The Express. — London, England, 1853-05-24 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.—MONDAY, MAY 23. TGo LOUD CUAXOILLOI took his 'tutu 5 o'clock. MK CHANCERY FUND. _ _ Lw 1 ST. Lia7 , ll:a.i'3erkederhatwas intended to be don. by the goscrnment with reference to the consolidated annuities b lonaina to the suitors in the Couto( Chancery ? he Earl of ABERDEEN said taey would receive pre eisely the same treatment u all other holders of stock. THE lIALDON ELECTION. Lord ST. LEONARD'S asked what the intention of the government was with reference to the address of the Mouse of Commons on the subject of the Malden election ? The Earl of ABERDEEN was ant aware of any grounds fur not takiug the course widen hal been pursued with re /entice to similar addresses from the other hawse; and ha mould, then fare, on Thursday met, more that their lode *hips agree to the addri is. THE ~LATH TRADE. Lewd BROUGHAM presented a petition from Sir Alex ander Stuart, of Winchester noun., Old Broad-street, on the subject of the alteration of the sugar dune% and the consequent depreciation of the value of his property in . Jamaica. He (Lard Brougham) had oppcse el the measure ed 1846 which did sway with the differential duties on sugar, not on account of t'te West India planter, but because he saw that the thrice. eendeney cat the nietsure would be the inevitable iserease of the Atricar. alive trade. Its eff.ct, with reference to the petitioner, had been, that the whole of his property was swept away. It was now too late to re trace the step taken in lee ; but they . might do all they could to accomplish the general ah admit of slavery, the partial abolition of which formed one of the grievances of which the Wed India proprietors coroplair.ed. He had some time ago read amongst the ordinary articles of COW =MIA! intelli4ence, that a noel had landed liar cargo is Cubs, and the. six hient.red miserable slaves formed a jot of that cargo. The Earl of CLARENDON—EIeven hundred. Lord BROUGHAM said that the increase in the number of the pow creatures made the ease more appalling. They lad rem I of a piratical expedition to Cube, which the Unit. d States government had succeesfully put down ; but whet piracy could be equal iv enormity to that of dragging from their homes and native land the unhappy beings who had to endure the horrors of a middle passage, and were then landed as slaves spun • distant shore. More atrocious piracy that, within their own dominion., than Cuban or any other pint y. (Hear, bear.) Ile untied to ark his noble friend whether Vet traffic in slaves was still going on we n n,. in spi te of tile r• retire winch hail been catered into ? Th , . EA.' .of CLARENDON (who spoke in a conversa tional tone across the t Ode, and was very indistinctly heard in the gallery) was understood to say that be wished it was in hi. poses r r give a satisfactory answer to the question of his noble end le irned friend ; he was sorry, however, to Bay that, althou.th the case to which he hail alluded coos almost alone in air,-es , y, it was by no means the only ease which bad come to the knowledge of her Majesty . * govern. ment. The save trade it appeared was being carried on to a eoneiderable extent in Cuba. Our consul-general had been most active, energetic, and zealous in procuring information with respect to it ; and bad made a report with reference to the particular case brought under their !ordains' notice, from which it appeared that such was the law with reference to slavery in the Jolene! of Cuba, that it was Impossible to follow newly imported negroes to the island, when mice they wen landed. The moment the negro passed into the bands of his new owner, the law was powerless in effecting his re lease. It 1,11111 almost useless, therefore, to denounce the authorities of the country, and equally so to bring snob cases before the courts. In the case referred to, and other which had coma under the nodes of the British bevernment, the most zealous efforts and reimenehmeses had en used. The Captain Genera! of Cubs had Unattained that the cargo of the ship to which his noble sad leaded friend referred oriuinally consisted of 1,300 parsons, and the sufferings which they had endured of Via peas . might be supposed from the fief, that the ship was onlyrod &MS tons beitelten. It appeared that an attempt AM been made by them to rise on their oppressors sad liberate themselves, and that during the strag gle upwards of two hundred were killed, which reduced the number landed to 1,100. Upon a remon strance the Captain-Ge neralef Cuba appeared to have taken on himself to act almost contrary to the law, for he had traced and rescued three hundred of the unhappy crea tures. Her Majesty's government had received the most solemn assurances from the government of Spain that the law henceforward should be strictly observed; and he trusted that it would be so. (Hear, hear.) The late minister for foreign alfain had placid in the hands of Lord Bowden, the British minister at the court of Spain, a pri vate letter oh:eh he had received from the present Can fain-General of Cubs, assuring him, on his word of honour, that he would het in such • manner as should be satisfactory to the B h government. He could only add that no effort on the part of her Majesty's government should be spared to put au end to the nefarious traffic ; and he had the satisfaction of stating that, in consequence of the cruisers which had been placed around the coast of Cuba four slave vessels had been seised, and within the last week he had heard of a fifth having been captured. (Hear, hear.) Her Majesty's government had addressed remonstrances to the governineot of the United States of America on the subject of the slave trade, and he felt perfectly satisfied that that government would do its utmost to prevent its Sag from being so degraded. (Hear, hear.) Lord BROUGHAM said the power exercised over the rolonial authorities in Spain was very great. Under Reporters, who was • great enemy of slavery, but little pro gress was made, for he was obliged to give way before the powerful influence exercised on the Colonial-offico in favour of slavery. Lord WHAIINCLIFFE said that the late Captain-Gene ral of Cuba, General Concha, who was • friend of Espar tero's, exerted himself to suppress the slave trade, and he did it with so much success that he had sreceeded, in the year 18.51, in reducing the number of slaves imported into Cuba to 6,000. In the spring of last year, however, with out notice or apparent cause, he was suddenly removed from his command. One of the last acts which he performed was the removal of the second in command in that island in consequence of his participation in acts of slavery. He was afraid there would be a much greater number of slaves im ported into Cuba this year than in the year 18-51 when Oen. Concha had the command. The lave trade was no doubt carried on there with the connivance of the government. THE CASE OF LIEUT. SANDHAM. The Earl of ELLEN BOROUGH said he wished to ask the noble earl the President of tho Council, whether he had any objection to produeo copies of the proceedings of two courts-martial held in India, one in IMO, and the other re cently, upon Lieut. Sandham. In 1840 this officer was accused of drawiog his sword on his superior officer on pa rade. The sentence of the court-martial was that he should be degraded and reprimanded ; and on being sent back by the Commander-in-Chief, Sir C. Napier, for revision, It was' ' confirmed. From sec-ousts received by the last mail it op geared that the same officer had recently been tried for three separate offences against native,. lie was accused and convicted of severely ill-treating • native cloth-merchant; be was accused and convicted of severely ill-treating an attendant of • brother officer; and he was also amused and convicted of breaking the arm of one of his own attendants. For this last cffence he was mulcted of all months' pay, and Sir W. Gomm, the Commander-in- Chief, told him that he hoped he would learn in future to treat his fellow-creatures a area and not as brutes. This officer still remained as Offing of the Indian army, an army apes wbsa dastien and Yelity this salary depeodeahemstbin he themalsassawofilasmidesfa India, web that Malan and Meaty mealy rated upon sweat for the Enrepess character. Under the Mecum- Mmes, it appease to him absolutely that the I=lll sMsid direct the prosecatien of is ellen 11spremie Court of India—a Nan which was atibibbe rfedg fee the protection af We and he wadi mese that if a verdict was pesesseed against him. he &esti be removed from the esay wader sign mensal. Earl GRANVILLE said he entirely agreed with the sable earl with regard to the treatment of natives et India. There was, however, a regulation ado bnaa government to the effect that the Indian gomratest shied send to this country an account of every case in which an Indian officer had been found guilty of maltreating • native, and he had no doubt that on an early day • communication on the sub ject would be received. THE COUNTESS DE ROLLAT. Lord ABINOER moaned the presaaletioa of a petition with regard to this lady until Monday nat. COMMON LODGING HOUSES BILL. This till pared through committee. CHIMNEY-SWEEPERS REGULATION ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY sewed the order of the day for bringing op the resort ea this bill. The Earl of CLANCARTY complained of the precipita tion with width this memare was being harried forward. Me wax inforumll Mid the failure of the existing act was swiss, not to wiled mien of it, but to its impracticability. During the Whitson MOM he hid examined • number of master sweeps is Irelemd, who all agreed in this statement. Be had aloe wMIIIW W the Mayors of Dublin, Belfast, Limerick, sad Mb" Owns, sad the answers which he had received eorpespewded with the statement of the trade. Boeing that fin bill wet bressist forward as an,pmendment of the exist's, law, he would suggest that it should be re ferred toe select committee. Lord BEAUMONT regretted that as noble earl had not done a step farther and moved this rejection of the bill, for It wee erroneous and &swam is principle, and its details were petty and misseahle. It was a bill simply to prevent postai persons under the •ge of 16 from carrying • beg and • brush. (Hear, hear.) It was not a bill to prevent boys from going up chimneys—there was already an act for that purpose. If this kind of legislation was to go on, where were they to stop? By and bye they would be asked to prevent boys from being trained to ride rocs horses. He could call this bill nothing bat the pitiful ant of peeudo-philanthropy. (Ironical Mies of " Rear, hear," from the Earl of Shatter Wiry). For his own part, he wished the former bill had sever bees enacted ; for he believed the sole effect of it was, that a few extra persons had been burnt in their beds ; the only set-of being what was termed the moral lizsprow meat of the sweeps. There was no reason why children employed in the chimney sweeping trade should not tw educated as well as other children ; end as to accidents, they might have been entirely preveoied by proper regale bens with regard t, the construction of chi:nneys. He would won as an amendment upon the amendment of the noble earl (Cie:warty) that the bill should be reported that day Mt months. !40rdli.NMURE said even at the risk of exposing him self to the charge of rfudo-phtlaathropy—rcheer*)—he lawn say OM Ward with regard to this bill more especially as his noble friend who had just sat down had expressed • wish that the original bill had not passed into • law. lie had the satisfaction of introducing the original bill as • member of the government of the day, and he must say he had never attached his name to a bill with greater satisfac tion. It was not unbecoming the dignity of that house to throw the shield of Re peoteetion over intents who were un able to protest them‘elves. They had does so in the case of factory children, and it was unquestionable that children em ployed in chimney-sweeping were exposed to greater hardship. By the 3rd and 4th Victoria children under 16 years of age were prevented from being bound apprentices to the trade of chimney sweep., and the ed . o et bad been to save the lives of maey hundred children. There was, however, another result. Many masters, having been deprived of the power of taking children as apprentices, had induced poor people to let them have their children virtually as !slaves ; and the object of this bill was , he understood, to meet that CAM.. Lord ST. LEONARDS said he entirely agreed with the noble lord that young children 'should not be forced to go up and down chimneys. But the noble lord appeared to have forgotten the plovisione of his own act. That act prevented children Irma being taken as apprentices under 16, hut it did not touch the question of going up and down a chimney at all. What it did was to pr ivide that no one should do th it who was under the age of 21, and as persons of that age were generally too rational to do so, the provi sion was virtually a prohibition. Ile thought the object of the noble earl was a good one, but the subject required MOM consideration. If they were not careful they might lairey the trade altogether. It sometimes happened that the machine stuck in the chimney, and it would be nines. airy that • boy should go up to extricate it. (Hear, bear.) The principle of preventing boys from being ill-used was a emir, but they should take care that they did not em the trade without doing any good. (Hear, be .r.) The Earl of WICKLOW said that he was in favour of the rejection of the bill altogether ; not that ho objected to its principle, but that no reason or ground fur legislating on this subject had been shown. The law imposed a pe nalty of 1001. on master sweeps if they sent • boy up a chimney, and any person in the hcuae who knowingly per mitted him to ascend was autject to the same penalty. This was amply sufficient to prevent the law being least evaded; at if this did not, he did no: know anything else that would. The noble earl said tbst it was in the country principally that the law was evaded. If so, it arose from an ignorance of the law, and not from its insufficiency ; and it would be better fur the noble earl to circulate handbills, stating what the law was, than to bring in this bill. It was mischievous is itself to load the statute books with laws for which there was en necessity. (IL ar, hear.) The Duke of AIWYLL said there could be no doubt that evasions of the law had taken place, and it was to prevent these evasioas that the noble earl had introduced the presert bill. Ile thought the principle of the bill was a good one, and that all those who siipported the former set ought to vote for the bill of the noble tall. (Hear.) Lord MONTEAGLE called the attention of their lord ships to a standing order of the helve, which provided that no bill for regulating the conduct of a whole trade be read • second time in the house till a select committee shall have inquired into the expediency or inexpediency of the pro posed regulations, and shall have reported to the house thereon. If this was • bill for the regulation of a whole trade—and he did not think there could be a doubt that it was—it was not competent fur the house to proceed with the bill without referring it to a select committee for this purpose. (Hear, hear.) The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said that the bill having arrived at its present point, he should net, as far as he was concerned, recede from the position he had taken up. With regard to the sentiments and language of the noble earl opposite (Beaumont), who charged him with "cant and a miserable pseudo-philanthrophy," he would only say that he trusted in God he should live under his censure, for he should rejoice to be the object of such observations from the noble lord, and such as be, to the last hour of his life. He denied the statement of the noble earl that the last act had led to the burning of houses and loss of life. On the contrary, there were thousands of children now at school or learning trades more in accordance with the dig nity of freemen and Christian beings, who but for that set would be employed in the disgusting and demoralising trade of chimney-sweepers. If a few houses had been burned in the country from sooty chimnics, it was because no attempt hail been made to make use of chimney doers, which could be made in every house at little expense, and would enable the machine to be worked in all eases. No system had ever been put in operation which was more disgusting and degrading, both morally and physically, than that of chimney-sweep ing by means of boys, and it was only because it operated on so small& camber that the humanity of this country did not repudiate it, as tl.ey did the System of slavery. The noble lord said that this was a piece of petty and miserable legislasion, and that it was below the dignity of their lord ships' house. He could only say that if their lordships re jected the bill now, which he hoped they would not, he would, wish Ool's blessing, bring it forward again. (Hear.) The Earl of ABERDEEN evirested that Use bill should be referred to a select committee to corer the standing orders. (Hear, hear.) Lord PANSIURE wished to be informed whether a Lill that had passed through committee of the house could be referred tea select committee ? _ . The Earl of REDESDALE said it could be so referred, even after a third reading. Alter some conversation the amendment was put in the form suggested by Lord Monteagte, namely, that the bill be referred to a select committee, for the purpose of in- quiring into the expediency or inexpediency of the proposed regulations. (heir lordships then divided. The gallery was then cleared for • division, but none took place. After a short debate, with closed doors, it was agreed to refer the bill to • select committee, to inquire into its compliance with the standing orders. Their lordships adjourned at boll-pat 7 o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MONDAY, MAT 23. The SriAlum took the cbair at four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were ivy/rally read a third time pas,ed Gravesend and Wroittam Road ; Great Batra-M Cemetery Association ; Kilkenny and Great Southern Western Railway ; Ludlow Cattle Market and Slaught homes; Manchester Improvement; Midland Railway (Leicester and Hitchin) ; North British Railway ; Staines, Wukingham, and Waking Junction Railway ; Swaffhaus and Bottisbans Drainage (No. ; Weston super-Mare Waterworks ; York Drainage and Sanitary Improvement and Foss Navigation ; Edinburgh Water works (No. 2) ; London and South-Western Railway ; Imams, Brighton, and South Coast Railway ; North and South-Western Junction Railway (Hammersmith) ; Sunderland Dock. The following bills were severally read a 'seated time: Aberdeen Tellers' Incorporation Estate, Fisher's Divorce, and %rods and Central India Railway Company. GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY (HENLEY) BILL. On the order for the third reading of this bill, Mr. CHRISTOPHER complained of the conduct of en hon. member an the ministerial side of the house In moving for the recommittal of this bill to a fresh committee in his absence, he (Mr. Christopher) having beta chairman of the original committee. Mr. OLIVEIRA defended the course he had taken. His I only object bad been to have the awe decided on its merits. He had not the slightest, intention of offending say hors. member of that how. The bill was then read a third ties and paned. PUBLIC BUSINESS. ADJOURNMENT OF THE ROUSE. moved that the bean at its rids; ste Thezahty ant. Agreed to. 4ad REPEAL OF THE SEPTENNIAL ACT. Lord D . S f UAftT nave entice that, i iiiiiiiiiii Mouth, be should move for lave to bring iu a bill to repeal the Septennial Att. EDUCATION BILL. _ _ Mr. MIALL gave notice that in committee on the Edu cation Bill he should move the insertion of a clause ex empting individuals from the borough rate to the amount of their subscription' to voluntary schools in the district DOCKYARD COMMITTEE.—REPORT. Lard SEYMOUR brought up the report of the committee on recent appointments in Chatham Dockyard. His lord ship moved that It be road by the Clerk at the table. The Cm= proceeded to read in a rapid manner and low "dos, the report, which recapitulated the circumstances ands which the committee had been appointed, thecireular sent to the dockyard superintendents in 1849, and the cir cumstances under which Sir B. Walker tendered his resig nation. The committee bad also to inquire into the circum stances attending the appointment of J. Wells, and gene rally into the exercise of the government patronage by the Admiralty in the dockyard boroughs. Four distinct ques tions had been submitted to them, respecting which they would offer separate observations. The filet question was thesancelliag et the circular to the superintendents by the set of the I9ih April, without any order or minute of the Board of Admiralty, and in order to render their re marks on this point intelligible, the conunmittes must advert to the circumstances of the case. The report then proceeded to recapitulate the evidence, the original order establishing a system of promotion by merit only, the board reserving to itself the right of first appointment. In 1849, Sir F. T. Baring introduced • further security for impartiality, by pledging the superintendents, on their honour, to discard all political prejudices in the exercise of their duty. The committee approved of this step, but thought it inexpedient with referents to the lower functionaries. Having detailed the mode in which promo tion was regulated under Sir B. Walker, it proceeded to the circumstances already detailed in evidence, commeacing with the %id March, 1842. The Duke of Northumberland had, it appeared, handed all the civil patronage over to Mr. Stafford, and Mr. Stafford had complained that it was gene rally ciistributed among the opponents of the then govern ment. The report then recapitulated the evidence of Sir B. Walker, of the clerk Grant, and the various letters of Mr. Stafford. The evidence of the Duke of Northumber land was next alluded to, and the discrepancies pointed out in the evidence of Mr. Stafford and Sir B. Walker. The latter bad deposed to Mr. Stafford having said, there was no blinking the matter, that he could not withstand the pressure of Lord Derby and the Chancellor of the Exche quer, and Admiral Parker confirmed Sir Baldwin's tee. timony. Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli had attended the committee, and deposed that they had never said any , thing of the kind. On the sth of April a promo eon was made, which gave rise to serious remonstrances. The document then proceeded to give the substance of the evidence of Captain Richards, the Superintendent of Chatham Dockyard, in reference to the appointment of Ridgeway through the influence of Sir Frederick Smith, land in violation of the Admiralty order., of 1817 and 1849, and declared the opinion of the committee that the late Secretary to the Admiralty had acted in opposition to the THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 24, MS. advice of Captain Richards, and without consulting the Surveyor of the Navy. With reference to the First Lord the committee, after referring to the evidence of the Duke of Northumberland himself, sad that of Lord Darby, the committee repotted that it appeared his Grace, though he had himself selected the naval members of the Board, did act consult them in reference to the circular of April 19, Cancelling the Admiralty order of 1819, in respect to the dockyard patronage, but relied on the Secretary of the Ad miralty, who had no official experience or profesaioral knowledge, and that from the day he came into office until he went out he knew whether the patronage was in the hands of the Navel Surveyor or the Superintendent of the Dockyards, and, in fact, that he knew nothing about the matter. The report next details the evidence of Mr. Stat. ford as to the correspondence between him and Sir Baldwin Walker, end the subsequent proceedings in the Rouse of Commons, in reference to the appointment of Colwell to the office of master smith at Davenport, the destruction of the warrant appointing AVells, and the resignation of Sir Bald win, but acquitting Mr. Stafford of the charge of with holding Sir Baldwin's letter of resignation from the Board, on the ground that it did not appear it had been delivered to him after Sir Hyde Parker had brought it under the notice of the First Lord. The conduct of the first lord is then commented upon at wine length, in reference to the circular of April, 1552, and he is reported to have ore lected his duty in nut informing himself sufficiently of the facts. The appointments made by Mr. Staffrrd are stated to have been many of them unjustifiable, and altogether contrary to the spirit of the Admiralty orders of 1817 and 1849, and were made without consulting the Surveyor. The committee, however, desire to state, that in the majority of cases he appears to have followed the recommendation of the superintendent; but they add, it is obvious the efficiency of the dockyard establishments would he destroyed if political influence were permitted to prevail in reference to the patronage. With reference to the appointments made by the First Lord, they say it is , due to his grace to say that the parties were selected from no other motive but the good of the service, at the same time they urge that iu every branch of government the head of the department must be held relionsible, not ter every appointment, bat for the system under which the pa treasure is dispensed. On the general exercise of the in fluence and patronage of the government in regard to the dockyard appointments the committee state they have re stricted their itoouiry to the period that bas elapsed since 1817, when the new era cominen eel, and they report that tram that year to the issuing of the circular in 1812 the spi rit of the orders of 1817 and 1819 was honestly followed by each Board of Admiralty ; they then comment upon the appointments made by Mr. Stafford, and refer in general terms of reprobation to his visit to Devonport during the general election, his canvassing the voters in the yards, and his giving a dinner to them and the electioneering agent, and they add, that Mr. Stafford asserted his ignorance of much that ho should have known—that he sought counsel from no on. —disregarded the counsel of those who offered it, and had consequently acted with an utter disregard to precedents, thereby rendering the rules and regulations of the Admiralty nugatory and uncertain. They urge the amount expended annually, 683,0001. in dockyard lib, ur, and the number of persons employed, 9,6521. as a reason for enforcing an official system of superintendence is the yards, and for making the appointments and procreation§ depend upon fitness only. They further recommend that if the system now in operation were modified or altered, such modification or alteration should be laid before parliament, and that means should be taken for preserving minutes and records of all important documents. The report was ordered to lie on the table. TILE AFFAIRS OF TURKEY. • - Lord D. STUART-1 wish to put a question to the noble lord, the member for London, of which I have given him notice. It has been stated in the public papers that-in consequence of representations made by the representatives of the governments of Russia and Austria at Constanti nople ten order has been iuued by the Porte fur tbehae moral of all political refugees from the Turkish e and it is asserted that this order is not merely fir t he =oval of persons who may be disagreeable and offensive the governments of the neighbouring or frontier countries, or for the purpose of sending the refugees into the interior of Turkey, but that it is a general and sweeping order for the removal of all refugees from the territory of the Turk. ish dominions. The question I have to ask the noble lad is whether he has any objection to lay before the house any' information the goverment may have received of such a demand having been made upon Twisty by the govern ments of Russia and Austria, sad which is obviously an in terference with the independence of the Turkish empire ? Lord J. RUSSELL said he bad made inquiry of his noble friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and he had received no information with respect to the expulsion of . political refugees Item the territory of Turkey. mined to this country. He thought that there was a clear WS for inquiry before subjectin4 Ireland to increased tax =and that the government ought not to refuse it. He for nothing but inquiry, in order to see whether erielir taxation would be just ; but neither he nor any beim= shrunk from fair taxation. With regard to the Ommolidated Annuities, he denied that that was a boon in the sense of being any equivalent for the income tax. la conclusion, the hon. and gallant gentleman observed that he hoped the Irish members would for once be found united in supporting this motion ; and should there be that union he thought it would be a gross injustice for an English ma jority to referee the demand of the confederated representa tives of Ireland. (Hear, hear.) Mr. F. FRENCH complained of the inattentive attitude of the Treasury bench during Col. Dunne's speech. Minis ten had not appeared to listen to one of the arouments of the hon. and gallant gentlemen; and that indifference, on such an occasion, was an insult to Ireland. lie begged to second the motion. Mr. MACARTNEY supported the motion. Ile would undertake to prove the cam from parliamentary documents before the committee. He would leave the names of that committee entirely to the English members ; he would not ask to have a single Irish member on it. Mr. CONOLLY urged on the government to accede to the committee. Mr. WILKINSON considered that the Irish members were very ill-adsised to come down to that house so often with their appeals in forma pauperia for fiscal exemptions. With regard to the budget, generally, he thought that,with some detects and exceptions, it was entitled to the approval of the Hew of Commons. Lord C. HAMILTON said if the Union had not taken place the Irish members would not have troubled the English representatives with their presence. As he under mood the question, it sees to see whether the terms of the Union had been strictly carried out ; and he hoped, there fore, the hon. member would not look upon it as suing is fbrma pauperis. The CHANCELLOR of tha EXCHEQUER Old he could not commence this discussion without adverting to the remarks of the hon. member for Roscommon on what he was pleased to call the inattention of government to this motion. For his own part he entirely disclaimed the charge. He was in the house endeavouring to hear the hon. and gallant colonel, who did net himself seem to care much about his motion, fur since ho had made his speech he had quitted the house. He was unsuccessful in his en deavours to hear him. The noise in the house was so great that what he did hear be heard must imperfectly, and what was remarkable was that a great part of the disturb- Knee appeared to come from members near the hon. sad gallant colonel. Then the hon. gentleman the member for Donegal spoke of evasion, and he thought that the making of the motion demonstrated that there was no attempt at evasion. It did not appear to him, he must confess, that this motion, considered apart from the assertion of the hon. gentleman, was at all of such a character as to m..ke it apparent there was no disposition to evade the question. Ile was quite sure this motion was not made with the concurrenee of the noble earl in another place (the Earl of Derby), fur if he remembered aright, in an analogous case in 1833, when there had been a pro longed preliminary discussion on tho question of negro emancipation, and when those discussions had come to en end, and the bill bad been brought in and read a second time, and a motion was made for going into committee, his hon. friend the member for Montrose made a similar mo tion to that which was now before the house, that a select committee be appointed to inquire how far it was practicable to cultivate the West Indies by free labour, and on that occasion his hon. friend was followed by Lord Stanley, who administered to him such a rebuke as, if it was in his (Mr. Gladstone's) power to administer to the hon. and gallant colonel he would find a sere) us discouragement to bringing forward such mo tions in future. Well then ho confessed that this motion was an extremely unfortunate one. In the first place, he would observe that the motion was interposed es an absolute bar to the progress of this bill. It was an amendment on the -motion that the Speaker leave the chair. What was this bill ? It was a bill for imposing a tax on Ireland undoubtedly, but it was in addition to that a bill to supply a deficit of flee millions in the revenue. If they wished to exclude Ireland from the payment of the tax, they could have moved that Ireland be excluded from its operation, but they had made the motion in such a way aeto be a bar to the progress of the bill. They would by their views put aside the financial arrangements of the year, and the deflcit'of live millions of the revenue would not be supplied till they got the report of the committee. Hethought that was an unfortunate mode of meeting the question. If a motion was to be made for a select commit tee it would have beep far more proper to have made it at the most a motion for inquiry. It should have been made at an earlier day. They raised the question over and over again, and the senpe of the house had been unequi vocally declared upon it. (" No.") He did not know in what way the hon. member voted ; that was quite another *atter ; bet he was speaking of what was done b derehouse, and that which was dose by the house he hrLa perfect right to refer to. Ile said distinctly that I the Amin quelteltilaphe principal debates on this measure chiefly owned was Mei ease of Ireland, and after they had been colteluded, the ease of Ireland was separately die ' cussed and separately decided, and the competency of the housi hiding been established by that decision, the hon. and gallant colonel could not come down and ask for a select committee. It appeared to him that that was a bad par liamentary ground en which to stand, and one very incon venient to the order and consistency of public business. Now, with regard to this committee, he must say he did not at all intend, having taken this objection—he had not even the slightest disposition, to evade or escape from the merits of the question. lie admired the judg ment of his honourable friend, who said he would not go into the details. lie admired the judgment and skill of men who gave an historical character to their speeches, and who took a particular epoch, the epoch of the union. Here was a regular charge of a breach of a con tract. They spoke of the seventh article of the union ; but he did not hear a Cagle reference to the question of the proceedings which have since taken place in reference to that seventh article. He did not at all now interfere with the question of the income tax : all he said was that when a breach of faith was charged, when they were told that they were treating the Act of Tinian as a piece of waste paper, it was rather remarkable that all the proceedings relating to the act of uoied which - bad occurred in the in terval should be allowierto drop out of sight. -What were those proceedings? They were told it was a hard case that Ireland should pay 4,600,0001, or, as the hon. and gallant colonel said, 5,000b001. to thocre eeeee of the coun try, and it was said that Ireland would have been much better off if her :finances had not been consolidated with those of England, and that her burdens would have been much lighter. He was glad he had got a perfectly distinct statement, if Ireland had had merely her own expenditure that her burdens would have been far less if they had not been consolidated with those of England. Now, let them see how this matter stood. A committee sat en this subject some years ago, and when they reported that the debts and finances of the two countries should be consolidated, in what sense did they make that report ? Did they make it with a view to impose a burden on Ire land for England, or on England for Ireland ? Why, they imposed a burden on England for the relief of Ireland. There it was in figures They were told now it was a great hardship that Ireland should pay four or five millions of taxation. Why, in 1816, just before the subject was ex amined and shortly before the debt of Ireland was consoli dated with that of kngland, the annual charge of the debt of Ireland, the mere debt, was 6,900,0001., which was to be paid before providing for the expense of the civil government. This was the state of things that they put an end to, and after that a motion was now made for a committee of inquiry. Ireland was called on to contribute for debt;and civil government together, a great deal lees than she paid, no not paid, for she did not pay, but was bound to pay for debt alone, and that they thought was no demonstration at all that there was no injustice. Here was • return which the hon. member for Glasgow obtained in 1849, and in this return they would see the revenue and expenditure for Ireland in every year from 1817 to 1848. Observe, the charge was, that Ireland bad been so treated by the oppressive majoelty of Beglish voices —by something approaching to- personal indignity—said the hon. ,member for Donegal—by something approaching even to physical force for the purpose of imposing on that country a greater shage of taxation than she ought to have borne. Now, what woo the expenditure of Ireland itt -1917 ? It was 10,214,0001. ; and what was the , .total amount paid by Ireland towards that expenditure ? ' 4,384.000 L The amount provided by the British exchequer arekagnod the deficiency was 5,830,0001. The bon. gen tleman said he would not go into figures, but here was the colurdll of expenditure year by year from 1817 to 1848, and the income, and the very lowest payment made in any one dear for help out of the British exchequer to make up the eficiency in the Irish revenue was 1,977,0001., but gene rally speaking it ranged from 6,000,0001. to 6,000,0001. dur ing the early part of that period down to 3,000,0001. during the latter part. If that was the ease, they did not want a committee to inquire whether Ireland was paying too much. Ireland had not been paying at any period the charges in curred by her in respect of debt, together with the charges for civil government, and that, moreover, was without charging anything to Ireland in respect to our colonial ex penditure. And when they were told, then, that the Act •of Union was not fulflUed, he must say that that ?Needing which he had referred to was strictly an conformity with that act. The honourable and gallant colonel did not refer to the terms of the Act of Union as far as he could learn. He did not refer to the fact that the Act of Union contem plated and provided for the principle of consolidated fi nances and equal taxation—(hear)--and the principle was that it became applicable when the debt of Ireland had reached a certain proportion to the debt of England. The debt of Ireland had reached the proportion, and a higher proportion, in 1816, at the close of the war ; and that was precisely the case provided for in the second article of the Act of Union. If the hon. gentleman had it distinctly in his recollection he would find it was that when the debt of Ireland came to bear the proportion stated with the debt of England then it should be consolidated with the debt of the United Kingdom, and that the rate and charge of all joint debts should be borne indi-critninattly by equal taxes im posed on both countries. The do bt of Ireland exceeded that proportion greatly, and, as he had *hewn, that the annual charge for 'rebind was nearly 6,000.000/. • year. The committee reported in July. 180, that with the view of relieving Ireland from a harden experience had shown to be too great, and at thepame time with • hope of render ing her resources more productive, they came to a resolution declaring that all future expenses of the United Kingdom alteuld be defrayed indiscriminately, subject to such exceptions in !related and Scotland as should be con sidered proper. Then the article of notion had been strictly and plainly c p flied into execution ; .and not only that, it had boon strictly and plainly carried out for the relief of Ireland, to :dim her of burdens which it was toe great for her to hear; and in consequent* of that, a large sum of , money, never less than 2,000,0001., and varying ftom that to 6,000,0001., had been annually paid out of the English exchequer to meet charges for Irish expenditure. lie ventured to rut it with great cotifidence that there was no necessity to inquire into a matter that was as clear as day , light. Then free trade, forsooth, was made to play its part in this discussion, as if it had caused a great sacrifice to Ireland—as if in England there had been no loss by free trade. Had the tall in prices been confined to Ireland ? They were told of the destruction of Irish manufactures. Now, what was gained by the language of hyperbole in the House of Commons ? (Laughter.) The hon. gentleman said Irish manufactures were destroyed. He had always thought Belfast was in Ireland. (Hear.) Surely there were manufactures in , Belfast, and be was under the Impression that they were not altogether in a bad condition. (Hear, bear.) Ile had heard that the manufactures of /Idlest were advancing more rapidly than those of any part of England. And now, with regard to the justice of this measure, he agreed with the lion. member that they were bound to be just, and not only that, but discreet ; and now he come to consider the injustice of this particular proposal. That injustice was shown by a peculiar process. In the first piece, by throwing overboard the figures on one sloe of the account. They throw overboard altogether the considerations of the Consolidated Annuities. No doubt if they took every ac count, and struck out the items on one side, they could ar rive at a result that might be satisfactory to themselves. I. was true that his propositions imposed • burden on Ire land ; but they gave relief, and they gave re lief to those who wanted relief, and imposed burdens on those who were able to bear them. With respect to Leinster and Ulster there were no grounds of complaint on the score of poverty, and y.t Ireland was spoken of as a poor country. What did hon. members mean ? Was it that money was scarce ? (" Hear, hear," from Colonel Dunne.) Will, if money was scerce, it fol lowed that a man with 150/. a year wail richer than a man with the same income in England. (Hear, hear.) Ile said then that strict justice demanded the extension of the tax to Ireland, and the justice ought to be admitted by the repre sentatives. (" Oh, ob," from an hon. member.) If that was the mode of ausweting adopted by the hon. me.nber, lie must entirely overlook the distinction between reason and folly, between the habits of rational beings, and of those who were not blessed with reflective powers. (A laugh.) He believed that the justice of the tax was generally acknowledged in Ireland, where it would only touch those who were comparatively richer than people with the same income in England. But let him consider the tax with reference to the consolidated annuities. Government laid oar the income tax :Ind took off the consolidated annuities, so that in Munster, annuities to the amount of 90,0001. would be taken off, and, as an equivalent, 85.000/. income tax levied. But that was not all. The annuities were divided between the landlord and the tenant, but the income tax would be divided between the landlord and the mortgagee. (Hear, bear.) The part of the annuity paid by the landlord—(Colonel Dunne— " The whole ")—None by the tenant ? (Colonel Dunne— Indirectly.") (Laughter.) He believed that the half was paid by the tenant. lie asked hon. members from Ireland who supported this motion, did they think that the people of England would consent at once to forego the consoli dated annuities and refrain from collecting the income tax? (Hear) Did they, as practical men, think that the parlia ment of the United Kingdom were likely to come to such a conclusion ? If they did, although he must doubt their conclusions, he could not but admire the sanguine tem peraments from which they resulted. (A laugh.) He would ask his noble friend opposite (Lord C. Hamilton) to consider what he was doing, in seeking to escape the in come tax. Was he not endeavouring to preserve 90,000/. a year taxes paid by tenant and landlord, instead of 86,000/. to be paid by landlord and mortgagee ? The burthen was at present on the lower class of farmers, who were ill-able to sustain it, and whose case had been so clearly stated by the hon. and learned member for Ennis. With re spect to the spirit duty, he denied that the im position of 190,000/. could be looked upon as a hardship to Ireland. If so, what about poor Scotland, upon whom 270.0001. was about to be levied. Of Scotland he was bound to say, that excepting the reclamation, that might naturally he expected from persons in the trade, there had been no voice raised from that country, either in the house or out of it, against the increased taxation. (Cheers.) Not one man had come forward to say, " Scotland is about to be mulct in 270,000/. additional, what equivalent are you going to. give ?" (Hear, hear.) As to spirits, people might talk about the rights of man, but he denied that it was one of the rights of man that an Irishman should be able to intoxicate himself at the rate of 2s. 4d. a gallon. (Laughter.) He maintained that the right was to get as much duty out of spirits as was possible. On these grounds he trusted that the committee would not accede to the amendment. _ _ Sir J. PABINGTON said that an an English member totally unconnected with Ireland, he was ready to give his vote for any motion affirming that the budget dealt hardly with Ireland. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer seceded to the present motion, it would cause no inconvenience to the public service, as all that would be necessary would be to exclude Ireland from the operation of the tax. Ile (Sir J. Pakington) was surprised that no allusion had been made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the admirable speech of the right hon. member for Portsmouth, who had shown the fallacy of dealing with the annuities as a regular branch of taxation. It seemed to him also a serious mis take to put the annuities into the same category as regular taxation. The annuities were the results of the famine and of poor-law debts, and had, in p re, been condemned by the report of the Lords' Committee. He remembered having sat on • committee en Irish distress, and being shown a shaded map of Ireland, in which the prosperous districts of the east and north were white, and from thence there was every gradation of colours down to the black misery of the south and west. The government was going to relieve these black counties, and against that he did not say a word ; but he did not see why they should be relieved at the expense of the white counties. On these last-named they were going to impose not only the income lex, but also a great additional burthen of taxation. Be sides this, he would remind the house that after the report of the Lords' committee, it would be morally impos sible to recover the annuities. (Hear, hear.) He thought, en the other hand, that the right hon. gentleman was needlessly throwing away the workhouse debt, which maght and could be recovered. It was said that in levying the income tax the right hon. gentleman gave an equivalent. It won certainly the most Irish equivalent he had everheard of-240,0001. taken off, and 460,0001. inflicted. But the infliction was much more. The income tax would be 460,000/. ; spirit duty 198,000/., and the succession tax was estimated by the hon. member for Dungarvon at 300,000/., although the right hon. gentleman himself set it down at only 60,0001. For all these the equivalent was to be 245,003/. The right hon. gentleman, who professed him self a disciple of the late Sir R. Peel, should remember that Sir Robert specially exempted Ireland, and that even before the famine. But the most important arguments on this point were those of the right hon. member for Portsmouth, who had reviewed the ease in all its hearings, both as they stood now, and would stand in 1860. That right hon. gentleman had shown that at the present mo ment the balance in favour of England would be by the budget 1,010,0001., while the balance against Ireland would be 413,0001. In 1860, supposing the Chancellor of the Ex chequer's plans to be fully carried out and the income tax repealed, the balance of remission in favour of England would be 6,71.5,000/., while the remissions to Ireland would be only 47,0001. (Hear, hear.) These figures of the right hon. member for Portsmouth had never been answered ; and be thought fully justified hint (Sir J. Pakington) to repeating that Ireland had been hardly dealt with in the budget of the present government Mi. F. SCULLY believed the late ministry had not the slightest intention of carrying out the report of the Lord's committee, and he knew that they had themselves collected during the last year 123,0001. of than Consoli dated Annuities. As a distinct subject he should be glad to see a committee appointed to ascertain whether taxation was fairly apportioned between the two countries. At the same time any opposition to the proposal of the government now must be fruitless, and the amendment of the hon. and gallant member would be ineffectual, and might possibly be looked upon as factious; he, therefore, recommended that it should be withdrawn, and brought forward at some future time as a substantive motion. M rad AGU IRE denied that the amendment of the hon. and gallant member for Pertlington partook In any degree of a factions character: and for himself, he felt fully justified in rising to oppose a tax' against which the opinion of Ireland was general. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had said that the justice of the application of this tat to Ireland was generally admitted; but he believed the majority of the een atituente of the hon. member who bad just sat down as wi II as almost every other constituency In Ireland bad peti tioned against it. lie had heard it said that the income tax was to last but for ids years, and that the Consolidated Annuities, which were to be given up as a sort of compen sation, would have lasted for 40 ; but who would venture to hold seriously that those•Coneolidated Annuities could last for 40 years ? - Why, they had been virtually surrendered by the late government and by the present. He was one of those who had been influenced by the promise of the authorised agent of the ministry now in o ffi ce, that if they succeeded to power they would net impose the in come tax on Ireland, and now that that contract had been violated ;was he not fully justified in opposing, by every means in his power, the imposition of that tax on an , already impoverished country? Was Ireland now in a , condition to bear additional taxation ? The peer-rate had , increased from the time when Bir R. Peel said it would be absurd to attempt to imoose the income tax on Ireland, from 280,0001. to 900,0001. a year, and in 18.51 it amounted to 1,200,0001. Then 9,000,0001. of property had changed , bands under the Eneambered Estates Act, and between 9,000.0001. and 10,000,000/. more was in the Encumbered Estates Court. He admitted the operation of the Encum bered Estates Act would be in the end beneficial, but it , must inflict a large amount of misery and suffaring before the bent fit began to be felt. The remission which, under ' the present proposal, Ireland would obtain was 449,000/., while the increase would be 559,000/. In poor rates, county octet, rent charge, absentee rent, and othe charges, Ireland now More a burden little short of 11,000,0001. a year. The exports of Ireland, and more especially that of corn, had decreased, while the imports of that which was neces sary for the food of the people had increased, and that was no teat of prosperity, but rather of a diminution of pro ' during power. He denied that the Consolidated Annuities would last for 40 year', when the Lords report, which Iv commended that they should be abandoned, was taken into cnnxideration. The hon. gentleman dilated on the effect produced in Ireland by the famine, and proceeded to con tend that although be believed protection ouly propped up rotten social system, yet free trade had in its first effects greatly diminished the value of property among all classes. The Chancellor of the Exchequer hail alluded to the uni ta. Now he (Mr. Maguire) was not a re cent convert to rereal, but as he wanted an ar gument to fortify his opinion on that point, would the flippant, he would almost say the heartless. speech of the right hon. gentleman, who bad asked if t h e Irish members were sanguine enough — sanguine wee the word, hut he meant foolish—wore s anguine enough t o b e . here that if the Consolidated Annuities were crossed the y would that might notmhilit have vet been he income done.ooiet. He (Mr. Mag u i re ) believed would ask huh members whether the Consolidated Annuit es, that famine debt,ought not to be done away on every princisle not only of generosity and sympathy, but of justice. If Yorkshi re , or any province of England, had been so aff ‘e ted, would that portion only of the kinedom have been called to con_ tribute to her distress—lreland contributed her share to the C 21110102 exeb«risr, and if the %mien was real, the burden in this case should not be a provinciul but an imperial one. He strongly urged that Ireland w. - . 5 not in a condition to bear that additional taxation, and that u case was m a d e out tor inquiry. Ile was not influenced by n s factious mo tives, but he should oppose the budget by every legitimate means. There was at present too great a desire to do jai. lice to Ireland by taxing her—(latsghter)—and those by whom this desire was entertained forgot that at the time of the union England had the coookina of the accounts, and set down the debt of Ireland at 100, 1, 00001.. instead of 28,01.4,906/. Mr. E. BALL fetid it was sr extraordinary to hear the farmers of England spoken of kindly that he could not help thanking the hou. gentleman (Mr. Maguire) for the kind feelings which he hod expressed towel ds them. (Cries of Question.") The question was, whether ur not an in c.nre tax should be imposed on beheld. (Hear, hear.) What was the position or Ireland ? She came to them in all her weakness; site came to them es a body which had just risen teem the tomb—(laughter)—with her grave_ clothes still on her.— (laughter) —and, instead of administering restoratives, the gavernment proposed to weaken and to purge ter. (Great laughter.) Instead of bread she was offered a gene. She had been visited with the plague of famine, end, before she Wheel time to recover her strength, she was to have a plague of locusts. Ills own o; , inion woe that Ireland was not in a position t t bear an increased burden. Alter a few words from Mr. M. O'Coleterti., which were iraudihle in the gollery, the house divided— Fur the motion Against it On our return to the gallery s.e found that the member on his legs woo Mr. BLACKETT, who was observing that, eonsitlcr . mg the manner in which the trading, chorus had received the budget this year, and the almost uncomplaining manner its which they had endured the long imposition of the income tax, he thought they were now entitled to some remedy for those subordinate imp. rfeetions in the machinery of the tax which had been fully admitted by all parties prac tically acquainted with its workiopa. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was about to rise, but was restrained, to the great merriment of the home, by Lord John Russell ; and The house went into committee. On clause 1, Mr. k ItENVEN rrotn , ed an amendment, the Met of which would be to limit the tax to two ye..ms. Lord C. HAMILTON wished to move an amendment which would leave out the word Ireland. (Sensation.) TheCHANCELLOltoftheEXCHEQUEßcouldscareely believe that his noble friend was in earnest. (Cheers.) That was the very -point they had been discussing all the evening and had divided on. (Chren.) Lord C. HAMILTON would nevertheless move that amendment, because of the unsatisfactory rummer in which his right hon. friend had answered his appeal in the early part of the evening, with regard to the opinion of Sir Robert Peel, in Piti, on the extension of the income tax to Ireland. Ile admitted tho propriety of making Ireland evntribute her fair proportion to the general permum nt taxation of the empire ; but the income tax being only a temporary tax, the right hon. gentleman was bound to show that she was in a better position to bear the 6.58,0001. additi•mal burden which he proposed to lay on her than she was in 1815, when Sir R. Peel exempted her from the income tax. (Cries of " Divide, divide.") England would gain 1,200,000/. by the remissions proposed, and Indent] would be saddled with ea additional tax of 1)58,0001. (.. Divide. dieid,...) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thoughtthe noble lord had pursued rather an unusual course in again discussing a subject which had been before the house during the previous part of the evening, and which the house had come to a clecis:on upon. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord said that ho bail proved to demonstration that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had failed to meet any of his arguments, and the nOtio lord had the benefit of that is the division which had taken place. (Hear, hear, and laugh ter.) The noble lord would bring them back to the same peint from which they started in the early part of the evening, but he thought it would not be disrespectful to the committee if he were to enter upon a discussion which it was evident the committee was not disposed to listen to. Colonel DUNNE (who rose amidst loud erica of "oh ") said that he bad a right to address the committee, and he would insist on that right or move the adjournment. (" Oh.") The right hon. gentleman had read him a lec ture on the motion which be submitted to the Lowe, but he denied the right of the right hon. gentleman to dictate to him in what manner he shou'd propose his motions. If the nob'e lord had read him a lecture he might have bowed to it, because he respected the noble lord ; but he would not bow to those he did not respect. The right Lon. gentle man's speech was nut courteous to the Irish members, and his reply to Isis (Colonel I)unne's) argument was quite misrepresentation of what he said. Ile would support the motion of the noh!e lord. Mr. M. O'CONNELL expressed his pleasure that hon. members were at length disposed to take the view of Irish finances that his late father did. For himself, he was willing to hear his share of the tax. Mr. ALCOCK said Ireland bore a very small portion of the taxation which England and Scotland bore. There was the income tax, 5,600,0e01. ; the soap tax, 1,230,000/.: the land tax, 1,200,000/ ; anti the assessed taxes, 2,300,0001.; which Ireland, did not contribute to at ell. Moreover, if Ireland lurid as high a duty for spirits as England dii she would pay two millions under that item. Mr. VANCE said there was a great amount of revenue collected from Irel.:nd which was not collected in Ireland. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had quoted the seventh article of the act of union to prove that when the debt of Ireland reached a certain proportion to that of England, the taxation in the two countries shwild be equal, whereas that article merely provided that the taxation on articles imported should be the same, which they were quite willing to submit to. His constituents had raised a tax, and pa:d off their portion of the consolidated annuities in three years. and it was hard, therefore, that they should be charged with the income tax. L nal C. HAMILTON withdrew his amendment. Mr. FREWEN moved an amendment restricting the tan to two years. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the main object which the government hail in view in proposing the renewal of the income tax for a considerable period was. in the first place, to give stability to our system of finance; in the second place, to put the income tax on such footing, and so to regulate its descent in rate, as to bring it to a point so that it will b. within their power to part with it if so disposed. The hon. gentleman, on the other hand, said " No, do not grant the tax for so long time ; grant it for two years." His objection to that was that it would leave the income tax in the same unsatisfactory position in which it had been for several years, that it would not enable them to establish their financial position, and, lastly, that it would not afford the slightest hope that they would make any progress towards that state of things at which it would be possible to repeal the tax. The committee then divided— For the amendment Against it 223-141 Mr. W. MICHELL moved an amendment on clause?, to leave out " property " and insert " profits." His object was that property should not pay the tax where it did not yield sprat. lie stated that, eight years ago,. he hid bought two manor*, from which he had never derived any profit; and the income tax on this property had been a positive confiacati n. Last year he paid 6/. 135.4 d. on those manors. (Laughter.) He was not certain that he would divide the committee on this question, but he wished to call attention to the hardship inflicted by the act as it stood. If a man bought an estate, and made no profit from it, the commissioners told him that he ought to have made a profit; and that was ail the relief he could get. 1" Hear. hear," and cries of "Divide, divide," which were kept up for some time, and in the midst of which an hon. member below the gangway, on the ministerial side, amused the committee with an imitation of the opening notes of Paul Bedford's "Jolly Nose.") The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that if the hon. gentleman's proposal could have been regarded as a mere change in the phraseology of the act, for the pur pose of giving to it greater clearness, he should have thought it more safe to adhere to the established phrase ology, which had acquired a fixed and known construction. and under which the tax had been levied all along, rather than to introduce any other words. But the hon. gentle man bad in view a substantial abject; he wished to change the effect of the enactment, by providing, under schedule A, that allowances should be made for deductions of every kind that could be shown to have been made to persons liable to pay under that schedule. Ile wished he could meet the wishes of the hon. gentleman; but it was impossi ble to do so. The house had already considered that ques tion very fully, and had decided against a proposal less wide than that of the hon. gentleman—the else made by the hon. member for Berkshire. Such a proposal as the one now made would, in the first instance, aggravate the inqui sitorial nature of the as to a great degree, and would add snore to its offensive character than it would give of relief by diminishing the pecuniary burden. It would effec tually cripple the tax ; for it would open up the claims of other parties in other schedules, against which the house bail already decided by a very considerable majority. Mr. SPOONER suggested that the nett annual value only ought to be as after all reasonable deductions were made. This ems done, by clause 30, in reference to cathedral and ecdesiastical property. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that had always been so. Mr. SPOON ER said that was no reason why those allow ances should be Menlo on one kind of property and not on others. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER laid that deem 30 related to repairs, but they were repairs of an en tirely different character from the repairs of property; they were in respect of the liabilities of these bodies. There was no analogy whatever between the repairs which a rec tor was liable for in the chancel of his church and those which a landlord or farmer made in order to enable a tene ment to yield its rent. The two things were entirely dis tinct. They proposed to maintain the framework of the act exactly as it was. In answer to a remark from Dlr. Mecutxx, THE NEW ZEALAND COMPANY. Mr. H. J. BAILLIK rose to put a question to the noble lord, the member for London, with regard to the New Zealand Company. It would be remembered that a bill had passed last session, giving a constitution to the colony of New Zealand, which contained a clause confirming a large grant of money to the New Zealand Company, which was to be paid out of the land sales of the colony. Againit that claim the right hon. baronet the Ntst Commissioner of Works protested, on the ground Ahat the claim of the New Zealand Company was founded on fraud, which he would be able to prove if papery, for while he moved, were laid on the table. A few days ago he (Mr. Bantle) asked the right boa. baronet if he was prepared to prove the charge of fraud he had made against the New Zealand Company last session, and to which he replied that there was no necessity for proceeding with the charge, because the papers on the table proved the fraud beyond the possibility of doubt. That answer being made by a member of the cabinet must be supposed to be the, answer of the government, and they must be of opinion that the charge of fraud was substantiated. The question he withrd to ask was, whether the government intended to leave the New Zealand Company in the enjoyment of the fruits of that fraud, or whether they meant to take any step to deprive them of the sum to which they became entitled under the act ? Lord J. RUSSELL—In the course of lasi session, when measure relating to New Zealand was under discussion, right hon. friend stated his opinion that a fraud had en committed, and moved for papers from which 'he would be enabled to make out a case of frank: and urged t the necessity for the production of those pa . .e. a reason for delaying the bill. The house, howevezi not concur e. in what w requested by my right bon. d, and the bell pasted. I may add that I heard the sta at made by the right hon. gentleman the member for Dinitwieb, and I thought the amusement pmpoad was a fair one for all the parties concerned. My right hon. Wend the other day, in answer to a question of the a Ileum, staled the papers on the table proved the caswished to tasks out, but, as parliament had decided the 'question, and the government saw no reason for disturbing that decision, h was not disposed to take any step in the matter. Mr. MANGLES said that as this was a question involv ing the personal honour of some members of the house, he lisped he might be allowed to say a few words. (" Order," mid " No.") ' The SPEAKER said the hon. gentleman could only go illa if no hon. member objected. Mr. V. SMITH rose to order, sad said that nothing was Esse lationvenient than chance discussions such na it was paeipmed to bring en. There was no imputation on any 111111114bef either in the question or answer, which was the Oaf ground on which any member ought to be allowed to raises discussion; but there could only be a refereace to de bates of last session. Lied J. RUSSELL said the words to which the hon. objected had not been used now, but in tomer C at bst i rbut, if the hon. gentleman made any observations, his right hon. friend would reply, and the whole question would be discussed without preparation or notice,. and he submitted that it would be better not to go on. (Hear.) Mr. AGLION ST said the noble lord was mistaken, for the words in question had been used now, and not Ave Minutes ego. The bon. gentleman opposite stated dia ridy that the right hon. baronet had reported a few days that a fraud bad been proved. He (Mr. Aglionby) labs prepared at the proper time to meet all the charges whisk had been made. . MANNING THE NAVY. Sir J. TYLER begged to ask the First Lord of the Ad miralty whether he would place on the table of the home the evidence upon which the report of naval officers ea =m ains the navy was founded ? Sir J. GRAHAM mid that the naval officers who re oat manning the navy had ban appointed by the re parted litre Board of Admiralty to make inquiries only on autho rity delegated to them by the bard ; they sat in a privet's, room at the Admiralty, they had no power to take evidence, and the ecarainations were takea under the seal of coati.: deuce, and, under these eiretimstanoes, it was not the in tention of the government to lay the evidence on the Utile. Admiral WALCOTT begged to ask whether, in conifers with the report of the naval officers on manning the navy, there would be any objection to lay on the table the meets of Mr. Pennell (se we understood) and Sir C. Napier? Btr J. GRAHAM said the government bad laid ea the table all the documents which they thought, consistently with the public interests, they could produce. Admiral WALCOTT gave notice that he should move for these papers. THE INCOME TAX BILL. On the motion for going into committee on the Ineenale Tax Bill, Col. DUNNE rose to move " that it is expedient, before additional taxation be extended to Deland, that a Wed committee be appointed to inquire into and _ eider the Haul and . political relations and maim taxation of Groat. Britain and Ireland, and to report whether the latter kingdom does not bear her lair share of imperial taxation." He urged that there was • great igno rance of the actual state of Ireland ; that no previous Chancellor of the Exchequer had attempted such an exten sion of taxation to Delano as either the income tax or the duty on spirits ; and that such a proceeding was a violation of an article of the Act of Union, which declared that there should be periodical inquiries into the relative condition of the two countries with reference to taxation. He urged that it was contemplated by the Act of Union that there should be similar bet not the same taxation for the two countries. The Treaty of the Union had been most iMuri an to Ireland, for whereas at that time her public debt was 25 millions, which was to have been liqui• dated from her revenue, that revenue had been appro. priated by the State, end her debt increased, by borrow ing, to 105 millions. In 1811 there had beta a molidation of the exchequers of the two countries, which was only a fiscal arrangement, but no violation of the Act of Union, as some people maintained ; but the late Lord Fitzgerald, who in 1818 introduced the measure for the consolidation of the two exchequers, ehowed that Ireland would lose instead of gain by that eep. Ireland had lost by reason of the change in the corn laws, absenteeism, and other causes, no less than 182 millions in the last thirty-five years, the greater part of which had been trans- The the 33r pcw en' w attic The day la Thi• re;tlin tic 4 C Ciehat M . V lics of for Won , ring i Tit( paw( On to bri Impri beA PA 21011 ham Prize l'rin whic yecte and posit mitt Earl Dow Ross Prof Rob yestc Di Dr.' an it Hon Char deno Mr. , Mr. Low, boai tion and 31. P of ii MT. Sydi Pan intei Ron the seve taro men turn tie. Coi pct. s.en Na,