The Express. — London, England, 1853-03-11 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS.—fItURiDAT, MARCH 10. The Lonu CluotcaLsoa took his seat at 3 o'clock. PUBLIC In:SINES:4. PETITIONS PIIESENTED. IllavfooTlt.—By the Deice of ARGYLL, from a place baßoothind ; and the Earl of EULINTUN, from a place sot heard, mAaisst - the codowment of. BIIIIIERY tT CAnnutnce.—Bp Earl FITZWILLIAN, rases CambrAge, complaining of britiscy at the last (lee- tiOn. AIMIRSION or Jews TO PAOLTAW:NT.—IST the Earl of 811 AF rEsuutor, from lane tater, Lek, Clare Prior, Btekeelvary, Callow, Seat.orou:rh. Cr Tahiti°. Steeple Long ford, llama 11411, Painsw..'a, Heartbeat. Westham, E tst bourne, and other places; and a Nouut Luau, from Twickenham, against. °FINING UF Till CUT.: t!. tcc ON Till SABBATH. —By the Earl of SIIAFTE:ibURY, from Bratington, end other places. against. Lied Moravia, liVa USAVU.:NT, and Rid Farrwit.- omsat preoated several petitions, but neither th, it oh jet' uor the names of the places from which they came reached the gallery. SUSPENSION OF A lIAGISTILATE IN IRELAND. The Earl of EOLINTON gave nada: that he shou.d sae, 7 w certain r , turni r lady.* is the swension or a magistrate whoa he was Lord Lieutenant of Irelaud, who had been rryoreil to the commiolon of the peace invite diately on tl.a arrival of the Dv -tnt Viceroy. Ile con sidered it du' , to himself, as Weil e. the i.ropet adminiArs tioa , that the grounds .4 inch suspension should be made known to their lordshil v, as it had been so hastily reverted. LAW OF 7:VIDENCE AND PROCEDURE BILL. Lard BI:OUGIIAM ros.• to move the second reading of this hill; the oliect of which was to amend. in many re spects, mud el :clue is some important particulars, the law et ev Pledge actl procedure. As the details were more fit for a committee than the house, he shmld confine his observe- Wee to three or four leadiots features in the hill; the first of which Tel.:o to the act of ISIL making panics compe tent and ceinpellable to be examined as witnesses. Thera was in that e.ll one exception—that of husband and wife, and when it was made the prosiusate possibility of repealing such eaception was contemplated, and putting husband and wife on the same footing with all other parties. There was one modification enabling the husband to bring forward the wife as a witness in a cue. for example, where she sold goods, and the exclusion of her evidence would deprive the hush out of tie mesas of proving such sale, but not allow ing her to be examined or cress-ex - veined upcu matters eammunicated to her by her husband during coverture, and placing the hush and on the same routin_ as to similar coin vunications made to him by his wife—just as communica tions betimes attorney and client were held to be pri vileged. This enactment in the present bill as to husband and wife would complete that important measure of IStil upon this branch of the law of evidence. There were seve ral other provision in the measure, amending in some par tinier., and declaring in others the law of evidence where it was now defective, as be believed all lawyers admitted it to b', in those provisiens which were of a declaratory na ture. Tirre was one most important matter to which he wand I allude which did not at all fall within the descrietion of &detail, but which was a principle—namely, that which, against all prtomple, prevented a witness from being called upon crometilsorily to answer any question, the reply to which might tend to criminate himself. Independent of the auenneht a and uncertainties in the administration of the law upon this subject, sad th contrary decisions of the owns, the • rincipl• itself was untenable. His proposition es eontaineel in the bill, was not that his deposition should be eietneetent evidence against him, if he was compelled to make it, but that he should be protected from the effect of such deposition, though compelled to give that it might be evidence in the CM*. Tee witnew's answer to the question might e ff ect other parties as well as himself. (Hear, hear.) At present the parties to the case were totally put out of conaideratitio; they were innocent people—no charge was made against them. Ile adverted briefly to the other provisions of the bill, the second reading of which he proposed to their lordships. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that with a consider able portion of his noble and learned iriend's measure not only was he not dissatisfied, but he was sere that the coun try meet ter: indebted to his noble and learned friend for lie pereereetuce and sea! in carrying into greater effect and creation that great measure on the low of evidence which le proposed two years ago. And though he was not able to &preen all that the bill proposed, he thought that the subject deserved c•nsideration, and that his noble and learned friend el ed credit for the pains which be took to im prove the law. (Henri hear.) L rd BROUGHAM was toad to hear that his view with regard to the trial by jury was likely to be confirmed by the report of the commissioners. After what had fallen from Lis noble and learned friend he thought the best maw for him to pursue would be to divide his measure into two bills, the one containing these provisions which his noble and learned friend approved of, and the other theee parts with regard to which he expressed some !setae. lion and doubt. Ile would not refer the measure to the select committee, which was aheady overburdened with business. (Hear.) The bill was then read a second time. MUTINY BILLS. Tee Mutiny and Marine Mutiny Limb were read a second time. ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE. The Earl of ABERDEEN gave notice that he should mice the Easter adjournment from Friday the 18th to the 4th of April. BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS. Lord BROUGHAM said he wished to :all the attention Of his noble blend at the bead of the government to the »- mineable state of things which had been revealed before the election petition committees, and to impress on his noble friend the necessity of losiug no time in introducing a mete we for the purpose of putting en end to the bribery sad eetruphos which had been priced to pervade their elects. oil system. (Hear, hear.) Oae of the benefits of the mews saris the second reading of which he had j'ist proposed, sad which so far obtained the concurrence of their lordships, was, that it would remove from guilty men the protection which they hitherto enjoyed tram the present state of the law, and would tend inca lculably to promote—if it was pos sible that anything could promote—the purification of :he electoral sytrem ; the postponeweat of which purification for try length of time would prove seriously injurious to the morals of the people, to the character of the country, and the character of parliament, and tend to make men lean towards those opinions—of which ht would say nothing, as they wcre opinions entertained in foreign sellout's—those opinions of distrust and jealousy of parlia mesitary government and representative institutions. (Ilea, hoar.) Their lordships adjourned at 7 o'clock. Mr. Glyn, Mr. Sotheron, Mr. Matthew Forcer, Mr. Denby Seymour, Mr. Thomas Chambers, Mr. Mailings, Mr. Fresbfield, Mr. O. ach, Mr. John Abel Smith, Mr. Cowan, and Mr. John Ball. The Sheriffs Court i•Scotland) Bill, the County Mations Polls (S cotland) ant. the Cfnsolidated Fund Sal Mire several - 4 read a second time • ---------- - CATUEDRAL APPG.IN:ViErS BILL. THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 11, 1853. shire; Mr. KKR SICYM ER, trims the parish of Child froeford ; Mr. MOODY, from Yeovil; Mr. J. NEELD, m Christian Mulford, Wiltshire ; Mr. BROTIIERTON, from working men in Salford; Mr. H. BAILLIE.from a place in the county of Inverness ; Mr. FAR KEIL, one from the working men in the City of Dur ham, and one from the Sunday-school teachers in the same city_, against. al AY MOO r G a NT.—Mr. MOODY, from Pendomer aad ; Mr. KINNAIRD, from the minbters and inhabitants of the parish of Kelshall, in Hertfordshire ; also from the Presbytery of Breadalbane ; Mr. STIRLING, from a plate not heard ; Mr. C. TURNER, from the minis ter., churchwardens, and members of St. John's Church, Liverpool ; Mr. 11. HAI LLIE, from the inhabitants of the pa-oh of Sleat, in the Weed of Skye, eeriest. 'ES ANT-RIG VT BILL.—By Mr. KIRK, from the minis ter oud congregation of Letterkenny, county Donegal, signed by nearly 300 persons, in favour Ociatx PENNY Pus rtoa.—lly Mr. DAVISON, f:om tha Sunday school teachers of the preshyterien church, Collegeoquare North, Belfast, in favour of. WAGE , ' WITHOUT STOPPAOEI3 BILL.—By Sir W. HAL. FORD. from Derby, with 1,308 signatures; from Notting ham, with 7,776 ; from Leicester, with about 10,000; in support of. or Serrtemaxr.—By Sir 11. UALFORD, from Ou iodises of the Bliley Union, for alteration of. l'A It tIAMEN TA UT PAPEII.B.—By Mr. TUFNELL (iu the absence of Mr. Macaulay), from the members of the Edinburgh Select Subscription Library ; Sir 11. NECK, from the Mechanics Institute, Hitchin, for supply of. CONSOLIDATED Anctortes.—By Sir C. li. COOTE, from the Basra of Guardian. of the Union of Roureen, in the c nutty of Tipperary. pray lag for a remission of. INCOMM TA I .—By Viscount GALWAY, from members of the medical professim at East Redford, prayiug that the incense tax ma. be allowed as far as regards their pro fesaion. louto.—By Mr. L. GOWER, from the native inhabi tants of Bombay, raying that the charter of the East India Compauy may not be renewed without lull and searching inquiry. Lurria Countites.—By Mr. BANKES,:from the letter , carriers of ;ipitaby, Lincolushire, tor an increase of 'okay. REGULATING Poetic' Horan BILL.—By Sir J. AN DERSON, from bankers, merchants, and others, inhabi tants of Stirling ; against. BRIDONORTH ELECTION. Sir J. SHELLEY presented, pursuant to notice, a peti tion from certain electors of Bridgitorth, complaining that a gross system of bribery and treating, coercion and cor ruption, had prevailed in that borough during the last and several previous elections. They stated that during the last election nearly all the public-houses in the town were open in the interest of Mr. Whitmore and Sir Robert Pigott, and they prayed that steps might be taken towards ensuring purity of election by the institution of a full in quiry, or, it necessary, a commission. The hon. baronet gave notice that be would this thy move that the petition be printed, with the view of founding a motion on it. BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS. Mr. PHINN gave notice that shortly after Easter he should move for leave to bring in a bill, giving to the County Courts jurisdiction in the case of actions for the recovery of penalties incurred by bribery, &a., at oleo Lions. (Hear, hear.) THE NEW OFFENCE OF CALLING A POLICE MAN A PIG. Sir DE L. EVANS had a question to ask the noble lord tbe Secretary for the Home Department respecting a ro ast decision of S.rjeant Adams at the Middlesex Sessions. It was stated in the pubEshed reports that a woman, nested Mary Hill, had been sintenced to seven years' transportation for robbery, but afterwards received a sen tence of three years additional, simply for calling a police man a pig. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") lie wished to know whether the noble lord had seen the report, as if ens, he (Sir De L. Evans) should certainly feel it his du t y found a motion on the subject. (Hear, hear.) Lord PALMERSTON promised to make inquiry. He had not wen the report alluded to. Sir DE L. EVANS—It is in this day's paper—the Daily News. DERBY ELECTION. On the motion of Mr. INGHAM the minutes of evident), taken before the Derby Election Committee were ordered to be printed. TILE LONDON WATER COMPANIES. Lord U. GROSVENOR having reminded the house of its preceding yetr's legislation with respect to the water oempaniee, the understood result of which was that the ex- Ming companies were to retain the supply of water to the metropolis, provided certain works were undertaken and improvements made, begged now to ask what was the opi nion of government on the subject ? Lord PALMERSTON amid that undoubtedly there was so po '• • stipulation between the government and the existing water companies, to prevent parliament from deal ing as it thought fit with any bill for establishing a new company. But if he was sake.' what was the feeling and opinion of government on the subject, with regard to the expediency or discretion on th • part of parliament of such a course, he should say that the act of last year having im posed on the existing water companies the obligation of un dertaking large works, which were now being executed at a very great expense, and there being reason to expect that if these works should be executed in the manner de scribed, there was a reasonable probability of the metropo lis getting a supply of good water, he must say that he would recommend the house to abstain from establishing any new company until the existing companies had had a fair trial, as to whether they could or not, under the pro visions of the act, accomplish the objects for which that act had been pawed. (Cheers.) PRICE OF GOLD. Mr. DRUMMOND asked the Chancellor of the Exche quer whether her Majesty's government had taken into c onsideration the effects of the reduced value of gold, the consequences of this reduction of value upon the industrious classes, and especially upon contributors to savings banks ; sad whether he did not think it advisable to appoint a committee to inquire into the altered value of the standard, send to suggest some remedy fur an evil that may be likely to arise. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that government had careful]; watched both the influx and efflux of gold into the market, but could not perceive that any sensible effect )tai been produced upon its price. They bad no intention under present circumstances, or es Amend advised, of making any motion for a committee on the sub ject. (Cheers.) ATTOENIES' CERTIFICATE DUTY. Lord If.. GROSVENOR said before going into the merits atlas ease he wished to notice the position in which the a was placed. So much had the profession felt this w to be a grievance, that during the last 20 years they had never ceased to petition for its removal. Ile himsel f had given notice to move for its repeal in 1149, but RN not able to bring forward the question till 1850. On that eon sion, although opposed by the government, he was seesaw ful. The bill went through several stages, until at tat. towards the end of the session, it was defeated threnth me of those difficulties which were incidental to the atismpta of private members at legislation. In 1851, on asionst Of the ministerial crisis and the debates on the Inimiestioal Titles Bill, he was unable to bring forward his immure until late in the session, and on that occasion, although again opposed by the then government, tho bill was carried by ag. eater majority than before. He had some reason to think, that had his friends remained in office, they would have supported the principle, and, deleting to the opinion of the house, would have considered the claims of the so licitors unanswerable. Last year, in consequence of the po litical circumstances of the time, and the near termination of the session, It was obvious that the house could not possibly pay sufficient attention to his motion. If this were the same parliament, or the house was com posed exclutivel of the same members as in the last year, be should not feel justified, seeing that he had so often called attention to the same subject, in doing more than reading his motion, and leaving the question to be decided at once by the vote ; but as he believed there were 200 gentlemen in the present who were not members of the last parliament, he felt he should scarcely do justice to those whose interests bad been conmitted to his charge if he did sot again direct attention to the history of the tax, and the arguments on which the demand rested for its repeal. At the conclusion of the hat century, Mr. Pitt being at the time in great distress for money, was compelled to raise it, not by any financial scheme, the principle of which he ap proved, but by any tax the house could be induced to vote. Mr. Pitt admitted that he could not justify this tax on at torneys and solicitors on any principle, and to make it ' tolerably fair in its application, he attached to it a coudition ,that the duty should be charged in proportion to the amount of business done. (Hear, bear.) But this fair and reasonable feature of the tax had long since been repealed ; and now, without reference to the amount of burins', the certificate duty was charged upon all the profession alike, 121. a year in London, and 8!. in the country ; and the con sequence was, that while to the house of large practice it amounted to scarcely . a per centage at all, it was upon the young man just entering into business, or the man whose practice was small, a very serious burden. Though, however, this inequality was a great objection to the tax, he was aware that if the case of the attorneys and solicitors rested upon that ground alone, they would he met by the argument that the same ground might be urged for the repeal of the taxes or license duties on all trades sub ject to them. (Hear, hear.) Still he conceived it would hardly be contended that because for the purposes of re venue certain trades paid license duties that therefore a learned profession—or rather, a part of a learned profession —should pay an annual certificate duty to entitle them ter pesctiere ; for, it should be remembered, that to quality fee the one requ ired a long, laborious, and expensive education while the others might be followed with scarcely say akar tion at all. And if it were the principle to lay a tax on the permission to follow professions then the barrister, the physician, the artist, the sculpt or, the architect, sad all other professions, ought to pay es well as the attorneys. (Hear, hear.) But even were those professions made to pay an annual certificate duty they would be dealt with . Moro fairly than were the attorneys and eoliciton, and on this ground. With regard to the attorney and solicitor, the tax-collector met him on the very threshold of his pro erosion, and called upon him to pay 1201. before kas parent, if he had one in the profession, wild communicate to him the first principle of pelherional knowledge. When his articles were out he 11011 again called upon to pay a tax of 251. before Ile could be eisitted to practise. 'Then, when he did practise, he to pay 3 per cent income tax on his earnings, and be. pond all this he was charged a certificate duty, which amounted to 3 Fier cent. on the aggregate returns of the i profession. (Hear, hear.) Ile knew it had been the fa shion to revile this branch of the legal profession, and to call the members of it extortioner., bloodsuckers, vam pires, and he knew not what besides; and he had heard MOUSE OF COMMONS.—TnuIteIeAT, M.tacu 10, The Sam tie's took the chair at the usual hoar. NEW MEMBERS. Colonel BOTLII. for Frome, and Mr. L. HETWORTH for Derby. respectively took the oaths and their seats. ELECTION COMMITTEES. The committees selected to trr the merits of the petitions against the Mahlon and Cirencester elections were respec tively sworn at the table. RAILWAY AMALGAMATION. Mr. CARDWELL moved, pursuant to notice, That no railway or canal bill, containing any powers of amal gamation, lease, working arrangement, or other com bination of interest between different companies, be reed a second time before the 2nd day of April next, unless the parties interested in yeemoting such bill shall elect to reseed with the same on the terms of striking out in einamillse td sub powers aforesaid. Be said that the imMeal etrandttee en railways had in structed him to brine Durward this motion. They admitted that it must be attended with some inconvenience to par tied, but considering the extreme magnitude of the question involved, they had felt it to be their bounden duty to take care that the house should not be compromised by any leseises of theirs, but should be prepared for legislation by the fullest possible information. Under these circumstances, he proposed that no proposal for railway amalgamation should be entertained until after the Easter holidays. PUBLIC BUSINESS. PETITIONS PRESENTED. Jxwrsu DISATILITILS.—By Mr. MOODY, from Pen darner, Barwick, Hardiagton, Carbamptoa, Otterhampton, Monksilver, and Yeovil; Vineunt GALWAY, from War ier); Sir J. BAILEY, from Cartrefr, and from the rector, churchwardens, and others, of the parish of Llamhamleek, in the county of Brecon; Sir W. CODRINGTON, two from Charlton Kings, one from Lechlade Little, Banbury, Writhed, Weston on Avon, and Cautpdon; Mr. S. WADDINGTON, from Hampstead; Mr. BENTINCK, from Eszlingharn, Sherington, and other parishes is the county of Norfolk; Sir J. Y. BULLER, from mho 'limits of Tognmouth, working men of Teignoirrath, and Inhabitants of Bishops Seynton ; Captain LOWTHER, from St.John'e, Berwick, and CroothwaPe parishes ; Sir H. MEUX, from the ecclesiastical district of Hoddesdon ; Him. C. HANBURY, from the parishioners of Deeklowl and Stoke Prior ; Mr. CHILD, from Richmond, Peter sham, and Twenham'IIE.MICOTIL from Bolton, Rutland ; ick Mr. BANK ES, from the parish of South Hornentle, Potherby of Covenham, St. Mary's of Coven- Ms, St. Bartholomew, ia Lincolnshire ; against the re novel of ATTORNIT.II' CttTrrcAnDVTT.—By. Mr. POTTER, from 32 attorneys and solicitors, practising_ in the county and city of Limerick; Mr. B. WADDINGTON. from the Atternses of Sudbury; Mr. CHEETHAM, from the anor ak* and solicitors of A s hton.under•Lyne ; Mr. T. PAR KER, from 39 solicitors pudding in the borough of Pres ton ; Mr. HAMILTON numeroualy signed, from attornies and solicitors of Ireland , ; Sir J. Y. BULLER, from Ply mouth Law Society ; Mr. GREGSON, from the attornies at Lancaster ; Mr. COBDEN, from Yorkshire • Mr. KINGSCOTE, from Coleford and Thornbury ; 'Sir J. DUCKWORTII, from atomics end proctors of Exeter ; Mr. PUG 11, from Maehyalleth and Llangollen ; Mr. SUL LIVAN, from 16 solicitors of Kilkenny ; Mr. F. MACK INZIE, from attorns and solicitors of Liverpool, and MOM the Society of Writers to the Signet in Scotland ; Sir B.MEUX. from the parish of Dunstable, in Bedford shire ;Mr MULLINOS, from the solleitors of Ciren cester; Mr. FARMER, from Bunn I Castle and Stockton en-Tees ; Mr. BANKES, from the solicitors of Thorn, in Yorkshire ; Sir 1. ANDERSON, from writers end others Danfermline ; Viscount LEWISH.AM,froin attorneys of Wolverhansptea ; Mr. 11. CLIVE, from the attorala and 'elision of Shiffoal ; for the aboli tins nf. Orcatorti co TNT, CIITATAL PALACT ox 13I'NDITS.— By Mr. A. PELLATT, from the Sunday sebonl teachers of the Independent Chapel of Betswor.b, Southampton! of one member of parliament who, having been asked the difference between en attorney and a solicitor, replied that there was precisely the same difference between them as there was between an alligator and a crocodile. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) Dot as it appeared to him it was the government who were the 'Montanan in maintaining a fiscal system, by which 123,0001. • year was extracted from the pcekets of that profession in the shape of certificate duty, 80,0001. in the stamp duty on articles of clerkship, and 20,0001. on the stamp duty on admissions—in all, 200,0001. a year on the industrial earnings of one portion ' only of a learned profession. When this certificate duty was first proposed by Mr. Pitt, Sir B. Ashley, who was member for Wilts, expressed himself delighted et t`te no tion of skinning the attornies, and said that he looked upon law as a luxury, and that nil who indulged in it ought to pay for it. He (Lord U. Grosvenor) did not think law was a luxury but a ncce s*a r y sail. (Hear, hear.) He thought law, which in other terms was " the adminLtration of juttice" should be made so cheap that it should be open to all. (Hear, hear.) It was far better to simplify the law and make it cheap than to maintain a system apparently for the benefit of the practitioners, by which it was made complicated and deer to the public, com pelling those practitioners on the other hand to bear an undue proportion of the public burdens. (Hear, hear.) He was glad to find that after many long delays the govern ment and the legislature heel at length entered in earnest upon the career of legal reform; bat, as by thole:. reforms the profits of the profession were necenari'y largely reduced the claim for the abolition of the certificate tax was the greater. (Hear, hear.) Ile bail hoped that his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer would have armed' him the necessity of making a speech by at once acquiescing in the motion ; and, though it appeared he was mistaken, he was altogether at a loss to conceive on what grounds' the very ingenious mind of his right hon. friend would yen- 1 ture to resist it. If, as he hoped and believed , his right hon. friend entertained a strong objection to this tax he could understand that be might be desirous of having the opinion of the new parliament expressed on the subject before dealing with it. If so ho felt sure that when that opinion was pronounced, as it had been in the last parlia ment, it wculd ho mi t with respect and deference by his i right hon. friend. One word as to the amount of revenue involved in the proposition. I'he whole amount of this annual certificate duty was only 120,0e01.. a sum so insignificant that if there were no surplus, injury to the revenue oughe not to be urged against its repeal. As it was, however, there was no reason for supposing that the re venue was in a position easily to bear this trifling abstrac tion. (Hear, hear.) And that being the case, he trusted there would be no objection to &motion, pledging the house to the repeal of a tax so objectionable in principle, and so unjust and unequal in its application. He did not antici pate any objection from his right hon. friend, as to the period at which the motion was brought forward. for he haagined his right hon. friend would naturally desire to know the mind of the boose in reference to the claims for ths repeal of this or any similar tax before he brought for ward big budget, rather than that he should afterwards be compelled, by a subsequent vote of the house, to make re ductions for which he might not have been provided. The aid objection against motions for abolishing or reducing taxes—that if brought forward before the budget, they were too soon, and if after the budget, they were too late—he did not expect to be met with on this occasion; for that had been completely disposed of on a former evening by his hon. friend the member for Montrose. (Hear, hear.) After thanking the house for the attention with which they had listened to him, the noble lord concluded by moving for leave to introduce a bill to repeal the attorniea' and sulici tore' annual certificate duty." Mr. COWAN seconded the motion. After referring to the petition which be had presented that evening against the tax, signed by 11l members of the legal profession of Edinburgh, be said that the petitioners objected to the tax, and he agreed with them, on the ground that it was an additional charge imposed upon them beyond the ordinary tale,. With regard to the principle of taxing professions he knew of no fairer tax that could be imposed than an annual license duty, provided that it extended to all pro fessions alike. Two years ago he had given notice of a motion on this subject in committee on the income tax bill. but the success of his hen. friend's (Mr. Hume's) proposal to refer the bill to a select committee, prevented the opinion of the house being taken upon it. There were now twenty trades and professions paying license duty under the excise sad twelve or thirteen paying Ikons's under the stamp duties. The amount paid for excise Heaton* in England, Ireland, and Scotland was 1,269,0001., and for licenses under the stamp duties 215,0001., together 1,484,0001. Looking to the small number of trades and professions which contribatid to these taxes, he begged to suggest to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that schedule Din the Income-tax Act should be repealed, and that the govern ment should consider the propriety of substituting for it an annual license or certificate duty extending to all trades and professions. (" Divide, divide.") The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed, that whatever might be the inteution of the hon. gentle. man who had just sat down, on the question before the house, it was clear he did not esteem it so highly as the general principles of public spirit and patriotism ; because, while he urged that this particular duty win of an excep tional character, he recommended that its principle stou'd be extended to all trades and professions. (Hear, bear.) Much was to be said, no doubt, in the way of argument in favour of the dcctriue which the hoc. gentleman advocated ; hut—and ho did not say it should be dens—if the house thought that it was a question which, under possible circum stances, deserved consideration, be would still submit that nothing could be more embarrassing and perplexing than to disturb portions of the system which now existed, in order that hereafter they might start upon it afresh. It would be more reasouable, before they proceeded to abolish any existing tar—when the question was, whether the principle of that tax should be made universal—that they should re tain the taxes they already had based upon the principle which they wished to extend. He could not at all sub scribe to the argument which had been addressed to the generosity of the house, on the ground that the body with whom they were dealing, were limited in numbers, and therefore limited in power. Ontho contrary, there was no one question brought under she notice of the house that was always so sure of obtaining a fair hearing, and some thing more than a fair hearing, as the question of the re peal of the Attornies' Certificate Duty. (" Hear," and a laugh.) His noble friend said, he hoped that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would acquiesce is the proposition for the abolition of this tax, —but he should be sorry to make any abstract or universal declaration on the subject, but would go to the point that no person holding the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer ought, under any circumstances, to consent to the abolition of any tax until he considered the arguments in favour of such abolition in conjunction with the arguments which might be brought forward for abolishing or reducing other taxes--end if the government intended to abolish this par dealer tax, as pan of their financial arrangements foe the year, they must still have felt it their duty to oppose this mastics. (Hear, hear.) Be by no means denied that in the duties which bore on attorneys and solicitors there was we SW for consideration. (Hear, hear.) But at the same time, he did not consider the annual certificate duty as the most unjust of those duties. No doubt it was open to those various objections which might be urged against almost every other similar tax ; bat he thought upon the whole that those taxes which were levied upon certain trades and professions, and leviable annually, were amongst the worst is our fiscal epshea. (Hear, bear.) 'flat they were good er unobjectioaelle he would not say; but this he had no beeitatica In win, that there were many that could pre sent mesh afteysrdear fee abolition. He admitted that there was setae ii the argument of the variety of duties that fall apes this particular prodessiee—and that there were quealkess as to the mama* sad the adjustment of slaw mental taxes whisk desseeed the consideration of the frissemment when they haw the financial resouices of the eareesy, and were is a positive to do justice to all doles who had claims ter the reduction of taxation. (Hear.) Per instance, as the Men was aware, the attorneys in Lon a= paid a certifies* bay of 121. • year, while the country afileseys =LI yew oily. sad it might be csntended list that related I to , sad was consequent upon, a slate of Wage ander which the London attorneys possessed as ad mAte ever the country attorneys, and were supposed to have the la rger and more lucrative share of the practice of the erantry, and that railways had changed matters in this ropes, sad In a great measure removed the inequality. Is abbe. thooders, be • fit cosmic& for consideration whe ther lie mos amount should not is future be charged on all seellesates. Again, it might be right to consider whether I ig th h e t tai ari — s r w d o r w th h er e. it still ad east Ile e l which might Ohs berass, fa hes of abolishing the annual certificate stampsm set nuke • considerable modification in the duty as articles of admission. (Hear, hear.) These who had applied to his noble friend and secured his ' valsatile services, had not thought to lay that part of the ONO before him. (Hear.) He wished the house to under gone' that, although he thought the fiscal considerations involved, in acceding to the motion, were serious, there were other questions beside the amount which, by the re peal of this duty, would be lost to the revenue, that must not be overlooked. Let the house consider what was the effect of saying to a youth at the door of the profession, you shall not enter until you have paid down 1201. (Hear.) Why, the effect of that was to create a virtual monopoly. (Hear.) But his noble friend proposed no alteration in that heavy duty, which, in its effect, was like a fence or a wall erected round the profesaion, to secure them from competi tion. (Cheers.) The proposal was to take the burden off those who had the means and the power to bear it, and to leave it upon those who had not. (Cheers.) lie trusted the house would come to no such conclusion. (Hear, hear.) When the proper time for considering the case of the attor neys and solicitors arrived, it would be a question deserving consideration, whether the most proper method of affording relief to the profession would not be by means of au import ant redaction in the duty on amides of admission—one effect of which would be, to give the public the benefit of freer competition than by the measure proposed by his noble friend, the mutt of which would be, to make the 1 monopoly which now existed, whatever that might be, still more stringent. (Hear, hear.) Ilia noble friend asked, I "Why do you not lay the tax on banisters ?" Why, his noble friend must know that there was all the difference in the world between keeping on a tax they had already got, and laying on a tax that they had not. (" Hear," and a laugh.) lie would impress on the house that the question they had to deal with was not the abstract merits of the tax. Upon that point he admitted, that not this tax sim ply, but the entire taxes which affected this profession, were deserving of consideration, together with the claims of other classes, when the state of the public finances would allow of it; but he protested against that practice which would prove destructive of the finances of the country—the practice of taking one particular tax, or the claims of one particular class, and dealing with it as an isolated case. (Ilea, bear.) His noble friend said he should not have the argument on the present occasion that this was the wrong time for bringing forward this question. Ile on time. An , house. An argument might be raised on the assumption would have It , nevertheless, for it was the cos hen. member %Mother night, speaking on midi& rent question , that there were very few who refused to taste an oath. He said that tbetChnneellor of t Exchequer Ina ariably told submitted that that was me answer. There were, however, he Outhouse, when motions were brought forward fa' reducing 1 many who had a conscientious objection, and who su ff ered taxation, that the time chosen was the wrong one. He ( the ; rather than violate their conscience. L ately a young lady Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not do so; and he would , was imprisoned for three days in Devonshire fur refusing to tell the house when was the proper time for imbue ittinff take en oath, and a gentleman named Hoffeter (as we claims of this nature. It was when the house had gun eso , understood him) was imprisoned three years for the same for in determining what sh alleged offence. The hon. gentleman concluding by moving should he the amount of the put tic expenditure of the ye that they were in a position to me• - I the resolution. Mr. MIME supported the motion on Vie ground that a sure the nee ar necessary amount of taxation to meet it. Then bad man would often take an oath when a good man would they knew whether they were in a condition to repeal any 1 effuse. tax or not; and when they . knew that then was the time k es The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER agreed in for considering and determining the claims of the various classes of the community, and with reference to the whole ;t h e .main principle of the motion, system of taxation, or if they found a tax so grievous that ' net b.' Premeds because, with regar d to reforms already made, courts, a commission was preparing a report; and it called for repeal because it was more grievous and inverine ration was unnecessary ; with regard to the case of oppressive than any other , then was the time for :consi- the law dering and determining whether it should be renewed. with regard to parliamentary oaths, the subject was not one (Hear, hear.) But he objected to this motion at for Ismaili:ellen by a committee, and as fir as the cue of the present time because it was calling upon the the sews w.na concerned a motion was already before the house to act with their eyes shut, and to pledge house. M itself to the concession of the claims of the atter - M r. J. Ball, Mr. aguire, and Mr. Vincent Scully, made 1 lacy" and solicitor", overlooking those of all other some observations as to the nature of the present oaths as classes of the community. (Hear, hear.) The right time affecting It MUM eitheliCS. to make the motion would be when be (if it should be his SMITH was satisfied with the explanation of duty to do so)whould, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, pro- the Chancellor of the Exchequer. pose any remission of taxation for any other class of tax- Mr. C. FORTESCUE, as a protestant, was opposed to payers—then would be the time for his noble friend to the nt system, as an injustice to all classes. bring forward his ease, and ask the house whether this par- pr eyM PELLATT withdrew his motion. titular tax had a greater claim for remission than any other. Mr. FITZROY asked for leave to bring in a bill for the That would be the proper and straightforward course of better prevention and punishment of aggravated assaults proceeding, and his noble friend was no doubt or thd same upon women and children. He described the frequent and opinion, for in 1850, when, in answer to his motion, the increasing nature of the grossest species of assault', cow same objection was taken that the financial statement of the witted by " brutes who call themselves men," and the in year was about in a short time to be submitted to the hoes q adequacy of the present law to meet the evil. He proposed admitted the force of that objection, and postponed taking for that purpose to give six incmont reas ehss' i d ummary power to with he Innrd is a vote upon the question. That was the course his noble trate*, to the extent ofimprisonment friend took in Meek and that was the course which he (the labour, or 201. tine, in cases of the kind. By so doing they Chancellor of the Exchequer) indulged in the hope would only be placing the " unfortunate female " in a posi he would take now. (Hear, hear.) The main question, tion of equality with the poodle dog or the King Charles's after all, was this—which was the view the house spaniel—a privilege which they do nut at present enjey. took of the duty of the executive government in re: and to Mr. PRIME went further than Mr. Fitzroy, believing the management of the finances of the country ? Did they the infliction of corporal punishment to be appropriate in think it right that the orinion of the house should be ex- such cane. pressed—that it was right that the Chancellor of the Ex- Mr. J. Phillimore, Mr. Parke, and Mr. Stapleton made chequer should know the opinion of the house as to any Noma suggestions, in giving their general support to the tax, the repeal of which might be proposed before the finan- motion, and leave was g iven to bring in the bill. ended:eine of the year was made up, and that he should ba A discussion took place on the motion of Mr. F. FRENCH, guided by that opinion in making the financial arrange- that Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Bowyer be added to the Indian i moot of the year? Ile would not now say whether that Committee, which resulted in • division, when the motion I would be a good system or not, but if it were to be fel- was lost by 20 to 95. lowed the office of the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought PUBLIC HEALTH ACT. to be abolished. (Ilene, hear.) If the proper mode of Col. HARCOUItT rose pursuant to notice to move for a , dealing with the finances of the country, in regard to the return of all cues in which either of the superintending in - 1 reduction of taxation, were upon the principles of " first specters of the General Board of Health had been em come first served"—that the chance of precedence by the ployed as the engineers in carrying out the works which ballot box should determine the order in which each sepa- had been executed under the authority of the Public rate claim for reduction should be considered and decided by Health Act, 18tS. The hon. and gallant member explained the vete of that house without reference to the whole financial that he made this motion especially with reference to certain system, and the claims of the country at large, the office transactions which had taken place in the town of Ryde in of Chancellor of the Exchequer would be unnecessary. connection with the Public Health Act. It appeared The duty of the government, as it appeared to him, was to that certain ratepayers, acting against the declared take the claims of each class, and to deal with them in a will of the great majority, bad applied to have comprehensive spirit in reference to every clan of the the provisions of the act applied to Hyde, and country, and having done ao, :to select those they thought that a Mr. Hanger was sent down by the board the weightiest, and make their proposals to parliament ao to make the neceisary arrsrigemente. This officer, how cordingly, and state the grounds upon which those proposals ever, not content with laying out what was to be done as rest—have them discussed in open debate, as against any the officer of the board, undertook the execution of them others that might be brought forward by individual mem- himself. In another ease, being sent down to Cowes to h e m and !cave it to the house to determine what class in amine and report on the waterworks, he sent in a bill to preference to others relief should be given. (Hear, hear.) the Town Council of 801. It was with a view to the pre- Such was his notion of the duty of a minister of finance, vention of such practices in future that he moved for these and whatever might be the opinion of the government here- returns. after as' to the particular tax in question—whether any Sir W. MOLESWORTH said the inspectors of the change should be made in it or not—he meet call upon the Board of Health were under very imperfect control, but house to join him in meeting his noble friend's motion with the constitution of the board was at present under con s direct negative. sideration. He had no objection to the production of the Sir F. THEME& ridiculed the idea of waiting for the returns. repeal of a tax until a Chancellor of the Exchequer chose Motion agreed to. to say that the time had arrived—which ho was never likely BRIBERY.—CASE OF STEPHEN MOUNT. to do. Ho opposed the tax as • gross and shameful ins- Mr. L. KING rose, pursuant to notice, to call the at position. tendon of the house to the following resolution of the Mr. FITZGERALD remarked generally upon the ab- Chatham election committee :—. That it is the opinion of snrdity of leaving particular grievances to be settled by this committee that there are strong grounds for believing general considerations. that Stephen Mount, in giving his evidence before the com ber. HUME saw the matter in a different light, and mittoe, has been guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury ;" would not vote for the repeal of the duty in question, while and to move, that the Attorney-General be directed other licensing duties remained in force. He was for a to prosecute the said Stephen Mount fur perjury, and committee to consider taxation generally. that in all cases in which a committee shall report there Lord R. GROSVENOR, in reply, said that the Chancel - are gr ounds for believin g a witness to be guilty of perjury, for of the Exchequer stated that on a former occasion, he the Attorney-General be directed to prosecute at once. (Lord:lt. Grosvenor) had acceded to a request male to him The hon. member said he felt that the house would agree to postpone his motion. Ile had done so, but the question with him that the time had come when proceedings such as was now in a very different position, for it had been re- were daily disclosed before the election committees should calved with favour by the house five or six times, and his receive some check. (Hear, hear.) They saw there every right hon. friend could not be surprised at his bringing it day witnesses take a solemn oath to tell the truth, at the leeward. His hon. friend the member for Montrose sue that time viten they had formed a fixed determination to withhold be should have proposed to repeal all taxes of this Lind ; the truth, or to say what was its very opposite. It had been but his hon. friend must be aware that if be attemptes that well remarked that it would be easier to draw blood from he sheuld not get many votes ; he objected to all taxes on some of these witnesses than the truth. Ile felt sure that the administration of the law. The Chancellor of the Ex- the house would not allow such a state of things to continue. chequer asked why:it was not proposed to repeal the duty on If they did not adopt some stringent course in these cases it articles and admission, and he (Lord R. Grosvenor) might be said of the house that they not only allowed but thought them an outrageous tax, but he believed an annual encouraged perjury. (Hear, hear.) And they would con tax to be the most objectionable, therefore he proposed its tints , to have witnesses coming before committees and abolition. swearing that they had not been bribed when they had, and The house then divided— that they had seen and heard what they had not, as in this For the motion Against it 167-52 only prove eek, accounted for a large sum in gold which it OATHS AND DECLARATIONS. was he had after the election by saying he found one note at one place and another at another. (Hear, hear.) Mr. A. PELLATT rose to move for "a select committee to inquire into the subject of oaths, and the operation of He thought the house and the country were greatly in to act 1 sad 2 Wm. IV. esp. 4, and the act 5 and G Wm. debted to the several election committees for the faithful IV., cap. 62, for m e th subs titution of declarations in lien of and impartial manner in which they had framed their re oatha in the Custos, Excise, public offices, and corporations eorts—(hear, hear)—and in the Chatham case especially. named in the said acts, and the advantsge of 4i:tending the (Cheers.) That committee had resolved " that it is the principle of those acts to the courts of law, and farther to opinion of this committee that there are strong grounds inquire into the oaths not taken by members of parliament for believing that one .Stephen Moan ?, in giving his at the table of the house, with the view of substituting one evidence before the committee, was guilty of wilful and form declaration fore, members of all religious persunions, corrupt perjury." He could not think the house could re and an to, report thereon from time to time. " He o n that the quire more to put this man on his trial fur perjury —(hear) question involved in his motion was the question of truth- —certainly it was not necessary, after such a declaration, to fulness. He proposed that the committee should go into wait until the evidence was printed and in the hands of the whole question, and not proceed as the committee of members. The five members who forn.ed that committee 1850 did, which reported on two special eases—those of the were, he understood, unanimous in their opinion upon this affirmations of Quakers, and the oaths to be taken by y ews . point, and surely they were as competent to form an He wished to furnish the committee with ample means of opinion, having the witness before them, as the house inquiry, so that they might get at such a result as that could be. The object was to prevent the recurrence of there should be no difference in the oaths taken at the table perjury before committees of that house, and the best way of the house, but that there should be one general affirm- to do that was, by letting it bo kuowa that certain and speedy punishment would follow the commission of the crime Mien. The bon. gentleman then referred to the present condition of the law, which was full of inequalities. hi all cases. (Hear.) Quaker , : and Separatists were allowed to affirm, because Mr. BRAMSTON, as chairman of the Cathbam cam • they objected to oaths on principle. Lord Brougham, in a mittee, could have no hesitation in seconding the motion. discussion on the oath administered to Jews, said that he Lord PALMERSTON cordially concurred in the opinion his hon. friend had expressed as to the impartial manner in wondered so much was said about oaths ; he found in which the election committees had performea their duties. Scripture the direction, " Swear not at all," and lie thought (Hear, hear. It was impossible to do more than justice m as that oaths were of no u ; but he found them on the o them—the ) y had acted with the greatest impartiality ; Statute - hook, like a good citizen he conformed to t and, what was still better, with becoming promp them. In a report of a committee of the House of Lords, titude. (Cheers.) He attached as much importance in 1834, it was recommended that the principle of derma - lion should be carried out in the Customs and Excise, ex- as any man could do to the necessity of punishing cept in eases of judicial inquiry. The hon. gentleman then those who gave false evidence before those committees; for proceeded to give instances of the modes in which if it were permitted that witnesses might perjure them oaths were taken among the ancient', „d e „ selves before these tribunals, the functions of the house among the Greeks, in Homer, the pouring of wine from a would be defeated, and all the purposes for which the com mittees were appointed unfulfilled. It was, therefore, the i pitcher and appealing to the gods that they and their children should be spilt on the ground as the wine was; duty of the house to visit, with the greatest degree of seve rity, all cases of perjury that could be established. He and among the Romans, the throwing of a stone and using a form of words implying a wish that if the oath was entirel concurred, therefore, with that part of his hon. violated Jupiter would put the warrior away as he cast friend' s resolution which recommended the prosecution in though he believed in the:ordinary course it should the stone ; and the oaths of the Egyptians , who were atom- this cue , the motion. He agreed with the honourable toured to swear by vegetables. Looking, therefore, toast- have been left to the chairman of the committee to make tiquity, there was no good authority for the imposition of ntleman who last spots that it would be bet oaths. I t bad been remarked by Paley of our form of ffe ter, after concurring with the first part of the motion, oaths that in no part of Christendom was it so ridiculous, to omit the latter part and leave the committees to pursue or so circuitous, and he expressed an opinion that the truth would be better ensured by affirmation than by their own course, and not to take out of their hands func oaths. As regarded the history of oaths in this dons which roperly belonged to them, reserving of course country, looking to the time of Elizabeth, it would be to the house t he duty of making good any omission the com found that there was an oath prescribed to be taken in cer- mittee might make. tain cases, by which a person might accuse himself of any Mr. NEWDEGATE, as a member of the Chatham corn crime, and if any ono refused the oath he might bo ilea- mittee, regretted that their chairman had not adopted the wined for an indefinite period. The hon. gentleman t en usual course of recommending the prosecution in this case. alluded to a case which had occurred in our courts of law, He had had much experience as a magistrate, but a worse in which a Brahmin had an oath administered to him in case of perjury he had never witnessed. the manner prescribed by his religion, thus establishing the Mr. L. KING accepted the suggestion which had been principle of law that the form of oath which a man was to thrown out, and withdrew the latter part of his motion, but take was tha t which was moil bindles on his regretted that it had been objecte.l to. sonscience, and which principle had been carrion Sir J. SHELLEY reminded the house that while there out of late years in the City of London. An was a sessional order declaring that any person who gave act was passed in 1831 which seemed to open out • false evidence before the house, or any committee of the better prospect, and to cause a greater respect to be paid to house, should be proceeded against with the utmost sees oaths, for at that period the clerks in some of the depart- rity, there was another declaring that any person who was menu were swearing oaths by the bushel. He believed Proved to have obtained a seat in the house by means of there were many conscientious persons who refused to take bribery or corrupt practices, should be proceeded against an oath ; and he asked on what ground Friends and Sept- with the utmost severity. lie limed that the great man ratists were allowed to make affirmation while others wars would be treated as the small ; and that as Sir F. Smith required to take oaths. Ho should not ' be surprised if in had been found guilty of bribery by the committee, they would recommend that he be visited with the utmost 'see the course of that evening they had another victim tom- rity . of the house as well as Stephen Mount. (Cheers.) mitted for refuting to take an oath before a committee of ear. BRAMSTON thought probably that it would be the house. The Lords' committee made their first report in considered the committee had been guilty of another omis -1834, in which this paseage occurred : "The committee sion, betides not recommending the prosecution of the cannot hesitate to lay down the position that recourse ought witness,that watt in not stating on which side he gave evidence. never to be had to the sanction of an oath where it can be The late member having been unseated on the ground of safely dispensed with." Many witnesses were examined bribery, it seemed to be arehended that the evidence of before the committee who were of opinion that a great the witness Mount might h ave p affected him, but such was benefit had resulted from substituting declarations for oaths. not the ease. The fact was, that the witness in question (The hon member then proceeded to quote evidence given was tendered by the petitioners, and his evidence in no way to that effect by Mr. Wedgwood, then a magistrate, and Dlr. Peacock, connected with the East India Company. He affected the gifting member. then referred to the report of 1812 .) One of t he wit- The resolution, as amended, was then put and speed to. noses examined was John Scoblc En., who had parts - ADMIRALTY COURT. cular scruples with regard to taking the oath. He Dr. R. rumumolut moved for returns of the number of actions or suits in the High Coont of Admiralty of Eng was a member of an independent congregation, land, for each o the six years precedin the passing the act and he said that, though among the corigregationalists taking an oath was not a test of communion, yet there was a grow - 3it 4 Vie. c. liar s intituled,:" An act to g m prove the practice ing feeling that oaths should not be taken. In 1850, a and extend thejuriediction of the High Court of Admiralty select committee on oaths was appointed by that house. It in England . , and for each of the Ilia years preceding Christ was appointed to search the journals of the house, and to mas, 1862, inclusive, specifying the nature of each action or suit, and whether personal or against the ship, distills report relative to the suestion of Jews or other persons taking their seats in parliament without taking the oaths ; guishing foreign from British ships ;and in ease of damage, and further to inquire in what manner Joseph Pease took whether single or cross actions ; and in cases of possession or his seat on making an affirmation. That committee had in bottom bonds, whether involving claims in equity ; and the most interesting manner traced the history of the sub. in cases of wages, whether involving claims of ject, and they stated that, until tbe period of Elizabeth, no masters and seamen against bankrupt owners of ships. oaths were taken by members in that house. At one time lie said his object was to show the satisfactory working of dissenters somewhat escaped, although Popish recusants the Court of Admiralty, and that though the act 3 & 4 were subject to imprisonment. It was a curious fact even Vie., esp. 65, gave an option to the suitor to go to the with regard to the Society of Friends, that from the time of common law courts in certain cases, that option had almost Elizabeth to the time of William and Mary they had no i invariably been exercised in favour of the Court of Admi respite, and that on the accession of William there were no sisitY• less than 500 of them in prison, and they were liberated by Agreed to. William 111., a king who was the produce of a revolution. ARREST OF ABSCONDING DEBTORS. Formerly a prejudice prevailed in the city of London Mr. NA PIER moved for leave to bring in a bill to feci against permitting Jews to take up their freedom in the Mate the more speedy arrest of absconding debtors it city. The Jews were willing to pay the fee , but when Ireland. they went to the council table they were required Agreed to. to take the oath on the holy evangelists, which of course LIVE ASSURANCES ASSOCIATIONS. they could not do. But after a while they were admitted i Oa the motion of Mr. Wiesen, the following were ap without, and he trusted that that house would follow the pointed a select committee on life war:maces associations : example of the city of Lonlen by admitting Jews into that Mr. Wilson, Mt. Cardwell, Ur. lienley, Mr. liarniltou, On theinotlOnf*iiie third ranging of this VII, Mr. FREWEN moved the fullowine clause :—" And whereas by the laws now in tom, any tem or more bene fices, or one or more benefice or benefices, and on a or more spiritual sinecure, rectory, or rectories, vicarage At vicar ages, in the same parish, or contiguous to each other, and of which the aggregate population daes not exceed one thousand five hundred persons, may be unite el, by order of her Majesty in Council, after such inquiry and notice, anet with such consent, and upon such certificate as is provided. for in an act passed in the first and second years of the reign of her present Majesty, entituled, An Act to abridge the holding of benefices in plurality, and to make better pro vision for the residence of the clergy,' withoutany reference to the yearly value of the said benefices, and it is desirable to alter and amend the said law ; be it therefore enacted, that after the passing of this act the said provisicre of the said act (except in the case of may benefices situate in any city or town where it shall appear desirable to the bishop of the diocese to pull down and remove one or more churches) shall only extend and be applicable to and fur the unioa of the two benefice., or one benethe and one spiritual sinecure rectory or vicarage, the aggregate yearly value of which deer not exceed six hundred pounds, and the churches (er, if there are more than two, then the churches which are the furthest from each other) shall be within one mile and a half of one another by the nearest road, and the annual value of one of the said benefices or spiritual sinecure rec tory or vicarage, shall not exceed two hundred pounds, or the population of one of them shall not exceed one hundred persons, according to the last census taken by the authority of any act of parliament provided alway-, that uoteleg herein contained shall be construed to alter the provieens of the twenty-sixth section of the said recited act for annex ing isolated places to the contiguous parishes, or nearing them separate benefices." lie also moved to add teese words to the title of the bill—" and to prevent the union er benefices above a certain value." Mr. S. HERBERT said the clause now proposed consti tuted the main part of a bill which the house threw out on Wednesday week, and which was besides quite foreign to the subject matter of the present bill, so much so that the hon. gentleman was obliged to alter the title of this bill, in order to make it applicable. This bill had nothing to do with the ecclesiastical cute of souls, but only provided that alefuture appointments in cathedrals shall be made subject to the recommendations of a commission now sitting on the question of cathedral trusts. Ile must resist the clause. The Image divided — For the clause 23 Against it The bill was then read a third time and passed. METRO I'OLITAN IM pitovEmENTs (REPAYMENT OUT OF CONSOLIDATED FUND) BILL. On the motion that the Speaker do leave the chair on going into committee on this bill, Mr. HENLEY, who was very ind'stinetly heard, was understood to object to the process by which this sum was passed from the Consolidated Fund into the revenue of the Commissioners of Works ; and to inquire if the money was to be taken out of the Consolidated Fund to pay the debt to which it was stated to be applicable. Then as to taking frem the balances in the Exchequer to pay that which was at present borne by the hind revekues was not a convenient course. The funds to which the bill applied were originall7 raised and charged on the London-bridge Approaches) Fund, which was obtained from cettain dues levied on a portion of the people. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had not stated when the fund is question would be in a condition to repay lots the Consoli dated Fund the suns that was now taken out. It was well known that the tax from which the money was derived was one which those who paid it were anxious to get rid of ; and this would he Ching a very poi foundation fur an agita tion to get rid of the tax. Ile did not know whether it was not intended, by paying off the debt, to get rid of the tax. No doubt the right hon. gentleman could give all the necessary information in committee, and he (Mr. Henley) should not further oppose the house going hate committee. Sir li. WILLOUGHBY said the debts in this case hav ing been created for street approaches in the city of Lon don, he could not tee why they should be thrown on the consolidated fund. The right hon. gentleman the Chan cellor of the Exchequer had stunted that there were assets to the amount of 1,200,000 e, but he had nototated how they were to be realised. It was evident that under the circum stances of the case neither the Bank of England nor the Equitable Assurance office would make the required ad vance. lie would like to hear some explanation with re gard to the repayment of interest to the land revenue. Mr. ALCOCK said he should oppose the bill because the coal.tax, instead of being reduced, was to be perpetuated); at least such was the tendency of the measure. The tax was levied within a circumference of 20 miles round Lan don; and where was the justice of making Croydon and the five or six counties surrounding the metropolis pay for improvements in the City ? The bill then went into committee. On chute I, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he must confess that there was an error in oh statement on the previous day, but it consisted in his understating his Own case. Ile said that the consumer of coals would not pay one farthing more or less in consequence of the passing of this bill, whereas, in fact, he would pay considerably less; but he was sorry to say that the threatened opposition tended to defeat that object. The debt of 893,0001., with the interest upon it, was chargeable upon the London-bridge Approaches Fund, of which this coal duty formed the prin cipal item, and the longer that debt continued in existence the heavier would the interest be. (Hear, hear) The sooner the bill parsed, the stainer the consumer will ha re leased from his liability. lie admitted the soundness of the principle that parliament had no right to chases the coun try with the burden of local improvements ; hut then, the 34,0001. had been paid out of the general revenues of the country, and what he wanted to do was to reimburse the country for that amount. As to the operation of the bill on the general revenue, ho had stated on the previous day that the principal debt was charged on the land revenues of the crown, in which the country had all the ir terost, that the sovereign who had the life estate could make over; but he felt confident that that house would never allow the crown to be deprived of property, which it had consented to mort gage for public purposes. The period of ultimate repay ment of the money to be advanced, depended, as he had in timated on the previous day, on the productiveness of the London-bridge Approaches Fund, which again depended on the increase of the population and trade of London. It was satisfactory to know that the charges on this fund would be paid off a considerable time before the expiration of the period for levying the oral duties. He was happy to state that there was at that moment a sum of 80,0001. available for the purposes to which this bill related; and he hoped that within five or Ail years the whole affair would be wound up. If any attempt should ever be made to disturb the claim of the government on the local fund he would be prepared to resist it. Mr. HENLEY said it was clear from the right hon. gen tleman's own statement that the 895,0001. was to be lent without interest, and so far the public revenue was affected. Sir W. JOLLIFFE said he could not make out what sum !it was that was to be recouped to the country—was it the 895,0001., the 961,000 e, or the whole 1,2/0,0001.? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER repeated ! that the operation of the bill would be to lessen the interest now payable, the effect of which would be to lessen the se icumulations of interest, and thereby enable the duty to be extinguished at an earlier period. But then the right lion. gentleman (Mr. Henley) said the effect of the bill would be to throw the interest on the consolidated fund ; but that was not so. The debt which had accrued on the ono side and the interest accruing on it was one thing. The charge for the repayment of that debt was quite another matter. On 66.5,0001. the London-bridge Approaches Fund was obliged to pay interest at 5 Per cent. until they should have paid off the principal. He could not en. derstand why it was that when the debt was 593,0001., in terest was only charged at 665,0001; but he presumedit was hecause their were other assets. Upon the whole it would appear that a calculation was made which involved elements at the time of considerable uncertainty and of great com plexity, and he assured the right hon. gentleman that he sympathised with him in his difficulty in understanding its Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said this was one of tbo most complicated statements ever made to the house. He still contended that the consolidated fund was to take upon itself a debt, for which there was no security. After a few words from Sir Dx L. EVANS, who provoked some laughter by remarking that the Chief Commissioner of Works (Sir W. ?dolesworth) was fast asleep (which was the case), and Mr. HENLEY, who observed that the discus sion was likely to send them all to sleep, but that, never theless, he began to understand the matter a little clearer, and that, perhaps, the Chancellor of the ElCill•Plet, attar another nap, would be able to make it clearer still, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the land revenue was entitled to receive reimbursement for all that it had paid for interest. They could not recover it eo tunnine, but they were entitled through the Commis sioner of Works to the proceeds of this fund. He now pro posed that they should be reimbursed immediately, instead of being kept out of it. After a few observatioua from Mr. Menem The clause was agreed to. The other clauses were then agreed to, and the bill was reported to the house, which then at 12 o'clock adjourued. I'AIRS.—ATTORNETS ' CIIII.TIFICATE TAM. —Mr. B. Brown paired in favour:with Mr. Portman against; 1d!. J. Martin paired in favour with Colonel Ferguson agiunst; Mr. Deedes paired in favour with Sir J. Johnstone against; Lord Alexander Lennox paired in favour with Mr. C•Fl ming Bruce against ; Mr. Bcntinck paired in favour watt Mr. J. B. Smith against. Sir It. Gore Booth, Bart., was accidentally shut out from the division on the attorneys' certificates tax. COST OF SEABORNE MAILS. —According to the last Admiralty racket List just published, the following iz the present annual cost of conveying Seaborne mails by he contract vessels lot steam navigation companies, and from the West Indies and Brazils, 270,0001. ; the But lathes, China, arid Australia, via Singapore, 100,6001.; the Peninsula, 20,5001. ; America, 173,340/. ; Chili and rash 25,0001.; Cape of Good Hope and Calcutta, 36,1001.; Aus tralia via the Cape of Good Rope, 26,0001. ; Skeet Coast of Africa, 23,2501.; Hamburg arid. Rotterdam, 17,0 0 0 1 .; be* tween Bermuda and Newfoundland, 10,6001. • IR ,_ trawl' and St. Thomas, 4,1001. ; Holyhead and Hinge:ow% 25,0001. • Liverpool and Isle of Mao, b 501.; b e and Lerwick', 9001. ; Alexandria and Beyrout, 1,:i00. ; oth suarton and. Channel Ides, 4,0001, via. :—To 4L ,, 4.4 A mem & raid.= • Gasette," IP Pa f,r Wt. •l" I llteTto6 114,! 2 alLr: be al Ale 1 , day of pabtleatio HIGH Tnu P4V--I 1.0.21011,0W-.4 LOYD( very large supporting more such ti shameful ci went of pec eu 4lomers,— might sweei standing th tion—fossil dity, ugly, is needed t THE 84 of levrist diacussioi porhaps, few who are not 1 they will that the of religi some fah majority numeral] a House mons of to be in farm seeming time, b of tho been pre been um on any 1 tiatory E at all. the I.is