The Express. — London, England, 1853-05-10 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.-MONDAY, 11Av 9. The Luau Cnamezza.on took his seat at 5 o'sleek. PETITIONS PRESENTED. Buttons (Scou.ann) Blu..—lty the Sul of EGLI\• TON, from places is Sootland ; against. PAULL./ M . PAPEILS.—tIy the Earl of CARLISLE, from Warwick and places is Cumberland, praying for the tree distribution of parliamentary papers. Jto w isit Ut t MIL! rIES.—By the Ent of CARLISLE, from a place not heard, in favour of the Tecate." of Jewish INSPECTION OF NUNNERIES. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY having presented several petitions praying for the inspection of nunneries, 'the Archbishop of DUBLIN rose to present a peti tion on the same subject, and in doing so, claimed the privilege of saying • few weeds. lie wished to eeeress its hearty concurrence is the general prayer of the petition. it was his deliberate conviction, that some allitionsl pr dection for individuals was neeelsert. However be might have been. charged with much ultra-liberalism, he had never been charged with wishing unduly to abridge the liberty of his fellow subjeats. lie wished not to east any stigma on Christians of any de nomination, Out the poise/110y and probability of great oppreween !icing emeriti on in a secret thoueht, some legislative interference—(heer, hear) —and he was convinced that a law ought to be pasted which would rot so much abridge as secure the liberty of indivi duals. Ile would not set forth the details of such • mea sure ; hut the 'subject wee well worth the attention of that house, teed so ear from each a measure as was suggested being any er eroschusent o• domestic liberty, civil or yeti pious, he was convinced that it was necessary for the better security of pereenal liberty. (Hear, hear.) The 'Bishop of NORWICH thought such a measure Wee' d hem tit the institutions themselves, and was most ka rt? =rely called for. (Hear, hear.) BUSINESS OF THE SESSION. tee d LYNDHURS T wished to refer to an important reateect. Their lordships bad jest passed tee Registration Aseurances Ili.l.which must occupy a considerable time in eiimussesu in the other house. The Charitable Trusts Bill 'would also take some time in passing there, and bills on 'these subjects bad before been sent down and thrown over from the multiplication of business. There was at present a dosncial measure before the other house which had =en peed a month, and would probably take two months more. Theo there was a questien as to the East India Company's charter and the subject of education to be disposed of by parliement. There was also a bill for the reform of the eecleeiustacel courts, the outline of which the Solicitor- Decimal Lad stated in great detail. Under these circum stances, be should be prepared to bring in a bill to enable any meesure to be taken up in the nest session of parlie sent at the rage where it had bees left in the present session. The noble earl (Derby) bed introduced a bill on the same subject four years ago; and if he received any esienormtemcnt from the government he would propose to send both bills to a select committee. It would be vain for his, however, to adopt such a course without the support of the government. The Kiel of ABERDEEN said it was the desire of the government to expedite by all proper means the measures to which the noble and learned lord referred. As he had not given him notice of his question, he was net prepared to s.y how far tbero might be an objection to his pro posed =cutlet ; but he was afraid that it was open to serious objections. He did not, however, wish to give any opinion upon the subject then. Lord CAMPBELL suggested that the sail might be elf eted by an adjournment fur two months, instead of • prorogation. Lord BROUGHAM said there was always great incon venience attending an early session, and it did not in the least expedite the business, so •as to make the session shorn , than if it had begun at the usual time. (Hear.) E sr' GREY asked the noble sad learned lord to consider the suggestion of Lord Truro as to whether the object might not he accomplished by a resolution rather than by a bill. It did nut rest on an set of parliament but on resolutions of the house that bills should go through a certain number of stages. The first step towards any arrangement would be • communication between the two houses on the subject, to see whether they could net effect the desired object by re solutions. THE PICTURES OF THE LATE KING OF THE FRENCH. The Earl of SIALMESBURY said that the noble:earl op , posit. had no doubt heard that an important sale was pole, on of tho pictures of the late King of the French. Part ef them had been already sold, and in the nest three weeks four or five hundred more would be brought to the hammer. There were amongst them some works of art of great value ; and he wished to ask whether the government had taken any steps to ascertain whether any of the pictures were worthy of this country ? The Earl of ABERDEEN was understood to say that sufficient notice of the sale had not been given. He be lieved, however, that one picture had been bought which would be placed in the National Gallery, but he was not then prepared to say whether any others would be put- The Marquis of LANSDOWNE was understood to say that only two days' notice had been given of the sale. THE POOR LAW. The Earl of SIALMESBURY gave notice that he would on Thursday, on presenting a petition, call attention to the present state of the poor law. DWELLINGS OF THE LABOURING CLASSES. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY moved that their lord. ships should take into consideration the report of the select committee on this subject, and should agree to the following resolution That before the first reading of any bill fee making any works in the construction of which compulsoey power is sought to take 30 houses or more inhabited by the labouring classes, in any one parish or place, the promoters be required to deposit in the office of the clerk of the parties meats a statement of the number, description, and sineaties of the said houses, the number (so far as they can he mad' mated) of pers.= to be displaced, and whether say mad what provision is made in the bill for remedying the intim venienee likely to arise from such displacement." The noble lord stated that he had received letters from Mr. Beasley, Mr. Cubitt, and others approving of this proposal. Ile thought it was one of the best resolutions which they cou'd come to. Tee resolution was agreed to. The Barg= (Scotland) Bill and the Sheriff and Commis sary Courts (Berwickshire) Bill severally passed through committee. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. The Earl of AIRLIE rose, in pursuance of nodes, to esk a question of her Majesty's government with reference to the mea tire which it wastheir intention to propose for the future government of India. A question he said had been pat in the other house on this subject, but it had nut yet been an swered. lie did not seek to be informed as to the details of the government measure. Ile wished to ascertain whether that measure was to be the first of a series of measures, or was to stand alone. Was it to be understood that, in adopt ing the government measure, parliament virtually pledged itself to abstain (rem all interference with the affairs of the Indian government, during the period, whatever it might be, fur which the provisions of that bill were to continue in force ? Was the question to be considered clotted for that period 1 It was very desirable that there should be a clew understanding on that point. The committee of the other house, at the close of the last session, reported on the first ef the eight heads into which they had divided their =quiz and were consequently very far from having ezhamield subject. They earnestly recommended that the should be renewed is the next session; and this It alone. lie did not think that the generality at thiek bide ships, with the exception of the members of thegweemement and those who were conversant with India, could be map competent to turns an opinion on this subject. Ministers had access to sources of information which private =elk viduals had not; but if they called upon the house to legis late on matters with which they were imperfectly ie. queioted, and matters of grave importance , they called at their lordships to incur a very grave responsibility. It might be said that as the committees had reported en the first head of inquiry—the administration of Indies asks in this country—the house might proceed to legislate ea that subject. It was no doubt competent for them to de" but the other beads of inquiry embraced meet isnp=taat suleicte, including the means of education and the means of religious instruction ; and how could they provide for the future government of Indio, end leave all diem ques tions onentehed ? If they proceeded to legislate this session is the dark for the government of India, they would place theme , lees in this dilemma : either they would take the responsibility of legislating on matters with which they were very imperfectly acquainted, or they would omit' these /flatten, and thus leave out the greater part of the question, and that which was of the most importance. They moult be dealing with the shadow instead of the substance. The effect of this would be to cut short the labours of the committees of both houses, and to postpone the inquiry. Be wished to ask whether the measure which it was pro p nee to introduce for the future government of India was to be based upon the evidence and report of the select eonseeettees of both Mines of Parliernent, or whether the house was to be calk, i upon t 3 legislate in this session upon those matters on which the committees had not yet es pressed as opinion. The lad of ABERDEEN said their le/debit). must feel that it wereld be somewhat premature were he to attempt =answer tire question of his noble friend. Notice had bean given that • meesure for the future government of India would be introduced into the other house of parlia ment before the end of this moeth . the noble earl would then see what eras the nature of that measure, and how far it answered the question he had put. If it were to be founded upon the report of a committee which hail not ma been made, it would certainly be premature is him to giro any description of the measure. It would be ia the discre tion of parliament to decide as to any future legislation. Their lordships would he able to judge in a very short time what the nature of the measure was; and he hoped the noble earl would find his question answered by that mess sere. LAND IMPROVEMENT (IRELAND) BILL. Oa the motion for the bout* to go into committee on this hill, • Lord MONTEAGLE compii:ined thst no ezplanation hart been liven of the provis i ons of the bill. To some of A t m he entertained very serious Pbj.tetionv. It might be es ;,i that 66 the bill authorised the inwrovement of land in Ireticsd be means of loans, arid contained no borrowing power', it would be inoperative ; but fhb. WU a very poor r ,, conu nendari'in of the hall Units+ it could he shns n that the bill ve , old work. their loriShipi would i.artily he in duced to pa•v if. flit hic great objection to it was !hi.— it contained a iiistinet enactment whereby an occupying tenant, however small ~is occupancy or beneficial interest, alight, din pommies of soy loots fog which two Myra were unexpired, put the powers of the bil3 motion, and create a debt, binding not only himself, ,tit the rever sioner, who might be in utter qorum. , of the trivet hoe, or disapproveof it. As the lois'thus contracted be came a first charge on the land, it yr 4 most unjust towards the landlord. Ile would put'_, their lordships if they would sanction such a inta-,are for owlet England or Scot land ? (Hear, hear.) "a ha tendency of the bill was that of too many measures relatiug to Ireland, to create a class of quasi owners of 1 "-nff or,t of the tenants and occupiers. ,It was an indi'ient **seek on the rights of property. ! (Hear, beg.) 1 1 ed it merely provided that all the consentir,g parties should have the power of binding thole respective interests it would have been unobkctionable. It was true the commissioners of works might require t:ne consent of the landlords, but this was not made cerr,pulsory. This bill was only one of Lour; the proper course would be to postpone it till the others were before the house, and then refer the whole to a select com mittee. Ile should prefer this course to negativing the bill in its present stage, and would therefore move that the hove should resolve itself into committee on the bill on that day month, when the other bills would probably bo before them. Lord DONOCOHNIORE laid the other bills to which reference had been made were before a committee of the other house, and it was unlikely that they would become law this 'session. He thought the objections of the noble lord to the present bill were unfounded. It was founded on an act 0(1817, which provided fur the issue of a loan of 1% million, at 3! per cent. interest, payable in 22 years. This act had worked admirably well in Ireland ; it had given satisfaction to all parties and had been the source of the greatest improvement. The present bill was a copy of that ace ; the system had worked so well that there was a general desire for its continuance; but as the principle of issuing these loans from the Treasury was objectionable, this bill gave power to borrow in the same way from private parties. The 7th clause, describing the persons who might qualify as owners was precisely the same as the 7th clause In the act of 1847. In seeking the improvement of the soil, which was the great object of the act of 1847, it must strike their lordships that the proprie tors by themselves were pswerlys, and that the great im provements which had taken place both in Ireland and Scotland had been effected either by the tenant farmers themselves, or with their ecpoperation. Their lordships had passed many acts for the benefit of the landed proprietors.. and he appealed to them whether it would not naturally lead to great jealousy and heart-burning if they refused to entertain a bill that was intended to be of service to the tenants. (deer, hear.) He would not attempt to deny that there might be men by whom the measure would be abused, but there was a large and daily increasing class to whom its powers might be safely entrusted, and for their sakes he mould support the motion for the recommitment of the bill. (Hear.) : The Earl of LUCAS was opposed to the measure, be cause it involved the most mischievous and communistic principle of tenant right. The Earl of WICKLOW thought the amendment most The Earl of EGLINTON bad been privy to the former bill, which had been prepared with the approval of the noble earl then at the head of her Majesty's government (Lord Derby). He (Lord Eglinton) had never considered this bill as one of those which were called tenant right bills, for the only oonnezion it had with them was, they had all been iatroduced in the other house by the late Attorney- General for Ireland. He (Lord Eglinton) should give the bill his most cordial support. Lord BEAUMONT felt some apology was necessary for making any observations upon • bill that was not likely ever to be extended to England, and which must therefore be regarded somewhat as a private arrangement. (Mar, hear.) Still he must express the strong objection he felt against its principles--fiat, because they invaded the rights of property ; and secondly, because in the present transition state of Ireland they must prove seriously inju rious. If he went into its details be thought he should be able to show that for • " well digested measure," it was as full of faults as any bill that had ever come up to their lordships' house; but for the present he would only protest against it altogether. (Hear, hear.) The Earl of GLENGALL looked upon the establish ment of • board to arbitrate between landlord and tenant as most objectionable ; and the proposal was not one which their lordships would sanction if it referred to their own estates, especially alter they had seen money so recklessly and scandalously wasted by just such • board under the Drainage Act. (Hear, hear.) He considered the present measure to be intimately connected with the other bills, and he should support their being referred to s select committee. Viscount CANNING said the principle of this bill had been stated by the noble earl opposite as one that had been asserted by parliament in 1847, but it was said that 1817 was ao exceptional year. So fier as the working details were concerned, that might be • good ground of opposition, but he apprehended that a principle which was good ' in 1847 was equally good in 18.53. But there was one mistake which almost every noble lord who had spoken had fallen into, in speaking of the act of 1847 as an ant which was expired. So far from that being the fact, it was still in operation. Two millions of the public money was authorised to be advanced for the purpose of improving land, partly in 1847 and partly in 18.51. Of that there re mained about 500,0001. unappropriated. A noble earl had stated that that sat had been confined in its operation to money borrowed by landlords, and that in no respect had it been taken advantage of by tenants. He was surprised to hear the noble lord quote the authority of Mr. Griffith for that statement, as he had himself received a letter from Mr. Griffith, in which he said, " There have been • considerable number of sums advanced to farmers with leases for lives under this act, but in every ease the loan has been approved of by the landlords." (Hear, hear.) That passage was cheered. lie expected that under this bill also the loans would be approved by the landlords. With reference to this bill being postponed in order that it and other bills which had originated in the same hands should be referred to a select committee, that was not the course followed in the House of Commons. This bill was brought in with • thorough knowledge on the part of the house that it was originally the work of the Attorney- General for Ireland under Lord Derby's government, and except that the other bills had the same name on the back, be saw no reason for putting them together. And instead of the bill passing unnoticed in the House of Commons, it was fully discussed in committee. The noble earl who spoke last but one made great objection to the power given to haute. if he had read the clause he would have seen that the person who was to derive the immediate benefit was to pay the it per cent. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that, throughout the whole of this discussion, they had heard excuses for this bill, t ut no reasons for it whatever. The Earl of DERBY said if he thought thatby adopting this bill tenants would acquire a permanent vested interest in the land, he should he one of the last parsons to sanction such an unwarrantable principle. (Hear.) He appre headed the simple object of the measure was to give either the landlord or the tenant having a long duration of inte rest in the land power to raise money for its improvement mime there was an absence of ready capital, or of power to twelves the estate ; and believing this object to be one of pest namankt to Ireland—believing that the principle has Mar illund to work well already—and moreover believing sea W{, whether right or wrong, to have been framed enzlise dss authority of the learned and excellent man in , w ass min he could not speak too highly, and who did hint the favour of accepting 'he seals of the Irish Chancel , beiliip when he had the honourof holding office as well as ! under the authority of his right hon. friend, the l ate Attor ney-General for Ireland, and believing also that the bill was supported by the representatives of almost every county and borough in Ireland, he thought it would be a matter of serious regret if their lordships should refuge now to go into a consideration of the bill, in consequence of some connexion it was supposed to have with a moosisre which might or might not come before their lordships within the nest four or five weeks. (Hear, hear.) lie trusted their lordships would at once consent to go into committee, and proceed with the details of the bill. Lord MONTEAGLE said he did not want to delay the bill for the purpose that had been stated by the noble lord. (Hear.) All he wanted to do was so to alter and amend the bill that tne tenant should not burrow without the consent of his landlord. He made no objection whatever to the principle of the law already in force, but he wished this bill to be made to conform to that law, in order that both parties interested should join in the undertaking before the money was bor rowed. (Hear, hear.) After a few words from the Earl of Decay, who still deprecated delay, their lordships divided, when there ap peared for the amendment— Contents' 8 Non-Cohtents The house then went into committee on the bill. On clause 1, The Marquis of CLANRICARDE again took an objec tion to the bill ou the ground that a teuaiat might borrow money under its provisions and apply it to his own use unless some alterations were made in its provisions to guard ageing such a contingency. The Earl of WICKLOW pointed out to the noble mar quis that he was in error, inasmuch as the money would have to be advanced under the authority of the Board of Works, who would be reaponsiblo for the proper outlay of the eapital. After some further discussion, clauses I and 2 were agreed to. Oa clause 3, Lord ST. LEONARD'S, suggested that the wording of the clause should bo made more stringent. It provided that a man should ho entitled to borrow who held a life *state in the land or possessed it for • term of years. Now this latter expression might mean two or three years, and be would propose that the term should be specified, city, fur • term not less than 2.5 years. The claem also related to the power of a reversioner to borrow in the event of the tenant in possession declining to do so. Now he would suggest that the law of Ireland in that respect should he made to assimilate with the law of En 'land, for he could see no reason for keeping up a different law in both eoua tries applicable to the same subject. Viscount CANNING said this point hail already been ander the cosaideration of the law advisers of the crown is Ireland and the right hon. §:endemic' who had had charge of the bill in the other house, but no determination had yet been e'me to upon it. Ile would, the:ol3)ra, suggest that this matter should be left open for future deliberation. Un clause 4 being read, providing who shall be deemed owners Lerd BEAVMONT moved the 0171141(011 of the words, mortgagee in possession, or in receipt edemas." After a short di , eumion, the house divided, when the numbers were— Coot , :An (for the omission of the war 1.),, ii NoneCentents l4 Najurity in frvouof tin claim 5 Lord BEAUMONT then moved the emission of the whole of the promo, ;tom the 33rd lialt to the end. of the clause. Algter k few wends from the earl of DEREY and Lsrd MoNtessotv, it was agreed that the proviso should be omitted Fu the present, and the further consideration of the sutojetet postponed to a subsequent stage of the bill. On Cause 5 being read, providing who shall be untitled to be treated as owner, where several persons have an inte rest in the land, &c., Lord MONTEAGLE moved u an amendment to insert after the words " two lives." "which Islay be in the judgment of the Commissioners of Works equivalent to • term of 25 years." After a convention in which the Lard Chancellor, the Earl of Derby, Viscount Canning, the Earl of Wicklow, the Earl of Donoughmore, and Lord St. Leonard's took part, the amendment was withdrawn. Another amendment, moved by the same noble lord, having for its object to prevent the subdivision of farms, gave rise to considerable discussion. The Duke of NEWCASTLE expressed his conviction that the clause, as it stood, would not afford any . gretter facilities for the subdivision of farms than had ex isted for several years. All that this bill aid was to enable private individuals to grant loans on the same terms as had been heretofore done by the Treasury. The amendment was negatived without a division. Lord MONTEAGLE then moved the omission of the words "whenever the said commissioners shall think fit so to require it," i. e. to require the tenant to produce the con sent of the landlord. The Earl of WICKLOW opposed this amendment, on the ground that it would make the measure a mere land lord's bill. Its real object, however, was to enable the te nant, if the landlord would not make an improvement, to make it without him. The Earl of DONOUGHMORE was of the same opinion. Omitting the words would be a great piece of favouritism to the landlords. Viscount CANNING said that practically the commis sioners would have the same powers that they already pos sessed. By the letter of the present bill, mere notice to the landlord was sufficient ; but the board bad succeeded in every instance (though in some cases only after considerable trouble) in procuring the assent of the landlord. Their lordships then divided— For the amendment Against it l3--G The amendment was therefore lost, and the clause was then agreed to. Clauses 6 to 23 were agreed to. On clause 24, The Earl of DONOUGHMORE said that this clause entrusted the commissioners with a very dangerous power, for it gave them the power of making alterations involving additional cost to the extent of 1-sth of the estimates. Viscount CANNING said the Cl4lllO was necessary. Cases might occur where the whole expenditure might be made useless for the want of a small additional outlay. The Earl of DONOUGHMORE did not object to the commissioners having power to make alterations, but he thought they ought not to be excused from going through the forms. lie begged to propose as an amendment to sub stitute the words "one-tenth" for "one-fifth." The committee then divided— For the amendment Against l3-3 The other clauses were then agreed to ; and the house ■rsumed. Viscount CANNING said he should postpone any fur ther proceeding with the bill till after the Whitsuntide holidays. COPIES OF SPECIFICATION REPEAL BILL. The LORD CHANCELLOR moved that this bill be read a second time. He had introduced s one amendments into it, and he proposed to hare it committed pro forma, in order that it might be printed with the amendments. After a few words from Lord EGLINTON, the bill was read a second time. CLITHEROE ELECTION. On the order of the day for Lord Beaumont to call atten tion to the address from the House of Commons respecting this election remaining unanswered, The Earl of ABERDEEN said the matter was under consideration, and he hoped the noble lord would postpone it till Thursday. Lord BEAUMONT said of course he should comply with the request. Their lordship. then adjourned at ten minutes put eleven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.-MONDAY, MAY 9. The firsaxsa took the chair at 4 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The fallowing bills ware read a third time and passed Mel Beck Reservoirs; Madras Railway; and Belfast and Ballymena Itsilway ; Bills. The following bills were considered : Australian Agri cultural Company; Dundee Waterworks; Great Northern Railway (No. 1) ; Londonderry, Enniskillen, and Sligo Railway,; Laugh Foyle and Lough Swilly Drainage and Reclamation; and Lough Foyle and Lough Swilly Rail way ; Bills. The following bills were read a second time: Burton upon-Trent Improvement (No. 2); and Rochdale Improve ment (No. 2) ; Bills. ROYAL COMMISSION. Sir A. CLIFFOII.I3 appeared at the table and summoned the house to the House of Peers to hear the royal assent given to several bills. HUTCHINSON'S CLAIM BILL. Mr. OLIVEIRA in moving the second reading of this bill, stated that this was a claim amounting to something like 48,0001., which originated in a debt alleged to have been due from the late Rajah of Travancore to Mr. Hutch inson, who had been • resident at his court. Both Mr. Ilutchinaon and the raj tit were dead, and the East India Company having succeeded to the property of the rajah they were looked to for the payment of the debt by the re• presentatives of Mr. Hutchinson. The government of Travancore so far admittedthe justice of the claim,that after the rajah's death, they paid a portion of what:was due. In 1808 the East India Company sent eut instructions that the claim should not be satisfied till Mr. Hutchinson established its justice. • committee of the House of Commons how ever was appointed to investigate the claim in 1831, and their report was in favour of Mr. tlutchinson's claim. The House of Commons however rejected the second reading of the bill, and nothing was done in the matter till the pre sent time. The reason that the claim was not followed up was that litigation had been going on between the repre sentatives of Mr. Hutchinson. That litigation was now at an end, sad he therefore brought the matter before the !louse of Commons, as the only tribunal that was capable of doing justice in the case. ( Rear, bear.) He hoped the house would allow the matter to go before a select ern. mittee. Mr. LOWE, on the part of the government, opposed the ilereend reading. Mr. BRIGHT said he would support the second reading eitho rest that he was perfectly acquainted with the fntMINI brought forward by the hon. member for , but on the general ground that there was no Ohm tribunal for the investigation of such cases than the House of Commune. The subject might be investigated by a committee of the house, and when they had made their report the house could determine on the third reading. Mr. COLLIER also supported the second reading. Sir C. WOOD moved that the bill be read • second time that day six months. No one could read the evidence taken before the select committee in 1631, without coming to the conclusion that the circumstances out of which the claim originated were of a colourable and fraudulent character. It would be absurd at this distance of time to tar the people of India for a debt which it did not appear had ever been acknowledged by the Rajah of Travancore himself. Mr. HUME said tnat though he was not acquainted with the particulars of the claim, he would support the second reading on the general grounds alleged by the hon. member for Manchester. Sir J. W. HOGG said that the hon. member for Man chester and the hon. member for Montrose had both de clared they knew nothing about this matter, and yet they were going to support the second reading of the bill. That there was some equitable ground for this claim was the truth, but it was not the whole truth. Hon. gentlemen wanted inquiry; but there had been an inquiry already before the house, and the house rejected the claim. (Hear.) That claim was brought forward in 1831, when the renewal of the ludia Charter was under discussion, and nothing had bees heard of it ever since till the charter was about to expire, when all kinds of birds of prey were hover ing over the carcass of the East India Company. (Hear.) The report of the committee had been carried by the casting vote of the chairman only, 'and yet with that re port there were only six members of the House of Com mons who supported the second reading of the bill in 1832. Ile held in his hams a report of Mr. Hutchinson to the go vernment, statir g that the Rajah was fraudulently cheating the government, by not giving up the pepper, whereas, at that very time Is• was preventing him from dying so. Mr. T. DUNCOMDE said the hen. barouet hail alluded to the fact, that his name was on the back of the bill ; he begged to say that the reason was, that he was a member of the committee which in 1832 reportedthat the claim wasjust. Ile still considered it just ; sod he was surprised that in the face of the report the hon. baronet the President of the Board of Control should have denounced it as fraudulent and collusive. lie really began to think there was some thing more in :his claim than he had supposed now that he saw the East India Company so energetic. (Hear, hear.) Mr. MARSHALL sold he had made inquiries of Sir Amy Willoughby as to the nature of the accounts, and they appeared t t be oo minstrous to be brougit before that douse or any other tribunal. Ile recollected that pepper , was bought for 81 and resold to the same man for 170 with• is four month". (Hear.) The house then rtit For the bil! 4B Against it TILE NEW WRIT FOR HARWICH. Sir J. TYRELL moved that Mr. Speaker do issue a new writ for this borough, in the room of Mr. Peseick, un seated,_ . . Sir D. L. EVANS objected to the motion on the ground that there had not been seven days' notice, and on the ground that he had a notice on the paper for inquiry. Sir CF. GREY thought it desirable that the house should be informed ',bother the rule anplitd to the CASE., and pro •cl that the clerk should read both the rule and the re , rap t* of the liarwich e•minit . ce. - The Clerk then read the rale and the report. Mt IIEADLAM, as chairman of the committee, wished to COileft that Mr. Peacock was unseated under a vccial st a ate, iloc , ,:rinir. that if the eindidate W.Ol proved to have entered into a ontraet with any person winitever to 112CUTO hi, return the ele. - tion should be void. It might, therefore, he a question whether he was unseated for bribery lle hall no intention of op Los i ng the issuing of the writ, bat it THE EXPRESS, TIJESDAY..,EVENING, MAY 10, ► 853. . iiittit.,kl,4heirable to postpone it on account of no notion j •.n} been giien, and because he was *tout to move that tow evidence should be printed. Sir J. TYRELL was surprised that the hon. and learned gentleman was not prepared to lay down the law lame clearly, as he was one of thew gentlemen who came there without any obvious motive. (Hear, hear.) Sir F. KELLY was ilndentood to say that the statute alluded to by Mr. Hegelian did not include bribery. Lord IL RUSSELL thought that the cam was one to which the rule of the house did not apply ; but as bribery and corrupt practices had been alleged it was desirable that the evidence should be laid before the house before the writ was issued. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said much difficulty was created in these cases through the non-compliance of the committers with the provisions of the Controverted Election Act, which required them to declare whether or not the report ought to be issued. With regard to this old offender, Harwich— (lmighter)—be was ve much disposed never to allow it to ry have another writ. (Laughter.) They had always had Harwich before them—(mar, hear)—and if the writ were issued without previous inquiry there would be nothing to prevent Mr. Thomas Attwood from playing his old pranks over again, and selling the borough. At present, one, if not both, of the seats was entirely in the hands of Mr. Attwood. Mr. AGLIONBY begged to inform the hon. member for Finsbury that he was altogether mistaken in his view of the law. His impression was that there was no clause in the act referred to, no obligation on the committee, to report whether the writ should issue or not, or upon the house to adopt their recommendation as final. With re gard to the motion before the house he was disposed to agree with the hon. and learned member for Suffolk that the report of the committee in the Harwich ease did not fell within the rule of the house requiring seven days' notice previous to the motion for the new writ. The offence which the committee had reported was not certainly in cluded in the rule of the house, but appeared to be a cams magus. It was not bribery or treating, but it was as bad, if not worse, and he thought the house ought to have the evidence upon which the committee reported before they consented to issue a new writ. If the hon. member would not consent to withdraw his motion and give seven days' notice of moving the writ, he (Mr. Arlionby) would submit an amendment to adjourn the debate for a fortnight. Mr. DISRAELI suggested that, in order to avoid em barresament in these cases, it was advisable they should adhere to what was the understood rule of the house. He theugbt it better to adjourn the debate. Mr. °MILBURN w Is in favour of adjourning the debate, until the evidence was before them. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE called the attention of the hon. and learned member for Ceckernaouth to the 66th clause of the act, which directed the committee to decide whether the sitting member was elected, whether the election was void, and whether or not a new writ should issue, and their de termination in this respect was to be binding on all the parties. air J. PAKINOTON considered this was one of those Mese in which there was nothing in the report to justify the Waal of the writ. , Sir G. GREY remarked that the committee had reported that a compact had existed, by which 60 or 70 votes were transferred to one of the parties making that compact. This was a corrupt practice of the worst kind--(hear, bear) — and so far there was as strong a prima facie case in the re port for the seven days' notice of the intention to move for the issue of the writ as he had ever known. (Hear.) Sir J. TYRELL did not believe that any vote would be influenced one way or other by the perusal of the evi dence, and therefore saw no reason for postponing the motion in order that that evidence might be in the hands of wembers. _ The house then divided— For the motion ll6 Against it On the aiotion that the debate be adjourned for a tort- night Sir J. TYRELL moved that it be adjourned for seven days. Lord J. RUSSELL and Mr. DISRAELI both urged that that would be against the understanding with which the division had just beep taken—and Sir J. TYRELL withdrew the amendment, and the debate was ordered to stand adjourned to that day fort night. Sir DE L. EVANS gave notice that he should bring forward his motion for inquiring into these cases as a sub stantive one. RETURN 3 ORDERED.. On the motion of an Hoar. Maims for Mr. Lvcaa— Return showing for each of the colonies which have convict establishments the name of each clergyman or other reli gious instructor receiving a salary or allowance ; the reli gious denomination to which he belongs; the office or ser vice in virtue of which his salary or allowance is paid ; and the number in each of the above-mentioned colonies of the convicts of each religious denomination ; and the amount of salary or allowance paid to each such clergyman or religious instructor. THE ALLEGED IRISH COMPACT. On the motion fur going into committee of ways and 11101141., Mr. E. BALL rose and said—l am desirous of taking this 1 opportunity of repeating a question which I put on Friday I night, but to which I could then obtain no answer. The 1 house will recollect that it was stated in this house by a member of the house that en accredited agent of the present government, during the time Lord Derby was in power, I went to a number of members of the House of Commons representing Irish constituencies, and stated to them that he was authorised on the part of the government—(uo, no) —well, authorised on the part of the combined whig and Peelite party—to say that if they would assist that party to turn out the government of Lord Derby, they would, on attaining power, undertake not to impose a property tax on Ireland. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, this seems to me to have been a transaction so iniquitous in itself—(cheers) —it seems a proposal so directly opposed to the British constitution—daughter, and " hear, hear ")—so contrary to the practice which this house has now unanimously adopted, that when anything in the shape of corruption comes before them, they are resolved to meet it and destroy it; when it appears that if a member is petitioned against, if he has spent a few shillings on a constituency he is to be unseated; when the house has resolved that one mem ber who gave a place of 12s. a week, for which ample work was to be done, to influence a voter, was to be turned out of his seat; when, in another ease, that of the late member for Bridgaorth, who having had 22 charges made against him, was exonerated from 21 of them; yet ,when in that charge it was proved that, through an agent, a bill was paid which had been due long before he was a candi date—(hear, hear)—and that without that hon. gentleman being consulted or with his consent—he was unseated, I say, the country at large expects that the house which adopts such a pure system of election, and requires such integrity and honesty to be pursued by parliamentary electors, should have its members themselves upright, and that there should be no appearance of bribes among them, either in the shape of place or influence, or anything else, and that they should respond to the purity they require from elec tors. I know too little of the practice of this house not to require its indulgence, but it •ppean to me that this is a case so wicked and revolting, that I should have thought gentlemen opposite would instantly have risen —(cheers)— to meet and repudiate the charge, and to shake it off before the press had circulated it all over the kingdom. But, as the press has circulated it, it seems to me that the earliest opportunity should be given to the government to repudiate, to explain, or to deny it; and I beg to ask the hon. mem ber for Westmeath if what I have now stated is correct— (' hear, hear," and cheers)—and, if I have correctly un derstood him, whether he will be so good as to repeat to the house the statement that such overtures were made, and were acted on, and whether such a promise was made of giving away to the Irish party a ceitain portion of the taxation of this country—(hear, hear) —conditionally on the whigs getting into power, and receiving the loaves and fishes attached to office; and that part of those advan tagee would be given to Irish members who voted in the way proposed after they made a contract so unconstitutional. Besides this, not only were such bribes offered, but when the expectations on which they were founded were realised, those who were seated in the places which they offered bribes to secure refused to pay the price of them. (Hear.) I think the government ought to be grateful to me for giving them an opportunity of meeting this question, and hope it will not be said that I have not given the usual notice. I brought on the question on Friday, and received no answer. I then put a notice of the question on the table, and gave it to the clerk, who returned it to me as being informal, and said that I could not bring it forward. I have therefore taken the liberty of detaining you, sir, a few minutes in the chair, in order that I might put the question. (Hear, hear.) I am sure that all those members who are so anxious to put down bribery and corruption, and to forwarl inquiries and appoint committees on those subjects, will give me their support —(hear, hear)—will be glad to reciprocate with me and come forward and say this is a proper question. (" Hear, hear," and cheers.) beg to put the question I have men tioned to the hon. member for Westmeath. Hr. MAOAN—I believe the hon. gentleman has no strict right to put such a question to me. The rules of the house are that it should be put by order of the house, and through you, sir. But I pass over that. I think, however, I aro unfairly treated by the hon. gentleman, for if he had considered fur a moment he must have seen that a question of this sort, involving such grave considerations as he owns it dors, ought to have been put oa the paper. The hon. gentleman accounts for not having don' so; he says he thought he had pat it there. I shall be li-pey to answer hi s que ,tion it he will put it on the paper, and not place me in an unfair position. At the same time I sell say to the boo. gentleman that he is completely mistaken in every thing he has said with regard to—(the remainder of the sentence was lost in a shout of laughter and cheers. ) Mr. L. BALL—I should be sorry to he wanting in courtesy to the lion. gentleman, but I asked an hon. mem ber whether I should lirat communicate to the hon. gentle man the member for Westmeath that I intended to put the question, and he said, that he had told the bon. member for Westmeath that the question would be put. Lord J. RUSSELL—After what has been raid by the hon. member for Cambridgeshire I think it right to say a few words, in consequence of the impression that appears to be on the mind of the hum. gentleman. The hon. gentle man seems to think that some one authorised by the whig party before the lute government left office, made a com pal tit it they would not he parties to the imposition of the Income tax on Ireland, if the Irish members would vote ageing the late government. I can only say that, accord ing to my knowledge and belief, no person was so author ised, nor any such comport made. (Loud cheers.) L .rd A. VANE—A , the lion. member for Westmeath has e lid that n party of maim members upet.iiri were waited by an accredited agent of the whig party, who made an otter of certain cunditiona if they would join with the l'eclities to put out the fete govetzuoutt—u the hoc. new- bit has saiditheit o and it has appeared in all the paper, I I not issued what remedy was to In adeeted. poet. submit, whetherm justice to the boo. member forWestmeath objection which was now made that had the effect of pose, and to the house, he should not state the grounds on *shish he poning the bill would postpone the issuing Of Cie ants toe made that statement, and who the secrelited agent was. boroughs effected by the bill. The bill applied to Chatkamo (Hear, hear.) I think some elucidation of these points will Rochester, Sandwich, Portsmouth, Plymouth, H arw i c h , be satisfactory to the house and the country. (lean) and Pembroke ; and it awi it was moved for fur oily of th e y Mr. MAGAN—With regard to the notice which has been 1 places it must be suspended till the Lill was p ...ed. h o e given me, I certainly heard a rumour that it was the in- at' some of the questions which were now before the Do e n. tention of the hon. gentleman to put the question , but at yard Committee must come before the house, he e mild pow the same time there was a rumour that it was to be openly , pone the introduction of the bill until Friday se', might, bat pat on the paper. It has not been put on the paper. lam not for any longer time. placed in an awkward position. I might name a gentle- Lord A. VANE here rose, and was understood to he • mat, who was absent. I will not do so until the question is about to ask a eitiestion, when put on the paper. I will nut strike a man behind his back. Tho SPEAKER interposed and said that the ruble lord (Cheers, " oh," and confusion.) I will answer the ques- I had already put a question oar going into comme ee. hon if it is put on the paper. Sir F. KELLY said he understood the noble lord to • Lord A. VANE (amidst much noise and confusion) was pone the introduction of the bill in question tint 1 after the understood to say that the hon. member for Westmeath had report of the Dockyard Committee was brought up. used the words "accredited agent," and he should have ord J. RUSSELL—No, until Friday se'aniieit. thought the government would have been anxious to have Sir F. KELLY was understuo Ito ask if toe writ fur the question answered. (" Oh," " question," and cheers.) Chatham would issue ? Colonel DUNNE (who spoke amid much confusion) Lord J. RUSSELL-1 propose that the writs oil be sus• thought the scene now going on was not very creditable to pended. the house. As an Irish member he had felt deeply the THE INCOME TAX. observations made in the newspapers with regard to the The house having then gone into committee ri ways so d conduct of the Irish members. If the Irish mem- means, the discussion on the income tax reselut. ni was To bets had made such a bargain as had been alleged turned by he did not think it was dishonourable, for if I Mr. It. PALMER, who moved the ten, Jelment of he wasabout to support a government, he should which he had given notice—viz., after the word. •• for every expect some pledge front them as to the measures they 20s. of the annual value or amount thereof." he'll ° such would introduce, and, if he had been a party to such a bar- annual value of any lands, tenements, or le r• •iitainente gain, he would not shrink from it. But, as it was all over being the net annual value thereof, atter One allows the town well known who was alluded to, why should ante made for repairs, insurance, and monieement." not the question be answered (as we understood) ? Ile The hon. gentleman spoke in so low a tone of yoke as to thought the way in which Irish members had been spoken render it impossible for us to fu nish a tonneau, report of of in the public prints, said to be the organs of the govern- his remarks ; but the purport of his observations, es we un. ment, was shameful, and he felt it moat deeply. The allu- derotood them, was this. Ile had fully made uo his mind sions which had been made to certain members were so that this was to be a permanent, an d not a tereourary tax; clear, that it would be better for the members who were and, as they were about to renew it for seven so ars, it be: ' known to be aliuded to to get up and say that they had log quite certain that in 1500 it would be imam renewed, I done what it was stated they had. The matter ought to be this was the obvious opportunity for the eerie eltural into. cleared up ; but it would be for the advantage of the public rest to endeavour to get the impost reviewed so far as ire service that such discussions as this should not take place incidence affected them unfairly. His argument WSJ of the is that house. The newspapers had given a challenge, and simplest character—that the nominal value of pr perty was 'mentioned names, and why should not this question be no criterion of the actual returns to the proprietor; and straightforwardly answered ? his proposal was that is assessing land a deutietion from Mr. MALINS said that these proceedings were not the gross rental should be made of certain thanes —such as creditable to the house. lie had heard the hon. member for repairs, insurance, and management. The Chancellor for Westmeath say that the Irish members were waited on of the Exchequer had himself admitted that there were by an accredited agent of the I'eelite and whig parties, who peculiar burdens on the land ; and the right boo. gentleman made this proposal to them—" If you will vote against Lord would find some difficulty in offering any valet argument Derby's government, we will protect you against the im- against a proposition to place the farmer on an equal foot. position of the income tax." Now, either that was correct ing, in respect to allowances, under this tax, with shop. Of it was incorrect. (" Hear, hear," and a laugh.) If it keepers. The right hon. gentlemen would probooly memo was incorrect, it was the duty of the hon. member for that they (the country gentlemen):were not istoled to urge Westmeath to explain and retract his assertion ; but if it such an amendment as this, inasmuch as when Mr. Disraeli was correct it was a grave imputation against the great was in office he hod not offered any such con party now in office, and at a time when we heard so much cession to the land ; but the answer to tl at was, that ,of purity, and discussions arose as to whether writs should Mr. Disraeli had not brought forward an exteio;on of the Issue ; when gentlemen were unseated by the conduct of legacy duty; and it was this proposed increased weight of parties over whom they had no control whatever, when taxation to be thrown on the l an d that justified sad re to-night there was a discussion whether tha writ for liar- quired such a modification as ho (Mr. Palmer) asked the with should issue ; because the house wished to government and the house to make. preserve purity of election, he would ask it it was Mr. ALCOCK should have been glad to see the income decent or proper, when an hon. member rose and stated tax extended to all classes, even to wages; and it would be that the accredited agent of two great parties had made a remembered that he had given notice of an proposal which, if it was made, was most discreditable, that amendment to that effect on Mr. Disraell's budget. tomb a statement should be allowed to pass unnoticed. At present only 5,400,000/. was obtained train the income There was no one in the house who did not perfectly well tax ; and the proportion of payment was about this—et know who the accredited agents were, and it was due to people in the United Kingdom paid nothing, and the pith them that that imputation should either be verified or over- person paid at the rate, on the average, of 13/. per a n num . thrown. (Hear, hear.) lle (Mr. Alcock) would be glad to see a direct too like this Lord J. RUSSELL—in answer to the hon. member for brought down to persons obtaining wages of ten shillings Cambridgeshire-1 stated that to the best of my knowledge a week, the result of which would be that 5,000,000 end belief no one accredited by the whig party made any more persons would contribute, and that the average such compact. (Hear. hear.) I ask the hou. gentleman then would be thirty shillings a head per annum. who has just sat down whether he believes me or does not If the right hon. gentleman extended the income tax to believe me 1 (Great cheering.) I ask the hon. gentleman wages, and derived from it 13,000,000/. instead of 5,400,0005. if he me its to sup that I made any such agreement or bars it would enable them not only to reduce the tea duty to le, , gain with the Irish members, and, if he does not mean to and to get rid of the soap tax, but to reduce the tobacco duty say that, let him say whom he means. (Loud cheers.) from 3s. 2d. a lb. to Is. per lb., and to abolish the malt and Mr. MALINS—Every statement of the noble lord will hop duties. The labour.ng man would be Cn coiner by be received by me with implicit credence ; but the noble such% change to a considerable extent. Ile calculated that lord stated that ho had not authorised any one to make the: savings in the year on ten, soap, malt, oed tobacco such a compact. (Hear, hear.) I wish to impress on the to the labourer, who earned 12s. a week, would be 2/.3i. house that that is not the question. (Hear, hear.) The per year, so that even if he had to pay income 1..1 he would question is not whether the noble lord authorised such an gain U. 4s. a year by the change. He w..s surprised offer, but whether accredited agents did its fact make it. that the right hon. gentleman who expressed so much Tn. (Hear, hear.) If the noble lord has accredited agents who pithy for those who paid the income tax, did not reserve go so much beyond their authority—(cheers, and cries of some of it for those who paid the malt and hop duties, or " spoke," amidst which the hon. member sat down.) fur those who paid 4,000,000/. of tobacco duty. It was Mr. G. MOORE—We have been a long time beating calculated that 56,000,000 lbs. of tobacco was consumed in about the bush, I will go to the point. (" Hear, hear," and this country, yet only 28,000,000 paid duty ; so that the dd. cheers.) Loyself know nothing of thistransaction. (" Hear," ference must be either smuggled or adulterated. It was and laughter.) I ant in no way influenced by the declaration no use to say that smoking was a dirty prectiee, for they which it is stated was made, for the simple reason that I had a smoking-room in that very house. (" Dear, Lear, never heard it. But I have heard, and every one has and laughter.) With regard to the legacy duiv, the pro- heard who the accredited agent is, and I will go to the position of the government was bailed with sen4actiou by point by asking the right hon. gentleman the member for the whole country, and there was but one opinion as to this Wells to say . whether he was the agent for such a purpose. manliness and courage of the right hon. gentleman who (Great cheering and laughter.) proposed it. (Hear.) Mr. HAYTER-1 beg to thank the boo. member for , Mr. MILES thought that the budget of the government Mayo for bringing this question to a point. I have some ' dealt hardly with the owners of real property. 'limy were reason to complain of the course taken by the hon. mem- now to be subjected to the legacy duty in addition to ton her for Cambridgeshire. I saw him as he entered the and ether burdens, and under such circumstances he thought house, and I asked him if he was about to they were fairly entitled to ask the Chancellor of the Es put a question to me on this matter? lie replied chequer to assent to the proposition of his lion. triead. that he had submitted a notice which he had placed on (Hear.) the table, but on account of some informality he should Captain SCOBELL observed, in reply to Mr. Miles, that be unable to put the question in the form and at the time the amount of poor rate and other 'barges on the land had he had originally decided to do so. I begged him to put considerably diminished since 1519, and there was every the question in a formal manner, so that I might prospect that the landed interest would continue to prosper. be enabled to give a plain answer to a plain question— Tho object of all parties ought to be to make a fair (hear, hear)—and had he had the courtesy to have complied and equitable budget. Such a budget he believed the with my request, much that has passed, and painfully present to be, and such also was the opinion of the reentry pawed, in the house to-night might have been spared. It was a budget of equivalents, and must be token as a (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman took occasion when I whole. He could not, therefore, support the propoeitiou of was not present to refer to this matter. Ile knew, for I the hon. member for Berkshire. (Cheers.) had said so, that I was anxious to be present, and I trust Mr. PHILIPPS said that his own feeling was is favoar the house will not think that I now shrink from, or at any of a graduated income tax, but he felt there were great time wished to shrink from, giving an answer to that guess difficulties in the way of carrying out such a eraduation. tion. Another hon. gentleman, the member for Wicklow, Looking at the budget as a whole, he was prepared to accept also came to me, and said The would ask a similar question'; it as a choice between something and nothing—between' and I told hint that I should be obliged to him if he would distinct scheme of taxation and no scheme at all. defer it until to-morrow, and put it on the paper, as I should Mr. L. HEYWORTH reminded the house that the its. then know the distinct Charge, which up to this moment I position of a tax of 5,000,0001. per annum had been the did not know. I told him I was deairous of commas- medium of 'emitting 11,060,0001., and still leaving the nicatiog with another honourable member before answer- Exchequer iii a better state than it was previously. The ing a question Involving such • charge. (Hear, hear.) country was every day becoming more and more enlighte No arrangement was made with me by the two hon. mein- ened on the subject ; and having heard it stated that the hers, and the question has arisen which I have not for a working classes strongly objected to the lowering of the tax moment misunderstood, but no positive question has been so as to make it apply to them, he was happy to say that he put to me. I now understand the hon. member for Cam- had attended meetings at which after hearing the matter bridgesbire to say that some agent, or alleged agent, of the put fairly belore them they had nut expressed any %los party now called the whig party, during the discussion of sition• the financial scheme of the late Chancellor of the Ezehe- Mr. BUCK wished hon. gentlemen opposite would, is quer, took on himself to attend on • body of Irish gentle- connexion with this subject, eensider the case of one of the men, amid to state that he was authorised to make this most industrious classes in this country—he meant the arrangement, namely, that if they gave their votes for the small freeholders, of whom there were not lees than 4,000 purpose of overthrowing the late government, the govern- in the county which lie represented (Devonshire). Here meat which would be founded on the ruins of the late were persons who for the must part had acquired land by government would not impose the income tax on Ireland. *Or own industry, and upon senora the burdens al land Do I understand the hon. gentleman rightly ?—(Mr. Ball fell very heavily. ' was understood to assent.) Then I will say I never autho- Mr. AGLIONBY said they were told that they must rised any person or body ofpersons to make any such coins take this measure ea a whole ; but admittieg that, be had munieation to any person—l never attended any meeting never heard, in the course of his experience, that because ? ta m life, that lam aware, of Irish gentlemen—l never they accepted a measute as a whole, they were not to ta to any person at any time that I authorised them deavour to amend any of its parts. (Cheers from the op hi my name to state, that in the event of the overthrow position.) if they failed in their efforts to maid it, it of Lord Derby's government, the government which took would still be open to them to take it with its evils. He the place of Lord Derby's government would undertake not thought nothing could be more fair and reasonable than the be impose the income tax on Ireland. I have now answered proposition of the hon. member fur Berkshire. the question of the hoe. gentleman, and if he had put it Colonel HARCOURT having voted for the proposal of plainly, as he ought to have done, he would have got that the late Chancellor of the Exchequer, for continuing the answer before this. (Loud cheers!) income tax for three years, with precisely the same provi- Mr. E. BALL—I bog to say that I did put the question eions as to land and houses as the present measure eon fully and fairly on Friday night last, and I do not under- tained, he could not reconcile it to his sense of justice to stand the right hon. gentleman's saying I never did put it. vote for an amendment which woald, by taking a portion In the next place, I beg to say that if the right hon. gentle- of the tax from land and houses, throw a heavier tat on man thought he was the person on whom the imputation trades and professions. If the proposal were however rested—(" oh, oh," cheers, and confusion)—he ought to brought forward as a substantive measure, he should sup have been toe eager to deny it to require notice of the port its principle as one of justice. question. (" Hear, heir," and cheers.) Mr. SPOONER was not aware the house came to any din Mr. MAGAN—The mistake which has been made is in tinct vote on the income tax as proposed in the budget of his taking it for granted that I meant the right hon. gentleman right hon. friend (Mr. Disraeli) —and had the qui stioo bees, opposite. (. Hear, bear," - -- hter, and cheers.) The brought directly under discussion he should ha v e voted, Sr . . . ' , ether, he had always done, s - Met a property tax in time of peaces . . , , words I used were these—(l spoke in the plural numne., and the right hon. gentleman is not in the p 1 .ral number) —(l..ughter and cheers)—l send certain persons, accredited agents, and using the word " accredited, ' made this com munication. They were three private Irish members. (" Name," and cheers.) I will not name them till a notice is put on the paper, so that they may be in the house to hear me. I believe some of them are not now in the house. Sir J. SHELLEY had hoped, after what had already oc curred, these bickerings among bon. gentlemen would have ceased. As regarded the hon. member for Cambridgeshire he was not surprised at the sensitiveness that hon. gentle man had shown, for nothing could he so odious and detest able to him as promises not fulfilled. The hon. member must feel that, for when we looked back to the way in which the wbig government had been displaced—(great cheering)—by Lord Derby's promising his party from one and to the other, that they should have protection back again—(cheers and confusion)—he was not surprised at the sensitiveness of the hon. member for Cambridgeshire. (Cheers.) Mr. G. MOORE wished to explain that in putting the question he had to the right hon. gentleman the member for Wells he did not wish to point him out as the person indicated, but he had heard everywhere that he was so in dicated, and he thought it fair and right to terminate a matter which must have heen exceedingly annoying to the right hon. gentleman. That was his sole reason for putting the question. Colonel KNOX wished to ask to know whether three Irish members did not wait on the meeting alluded to, and were authorised as a deputation to make the offer which had been mentioned? Mr. HAYTER—I wish the hon. gentleman would put his question on the paper. llowever, I will answer him now, by saying that no such thing ever occurred. (Cheers.) Mr. J. S. WORTLEY said his right hon. friend must be greatly obliged by having the question put to W.', and he hoped that the matter was now done with. (Loud cheers.) lie did not think any one ever really entertained any belief in the truth of the statement—(sheers, counter-cheers, and confusioe)—and as it hail been denied, he hoped the house would now proceed to the business Wore it (Loud cheers.) The matter then dropped. DISFRANCHISEMENT OF PERSONS IN DOCK YARDS. Sir F. BARING put a question to his noble friend friend (Lord John Russell) with reference to shill of which he had given notice for disfranchising labourers and per. sone employed in dockyards. Lord J. RUSSELL (who was very imperfectly heard) said that in the lint place the bill he propo.e.l was not at all lquiiiled on the inquiry now going on hi f,ro the com mittee, but on the report at the committee which sat on the election for the borough of Chatham. When that report was brought before the house there was some question made as to the issuing of the writ, and it was asked if it was - "Y , &trail The tax was peculiarly severe as against land—for, while there was a deduction on acceunt of houses for loss of writ when tenants ran awk,, in the case of land no deduction was allowed. Mr. DRUMMOND observed that it was admitted on all hands that land bore mare burdens than any other class of property. (" No, no," from Mr. Bright.) Oat hon. member dissented from this view ; but it was generally ad- mitted by the house, and it lied been acknowledged by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (near, hear.) The right hon. gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) proposed to allow certain qualificati,ns in imposing the tax on land, one of which was a deduction for management. This, how ever, could not affect the ease of the large proprietor; the small freeholder would obtain no benefit from it. He thought it would be more advantageous to discuss there details in committee on the bill. (near, bear.) Mr. BRIGHT had heard the statement as to land ' , deg so he wily taxed ever since he had been in that house,.tld the course of legislation of late years bad limn to diminish the exclusive privileges of land, and now they found the Chancellor of the Exchequer was about to include a large number of farmers under the if:come tax, and ti impose the legacy duty on real property (" Hear, hear," from the opuosition.) Ile applauded the right hon. gentleman or so doing; and that, being convinced the course he ook when a young man was wrong, ho was determiued to bandon it, and carry out what he felt to be the oolitic' prind; le. But the right lion. gentleman appeared to be 1.11 somewhat of a difficulty in this matter. When he brought forward his budget he stated that land paid on the eerie, instead of on the net income, and therefore paid Pd. iii.tcad of id. is the pound to the income tax; but, at the same time he urged that no discrimination should be made In the case of land, and that all incomes should pay alike- There wan, as it appeared to him (Mr. Bright), greet discrepancy in those two statements. He however thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer had committed a sleht mistake. Ile seemed to look only at the mode in which land was charged, forgetting to take into account the wide in which other property was charged. If the right hos• gond, man would turn his attention to trades he nisi gulf! sure lie would find that they required an eV" deduction to land. Take for instance the manufactunag traders. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had re fermi to insurance as a charge upon land. But Montana was the smallest charge the landowner had to pay. Land wanted no insurance, and all he had to pay u; na the farm-buildings, and even for them he was earned tram the stamp duty. The manufacturer was equally eonte to pay iiieurance and to a far I weer exteut, but the income tax no allowance was made for it, but he h.,d to pay upeu is ito profit. In 5,015, C l the menufacuter paid Po/. or :at a year for incur mi.'. of this, 100. would go to tho exchequer. But the at!t regarded it all as profit, and upon every pound thus pata