would a bank be justified in paying cash over the counter for a crossed cheque presented by a loan office styling itself a bank?

ANSWER: A bank paying cash over the counter for a crossed cheque presented by a loan office styling itself a bank would do so at its own risk, unless the loan office had made a return as a banker to the Inland Revenue Office.

QUESTION III.-Is it not the duty of a banker to refuse payment of bills in either of the following cases-(1) where a bill is drawn by an individual (not a firm) to his order, and the handwriting of the endorsement obviously differs from the drawer's signature, the banker having no means of knowing whether the endorsement be genuine; (2) In the case of a bill being endorsed per procuration and not bearing banker's guarantee?

ANSWER: The banker would not be justified in refusing payment in either of these cases.

QUESTION IV.-If A. gives a letter of authority or standing order to his banker for B. to sign cheques on his account, should such letter of authority bear a Id. Inland Revenue or what stamp? ANSWER: No stamp is necessary on such a letter.

QUESTION V.-A. gives a guarantee to B., a banker, for C.'s debt, in which it is stated to be a continuing guarantee "till the debt is paid." Does the Statute of Limitations affect this guarantee, or is it binding on the guarantor after six years?

ANSWER: Such guarantee is subject to the Statute of Limitations.

OBITUARY.

GEORGE WARDE NORMAN, Esq.

How far or often it is the case that any well known legislation, which, though always coupled in the public mind with the name of some celebrated statesman, is really due to some philosopher whose name is rarely mentioned in connection with it, cannot always be clearly ascertained. But a more conspicuous instance in support of the view that such vicarious authorship does sometimes actually exist, could scarcely perhaps be found than in the case of the late Mr. George Warde Norman, who died on the 4th September last. Almost the last of a small body of eminent economists belonging to a past generation, there is probably no one to whom those now living are so indebted for the legislation which has placed our currency and banking laws on their present footing. And this is just as he would have wished it to be. With a mind singularly careless as to details, it mattered to him little who worked out and adopted his views, so long as the truths of which he had so clear a perception could be made to assume a practical form, and be applied to the benefit of others. It is necessary to read old treatises and pamphlets now almost forgotten except by the few, and the voluminous evidence wrapped up in blue books, clearly to estimate the influence which he exerted during a long period over that legislation which may be regarded as culminating in the familiar Bank Act of 1844. His powerful intellect and extraordinary memory remained clear until the end, and those only who had the privilege of a personal acquaintance with him could truly realise the perfect integrity of purpose which prompted all he undertook, and the charm of that simple and kindly disposition which was intolerant only of meanness, or of those who, desiring to escape the trammels of legitimate paths and the burden of honest labour, were, to use his old expression, "hasting to be rich.”

The following notes of Mr. Norman's life, and principal subjects which occupied him, are reprinted, by permission, from the Economist:

In our publication of the 9th instant, we mentioned the death of Mr. George Warde Norman, who was well known in the city, and was for upwards of fifty years (from 1821 to 1872), a director of the Bank of England. Considering Mr. Norman's high position as a political economist, and the important part he took in bringing about the changes upon which our present monetary system is based, we think it may interest our readers to have their attention called to his work in somewhat more detail,