The Express. — London, England, 1848-03-28 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN HOUSE OF LORDS.—HONDAY, MARCH 27. Tho LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat at 5 o'clock. PRIVATE. RUMNESS. THIRD RRADLNO.—Watron's Hosp ital Estate Sill. PUBLIC BUSINESS. THIRD RESDlNGlL—Aciadnistrouou of oaths, Re.: Court of Chancery; Queen's Prison ; PETItIONS.-13v Lord Cveravviv fnl4a o dd Fellows, ot Odd Fellows, praying that they might be legalawd.—Lord Lyrriu.v. front a place in timer/het, and Lord RIFDCWAIA from place. in lane county. against the management cleave in the government educe. Ronal scheme.—Bishop of °stoop, train Bath, sod a place in Che shire, against the admission of Jews to parliament. —Rani of Lasts- DriS, Men Aberdeen, in favour of sanitary reform. NOTICE OF MOTION—The Duke of Rtemscam, on Turodur week, the 4th pros., to put a quill:lan co to the way in which the corn overages are taken. BAIL IN CASES OF MANSLAUGHTER. The Earl of ELLEN BOROUH wi.hed to know when the noble and learned lord opposite intended to move the second reading of this hill ? Lord CAMPBELL had laid the hill on the table on behalf of Lord Denman, who would take charge of the second read ing on his return from the circuit. PENINSULAR MEDALS. The Duke of RICHMOND asked when the medals to the veteran officers, non-commissioned officers, soldiers and aai'ors, engaged in the PeLinsular war, were to be issued, and suggests& if any ,urther delay w as to take place, that the ribbons be forthwith sent to all who have ploy,rl their claim, with permission to wear them. In the year 1846, Lord John Russell, in reply to a memorial to her Majesty, communicated to him that a medal should be struck for the purpose of bring given to the officers and men enTaged in the Peninsular war, and be wished to know when they w re to be issued ? He thougr.t t• c alkali and men were entitled to this distinction, en:. it ought not to be further delard . Medals fur the victories won in India aiateen mo nths ago had been distributed, whilst many of the Peoinsular officers had died since ? made his motion on tho subject. He hoped the meda's would he given to their representatives. Earl GREY said no clay wh . ch could be avoided bad taken place. It eas a work of consi icrable labour ti ascer tain who were en itled to !he e mt des; the investization bad, however, been near y umipleted. An accident rad oc curred to the distinguished ..rtist, Mr. Wynn, which had caused the work to be thrown back. He was afraid that medals could not be given to the tvpresentativel ot the per sor s engaged in tho Peninsular bottles, as it would be almost impossible to investigate the clams of the various individuals who might se. k to obtain mciLle. After a few words from the Earl of IIAnDWICE.B and the Eerl of AVCKLAND, which were inaudible in the gal lery, the subjec . dropped. Their lordships adjourned at half.past five o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MON DAT, Msaca 27. The SPEAKER took the. ChM? at 4 o'clock. 1310IIAIOS. Seemed reading of railwayUEL Id* tary Raithay News in par I. PIC VIRAT RE iDlNGS.—Parikenre Eteetors ( ; Administration of Oaths, tar., alert of Cherrorry ; Billsßate, and Tame) SECOND READlNG.—ltsolvent Debtors tludia) 8111. COMMITTER.—Atemp Duties Assimilation ; Property Tali Bills. THIRD READING. —Borough Police Superannuation and But. NOTICE OF MOTION. Peseta:6 Caesarea. Mr. F. O'CONNOR, on Thursday, the 10th of April, to pretest a pentane frstn the national chartists of the kingdom, and to move the following re solution, nun amendment on the Met order of the day, on that day. "that ibis house recognises the principle that labour to the source of all wealth, that the people are the legitimate source of all power. and that they have the first right w partake of the fruits of their own in dustry; that taxation without represeetatun is a tyranny whi:h should be resisted; that the reeoaries of the coney would be beet thy:loped by representatives chosen by the lathering ciaeees hying upan the pre...id:ref sober anti induatikuts pureed:A; anal that, to reCorthill4/ the shove great truths, this home will adapt the prin ciples embodied in the people's charter—viz., vote by ballot, annual pathantents, universal suffrage, equal electoral districts, and the pay nest of members." ('a strust. l'kernmer, tomorrow (this MIR), to ask a question of the government relative to the taking possession of the port of Nicaragua. rOLANO. —Mr. Astray, on an early day, to move an address that her Majesty will not content to my new territorial arrangements that may be arnved at between AUSUIZ, aod Rivets, which do ' not secure to the Polish people their liberties and their terraory. NEW WRIT. On the motion of Mr. TUFNELL, a new writ was or dered for the election of a burgess to serve for the bor nigh of Devonport, in the room of John Rorflly, Ext., who, since his election, had accepted the office of Ler Majesty's Solicit3r. General. DERBY ELECTION. Mr. Chalmers, of the Committee C:erks' Office, app eire.l at the b and delivered in the min.tea of ev dence taker before the Derby election committee. RYE ELECTION. 31r. DIVETT appeared at the bar, and reported to the house that the committee appointed to try the merits of the petition ccmplaining of an undue election and return for the borough of Rye, has res:lvtd that Herbert Mascali Cur teis, Eat, had not hem duly elected a baron to serve in the present parliament for the boro-iqh and port of Rye, and that the last election for the said b 'rough was a void election. The ham. snail:or further informed tit• bout:. that the committee had agreed to a resolution tc the effect that the petition contained allegatiens of bribery and treating ; that no proof VZS offered in support of these allen tions, which the commivee held to be unfounded, and that so much of the mid petition was frivolous and vexatious, and they had therefore ordered that the costs and expenses be forthwith paid by the petitioners to the said Herbert Muesli Curtfie, Esq. CHES'T'ER AND HOLYHEAD. RAILWAY (POWER TO PIIR.CHIOOI, &c.l BILL. Mr. OLYN moved that this bill be now read a could time. Mr. OROGAN oppesed the bid on the ground that it nipowered the railway empany to parches and establish steam boats between Holyhead and Dublin, and thus gaw them a monopoly in the transit of passengers. time as an amendment that the bill be read a second his day six months. Mr. F. FRENCH seconded the amendment. Mr. LABOUCHERE said that the principles involved in this bill bad been long under the consideration of the govern ment, but as yet he was not prepared to offer an opinion upon it. The subject would go to the general committee on railways for that committee to report its opinion thereon. Be advised that the bill should now be showed a second reading; and as it could not be committed until after Baster, abundant time we:A be aff;irded for the expressim of an opinion on the prictiple by the general committee on railways, by the Railway Board, and by the Board of Trade. By this course the house would not he precluded, if it so thought fit, from throwing out the bill at a future stage. Sir R. H. INGLIS thought the house was fully compe tent now to express an opinion up.n the principle of the bill, and he did not see wty in this case the ordinary rules of the horse should be departed from. Mr. FAGAN oppos d the tuff, on seeonnt of the moirr poly which it would confer upon the railway company. Sir W. HEATHCOTE said, in hie judgment. no case hid been made out to warrant a deviation from the course usu ally pursued by the hours. Mr. HUDSON supported the wooed reading of the bill, which in principle was identical with two other bills which bad already received a second rending. Sir D. L. EVANS expressed a hope that the house would not refuse to advance he bill its per sent stage. Mr. HUME was d opinion the house ought to be cautioas before it granted suit a monopoly to any company. As the question was to go Wore the general committee on railway', as well as the railway boned, it would he better to suspend the proceeding with the till until fu.l information by a re, port on the subject was laid before the house. With this view be moved that the debate be now adjourned. Mr. FORSTER seennded the proposition ef the hon. member for Montrose, for an adjourr merit of the debate. Sir C. DOUGLAS ' opposed the adjournment, as being calculated to inflict a great haruship upon the promoters of the bill. Mr. MACGREGOR recommended the house to adopt the suggestion made by the right hon. the President of the Board of Trade. Mr. LABOUCHERE repeated that he wished to be un derstood as at present offering no opinion upon the principle of the bill, but at the ;ime time he admAted that if the powers sought were to lie grunted re all, tilt . , company bad every elides to have their MUM tiered. After a few words in explanatirn from Sir R H. 'Notts, Mr. GLADSTONE expressed his surprise thet two bike, c o n ferring on other companies similar powers to those sought by the present bill, should have p peed a second reading, without the special notice r f the hnuse having been called to the trinciple of the measure by the railway department of the government. Though he conferees] he entertained the strongest prejudice against the pr.rileges which this bill would confer, still he triought fair aLlsaffitiaat grounds en. Wed for its second reading. Mr. MANGLES expressed surprise at the oppaeition of feral by Irish members to this VD, which w,ulil boa bens tit to the Irish commun , ty generally. Lord RENDLESHAM .0 .parted the stcon.l reading. UME withdrew I.it amendment for the ad;nura- a few wonls from Mr. Gxecatt and Col. DUNN e. notion for the second reading was agreed to. 'UNDEE AND PERTH RAILWAY—(TAY CROSSING) BILL. the motion for the second reading of this bill, H. H. DRUMMOND moved that it should be rea,. a time that , ley a 1 secuths. DUNCAN supported the hill, and stated tile every idle works had hese sanctioned by the Admiralty. IL DRUMMOND opposed the second riuding house divided—For the second reading B9 Ag.sinst it 57-32 lINBURGH AND PERTH RAILWAY (WITH BRANCHES) BILL. the motion for the second reeling of this bill, ELLICE, jun.. opposed it, observing that the scheme already been three times rejected, and ought not to again been introduced to the house. As no new 6:men aces had been urged, be hoped the house would sustain decision. He moved that the bill be reed a second time t day six months. tajor BERMFORD sail the bill had been lost last year die committee by a mak rity of one. He complained of • .atement which hod hers, pat forward by the promotors of .he bill as to his conduct on the C 4 ccarittse. an I acid th it the committee haul bees iseriesset: *: a heist .bat sufficient had not been shown. r. LOCK denied that this w,,s this sane mistime whi„li been rojectul on a fernier I:eur C. BIZ GCE sil.er.t the C.. a waste of :nailer h suss tne second reading .... 125 At•sim: it ARPOOL. MANE;ii-BeREII, AND NEWCASTLE 'UNCTION RAILWAY (ABANDONMEN T AND ISSOLUTION) BILL. ;he !notion for the second reading of thi. bill, .W. PATTEN reposed it ou ground that the me et the shareholders were favourable to the line being Lord R I Mr. HI. meat. • i A'ter a the meth, DUNE • On the 1 , Mr. H. second tit • . Mr. DI part of tb Mr. 11. Toe ho EDIN 1 (In tbl Mr. El had alma .11. have oga Manus h . its dtch,i, that day Major in the cc statemel the hill , commits traffic Is Mr. I i had bee MAio. . T :le ! i i 1 LIVEi I JUN DISI On :I Mr.' jority • >ta. . . THE EXPRESS, TUESDAY , EVENING, MARCH 28, 1848. proceeded with. He moved that the bill be read a second time that dal sir months. Kr. HLM supported the bill , c ontending that a majority were in favour of the dissolution. Mr. ELLIOT also supported the measure. Mr. BRIGHT said the bill came before the house under false pretences ; its object was merely to transfer power from one set of directors to another, and there was no bona fide intention of abandoning the line. Mr. HUDSON believed that the bill was not promoted by the shareholders generally. He, therefore, thought the house ought not to went to it. Mr. F OS TER and M r . AGLIONBY supported the s e cond msdin The house divided.—For the second reading 76 Against it 74-2 The bill was then read a second time. NORTH STAF RDFOAT W SHIRE RAILWAY (DEVIA TION ELLINGTON ) BILL. On the motion for the second reading of ibis bill, Mr. HINDLEY moved that it be read this day sir months, OD the ground that it would do an injury to an individual — Sir H. Every—without conferring any public advantage. Mr. COLVILE seconded the amendment. Mr. RICARDO said that the line which was before the h o use was the very line proposed . by Sir H. Every himself when he proposed one in opposition to the North Stafford shire Company. The howe divided.—For the second reading ..143 Against it The bill was then read a second time. SLIGO ELECTION. Mr. GRANGER, as chairman of the Sligo election committee, reported that Mr. J. P. Somers was not duly elected at the lust election, and that the said election was a void deotion. Sir H. BARRON moved that a new writ be issued for the election of • member for the borough of Sligo in the room of Mr. Somers.—Ordered. TURNPIKE TRUSTS. In answer to Sir J. DIJCILWonTH, Sir G. GREY said that he could not hold out any hope of bringing in a bill on the subject of turnpike trusts with an expectation of p.ssing it through the house in the present session. A bill was prepared on the subject of highways, and it would also include turnpike trusts. It was not in tended to have the same separate control which caused the rejection of the bill tut session. COMPULSORY ENFR OPYHOLDS.ANCHISEMENT OF C In answer to Mr. Aoetorsiz, Sir G. GREY said that a bill was prepared on this 'ab ject. and was now in the hands of the Lord Chancellor. He hoped to introduce the bill at an early period. IRISH REGISTRATION AND GRAND JURY BILLS. In answer to Mr. Itocne, Lord J. RUSSELL said that the government had prepared bills on these subjects ; but he must state that it would be only misleading him, when there was no chance of • day for bringing them forward, if he were to say that he would soon bring them under the notice of the house. EXPULSION OF TENANTRY IN GALWAY. Mr. P. SCROPE wished to know if it was the intention of governmeat to prosec ute the perpetrator of the outrages which he brought before the house on Friday T Sir G. GREY said that he immediately communicated with the Lord-Lieutenut of Ireland on the appearance of Major M'Kie" report, with a view of calling the attention of the Irish government to it, in order to take such imme diate steps as the law would allow. He was informed, how ever, by the Solicitor-General that, in the present state of the law, • criminal prosecution could not be instituted. The subject, howeverovas under the consideration of government. Sir R. PEEL wished to know from the right hon. gentle. I man the Secretary for Ireland whether it was not the duty of the police in the county of Galway to make a report of the circumstances to the government, and whether they were not guilty of a dereliction of duty in not reporting the facts T Sir W. SOMERVILLE could not say why the polioe had toot made a report. lie would make an inquiry on the subject. Dr. POWER wished to know whether Mr. Blake was still in the commiss i on of the peace ? Sir W. SONIERVILLE was not able to say. IRISH POOR IN EDINBURGH. In answer to an lioN. Measliest, Sir G. GREY said that he had received a representation that two Irish families had been sent out of Edinburgh, and referred the matter to the Lord Advocate, who directed a strict investigation to be made into the circumstances. Pend ing that he could not pledge himself to produce any cor respondence on the su THEbject. MILITIA. Ise answer to Sir W. J °lmre, Sir G. GREY said that ample notice would be given when the government intended to introduce the measure for elm. bodying the militia. ELECTION RECOGNISANCES DILL. Mr. S. WORTLEY said he had given notice of his inten tion to move the Election Recogniminces Bill before the other orders on the ground of privilege, but, as it might be inconvenient to the house to proceed with the measure to day. he would suggest that it should be taken on the same ground before the notices of motion to-morrow. Sir R. H. 'INGLIS could not admit that this we, a mea sure of privilege at all, and intimated, that when brought forward, he should oppose the bill. Lord J. RUSSELL suggested that the measure should stand for consideration to-morrow, and this was understood to be agreed to. ISSUING OF NEW WRITS. Mr. HUSIE moved—" That in all cues where the seat of any member has been dec'ared void by an election commit tee, on the grounds of bribery or treating, no motion fur the issuing of a new writ shall be made, without previous notice being given in the votes." He observed that he moved this now as a matter of privilege, and he urged the adoption of the r solution so calculated greatly to convenience the haus. The question having been put, Sir R. H. INGLIS said it was the duty of the house to issue a writ where I,4l3llCies occurred unless good cause were shown to the contrary, and in his opinion such a gene ral resolution as this might in certain instances operate very prejudicially. Mr. B. COCHRANE rose to order, and asked if this was a question of privilege ? The SPEAKER said the question had been put from the chair, and therefore it was, compe'ent now for the house to consider it. Sir R. H. INGLIS bad spoken upon that assumption. If the question were pressed he must divide against it. Mr. HUME thought there would not be a single member opposed to this resolution ; of course, if opposed, he should withdraw the resolution. Mr. AGLIONBY thought the practical convenience of this rule would be eery great. The house was now fre quently placed in very awkward predicaments by racitions being made for new writs before evidence was before them. The delay which the rule would occasion would only be a delay of one day. Lord J. RUSSELL said he feared this resolution could not be pressed to a division now, but certainly, whenever it was, it s hould have his decided support. He agreed that great practical inconvenience resulted trout the present system. The motion was then by leave withdrawn. Mr. FOLLETT'S CASE. Mr. B. COCHRANE wished to ask • question of the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to the case of a Mr. Pallett, who had been incarcerated in Whitecross-sweet Prison for non-payment of a debt of 21., recovered from him in the Whitechepel County Court. The hon. member stated that Mr. Pollen was • clerk upon the London and Brighton. Railway ; and he then read from the Daily News a statement of the hardships and indignities which the gentleman he referred to underwent, rind to which attention has already been called in this journal. He proceeded to sly that alr. Follett had lost his situation, his character had been ruined, and, in tact, all that occurred was mere like a 'erne under th e Sultan than under a free government. Sir G. GREY said the statement referred to had appeared in the Daily News of the 17th of March, and immediately on seeing it he had directed an inquiry, but up to the pre sent time he had not received any report on the subject. Mr. B. COCERANE said it would be a g. at consolation to Mr. l'ollett and his friends that the matter was undergoing inquiry. INCOME TAX BILL. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then moved the order of the day for the committee of the whole house upon this bill. lie observed that the member for Montrose proposed to refer it to a select committee. This was a very unusual course to pursue, and one attended with great dab entities, and he h'ped it would not be persisted in. Mr. HUME said the course might be unusual, but ties were all the proceedings upon this bill ; indeed, they were mote than put it Ha to tsual,he h they ouse, m n were o ow uthat ncons ittituti become ••had onal. (Hear.) Ile cer tainty that this was to be a perpetual tax, whether they would not endeavouPto secure some modification of its provisions, so as to make it more generally acceptable. He appealed to the house now for the last time. He hail sup ported this hill when it was first proposed as en experiment and as a temporary measure of finance. But circumstances were now altered. The principle of a direct tax was esta blished, but it was found to be levied unfairly acel unjustly. The whole country cried aloud against it, and he trusted the government would take this, the last, opportunity of meeting the people's requirements. lie wished to say some thing as to the character of this bill in respect ef ern e of its details. In all other casee, taxes were levied by officers directly responsiWe to the crown. The machinery under which this tax was levied was, however, of a very different character. The commissioners appointed to carry it out were appointed by the land tax comraiesioners, I who were themselves appointed by members for counties. What political in:luenre enlist not this arrangement give to a particular party ! Let them look at the questions which these commtssieoersmade people answer. Why, if a merctiant could get appointed'one of these income tax commissioners he might make himself acquainted with every detail of a competitor's business, and do him infinite damage in hi* trade. He denounced the machinery . of this bill not alma as inquisitorial—it was oppressive—it was cruel. If they sent the bill to a committee up stairs, something might be done to reader it more just and less offensive. What he wanted was to save the capital of the country. Leave the goose, be said, to lay the golden eggs ; take To:ashore of the eggs, but leave the 'OM.. (A laugh.) Mr. ROBINSON seconded the amendment. Ile objected to the imposition of the tax for three yearn, Lecause he ap prehended that the obtainment of this easy impost would form a ground with the prernment for not going into the question of reviewing the whole subjec ta xation. t of He h..d every disposition to give the governmentll means of eo nducting the affairs ot the country, and least ot all would Le cripple their energies in the present critical state of thing: at home and abroad ,• and, among other sources of revenue, be was decidedly in favour •of a tax upon income and upoa property, justly apportioned ; but he saw no reason why the tax should not be referred to a select committee, by which, with-sut any material loss of time, its inequalities might be, at all events, modified, and its injustice, consequently, dindolithed. He was peseuled that ny per adjustment of the tax, making propmty pay its due proportion, far more than 5 millions a year could be raised from it, and this permanently, without creating that constant dissatisfaction which it at present occasioned. Sir R. INOLIS *peened the amendment as ineepedient. He urged,however, the propriety of making 1501. per annum the starting point for taxation, so that a person having, say 2001. a year, should pay the tax, not upon the 2001., but upon the 501. above 1501. He thought, too, that much benefit tale= be conferred upon the poorer classes by an alteration of the stamp duties, so that a perso n transferring 2,0001. should pay a higher stamp duty, inroportion, than a per t= transferring only 2001. Should the goternment, at the Oa of the now proposed three years, find it necessary to con done the income tax, he thought it might then be advisable to modify its adjustment, so as to render Its imposition more suited to what were undoubtedly the views of the general public on the suhject. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER bad been in hopes that after the division on the motion of the amendment of the hon. member for Cockermouth, the hon. member far Montrose would not have brought forward this amendment. The subject of a modified scal had been moat maturel considered by him, but I the e more deeply he had gone into the subject, the more clearly had it appeared to him that any alteration presented to his attention, or which had occurred to his own mind, would only . render the tax still more unequal, and still more inquisitorial than the present system. In vin dication of the liberal character of the impost, as now cul lected, he mentioned that in South Carolina, an income tax was levied on exactly the same principles, alike from real property and from p r ofessional and other incomes. It bad Wen I urged that it would be very easy to smite at a just estimate of the amount at which professional incomes should be I peed by what was called capitalising that income ; and ready reference bad been proposed to the actuary of any 1 insurance-office; but, however facile this might appear in theory, it would in practice be found infinitely more inqui sitorial and more a subject of complaint. Let him examine for a moment the positions of two persons each paying an equal amount of tr.come-tax--say 301 , one of whom was in 'ocher:tile A, and the other in schedule Dof the set. In the first case the tax collector must direct to the landholder's tenant, and having ascertained the amount of rent paid by I him, forthwith levies the income tax, which is paid into the exchequer. The landowner, be it observed. paid all the ' sums necessary towards keeping up the estate without hee -1 ing any deduction made from his gross rental in that case, and even if the land should not be occupied, the tenant who next entered upon possession was called upon to pay up all arrears of income tax which he could afterwards claim from his landlord when he paid his rent. Now, what, let him ask, was the per centoge levied upon the landlord before he could put the amount of his rental into Isis pocket ? He had s beard it variously estimated, as low as ten per cent., and a high as 30 per cent. But taking it at a mean of 20 per cent. he did not think that was an Geer-estimate. If that was the ere, the net income represented by a rental from land of 1,0001. a year could not be estimated at more than 7701. I Whereas what did the man assessed at 1,0001. a year antler schedule 1) pay ? He merely paid his 301. and put 9701 into his pocket as a net income, having previously deducted bool his gross gains all the expenses., wear and tear, and other charges incidental to his trade or profession. In these two eases the landholder pocketed 7701., and the trader or profes sional man 9701. out of 1,0001. a year ; and, makieg even allowance fur the expenses of life instaance, &c., entailed , upon the tax-payer in sch.dule 1), he still thought that 2001. a year would amply balance the advantages possessed I by the landholder over him ; to that after all the tax payer in schedule A had no such ereatsuperiority in pointer position over him in schedule 1). But even admitting fur a moment tl at teaised property ought to pay in a greater proportion than i :comes derived from trade or professions, there was another circumstance attendant on the income tax and its collection which must be taken into account. According to the return moved for by the hon. member for Dartmouth it appeared there were only 111,000 persons returned as paying income tax under schedule D on their professional or personal exertions, conseque ntly there were only that number of persona wh o' possessed incomes arising from those sources of 130/. a year. Now, did any one believe that the number of persons earning 1501. in Great Britain was limited to 111,0001. ? Did any one believe there was not almost that number of incomes in the metropolis alone ? The idea was moat preposterous. And when the return was analysed it showed still more extraordinary results. But if this subject were to be more narrowly in quired into, let him ask how far the tax would be rendered more unpalatable by being made more stringent and inquisitorial. He bad a right to assert that the tax under the head of schedule 1) might be rendered more pro fitable, and at the same time be more fairly exacted, but in order to effect those objects there must Ito instituted so in• quisitorial a system as would render it infinitely more odi ous than it was at present. The difference between sche dules A and 1) was, that the persons who paid the tax in the former instance, generally speaking, had no interest in concealing the amount of rental, for they received it bads again from the landholders, whereas those paying under schedule D had a direct personal in terest in concealing the tine amount of their moneys. He granted it might be said that the mode of levying it was a premium upon roguery ; but where was the remedy ? Only in resorting to an inquisition of a most rigorous nature, which would have In be carried out still further if the tax were imposed on smeller incomes than were now touched. That was the argument he had always urged ; the tax might be made more equitable,. but, at the some time, it would be rendered more inquisitorial a nd odious, and his belief was that the objection to schedule D was more on account of its inquisitorial powers than on ac count of the amount levied. He hoped he had now convinced his hon. friend that whether the government was right or wrong in it. views on the subject of the tax, neither himself nor his colleagues bad adopted . the conclusions to which they had come without having given full cousideratioa to the point raised by hie amendment. lie found it impos-ible to levy the tax in a manner devoid of objection. lie admitted those objections to it did still exist as he had originally stated them, but he must also admit that th e property tax was a better one than many which had been recently repealed by the house, sod be said this consistently with the opposition he had formerly raised to it. He would only add one word more. Adam Smith had often been quoted by hon. mem bers as an authority against the income tax ; but those who had so quoted him always left out a part of the sentence. Adam Smith was represented, and trete', to have said that " the subject of every state ought to be taxed as nearly as possible proportioned to his ability to pay"; and then he added, " that is to say, in proportion to the revenue he en joys under the protection of the state." Now this assertion did not refer to capital, but simply to revenue, sold he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) apprehended that a revenue derived from trade or profession was as much under the protection of the state as one derived from land. After , a very careful consideration he had come to the conclusion that no practical injustice was done to persons in schedule 1) as compared wilt schedule A, and moreover, any =edifice. tion of the injustice that the income tax, from its inherent nature, inflicted, would only increase its odium and unpopu larity. He must, therefore, on all the grounds he had stated, object to the motion of his hon. friend, or to say other mo tion having for its object the modification of the tax. Mr. J. CLAY would not have broken the silence which best became a young member of that house, hit for his de sire to:explain his reasons for voting against a government in whose general policy he heartily concurred. lint if there were any subjects on which he distrusted the present minis try, they were those which the question before the house more particularly touched—namely, retrenchment, economy, and financial ability. lie was one of those who strongly ad vocated direct taxation, and it was his opinion that the in come tax would become a permanent one. For if hereafter a surplus income should =me it might better be applied to the reduction of other taxes levied on the necessaries and conveniencics of life, than towards repealing an impost of so just and reasonable a character as the income tax. His only objection to the tax was its inequality. It had been raid that the efforts to render it eqiel were neutralised by the insuperable diffiiulties which presented themselves, lie cnuld not admit the excuse. The right bon. baronet the Chancellor of the Exchequer had again urged those difßcul ties, but if the country saw an honest endeavour, eat to ad just the tax in a manner mathematically correct, but even to make an approximation to faireess, they would be satisfied. The right bon. baronet had also attempted to show that, be cause the incomes taxed under schedule A, paid a gross amount of taxes under other heads, they ought not to be as sessed more heavily to the inme tax than professional gains. But it ought to be recollected that lan d paid those taxes before the income tax was imposed, and there was no grumbling about inequality ; so that if any fresh trot, such es the present, was imposed, it ought to he levied with a due regard to the different sources of income. The right hon. baronet had expressed his surprise at the such number of persons returnel under schedule 1), as paying tax upon incomes of 1301. and upwards, and he had intimated his belief that the amount had, in numerous came, been dishonourably withheld. The fact might be as he had surmised, but it the income tax were imposed on fair and equal princip'es, then if there were any just grounds .ur supposing that the amount was unfairly withheld, no one would object to the exercise of the moat inquisiterial powers. I Under these circumstances he joined in the endeavour of the I hon. member for Montrose, to press upon the government a I more equitable adjustment of the tax and it was his belief that the country at large was determined to have that ad justment made. TRELAWNY said that the hon. member for the West Riding of Yorkshire bad 'bowed very clearly, on a former eveniog, the enormous amount of taxation levied on the labouring claw= in the shape of malt and spirit duties, and in the tax on tea. The poor labourer paid more in the shape of taxation on what he consumed than the richest duke contributed out of his large income, and on that showing alone the income tax was eminently fair. If it were to be subjected to revision, the whole system of taxation ought likewise to be revised. &sign, the three years would not be more time than was lettelliny7 to test the soundness of the principles on which time right hon. baronet the member for Tamworth had f oun ded both the income tax and the tariff. With these tripes he must oppose the proposition of the hon. member or Montrose. . Ile. S. CRAW FORD said that the government had de. Med the passibility of reducieg the national expenditure, merely (as he believed) to afford them a pretence for main taining the tax. His advice to the hon. member for Mon trose was, to withdraw his proposition and take a division on , the main queedeo, tR,UR did not think the present a proper time far referring to 'a Mlect committee a tax which they had been .usured wee necessary to sustain the i...tional credits. (Hear, hear.) A:select committee migLt sit for an indefinite period, and at length terminate without presenting a report. Although, therefore, the income tax might be susceptible of modification, he could not concur in the amendment :- hon. member for Montrose. Mr. URQUHAR f complained that the question of the income tax had been mixed up with a great deLl of extra- seems matter. He should support the amendment. net eldnhing that it went far enough, but merely as setting the th e fairly afloat in the house and out of the h ouse. On the gerund ;question be would say that if they meant to adopt direct natation se • principle, they must reconstruct the whole of their municipal system, so se to give local fa cilities far its collection. In the present instance 11- , ob jected to it as being used for the subvention of an expenditure which was in hie opinion wasteful and unnecessary. Mr. MITCHELL thought the ministerial budget most numatisfamory, as not meeting the deficiency, which went on increasing from year to year. He had listened with great attention to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but to that right hon. geatleman's observations he could not give his concurrence. The right hon. gentleman had said that in misadole D the income tax was greatly evaded, and gave that MI • /NOVI for continuing to levy under that bead, and with increased strictness. lie (Mr. Mitchell) believed that eva sion was practised by many; but what comfort was that to those persons who, being unfairly well:wit, regularly psid the tat (Hear, hear.) He considered that the right has. gentleman had given • most extraordinary reason for Offitinung to levy the tax unfairly. The income tax had bees defended by the right hon, baronet the member fur Tsaworth on the ground that it was the substitute for many from which income had been relieved. lie (Mr. = t ell) conceded that it was a fair substitute where landed property was c oncerned, as the holder of such property might isirly expend the whole of his income ; but in the ,case of professional income, a man of a thousand a year would not be justified in spending more than live hundred. There was one consolation, however, for the opponents of the tax, that, if continued as at present levied, it would be impossible to renew it alter the three years, but as an &deo cats of direct taxation, he, for one, should regret that result. Mr. NEWDEGATE combated the notion which appeared to be held by some hon. gentlemen that agriculture coat widely favoured by the present distribution of the tax. The result of the present debate, however, led to one coo -1 clusioa only, that direct taxation, impose it as you might. was so invidious that it was impossible it could be received other than with general discontent. He opposed the motion of the hon. member for Montrose because he saw no practi cal advantage that could arise from it, but he by no means wished it to be understood that he supported the motion for going into committee, because he wished the tax to be permanent. Mr. HORSMAN bad no hope of any practical good arising from the amendment of his bon. friend (Mr. Hume). Ile was anxious to take that opportunity of correcting some misapprehensions which appeared to prevail as to the plan he had proposed fur equalisiog the tax. His hen. friend the member for Liverpool (Mr. Cardwell) had contended, in • pamphlet since published, that that plan would, so far from removing the objections to the tax, metier the inequali• ties, the injustice, and the annoyance resulting from the in. quisiteriel rating of the tax greater than at present. (Hear, hear.) Now, he challenged his hon. friend to cite a case, or rather a class of cases, in which it would have that effect. The principal object of hiaplan was to put an end to the in justice consequent upon taxing real property and professional and trading or terminable incomes at the same rate he challenged his hon. friend to adduce any class of eaten in regard to which that would not have been the result of his proposition had it been adopted. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord supposed that the landed proprietors would object to the additional penny in the pound.—an addition which amounted only to 41. 4s. a year on each 1,0001. of in come which he (Mr Reesman) proposed to impose on them ; hut he could not believe that if the landed proprietors were convinced that any scheme would confer great benefit on the rest of the community they would refuse to make a far greater sacrifice for such an o ject. (Hear.) The landed interest, however, opposed direct taxation altogether, and therefore they objected to any plan which should iced to make it permanent. His object, on the contrary, was to make it permanent, and therefore it was that he wished to improve it. Seeing, however, that the subject had been now fully de hated, and the house had decided on its continuance for the present in its present shape, he saw no practical obji ci in the amendment. It would be better, he thought, to turn their attention to the question of the revision of the whole scheme of taxation, which was called for both by the voice of public opinion and the exigencies of the country. That was • question which could only be taken up effectually by the government itself ; but should they decline he hoped some private member would bring it forward. (Hear.) Mr. CARDWEI4 , would athmpt to point out the case which his hon. fsfettd had so pointedly challenged him to show. lie told his hen. friend at the tin.. that they were dacuming net an abstract principle but a particular plan, and he showed that under the plan_ proposed there would be two cases of grievance at least. His bon. friend by his plan would tax the income, not according to the interest the man would have in it, but the source from which it arose—(bear,' bur) ; and he had instanced the case of a widow with • Man annuity of 1601. • year secured on land or the public funds, but being a mere fleeting and terminating interest ending with her life. Mr. HORSMAN—According to my plan she would have paid the lowest tax. (Hear.) Mr. CART/WELL—No ; but the highest. (Hear.) Mr. HORSMAN—Most assuredly not. Mr. CARDWELL did his hon. friend the justice to be. lieve that his intention was as he had now stated ; but the effect of his plan, as explained at the time, would have been to charge the highest tax in such a case. Ile (Mr. Card well) also instanced the care of a trader carrying on bui -1 ness with a capital partly his own and partly borro red. Ac lending to his hon. friend's plan he would have to pay 6d. in the pound on the profits of his own capital and Bd. on those of the borrowed money, Moved of as at present 7d. on the whole. This change he had contended would necessa rily occasion an inquisitorial supervision on the part of the government to ascertain what was the amount of borrowed and what of real capital, which would be more inconvenient and annoying to the trader than anything that belonged to the tax as now imposed. With regard to the motion of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Hume), though be was most anxi ous that the tax should be levied on the moat fair and equal principles, as that motion merely went to propose that a measure which the house had decided was essential to the maintenance of public credit should be indefinitely deferred, he must oppose it. (Hear.) Mr. HORSMAN said the hon. gentleman had com pletely misunderstood what he had said. He hail explained distinctly that he proposed to tax the terminable annuitant at the lowest duty, and in fact that was the very cu e he had related to illustrate the hardship of the present eye tern. The highest tax he proposed to levy only on property of that description which would ascend unimpaired to the heirs of the possessor. Mr. COULBURN had understood the hon. gentleman's statement precisely in the same way as had his hen. friend, Mr. Cardwell. The hon. gentleman said diatinctly that all incomes included in schedule A were to be charged at Bd., and jointures and annuities on landed property, &c., were included in that schedule. Mr. ANSTEY considered the principal question to be, whether the supplies Weis to be levied in the form of a rate or a tax, and that that was a proper question for a select committee to consider. He should, therefure, vote for the amendment of the hon. member for Montrose. The house divided.—For the amendment 73 Against it The house immediately after divided on the main question. For the original motion .. • . 313-311 Against it • l2-311 On our re-admission, we found the house resolved into committee on the bill, Mr. HEIINAL in the chair. On clause 1 being proposed, Major BERESFORD moved to substitute the words "two years " for the words " for a limited period." While he admitted that one year was tee short a period, regard being had to the state of the revenue, still t.e was of opinion that the continuance of the iccome ton for two years, as he proposed, would give ample time for an improvement in the revenue, or, if not, to afford the government an opportunity to consider some other system of taxation. A period of three years was somewhat ominous. When the tax was originally proposed by the right hon. baronet the member for Tamwortb, he fixed it for a period of three years. Again, when renewed, it was for a further period of three years, and it now seemed as though it was int, nded to bring upon the country the same awful triennial visitation. Without wishing in any way to embarrass the government, he felt bound to move his amendment. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought the question had already been decided by the division on the amendment which had been moved by the tfsh. member for Mwhi c onttose and as me three years was the shortest Dori° I for h the govern nt co ld u take it, he must oppose the amendment. The amendment was t glut and negatived without a division; the period of thr raawas inserted in the douse, which was agreed to, and o re II to stand part e f the bill. The remaining clauses and the preamble were agreed to without any discussion, the house resumed, the bill was re ported with amendments, and the report was ordered to be received to-morrow (this day). SUPPLY. Mr. 131'.11.NAL brought up the r, port of the committee of supply (Ordnance estimate.), which was agreed to. LAW OF ENTAIL (SC BILL OTLAND) AMENDMENT The LORD ADVOCATE nominated the following hon. members as the select committee on this bill : The Lord Ad vocate, Sir James Graham, Mr. Fox Maule, Sir G. Clerk, Mr. Stuart Wortley, Mr. Gibson Craig, Viscount Melgund, Mr. Bouverie, Mr. Charteris, Mr. M'Neill, Mr. Home Drummond, Mr. James Loch, Mr. Ewart, Mr. W. F. Mac kenzie, and Mr. Cochrane. An HON. MEMBER proposed the substitution of Mr. J. Stuart's name for that of Mr. Ewart. The house divided—For the original name 66 Against it On the motion for the appointment of the committee, Mr. SCOTT moved the adjournment of the house. After a conversation the amendm- nt was withdrawn, and the appointment of the committee was agreed to. PAYMENT OF RATES AND TAXES. Sir D. L. EVANS moved for leave to bring in a bill to regulate the times of payment of rates and taxes by parlia- mentary electors, stating that the measure was in substance the same as one Ise had introduced on a former occasion. Mr. FORBES opposed the motion, and moved the ad journment of the house. The house divided—For the adjournment Against it 5l-39 Leave was then given to bring in the bill. Mr. WAKLEY moved that the petition of Mr. Shillibeer be printed. Mr. THORNELY opposed the motion on the grouad that the public should not be put to the cap.use et printing a petition which was in the nature of a mere adv,rtisement. Afar a short discussion the motion was withdrawn. f The house then adjourned at one o'clock. of the ARRIVAL OF THE CHINESE JUNK.—The Keying melted at Gravesend yesterday. ELECTION COMMITTEES.—YESTERDAY. tenant, a tenant . proprietor too, the . most ark —. ... a SLIOO --Counsel having concluded their arguments and recalcitrant disciple that socialism or a gr ..;i;: of France we do nut very well know ; but thi s ., o the point of qualification, the committee resolved that ism could undertake to convert. What will r oam riot duly elected, and that least, may be known, that it will never become a l b ; after M. Louts BLANC'S heart, doctrine, or design. We are glad to see that M. TMERS has paslnld thlnoehnelPect-atrlionckwB""aa null and in favour of " In Amtlle," and that he deprecator. overthrow of the foundations of society. His aim is a meet courageous one—too bold, indeed. And% admiration "of England for the last two hol e d years" is not the fittest language for a Freottio dienoe. It was that which discredited the f e and depopularised LAFAYETTE. And we see it tu already driven the hitherto moderate National is adopt the ultra-democratic idea of a peasant lei* tare as well as operative praetorians. There are, however, or there may be, such thi. o as both monarchies and republics not founded on ti t affection or predominance of any particular d u , • high or low, with too little to bestow, in the way o f favour, to tempt support, or consequent envy, T im interested parties, and consequently entitled to the km „ port of all, simply from their securing all the g eo d e A of government—peace, security, decorum, and p l bh, morals. Notwithstanding all that we have said, thr are still hopes that the French may fall at ]set int o this simplest of systems, if not from preference, ai r dom, and direct forethought, at least from the kno n sibility of making any other system work. And et certainly think M. Louis BLANC'S scheme as hopei r as that of Lou IN l'itutTres, whose idea it very m oo t resembles, with the mere substitution of lower f c , middle class, and paid operatives for salaried placeum GENERAL COMMITTEE OF ELECTIONS. The committee sat yesterday, and struck the following committees ..—BoomtN—Memrs. 0. A. fismilton (chairman), J. H. Foley, F. French, R. Trevor, and Sir E. FtiMeT.--Latcsarratt and CIIILTENHAY were also on the list, but were t ostponed until Thursday next, in order to await the decisionof the houseon the Etectioei Recognisance , Bill. - We had hoped that the Health of Towns Bic:; would at last pass without any serious oppoie ot • but the determination of government to preserve th e obnoxious provisions of the bill, to which. attenlice has already been drawn, ie raising such determined hostility in the provinces, that the efficiency of the whole measure is threatened in the changes now ie. sisted upon and in the exemptions claimed. R e d the promoters of the bill shown a conciliatory e re i e j,, by altering, more in form than in substance, the e t, noxious powers of the central board, it would hue been allowed to pass without difficulty. Now, M e . ever, that Manchester, Bolton, and, in fact, all th e large towns of Lancashire, have claimed to be altogether exempted from its operation, the ole position assumes a formidable aspect. We do not fear that Lord MORPETH need yield to this com bined force, but we fear that his delay in acceding to public more t h aopiniondesirable. 'f compel hebill, him passtedo relinquish e li s a u g e t mutilated condition as to have cut off from its Nem tion all the principal towns of Lancashire, would scarcely be worth having at all. The local acts of these towns,although in most cases recently obtained, are wholly insufficient for the execution of extended measures of sanitary improvements. It is palate natural that they should to retain their civic powers intact, but in no cue do they strenuously r► act communication with a central executive teml. It is against the detailed interference of that bard that all the hostility manifests itself. The knowledge of self-government acquired throughout the country by a constant attention to the execution of municipal powers, is probably one of the principal reasons why this country remains vis controlled, at a time when all Europe is disturbed by great political events. In other countries, theme" tive is mainly central, and the functions of civic powers are more nominal than real. There is is education for the people in the art of self-go. yernment, no guarantee of peace in the pran• I eel knowledge acquired by habitually work ing the machinery of a collected population It has therefore always been a wise object of tie legislature to encourage the taste for local gores. went, and only to retain so much power in the hands of the central authority as would suffice to Minable the former to exertion, or to check those abase which might occasionally ensue. This modified rev tralisatio a of power has never been ohjected to Town councils, for example, cannot make bye-lave, without their being approved of by the Secretary of State, yet notwithstanding this restrietim power, the responsibility of the measures reds wit the local authority. Under the new poor law, hn centralisation was carried to excess, and instead being merely a superintending power, the Lands board became wholly executive and responsible. the abuses perpetrated by local boards were non heaped upon the central authority, which filially we crushed under the opprobrium that it was not , ! colt u foresee must have ensued. This should have acted e a warning to the framers of the Health of TOWN 1311 and induced them to avoid the risk of throwing too much responsibility on the general board appointed by it. As it now steeds, the local boards may throw off the odium of every unpopular toes sure on the central authority, which mot inevitably sink under the pressure of acts for which it becameunneeessarily responsible. Merrell contained in Lord ;Amur:nes hill include almost sE those, except mere matters of police, which ton councils and local authorities are accustomed to eve cisc. The removal of the responsibility fur their jag execution from the town to a central board, deem. tive as it must be of our present principles of self government and reliance, would of itself be a gnu political evil, without reference to the more immediate objects of the bill itself. We have already expressed our belief that the hi, has been framed with all honesty of purpose and that the proposed powers of the germa board have been conceived with a single view to th efficiency of the measure, and without any conceded attempt to grasp at central power. The argumin for the necessity of granting these extended pOWeri 5 to us the strongest proof that they are not wanted:j the extent proposed in the bill. It is stated, justice, that the Health of Towns Comas stun have shown that there was a great and culpshi neglect in the manner in which the powers investi in corporations for the improvement of towns been carried into operation, and it is argued that tt . activity of the last few years is a consequence c: the exposure of this negligence. The commis sion which produced this good moral effect was or: of inquiry, and not of execution, so that the improved execution of the local measures wasp. viously due to a feeling of public responsibility, and not to compulsion. It is precisely this effect which we desire to see the general board exercise. Let the local boards be responsible to their constituencies lad to public opinion, and not be the mere servants of the general board. The latter, at the same time, by the: superintending inspectors, and by their annual re ports, could expose abuses and the negligent as of power, and would be enabled, in esteem cases, under some clause, to take legal ateP to enforce the provisions of the act. This individua responsibility to the public would certainly be a mite and probably a more powerful check to abuse the the absolute power over detail now claimed for th central board. The nature of the measures included in the Heal: of Towns Bill requires the cordial co-operation of th put lie about to be benefited by them. Their dislike o even indifference to them will render their Millie certain. The law may, compel the owner of , house to build a drain or to construct yet tilators, but it cannot force him to use thee melees he is convinced of their advantage• is the full discussion of the measures by . the lots authorities that will best advance public opinion as t , the necessity of the proposed improvements, and the knowledge is much more likely to be acquired on te spot than when urged by a distant and uninterestet body. Although it is often advisable for the leggy tore to act upon its own perception of rights ev e ' when it is in advance of public opinion, it is wise', it matters involving private feeling and comforts, eatil l ' to delay an improvement until the opinion of the!' for whose benefit it is intended has been iustructeda. perceive its utility, than to insist upon a forced ad' practically useless acquies cenc e. This must often , he e . . ever, be the fate of measures forced by the genets upon the local authority. The very jealoasY ilk rally resulting lri from the continued interference of a general will often retard, instead of prewar: the measures which may originate with it. Lord MORPETH has another week to consider lr bill now before the house, and in the amended copy, which he has promised to present general to the couinutterui we trust to see the powers of the fort t te l h e ss o f i n t a t h aisblee variouss done, o p b re d n o w x e o cso u fear s r a , n the d Lb m i lmmi prominent t meet ala I 1 I GENERAL LYING-IN HOSPITAL, YORK-ROAD. —At a meeting of the governors of this institution held yeiterday. the Earl of Shaftesbury was elected president, in the :owl of the late Duke of Northumberland. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS. HOUSE OF LORDS.-(7.5.) INCREASE AND DI MINUTION IN NUMBER OF PERSONS, SALARIES, &C., IN PUBLIC OFFICES IN 1847.-In 1847 there have been added to the official personnel 1,282 individuals; there has been an increasein the amount of officialsalariesol 64,2221.45. 71d , ; of emoluments of 18,5291. Ils. 11d.; of retired allowances of 14,6241. 16a. 3d ; of expenses, 36,6491. Is, 71d. ; being • total of 133,92.51. 14s 41d. l'er contra there has been a reduction of 32 penoris ; and a diminution of salaries In the amount of 7,7391. 10d.; of emoluments, 4,0491. 15s. 1111 . ;of retired allowances, 6.6571. 15s. 10d. ; of expenses, 5,6291. Os. 714. ; ia all, 24,0761. ls. 21d. Th e chief increase has been in the Customs (62 persons end 49,0771. 18s. l i d .) and in the Poet. office (1,109 persons and 38,9871. 12.. Bd.). HOUSE OF COMMONS. - (176.) FREIGHT MONET (GREENWICH HOSPITAL).- - From Nov. 29, 1837, to April 20, 1847, the treasurer of Greenwich Hospital received for freight money, 98,0091. 181. 4d. This total was paid on 1,781 voyages ; 24,2381. 105. 31d. was received on public ac count; and 73,7711. Bs. Old. on private account. (189.) MILITARY SAVINGS BANKS.-The number of depositors on the 31st March, 1847, was 4,907. The balance due to the depositors in these beaks by the public, on the 31st March, 1846, was 47,9381. 145. Bd. The amount of deposits during the year ending 31st March, 1847, was 28,1171. Is. 311. the amount of interest allowed during that year, 1,9601. 2 s . 101. ; the sums withdrawn by depositors during the year amounted to 23,0261. the balance due by the public 31st March, 1847, was 54.9881. 14e. 101 d. The amount paid over by the Secretary at War to the com missioners for the reduction of the national debt, on account of the fund for military savings banks, from 1843.4 to 1846 7, both inclusive, was 47,938!. 14s. Bd. ; the further sum the PaymasterOeneral was authorised on the 18th of March, 1848, to pay over to the said commissioners, was 7,0511. 21d.; the dividends received on account of saying. bank fund, and invested in further aid thereof up to the Bth of January, 1847, amounted to 1,053!. 6d. ; during the year ending Bth January, 1848, to 1,607 1 . se. 61. ; the total amount of the fund fur military savings banks up to 20th March, 1848, is 57,6501. 101 d. (193.) FOREIGN VeaseLs.-There was paid out of the Consolidated Duties of Customs, under the act 59 0. 3, c. 54, in the year 1847, for the difference of rates end charges due corporations, companies, or individuals, for foreign vessels which under treaties of reciprocity are ad mitted to British ports at the same rates of charge as British vessels, 33,9151. lls. I Id. There had been paid (under reciprocity treaties) up to 31st December, 1846, 634,0861. 10e. 64d. ; which. with the amount or 1847, Iva a total at 668,002/. 2s. 41d. Ithe Orprefos. MAILS. Vie mails for New South Wales, Van Dieman'a Land, and New Zealand will he made op on the evening of the 31st March. _ The ma th for the Weat Coast of Africa and Madeira will be math op Oa the evening of the slat March. The Weal India Math. including Bermuda, Neaten, Havanna, Honduras, New thiamin, Vera Cruz, Tampico, and Porto Rico, min excluding throe for Madeira, JacnieL Carthagena, Santa Martha, Chagros, Panama, West Coast of South America, and lit. Juazi-de- NiCallgUa, will be made op on the evening of the tat April. The overland math foe Gibraltar, Malts, Greece, the lonian Islam* Egypt, Aden, Ceylon, India, Hong-Kong, and China, Ma Southamp ton, will be made up on the morning of the 3rd April. The mails Made i ra , razils, the River Plate, Monte made , up Bahia, and Buenos Ayrea, will be made up on the evening of the 4th April. The mails for Vigo, °wain, Lithon, Madeira, Cadiz, and Gibraltar will be made up en the morning of the 7th April. The overland clewed malls, win Marwillen, to the Mediterranesn, Egypt, Aden, Ceylon, India, Hoeg-Kong, eke., will be made up on the evening of the 7th Ths mails for Britith North America, and the United Ste", will be made up on the evening of the 7th ApriL NOTICE. The number of STAMPS issued to the DAILY NEWS by the authorities of the Stamp-otfic.?, during 1847.:we5: From JAN. 1, to DEc. 31 .• • • 3,447,009 This, we believe, is within eight per cent of the number issued to the Morning Herald, Morning Chronicle, and Morning Post, ALL PVT TOGETHER. In addition to the above, issued to the DAILY NEWS, Morning Paper, there were issued for the E ming Edition, THE EXPRESS, From JAN.I, to Dric. 31 Which was more, we believe, than were issued either to the Globe or Stand ard, Evening Papers. TO CORRESPONDENTS. w. beg to 0b0e... to Looker°. ° that t►e speolont a y.o runs a IpOMll, 111.11 la to 00C It. sad Worm Trott. too touch connnee •.prelatie trouble..a time. lino.. Oulu. od Lod. thea majority wad thew ono. .i.eaat"tV:treriti, tolt " rtorvera " Try trr crefonierg:,7l ►ublwtioa. 111011 WATIM AT LONDON SaIDOE. =JAM. ; Aftzroooo.Bl ode poet To roAsow—lllorslag, I Ada. pot I ; Aftarooork.49 mIA. past P. LONDON, TUESDAY, MARCH 28 THE British constitution has been a government of king and aristocracy, the latter supporting the monarch with loyal devotion, and managing the inferior classes, as ministers, as lords, as members of parliament, as magistrates, as bishops, and, in short, as everything. The monarch or the constitution re paid them by influence, honours, privileges, and wealth, secured not only to them but to their class and descendants. The French constitution, as founded and developed by Lows Pnittere, was a government of king and middle classes ; of notable men, who set up no pre tensions of birth or caste, but who had acquired wealth and importance in land, in commerce, in professions, in the sciences, or even a little in the arts. These formed the aristocracy of the monarchy of the middle classes. Unfortunately they made the same bargain with their king that our aristocracy did, that is, supported him with loyal devotion in return for his dividing amongst them all the good things that a government could gather and redistribute. Louis PHILIPPE imitated the English system.-that, in fact, of recipro city between the crown and the class nearest to it. When the King of the FRENCH had done this, he thought he had done everything; and that these notables, this front rank in society, being satisfied by him, ought, in turn, like the English front rank, to labour and succeed in satis fying those beneath them. The front rank of a middle class is, however, very extended. Royal favour, however immense its resources, could not reach all. And thus the French constitution did not keep up liberal appearances half so adroitly as the British constitution. It did not satisfy that pride and vanity in being free, which is as requisite as the reality ; so much so, that we do believe it is this feeling rather than the actual thirst for freedom, that has driven the people of Vienna and Berlin to humble their monarchs m the dust. The French are now making an essay of a third kind of constitution, which is a government of the lower and laboUring classes—the same that Mr. PEAROUS O'CONNOR recommends in this country, and which is moreover hailed and looked to by a far larger mass of Englishmen than our public press will admit, or than the upper classes seem to be aware of. We don't think, however, that any English socialist adopts the reciprocity system of a government feeding the labouring class, and the labouring class in turn supporting it. This is evi dently M. LOUIE BLANC'S plan. He sees that the middle and citizen class is hostile to his form and ideas of government ; and consequently he would transfer government care and favour to another class. And in order to do this he would establish a great system of centralisation, and put the govern ment in the place of all other employers. All public works, all railroads, all canals, manufactories—these are to be in the hands of government, on which alone the thousands upon thousands of operatives will depend. The working classes would thus form the court and the courtiers of the new republican government; and the recipro city system, which was carried on in England between crown and aristocracy, and in France between Loris PHILIPPE and the 6ourycoisie, would be satisfactorily and solidly established between Dictator LEDRI: ROLLIN and the labouring class throughout France. We shall not take the trouble of even seeking to show the impracticability or injustice of such a scheme. It speaks for itself. Making the largest allowance, even, the attempt could only be made in Paris: the provinces would scout it. The small pro prietor would level his musket at it. Of all the countries in the world, France is least fitted for the government of the non-proprietorial class. We can conceive inch s scheme very tempting in England, and still more tempting in Ireland, because, in fact, the operatives, turned lords, might seize the land, and " live at home at ease." But in France every ten scree and five scree have their sturdy