The Express. — London, England, 1853-05-03 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 3, 1853 .'''''------r.r.ikd is this country, at least since the re-itn osi- l ead inevitabl e i n f erence from his arguments. (Hear.) ai „ ... 3 1 u 1 the ine.tuse tat is IS-1.1. Since then upwar.ls of five I Yeats them two reaso ns , th en — t h e character and f‘ sling sgb .Th oo f the satins a! income have been subject to an lof the age, and the character of the right hon. gentleman— s.sts. - The great political feature then of the pre- 1 I asn induced to thi n k th a t th e i ncome tax w i ll be continued at gentleman— ea teal -i s to terminate this uncertainty, and it is 'as effective in o ur poli cy if we consent to its renewal for s..,,,h blil e i r i a s fiscal enormity that five millions of our seven years ; and, if on , we have arrived at this dilemma— „--0 me se sltoul.l be subjret to an annual vote. (Hear) If this is to be a p ermanent tax , are we authorised, with "--- - ri nar..l the house that, not in the old all its inequalities , its injastice, and its odious qualities, 1. ft.,re I ulaY • i . ' pat since 1 became a member of this house, s uc h which all of us acknowledge it possesses, to ezten4 it to new d im ' , it )t 01.1 annual revenue wa s , abtays ' I clause and to • new -•— without attensr -to I - country, _..toenipting Mushiest' those odious qualities and to adjust thous inequalities? (Cheers.) If, on the contrary, it is to be assumed as the whole basis of the government proposal that it is to be only a temporary lease fur a period of seven years, is it wise, is it politic, that we should introduce an impost so essentially unjust and odious, to new classes and a new country . (Cheers.) Now, that is the dilemma in which the right hon. gentleman is placed. (Hear, hear.) My opinion is, that our proper policy in the present position in which we are placed would be to renew it for a very limited time, sou to admit any mitigatory plan that might be devised. If, how ever, nothing can be done with it; if it cannot be mitigated; if its inequalities and injustice baffle tee ministers and legislature, then the best thing that can ho dune would be to apply our surplus, as it is received, to the introduction of an impost that no minister can manage and no people can long endure. Sir, in the whole of this question, in considering this important arm of OUT finances, which the right hon. gentleman has described with so much power—but which, I think, he described in a maim that conveyed an erroneous impression to these who are not experienced in commercial matters —coo must always endeavour to ascertain whe ther the perpetuation and continuance of this tax la worth the rest. (Cheers.) No doubt the remission of the duty on soap and paper would be excellent things, if we could obtain them by the accruieg of our surplus ; but we may well ask whether it is worth while to bear the income tax for that purpose ? We ought first to fellow Dr. Frank lin's advice, and see whether the whistle is worth its price. (Cheers.) The right hoar. gentleman gave us a description of the income tax, and of its great achiennents; and which the hon. member for the West Riding said was declamatory. Well, sir, the right hon. gentleman's acclamation was such good declamation that I will not quarrel with it on that se smut ; but it appeared tome that his description was thee mirate ; or rather, that it appeared to convey to the house a. inaccurate idea of the results which had been brought about by the income tax. The right hon. gentle. man succeeded in conveying to those new mem bers, of whom I am glad to see so say in the house who have been born mime those great events, which some of us recollect—an impression that the income tax produced a revenue sufficient for all the expenses of the war and of the civil govern ment, with only an insignificant surplus of expenditure. He said that the revenue was something like 65,000,000/., sad the expenditure 67,000,0001., or perhaps the reverse. If that were so, unquestionably it would indeed be the colossal weapon he had so justly described; but he had forgotten that between 1806 and 1816, the year of the peace, the debt increased from some thing over 600,000,0001. to 840,000,0001. (Cheers.) We must always remember when we are talking of this colossal instrument, that the debt in 1814, 1815, and 1816 amounted to no less than 91,000,0001. sterling. (Cheers.) There is one more point connected with the income tax to which I must advert, and that is its extension. (Hear, hear) Assuming that this is to be a permanent feature in our flame*, I think there is no class to whom it ought to be extended without mitigation; but I will argue on the principle that the government is correct, and that the tax will cease. Well, sir, I have heard it said that we pro posed its extension to Ireland, but that we did not propose any measure for dealing with the Consolidated Annuities. I will only say new, as I have said before, that I do not see any connexion between the income tax and the Consoli dated Annuities. (Hear, hear.) I see no connexion what ever between the incidence of imperial taxation and the re sults of • local arrangement ; and I think it most impolitic, most indiscreet and unwise, ever to have mixed them toge ther. (Hear, hear.) I should not have thought it neces sary to notice this, had I not beard—not is the debates, but in the house during the debate—eomething of compacts on the subject of the income tax with the Irish members. (Hear, hear.) Certainly I should be the last man in the world to have made such a compact, for it is only four months sinew I had to consider the subject in a responsible situation with my colleagues, and we were unanimously of opinion that it would be meet uawise to extend the income tax to Ireland. It would, therefore, have been most Quixotic in me to have advocated its extension to Ireland. (Hear.) It was after the most ample and anxious consideration that the late government cam* to the conclusion not to take that coarse, and I am prepared to support the policy which I proposed from the other side of the table. (Hear, hear.) It is not true that I was not prepared to make a proposi tion with resiect to the Consolidated Annuities. On the con trary, I stated in the budget that I would take the earliest opportunity of submitting resolutions to the house on the Consolidated Annnities, and 'that II was pre parednot to extend the income tax to the land of Ireland. h respect to the proposition I should have brought for ward on the subject of the Consolidated Annuities, I believe it would have given complete satisfaction to all who were interested in the matter. (Hear, hear.) I have now touched on all the principal topics suggested by the resolution immediately before the house. I might stop here ; but I wish to express the opinion which I entertain generally with respect to the financial policy recommended by the Chancellor of the Ex chequer. Sir, I have one great objection to that policy. It appears to me to be conceived in a spirit of injustice to the land. (Opposition cheers.) I have no wish to indu4s_ is 1 declamations, as the Don. member for the West Stiles 1 phrases it; but I am ready to establish what I Miler to be the truth of my opinions by retwoodag and facts. (Hear, hear.) I give you credit for wishing that all classes should so far as is possible receive upon final subjects justice; and I trust you will listea to my observations with temper and toleration. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I ask the committee to view for one rm. meat the state of our revenue at the present time. If you look at the last returns you will find that the ordinary I sources of revenue, deducting the income tax, which was originally proposed as a temporary impost—and the tem- 1 porary nature of which is the basis of the financial scheme of the ministry—amounts to about 46 millions I sterling. This great country, with the most extensive commerce of modern times, and governed, as we are told by the great towns,—this country raises an unparalleled I revenue amounting to 48 millions sterling from its ordi dary sources; and of that one-fourth is raised by a duty upea a single crop of the British farmer. (Opposition cheers.) The average of the united duties which we levy directly or indirectl on brandy is more than 230 per cent. (Hear, I bear.) Now, let me show the committee how this system opionlos, and how it must operate under the financial policy emeammeaded by her Majesty's government. It is of great important* that we should extend our con anion with India and China, and place it on • seeder basis ; and that is • main reason why pm should repeal the tea duties—it is of great importance that we should increase our commerce with Prance and I Southern Europe, and that is • good reason why you ' should deal with the duties on brandy and on wine ; bee have yen considered the fiscal consequences that mot MEM lips persist in lessening the duty on Chinese tea owl peoi eventually on French wine, and leave ' se atom= Impost existing on malt and on the beverage Made Eras salt and barley (Opposition cheers.) If the 61=64 policy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer deals in ' , Yds way with the indirect taxation, as regards the land, 1 what is he doing at the same time with the direct to:Ra tion? Here is the first thing that meets me. Here is a man, • farmer, with a crop of barley, sad he finds that that barley, which is subject to an enormous impost, is placed uaexpectedly in competition with the produce of foreign rivals who pay a reduced rate, and that at the same time the indirect tax on his own product is increased. And when ho leaves the domain of indirect taxation and turns to direct taxation, he finds the Chancellor of the Exchequer before him, and he tells him " we are going to put upon you an income tax, in addition to what you now pay." Such is the case of the cultivator of the soil. And, now what is the condition of the proprietor who his , been told that he should devote kis capital and his energy, to the improvement of his estate; —he is told " we are going to propose • tax which we call =tending the legacy duty to land, but which will operate as a tax, to a very large amount, on all real property, and of course in • great degree, if not mainly, upon land." one President of the Board of Control said the other sight that the late government were going to impose a tax se successions. The right hon. gentleman s po ke upon the ' authority of an imperfect memory. What the late govern ment proposed was this: it was their duty, while revising the general taxation, not to omit so important • sulgact as the duty on successions or legacies, and it was our opinion that it would be Imprudent to delay dealing with that quer tion—that it was a subject on which a proposition for a per manent settlement should be brought before the house with out loss of time ; and what I did say was," That we did not think it impossible that we should be enabled to make a pro posal on that subject which would terminate for ever the controversy " Or something to that effect) " in • manner that would we believed be recognised by the country as perfectly satisfactory." And that was no vague phrase. The proposition was a matured proposition, and in the course of this discussion perhaps I may be able to submit it to the consideration of the house. But in considering this question of taxation on successions we must not disguise from ourselves that it is an impor tant subject—and that there are many points we must consider before we come to vote upon it. We must ask ourselves, in the first place, is it a just tax, is it abstractedly a just tax, is it a politic and just tax that can be vindicated on principle ? We must ask ourselves in the second place, whether if it be • tax sound in principle, it is • tax adapted to the country in which it is proposed to be introduced. Thirdly, we must ask ounelves ;what are the data on which the Chancellor of the Exchequer founds his estimate of his produce--(hear, hear)—and above all what is the machinery by which he means the tax to be raised ? Now, these are three impor tant points—which well deserve the consideration of the committee. For my own part, although think that if the arrangement of Mr. Pitt, the bill of Mr. Pitt, bad passed, it would have been, unless the state of finances justified it, unwise to disturb precipi tately that arrangement ; for my own part, I believe that the whole principle of taxes on suceession, whatever shape they bear, is unsound. They are taxes on capital, they are unsound in principle as regards personal pro perty, but they arc mum unsound as regards landed pro perty, because they lead to partition, which in my opinion isa greet evil. But I will not enter into that important subject now. All that I will say is, that you cannot deny that . you are, by proposing this tax on successions with reference to landed ' property, proposing a new tax on the lead. (Oppo sition cheers) I have shown you that in dealing with direct taxation you have commenced • system, you se psi sa-accoust ________ i s kept, subject ei ee l vote. It was dam considered one of the best _,„,, t . e .,• we Lad he we, righb and liberties, and as such au 's - 4 - ay seiaeil by somber , of liberal principles, not San seeetiet ef its vase in the protection of our rights 4. e • as ii security for the economic man we ar., 'Aries. b ut .., ti ii esse ( (fear, hear.) You had, for instance, Mot 4° 7 - h . ' .t to an annual Tot e, I Stosajar mute, ”I JCS . „ m i te w i re 1. ry little less in amount than the income tax, which wear: now discussing. (Hear, hear.) It was only at we e a „ pp t period that the minister of the day , having to T having to propose other d „; with the sugar duties, a w ed e ' great importance, appealed to the house • sr duties no t o mike the s ag l onger the subject of an os• m i site, and at the same time he entered into a o nset with the hove , that for the sugar duties he would a ..„situte sosne tax ot “jail amount as a subject fur paella alr"r control. Who was that minister? On July 20 , 1 i o f ways and means, Lord J. Russell roe le e•eneuittess tied he did set ioroN use to vary i n any respect the constitu tToc,il melee of hadne a considerable amount of revenue cl.pe glen" on a yet.:!y r ite of th- house; but while pros t'"- t the stir d uty should not he subject to se P 3421 -" d tliet some other source of revenue me sa: TA , 1111G01,114, C g eed be pieced in its stead, and that the particular item „,,,,„J be wineue.cel before the resolutions assumed the e " a g a pe . c • ',X. (*dear.) I say, then, that as far as the first . ..hol at th e right hon. gentleman, in proposing the ,atomsym for acne yews, on the ground that so impor t a branch of the resenue should not be mule the sub it: cf m ammo vote, I differ from him completely. We, `or to proesse the income tax, indicated the term of t hee years in deference to precedent, but if I were to t h 7eee between seven years and one year I should certainly g i ve my vete for or, year. And what I want to express to ~i , ,,m s • is thee , that when these new tangled doctrines the c . i - re - Cd.i......; about the advantage to bo derived from with drawing a-. at sources of revenue from the control of the House of Cemuisior, we, in taking the contrary view, are only standing up for an ancient privilege of which we have bees too long deprived ; ard if we regain that power, mean to use it for the purpose of obtaining • better and more omic alministration of our fi nances. I come now to the wood part of the income tax proposition, that relating to the assessment. The right hon. gentleman proposes that we should reenact tio. income tax for seven years, and that we fh•Ald 1314W0 no difference in the mode of assessment. Perhaps the house w''i not think it impertinent if I take tni, opportunity of very briefly explaining the reasons why the late government fixed nn the rate of assessment which they r:commended the House of Commons to adopt. It was our °einem that the tasetion of the country pr. Pet unduly on the interests connected with land. That was the opinion which we of announced, and did not wish to t ome; and we depressed our opinion, also, that after the inroptioa of our protective policy, the best way of sweep the classes who were subject to unrestricted saestitien was to lighten the cost of production, and we thought - that tb . cost of production could not be lightened without "general revision of taxation. (Comers ative cheers.) e ice s isspoeible for us to carry this measure ism effect relent the aid of the income tax—that tax against whioh ss mull oJism had been excited, and in our opinion had is a great d. Free h• en justly excited. Having to relieve thetas , from this undue pressure, it was our opinion that vs should cow to the commercial classes with some expla esti= of what we thought was this undue pres go. Me then could we deny the injustice of the assessment with respect to the commercial, m ime. and professional classes? I make no contrast tow between income from realised property and income de rived hem intelligence and skill with reference to undue pressewe, there is no time for it, and besides there is not a sum lathe house who has not contemplated it in every pant of view. act the house has been shocked by the con gest, but. I appal ~like to the brain and heart of every man for a nerd et or. the question. (Hear, hear.) I will sow come to the trading and commercial classes, and to terminable annuities. I will put in the succinct formula that brought conviction to their relative position. I dare say it is already familiar, but it is necessary that I should sacs it before the house in order that the difference way deedy be wen. Then is one man who has 20,0001. Wrested in real property, which produces him 8001. a year. Mother man invests a similar sum In property that is penshabk at the end of twenty years, machinery, for mance, sr an annuity terminable with life. One man re efltes for his 24,0001. 9001. a year, mull the other nevem for his capital which he has invested in perishable material 1.1731 , the 6731. being the i .terest of the capital which at the end of 20 years is to supply the pan of what has perished. Virtually the individuals re stive the Same income, virtually they each receive 8001. a per, bat how do you tax them ? One man pays 24/. a year ad the other pays 141., and this is the system which you Maples to support. (Hear, hear.) This is the system *Wpm who profess to be the representatives of the ammeselal classes. are going to renew for a term of seven ye" er, am I shall Ken show you, for ever. (Hear.) Yon me permed to tax perishable property to double the amount deal, sad you do this while you say that _you represent ths interests of commerce. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, with thew fasts befoul us, with the conviction that the assess mat was unjust, we felt that it was necessary to get the swat of the commercial classes, the continuance of the same tax being asked, is order that we might revise the isiminal system for the avowed purpose of relieving the sad from endue pressure. It was iseesiessry, in our opinion, lit we should acknowledge the inequality of *mew mat is sehelulr D. We did act propose our alteration as a exact arrangement; we merely offered it as au ieksodedgment of the principle. (Hear, hear.) The Isee•licr of the Exchequer says that the land .s sew more taxed than other property, and that be farmer's schedule is higher thou any other. He says hat sites you take the burtheus of land, the general sier4 with the local taxation, you will find that the farmer sever taxed. What a startling admission from the Chan. *Woe of the Exchequer! (Loud conservative cheers.) What a significant admission when we recollect what I have for the last five years endeavoured to ins gess on the house. When I remember how then I was told tight aftu night by the members of the present govern• mat that the idea of local taxation being a local burthen, sas a mere delusion. (Hear, hear.) It is satisfactory at isset to me to end my principle acknowledged by the Chan. rise of the Exchequer admitting that the farmer pays 2d. stem in his schedule. I shall not stop to analyse his data, at be may be sure he will be reminded of his conclusions her this discussion is over, but with respect to my own is I have to repeat that it was not proposed as a coin. its financial system, but as the acknowledgment da ineiple brought forward in a spirit of conciliation. to have now an income tax to consider, raised at a given Ms of wersament, but what security have we that that as tweaent will never be cha n g e d ? (Hear, hear.) We have mevernment now that proposes to deal more largely with ge lacome tax than has ever been done within our ex- Neleara—for it deals with it for the period of seven years ; Ind suppose, as this is the era of great financial propoei hos, the Chancellor of the Exchequer should next year =eto double that assessment? (Cheers.) Suppose pees.' which happened about half a century ago, Ike we were also governed by " All the Talents"— giegliter)--suppnee that he should come down to the house tea peewee to establish an income tax of ten per cent. ? (Chum.) Well, what answer would it be to the artist, the masa, the merchant, and the trader, to say, that while you Ny 23. or 21 pence in the pound the lead pap 2d. in the Pied more than you ? Why, air, if our principle had been etateisheel, he would at least have felt, that if at any fu lls, time 'his impost should take a and more bur 'lsome character, be would then find a considerable re- Of in the assemmeat that would then have to be made? frill maintain that in coming forward and asking the ammercial dame* to great us the income tax in order that *sight carry into effect a complete revision of our taxation. Is object of which was to relieve the land of the great and Wu pressure of taxation, according to our opinion, we task a politic, a wise, and a conciliatory course. (Hear.) tell, sir, the right hon. gentleman has now proposed thistaz *that& any difference in its rate of amassment, for the wird of seven years ; and I ma be allowed briefly to +ate the n isO ns why I d on 't thi n k that the incidence of at tax will terminate then. The first reason why I am strulalous is because I we the spirit of the times in which ; * ins is hatil e to the abrogation of this tax. (Hear.) ; s 'w. I beg the house just to recollect the various upsets each the income Me has assumed, since it was introduced O •F..r It. Peel. It was first of all brought forward in ehrthat it might create a surplus, with which to deal irik the indirect taxation of the country. Then it was con tused ayes for the sole purpose of creating a surplus, *eh should allow the house still further to deal with that *net taxation. Well, now, sir, what is the form it se ism ' At I. resent it is no longer proposed for that par iah but we hiss so far advanced that we are asked to Peat it won for the purpose of supporting the ise thlik is at present necessary for your expenditure, and A me asked to lay on other taxes also to deal with indirect Wis. (Hew, hear.) Under such circumstances, when al Nessett rapid progress made in ten or twelve years, the A mutt shut his eyes to all that passes around him, and et be completely unobservant of the signs of the times, ' ot the habits of those amongst whom he lives, who can glow that the income tax, after having already ceased het its first office of creating a surplus for dealing with Mille c t taxation, when it has taken a eat part in the revenue, and while we having recourse to fresh taxation, in addition, deal with those indirect imposts—he must, in- i be the gust inc re d u l ous of men w h o supposes that I shoal.' suddenly repudiate the principle upon which ' have advanced, and that, while we are making further I • bon our indirect taxation, we shall in the interim I uP the income tax which is imposed for that pureed.. rile, bear.) Besides, what argument is there in favour „. hie* of the tea duty which does not apply equally to mswine duty ? Whit argument for remitting the excise doll ere sm. that does not tell with equal weight for &ban tam of the excise on paper ? (Cheers.) Cheap mat it , are a the blessings of the age—why should yea ail laws ' I_ l.l P7 . l thrtr ? (Cheers) We have already lei taws, .min. tillmitr oar notice, and reminded that the English nusgear ell: always make his fortime so long as our ism 111111( / have impost apes tocel remains. (Hear, hesir . .) a wend rea son why I think that this tax will rat terminate at the end of seven years ; and that reason I led is the rid& scope of the financial policy of the right Lou, • 'milkman, in all his antecedents, and in the whole of In pest coreluct and career an d in the arguments of the,right „ha. gees" , man, not o n ly ' or. this but on former occasions, "must, if p e , s ,ibl e, terminate the 'whole of the revenue that *mike. by tier Customs. (Cheers) That is the necessary , have laid down • principle, which must immensely affect the indirect taxation on the British producer. I have shown you in the second place that while you are about to pursue that unjust and injurious policy, the propriety of which no man can vindicate, while you are aggravating the pressure of indirect taxation upon the British producer, you are indicting neon th e cu l t i vator o f t h e so il a di rect tax in the sbape of an income tax, and upon the peosessers of the soil • direct tax in the way of a tax in sue ovation. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I say that the whole scope of the budget of the right hon. gentleman is con ceived in • spirit of injustice to the lead. (Loud opposition chain.) I remember when Sir Robert Peel Fri ths first income tax, and I remember the noble Crl d the leader of thi s Acme sitting on this bench, and with the traditionary spirit of Mr. Fox, denouncing that Impost as Mr. Fox denounced the legacy duty, because the noble lord, as well as Mr. Fox, had some feeling for the land of the country which Hide forefathers had been so long connected with. I remember the noble lord saying to Sir 11... , hert Peel—" There are other means to supply the deficiency not SO unjust and so inquisitorial as the income tax." the epithets are the epithets of the noble lord— " You have got a deficiency, why do you not supply it by applying the legacy duty to land ?" Well, the noble lord has applied the legacy duty to land ; but he has given us the income tax too. (Loud opposition cheers.) That is the fate of England ; what is the fate of Ireland ? Sir Robert Peel did not propose an income tax for Ireland, though he proposed one for England. Sir Robert Peel thought there were constitutional and legal grounds which prevented Dim from applying en income tan to Ireland. But Sir Robert Peel said—'• I will propene • substitute, and it shall be • duty on spirits." Ireland was to have a duty on spirits instead of the income tax, es the English were to have • legacy duty. England has got the legacy duty as well as the income tax, and Ireland is to get the income tax and the spirit duty to o. Strange fate that both countries, from the ministry of All the Talent', should receive such accumulated miseries. (Cheers.) Bat it is not my intention to abuse the patience of the mlemraittee. We shall have so many opportunities of enter ing Into this great subject that it is not my intention to go Into all the details of the budget now, or even into all its main features. I am confining myself to showing you that the budget of the minister is conceived in • spirit of hostility to the land, and I am endeavouring to substantiate that by arguments and facts which it is open to others to refute. I appeal with the same confidence to gentlemen opposite as to gentlemen on this side of the house. All I ask is that you should deal with this great interest as you would deal with all other interests, great or small, in a spirit of justice, and if you cannot ac complish all that justice requires, all I tat is that . you will not persevere in a course which I think is most uajust, and is calculated to sour the tempers and exasperate the feel ings of a large portion of the subjects of her Msjesty. There is another point in this budget to which I must ad vert before I sit down. The right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer has a project of licensee, and, I dare say many of his supporters have heard something about it. (Laughter.) Well, sir, I have rented between 300 and 400 letters on the subject full of suggestions, and it was first of all my intention to have sent them to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but when I found that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with a devotion to public affairs for which I had not given even him credit, was in the habit of answer ing all his letters himself—(cheers and laughter)—l thought the right hon. gentleman might have misrepresented what was really an act of friendly courteousness on my part, and the right hon. gentleman would probably have wished to be disembarrassed of them. The general tone of those letters may be described in this way. We say " thi s system of licenses is infinitely worse than your house tax." I should say that the majority describe it as a quadriplica tion of the house tax, and they all say they would rather have bad something of my house tax than this system of licenses, for it is a graduated tax ; and that they thought the right hon. gentleman had turned me out of office in order that they should be free of this house tax. There has been • great clamour in the country on this subject—great discontent; and unless I misunder stood the right hon. gentleman, his opinion on the subject is already shaken. I should have supposed that a minister of finance would not have taken such a step as proposing licenses for trade ; and I am not giving any opinion now on the policy of such a measure; but it is unquestionably one of the most important projects that • finance minister could entertain. I should have supposed that no Chancellor of the Exchequer would have brought forward a proposition of such a nature without wed weighing its character and consequences. Such • plan is not to be taken for Manchester. Well, sir, I bad hoped that M..' old fend between town and country had ceased for ever. (s: beer..) There is no difference of nati ona l i n t eres t any l onger to tween town and Country, and the very motion which my honourable friend the member for Hertfordshire has pro posed tonight is somewhat significant of that. It is con ceived in a spirit of honourable conciliation. And I should have thought, however you might have voted last year, you would have accepted it in the same spirit. (Cheers.) There is the member for Manchester, who. whim I addressing his constituents some three or four months ego, expressed his amazement that the country cZetnen of England had made a proposition that entitled to the kind feeling of the working classes of the sentry. That was the hon. member for Manchester who spoke of our proposition ; but the right honourable gentleman the Presideat of the Board of Control spoke of our proposition to make a difference in the:schedules of the income tax in terms, I will not say offensive, but if they bad been pronounced in an offensive manner, in an offensive tone of voice, I should have called upon the Attorney-General to have taken a message to the right hon. gentleman, (Cheers and Isughter.) Because. if I recollect rightly, the argument in favour of an equalis !ration of the tax first came from that hon. and learned gentleman; indeed, he was the first to speak' in favour of the subject upon which the hon. Secretary to the Board of Control has taken to-night so different an opinion. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman tie member for Manchester spoke in a manner honourable to himself, no doubt, but at the same time I must take leave to remind him that there are none who have more al heart the liberties of the people than the country gentlemen, nor is there any class less interested l In a corrupt administration, or more interested In an economical administration of the finance, of the country. (Hear, hear.) Some gentlemen there are who are very happy to tell us that they are MOW ben for great towns, but I should - have thought there woe so difference, so far as material iaterest is concerned, be tween them and the country gentlemen present, but I at told that there is a social and a political difference. Honourable gentlemen, however, who say this shosild remember that these great towns are situate Is a country of no considerable extent, with no m issive population,with a commerce which, however great. has been rivalled, and with manufactures, however sue oessful, have been surpassed. What makes this country` great then ? What, but the national character of the sentry ? (Cheers.) The national character of the sentry, then, has been created by institutions which sprang from the land, they are deeply pleated in the soil, and that soil is not in the possession of any exclusive clan ; the merchant and the manufacturer may deposit within it their accumulated capital, and they may enjoy those privileges which its possession entails, and perform those duties which its possession also invitee. (Cheers.) Then why this hostility to the land ? I say that every man in this house is deeply interested in maintaining the pros perity of the land of this country. I say that there is no man in this house who wishes to secure the prosperity by unjust legislation, and I adjure those gentlemen who represent large towns not to be led away in the present de bate by the prejudices of former discussions. Let it be clearly understood that we all of us stand in different rela tions to each other than we did, that we are alike interested in the greatness and prosperity of the country. (Hear.) Let them take another course—but I trust they will not —and I feel convinced that if they remain hostile to the land and proceed onwards with their illusive progress, they may arrive at the goal which they contemplate—they may achieve the object which they have set before them, but believe me they will be greatly disappointed in the result, for they will find that they have only changed a first-rate kingdom for a second-rate republic. (Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL—At this late hour (1 o'clock), and after four nights' debate, I shall attempt to do little more than set before the committee, as clearly as I can, the ques tion upon which they are about to decide. They have a budget before them, comprising propositions of very great importance to the finances of the country, and the ques tion they have to decide is whether the advantages held out are such as to be greater than the burdens which are to be inflicted ; and whether or not it is the duty of this house to adopt that budget. Now, in the first place, the proposition of the government is the question of the income tax, its duration and its inci dence, as part of the financial system of the country, hav ing been for a long time in debate, and having given rise to controversies more perplexing even to those mat conver sant with the subject—whether an endeavour should be made to enable parliament to come to a final decision on the question. It must be evident to every person who has followed the course of events and discussions on the subject that, although the original propo sition of Sir Robert Peel in 1842 to impose an income tax for three years may have been wise and well adapted to tits then situation of the country, yet it is now impossible le continue the tax from three years to three years without exalting at every renewal doubts and differences as to the mode in which the tax should be imposed highly disadvait teems to the repose of the country. (Hear, hear.) Sack discussions cannot exist without disturbing and shaking your whole system; and yet it is a fact that no government eines 1842 and no House of Commons since 1842 has seriously contemplated the definitive termination of this tax. (Hear.) Beery Chancellor of the Exchequer is the intervals of the three years has proposed various redactions' of taxes and duties, and other reductions which he did net propose wen pressed upon him by different members of all parties. (Hear, hear.) And nothing can be clearer than that the government which made these propositions, and that the house which urged them, did not contemplate that the income tax should really terminate at the period when it would terminate by the current law. (Hear, hear.) Such being the ease, my right hon. friend has shown to this house that by continuing the tax for • certain limited period—l admit not for a very short period—the House of Commons will then have the means, if it should think fit so to do, of parting with the tax as one of the ordinary resources of the country. Therefore, I say, prima facie there is • great advantage proposed by this budget as it now stands before the com mittee. (Hear, hear.) Well, in the next place it is pro posed to remove one of the most injurious of the excise duties—almost one of the only taxes which remain on what may be called the necessaries of life—the tax on soap—a tax on cleanliness and comfort. (Hear, hear.) That would be 1,000,0001. parted with under that head. It is proposed to reduceithe tea duties from 2s. 2d. to le. in the course of 3 years. (The noble lord went through the minor features of the budget.) To these (he proceeded) may be added a pro posal to adjust the assessed taxes, not on the absurd sumptuary principle, in proportion to the number of ser vants, carriages, and horses, &c., but on the principle of charging in the same proportion for each servant, horse, and carriage. An hon. gentleman has said that this would be • system entirely to the advantage of the rich. I believe that is • mietake, and that by high duties the number of persons employed as servants is restricted, sad that various trades are discouraged. (Hear, hear.) This is a summary of the direct benefits to be conferred by the budget. On the other hand, it is objected to it that there is no difference whatever in the income tax ; and, win, it is objected that the legacy duty is to be extended. Others of the new duties we propose have given till to va rious objections. Now, without speaking immediately of these objections, I mint say that :the spirit in which the proposition of the government is met, and the grounds of the amendment on which the division is to be taken, do seem to me to be completely irre itencilable. (Cheers.) The language, I say, of ' Ms honourable and learned member for Suffolk, (kir F. Kelly), is that new and enlarged burdens are to be pissed upon laud. The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) emplane also of new taxes on the land, and says that the whole budget is framed in a spirit of hostility to the lied." (Cheers and counter cheers.) Hon. gentlemen op posite cheer that representation of the lan guage of their ailosoatas. But what is the amendment? Dose it propose to Mx land lea—to take off so of the existing burdens on land? Quito the reverse. The proposition of the hon. baronet (Si R. B. Lytton) is, whorish's' now pays 7d. in the pound to the income tax, end trade also pays 7d. that land shall be continued to be taxed at that rate, but that trade and manufactures shall be treed at a less rate. (Cheers and laughter.) Was then ever anything s• contradictory ? (Cheers and laughter.) These hon. gentlemen have been complaining for seven years that the land has been op pressed by recent commercial legislation, and yet now they come forward with a proposition to iacrease the advantages of that trade and that manufacturing industry with whose supposed . predominance they have so often found fault. Why, same the day when Marshal Mumma con ducted his division, which should have fought for Napoleon, over to the allied Prussians and Austrians, no such mili tary move has been witnessed in Europe. (Great laughter.) What is the ease which the amendment insists on ? The great difficulty with these income tax schedules is to make an alteration which will not force you into further alterations, those further alterations exposing you at last to the risk of breaking up and abandoning the tax. (Hear.) Nothing is more plausible than to say—let there be lower rates for the professional man, whose livelihood is earned by great mental toil, and whose families are dependent also on the one life and on the good health in life, of the head of the family. But then come the traders, persons living by skill, and intelligence too, who ask for similar advan tages. Then comes the question with respect to salaries and public office, mental toil being bees also an element in the etiolation. Then comes the question of the land, which claims is own allowance for repair. What do you arrive at then? At this: that every schedule is altered except this which relates to the p ublic funds. (Hear, hear.) And that is a question which I hope will be treated in this house in the manner in which it has been dealt with by the hon. and learned member for Suffolk. (Cheers.) His principle would lead at one.: to a breech of public faith. There are two principles—the theoretical and the practical —contended for. One principle is that laid down by Mr. Pitt, to fox incomes, not to tax any peculiar incomes— all incomes, from whatever sources they may be de rived ; and in that case the fundholder has his: security against excessive taxation equally with other classes. Bat when you say to them, " We tax you 7d., and others 61d., because the source of your income is more permanent than others," the fundholder would say that if you come to the sources of income, you have no right to place any tar on public property. On the other hand, if you tax incomes equally, the fundholder is guarded against excessive taxation by his equal burden with the rest of the community. (Hear, hear.) If you separate the fundholder from other classes, there is no security that the tax would not be 5 per cent. on land, and 50 per cent. on the funds. (Hear, hear.) It was, there fore, because I believed the practical security is in equal rates, that I viewed with alarm and apprehension the re ceat proposal of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), , in his financial scheme, Vast salaries and the funds alone in l Ireland should be subjected to the income tag. (Cheers.) That was a beginning, and a very serious beginning, of • plan by which the funds might be taxed alone, and it up hastily,lor should it be relinquished hastily. It is a very great subject, which touches the trade of the country ; the retail trade of the country, that most tender portion of the community—the most irritable, the most lively and sensible to anything like an attack on their finances. The system of licensing involves some of the meet impeetamt considerations in direct taxation. Some have Vague/ it even as a partial substitute for the buss tax. It appears in this, as in other mine we are to have an income tax and • Easnes, too, according to the original project of the Cher was of the Exchequer. But there is • great murmur of dbUstent, and we have seen the Chancellor of the Exch.- =dog up and saying something about the scale being already. The wale is to be altered, and, if rumour is Nue , even the plan is to be abandoned. And now mark the difference when a particular class of population in town isslionserned in matters of taxation and those who are °oa rsman* with the land. (Cheers.) I take for granted thus is not the slightest doubt that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not have proposed the licenses unless he believed them to be a just and proper tax, not only a just but a politic tax, but he changes his opinion when the trade rises and tell him they will not endure it. The farmer most bear his income tax, the proprietor of the soil must bear his Increased burden of taxation, the cultivator of the soil must Lind that his burden of local taxation is increased, and that he has fresh competitors in the market against him, but he is to get no relief ; but the moment you touch a particular class and delegates wait upon you, the minister trembles. Now, sir, I have adverted to the subject before. I think it Is one of he most serious features in our political condition, that it is now a fact that certain classes in the country who, because they have a certain portion of the electoral power are exercising that power systematically to exempt themselves from just taxation. (Cheers.) I can conceive no featare in our situation as a nation more fearful, more to lie deprecated, more to be resisted. (Cheers.) Why, what Ms been the cause of all disturbances in great countries ? what produced the fall of even Rome ? Why, it was the existence of • class exempt from taxation. Well, then, I see no difference between • privileged noble sat a privileged tobacconist—(hear and laughter)— my mead the master is this, it is equally wrong to exempt soy ems lbemtjast taxation whether it be a noble or a bmilltmsa id& a 101. franchise, because in both cases all duns so opprieved—each is equally fatal to political order. ' Each disibv all notions of honour, and who can doubt that the oominguence in each will be equally fatal ? (Bear.) Even:the class who enjoy the privilege must ultimately suffer though they may now, indeed, be reaping a ric h harvest from the power which they possess. Well, sir, in this state of things the owners of the soil, and the cultiva tors of the soil complain that in the projects ' of the financial minister they are not justly treated. They hear from him nothing but censure ; when they complain ' that they are not only injured by his projects, they are stig- Malised as being unwise; and when they approach the Minister through their representatives in the House of Commons, they are met by taunts. What said the Presi dent of the Beard of Control the other night to some one who had made comments upon the scheme of the govern ment—" Why, you hail better take my advice (said the President of theßoard of Control)—(a laugh)—you had better take these measures, or you will get worse." (A laugh.) "Now, sir," said the President of the Board of Castro', " remember the Bs. fixed duty ; you did not take that, and you see now what it is not taking the measures we bring forward." (A laugh.) But it is not merely the President of the Board of Control who takes this course. The Presi dent of the Board of Control is rather of an active and vigorous, than an original mind—(a laugh)—ad the Pre sident of the Board of Control has followed the conduct of Gee who—without offence I say it, because I bold the right Ma. gentleman in particular regard--etandi higher than itimeelf. The President of the Board of Control In fact has only followed the example of a more eminent person, for the noble lord opposite (Lord J. Russell) has very often given us advice of this kind. (A laugh.) At the beginning of the year I brought forward a motion respecting our foreign relations—respecting our relations with France in fact, and it fell to the lot of the noble lord to answer the observations I made. The noble lord—the subject being our relations with France—delivered himself of an oration in favour of free trade--(a laugh)— aud—it was a very common habit with the noble lord—he gave me some advice. (A laugh.) He said if I had followed his advice I might have been one of her Majesty's ministers at the time. Really, so far as I was concerned, it was not n to follow the noble lord's advice, because, had we wishe to have remained in as ministers, we need only have followed his example. (A laugh.) I dare say, if we had submitted to what I have seen ministers submit to since I have been in parliament, probably we might still have been sitting on those benches opposite ; but that is nos the point to which I wish to call attention, though the point itself has great reference to the subject in hand. The noble lord said that evening, " You never took my ad vice. I advised you some years ago to take an 135. duty on corn, but you did not take it." Sir, the noble lord has reminded me of that several times, and I should not have particularly referred to it again myself had not the President of the Board of Control introduced it to us the other evening. If the taunt had come from such a man as the right hon. member for Portsmouth who offered us the Be. duty I think it would have been a fair one, but I find it has now been so frequently used by others as to have become a complete stereotype expression on the Treasury benches, and I have thought it necessary to say thus much upon it to prevent its repetition in future. (Hew.) Con sidering the change which has taken place I think it would be decent in the noble lord to remember under whose advice and at whose urgent instance it was that we did refuse the Bs. fixed duty upon corn ; but so far from my wishing to deprecate the comprehensive mind that could alone conceive so vast an idea as an Bs. fixed duty, I give the noble lord credit for all he de serves in that respect. At the same time, however, when he remembers who the statesman was under whose advice, and at whose urgent entreaty, the proposal was refused ; and when the noble lord remembers those by whom be is now surrounded—(cheers)—when the noble lord remembers that, and also that he has thrown away the whig party, and that he has accepted a subordinate office under a subordinate officer of Sir Robert Peel, I think the noble lord may find that the time has come when these remarks should cease. (Cheers.) Sir, I remember the member for the West Riding said the other night that the hon. member, my respected friend the member for Warwickshire, stated that this oudget was a great triumph . might have been eoneerted into a precedent for any con veusent breach of fain: by which that lugs rum which , we now pay to the public creditor should be diminished to , any extent parliament in its want of discretion or want of honesty might think fit. (Cha s ers.) These are the general considerations on which the go,"lrotneut have eroevedod with respect to the income tax. n e right hon. gentleman opposite now denies that he ever avid that he had not had time to look into the schedules, but he has almost confirmed the impression he formerly pro duced by what he has said to-night, for he states that having had two or three months before him, he did not go into any particulsr analysis of the mode in which the tax would be levied, but that he reserved himself for the recess which was to have followed Christmas. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentlema n did no: then tell us, and has not told us now, how he pro posed to make the great distinctions which we called upon him to make, if he made any. (Hear, hear.) I should be sorry to believe that he did nut think it incum bent on him, or worth his while, to go into every particular of a change in the rates of the income tax before he came down to the house and proclaimed a principle as good, from which I thjpk evil would result. (Cheers.) As to the ex tension of the tax to incomes of 1001., the right hon. gentle man himself made a proposal that, with regard even to trade, it should be carried down to that sum. A right hon. gentleman says that when we are proposing a term to this tax it is not a fitting time to extend it ; but it should be remembered that if an augmentation of income is to be derived from the present proposal, there will be a diminu tion before we come to the end of the seven years ; and in stead of 6 millions or 55 millions we shall only have to deal with 41 millions, The Chancellor of the Exchequer has, In fact, taken the precaution of making the sum then to be dealt with smaller than it is now. Meer.) Mr. Cairns says the remission of the Consolidated Annuities is due in justice to those now paying them, and that we are propos i ng an income tax on the whole community in Ireland to make up the deficiency. I should state the case precisely the oppo site way. There is ns claim whatever in justice to the re mission of the Consolidated Annuities, and on that ground I never could admit of it—(hear, hear)—but by means of the income tax you have obtained the remission of many other duties which pressed on the whole community of the United Kingdom, and why should not Ireland bear such a tax ? 4Hear, hear.) If Ireland is to receive great benefit with .he rest of the kingdom, why should she not bear burdens in the same proportion ? In 1848, the calamity of the fa mine was a very good answer to this. We propose to re move the taxation consequent upon that, and then Ireland falls into the same - category as the rest, of the empire. (Hear, hear.) Even in 1848, when the country was far more distressed than now, Sir B. Hall proposed the exten sion of the income tax to Ireland, without proposing a re mission of the Consolidates, Annuities ;'xnd Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Henley, and other of their political friends and colleagues voted for that motion. (Loud cheers.) A mere glaring example of inconsistency will hardly be found in the annals of parliamentary history. (Cheers.) The in creased burden on Ireland from the alterations now pro posed will be 400,0001. the income tax ; the succession tax, 60,0001. ; the spirit duties, 198,000/. ; total, 6.58,0001. : while the relief will amount to 670,0001. In 1860 the only additional duties will be the legacy and spirit duties, 258,0001. ; leaving 412,0001. a year as the balanee of remis sion. (Hear, hear.) But gentlemen have looked rather too much at the value of these particular figures, and not to the general interests of Ireland. Ireland hid long suf fered from the heavy duties on articles of consumption, which she paid in common with Great Britain. In this country they discouraged consumption; in Ireland, in some cases, they totally prevented it. Lord Sydenham once stated that the revenue of Ireland in 1807 was 4,300,0001. ; upwards of three millions of taxes had been imposed between 1807 and 1821, but the revenue had then fallen to 3,800,0001. (Hear.) Great as war the advantage of the removal of those duties in this country it must have been still greater in Ireland. (Hear, hear.) Several hon. gentlemen have .referred to my opposition of the income tax in 1812; but the questisn is now very different, after the tax has been iu operation eleven years. This tax has been the means of relieving the country from very great burdens, and I be lieve that before 1860, it will afford still greater relief. (Cheers.) Thu hardship of the proposed legacy.duty has been referred to; that hardship has been much exagge rated. It was said that two millions of additional taxation , were about to be placed on the land. But the fact is, there is already a heavy legacy duty on a portion of the land, 1 while other parts are totally exempt. (Hear, hear.) What can be more just and equal then to remove that exemption ? The amount will be, not two millions, but 500.0001. or 700,0001. ; and when the tax comes to its full amount, the income tax will be diminished, and at least 700,0001. will he taken off it. By supporting the amendment you will vote not only not to relieve the land, but to lay upea it in 185.5 a burden from which it will be ,free by the propositio n o f th e government. I Sir, in the course of these discussions, having begun with the removal of prohibitions and of differential duties, we came at length to the abolition of those duties which press more especially upon the people, and which have deprived them of much comfort and enjoyment. I believe that this house can no more worthily represent the people, can no more worthily consult the interest of the people, than by pursuing this course. (Cheers.) It was said by one last year-1 think it was a proof of little wisdom in him who said it—that he should endeavour to role this country so as to check the advances of democracy. (Hear, hear.) You may depend upon it that a ruler who sets himself to check the advances of democracy, will but increase end irri tate, and make finally triumphant, the power to which ho thus opposes himself. (Cheers.) But if you consult the interests of the people, you will make the de mocracy conservative, and you will carry that democracy with you instead of opposing them as your enemy. (Load cheers.) That, it seems to me, is the true . policy for parlia ment to pursue; neither neglecting the interests of land nor the interests of trade, but consaltiag all together ; giving no undue favour to any class, but pursuing a course which each must acknowledge to be jug. (Cheers.) Sir, I rejoice that towards the termination of this course, which parliament has now for nearly twelve years adopted, my right hon. friend the Cbanceller of the Exchequer has had an opportunity of laying propositions before the house, which, whether we consider the propositions themselves, or whether we consider the manner in which they were introduced—(much cheering) —must give him a name to be envied among the financial ministers of this country. (Loud cheers.) Sir, if, in order to do this, it has been his fortune to live laborious days, I trust he will find his reward in the approbation and support of this house, and in the gratitude of an admiring people. (Great cheering.) Mr. ROSS MOORE rose amid loud cries of " Divide," which rendered it impossible for him to be beard. After a vain effort, continued for two or three minutes, to obtain a ' hearing, the hon. member resumed his seat, and the com mittee immediately divided. The committee then divided— For the amendment 2.52 Against Majority for ministers 7l The reads was hailed with loud cheers by the ministe rialists. The CHAIRMAN then put the resolution of the go vernment, but Mr. Lawless having a further amendment to the effect that Great Britain should be substituted for the United Kingdom wherever the latter words occurred is the resolution, it was postponed till Thursday next. BERWICK-UPON-TWEED. Colonel FORESTER rose to move the following resolu tion :—" That Mr. Speaker do issue his warrant to the clerk of the crown to make out a new writ for the electing of two burgesses to sine in this present parliament for the borough of Berwick. upon-Tweed, in the room of John Stapleton, Esq., and Matthew Forster, Esq., whose elec tions have been determined to be void." Mr. PIIINN submitted that, at this time in the morn ing, this motion ought not to be proceeded with ; and It wee accordingly withdrawn. TYNEhIOUTH. _ _ _ - -..-- ---. Sir B. HALL was about to rise for the purpose of pro posing an address for a commission in this ease ' but he wished to know whether the hon. member (Mr. Matsu) ram serious in his motio- wit‘houldisitte ? Mr. MOFFATT b Jne through evidence, and had Come the that a writ ouguL to Li ,ltory L variation then took place bet n Lord J. , ell, Sir J. Pakington, and Sir J. Tr It inti m/1k Mr. MOFFATT concluded by moving—That Mr. Spelkker do issue his warrant to the clerk of the crown to makik out a new writ for the electing of a burgess to serve in this t - .nt parliament for the borough of Tynemouth in the r00m...' Hugh Taylor, Esg , whose election has been determined to Or void. Mr. BASS, considv. • o, st the writ ought not to issue, and that at that hour the au..." " not Hely be dis cussed, moved, by way of amendment, inc adjournment of the house. _ _ After acall for a division, which, however, did not take place, the amendment was agreed to, and The house adjourned at a quarter to three o'clock. Patn.—Mr. Foley with Lord Lewisham, in favour of the ;overnment. cot court. OSBORNB, MONDAY. _, The Queen and Prince, with the royal children, walked sad drove in the grounds at Osborne this morning. The Duchess of Kent, accompanied by the Princess Ade laide of Hohenlohe, and attended by Lady Ansa Maria Dawson and Sir George Couper, honoured the performance of the French Plays with her presence last evening. M. Mounts, the Turkish Minister, transacted business yesterday at the Foreign-office. A deputation of wholesale dealers (London) on street im provements, in connexion with the Central City Terminus I Railway, had an interview with Viscount Palmerston yes terday, at the Home-office. The deputation consisted of the Marquis of Clanricarde, Baron Rothschild, M.P. Mr. Masten:nen, M.P., Sir James Duke, Bart., M.P., Mr. kaikes Currie, M P., Mr. W. A. Wilkinson, M.P., Mr. Apsley Pellatt, M.P., Mr. T. Duncombe, M.P., Mr. William ta il- Bays, M.P., Mr. Alderman Lawrence, Mr. Sheriff Croll, Rev. James Jackson, M.A., Rev. George Mansfield, M.A., Mr. Wm. Leaf, Mr. Thomas Lowrey, Mr. John Fisher, Mr. Dillon, Mr. Bradbury, Mr. Moore, Mr. Howell, Mr. Walter, Mr. William Barber, Mr. Millard, Mr. W. Bur. shell, Mr. W. T. Hely (Temple), Mr. Arlon, Mr. Matins, Mr. Dakin, Mr. Thomas Lawrence, Mr. - Thorny Dix, Mr. John Lemon, Mr. F. Leathall, Mr. Pullen (Temple), Mr. B. J. Armstrong, Mr. J. 11. Stevens, Mr. Sandlands, Mr. Buekmaster, Mr. Boole, and Mr. Sidney Smith. 1 Mr. John Leslie Foster had an interview with the Duke I of Newcastle yesterday at the Colonial-office. I The Chancellor of the lixchequcr was better yesterday. V,itr evorzgli. T 1 Co RItIiSPON .et Th e esz:wees," containing 'be same ewer.inre ssaette," is publiebed every Tweeds) and Veils, etch. in ti n . n tor Port , aereezlieentilteineealed tor " The gaTteee," Lawton srleig piper. .. ot be et the Ciwee, it,. Bouverw.an•cet, 17 Twc 0 oer,ee as dos say of p.b b 1110 k WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE Tnr Dao-31conle..10b. ...... Afternoon. 110. 32m. T kmostom—lgornim. On. Om . Altormoot. I.a. 2m. LONDON, TUESDAY, MAY 3. Moron another long night's debate on the In t come Tax has thrown very little new light on the subject, it has not failed to show that the Tories relied very much upon being able to use Irish members us cat's-paws for opposition purposes. In the House of Commons, the great point is, of course, to influence votes, and as • considerable number of those needful things are known to waver in the possession of certain honourable members from the Sister Isle, a great Tory effort has been made to get Ireland into a state of revolt against the imposition of Income Tax in that country, although these very Tories last year proposed to extend to Ire land this very tax they now object to. Much that is unjust, and much more that is foolish, was said last night to this end ; so much, indeed, that it becomes a positive duty to examine the real present condi tion of Ireland, that we may see how tar there is ground for excusing her from a tax now levied on the other portions of the United Kingdom. Last night the Tory swindle on this subject was most thoroughly upset when, in a Ilouse unusually full, their opposition was defeated by a majority of 71. But the first stage not being the whole journey of a new law, let us join issue with the Obstructives on their own ground, and see " Whether Ireland is is a condition to pay Income Tux." In 1737, Bishop BERKELEY called on the State "with a high hand to introduce agriculture," and inquired " whether there be upon earth any Christian or civilised people so beggarly wretched and destitute as the common Irish?" In 1841, Lord Dt.voe's digest of the evidence brought before his Commission laments over " the usual agricultural practice throughout Ireland as de fective in the highest degree ;" and all the reports intervening between these two bore the same testi mony ; whereas now, only nine years after Lord DEVON'S lament, we have the remonstrance of a the Rev. ALEXANDER PEYTON, parish priest of Blarney, against the desertion of Irish land, which is to be had so much cheaper now than land in Canada and the United States, which he has visited for purposes of inspection and inquiry. We have the records of the locumbered Estates Court, which show us that, while the old ruinous prices of Irish farms are gone for ever, the land is not, on the other hand, ruinously cheap. It is rising at this moment; rising in a way which testifies to the security of pro perty, the intention of purchasers to improve, and the ingress of a new class of landholders, whose busi ness it is, expressly, to improve and cultivate the land. How economists have sighed out their despair over the conacre systein! It is broken up, uud is fast melting away. How they have painfully calculated the enormous disproportion of the people to the land ! The people are gone or going,—so as to have relieved all apprehension about their numbers. What dread we hear of now is about depopulation— a dread we do not share; and shall not, till wages have risen a good deal higher than they are yet. There lie the broad lands of that fertile island, mellowing in the air and sunshine, in preparation for future harvests, instead of yielding, in its exhaustion, half-putrid roots to a wan and haggard peasantry. And that peasantry, thus leaving those fields to lie fallow, are no longer wan and haggard, but sending over money to carry out thousands more to a land where nobody hungers. How we used to discuss, in a hopeless sort of way, the constitutional illegality of the Irish, and listen, with ever lessening surprise, and ever growing de spair, to the frequent news of assassinations, and the atrocities of Ribbon societies ! Now, what a won derful dissolution of that enormous mischief is taking place! If there are men enough, there are not dis contented men enough to carry on chronic rebellion, They are busy going away, or helping their friends away: or, from so many of their neighbours having gone away, they are earning their ls. 3d. or Is. 6d. per day, and are disposed to sleep at night, as working men should, instead of being out in the starlight, as rebels and poachers only are. When we used to say privately to each other that Government never had got at the mystery of those Ribbon Societies, and never would get at it, we did not dream of their dissolving under a higher and more beneficent Government than that of Queen, Viceroy and Parliament—under those great natural laws which have now intervened to supersede and to rebuke oar beet wisdom, so lately puzzling over an insoluble problem. How we used to mourn over the influence of the demagogue and the priest—the de magogue at all inconvenient times, and the priest at all seasons, and through all time. Where now is the demagogue—the prince of his order? Not only is he dead, but his ghost is laid. He has been found out, and he is forgotten. Nothing came of his great promises; but a new and splendid promise, which realises itself from day to day, has presented itself from quite another quarter; and, looking that way, the people turn their backs on the agitator's grave. And as for the priests, they are perhaps the only class in Ireland excluded from the new promise. They warn the people from the shores, but still the people go. They tell of terrible things to be feared in far countries, but the people go to see what they are like. The priests count over to them " the blessings of home—the blessings of education—the blessings of religion :" but the people go for the very purpose of finding a better home ; and they know that an education of comfort and decency must be better than anything they have found for their children yet ; and that if religion be good for anything, it can live in all latitudes. And so is the power a the priests expiring, and small are the gatherings about their altars, and humble is their position among their diminished flocks, in com parison with what it was before the famine came to put their quality to the proof. If the peasantry and farmers are thinking of emigrating, it is not now Protestantism in America or Romwism in Ireland how we used to at condition them mhaek. A gain , of Irish landlord, and, through him, of that of his tenants. How deci sively we pronounced that the tenure of land was the that will h o o f ld th th e beginning and end of Irish misery; and that the mischief was of so inextricable a kind that nothing but a total revolution, a clean sweep of property, or of its obligations, could bring about any amendment. Yet now, how we see the renovation begun, legally, equitably, for everybody's gain, and nobody's practical loss. The landlord is freed ; his creditor is paid ; his estates are thrown open to use; and openings are made for the acme of men who can improve the land and establish new branches of industry. A new field is opened for the return and applica tion of absentee Irish capital, and for the immigration of skilled English and Scotch labour. Now, if any one had told us, when Lord DevoN's Report was Mailed, that in ten years Irish land would be in course of retrieval, Irish population diminishing through prosperity instead of adversity, wages ris ing, disaffection dying out; priestly influence de clining; the land released and divided, and obtaining the fair value,—in short, every peculiar and unma nageable evil dissolving, and renovation beginning in every direction; and all this without con v ulsion , ht without alarm or injury ; — we might s almost say with out human intervention; but under the steady working of impartial natural laws, what should we have said ? We know what ought to be said, and what is said, by observers in other countries: that, amidst the manifold wonders of the remarkable times in which we live, none is more solemn, none more animating, none so precious and so sweet as the spectacle of the regeneration of the most wretched of the civilised countries of the world. It is not that " Order reigns," as the Emperor NICDOLAS says of Warsaw. It is not that " Pacification is achieved," as the Em peror NAPOLEON says of dumb France. It is not that " the compromise of the constitution are linen', a n the lY der estab u li n s tie he t d dem a e s nt th of e th r e e ir .er clie la l \ .ll‘77.- . and f y in e e u i c n o q n u s e a s i on u a t y obeyed Fugitive Slave Law. It is a real renovatien k .' • i " being wrought out, not by despotic decrees, -eifr even by Parliamentary Laws; but by law' tits i~~ f.A . f y ~ .ti;~ 1 ~~ i