The Express. — London, England, 1851-05-09 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDB.—TinitBDAY, MAT 8. The LORD C111•11CIILLOR took his mat at SIPS o'clock. ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE—IM PROVEMENT AND PREVENTION OF OF FENCES BILLS. Lod warBELL laid on the table the report of the m ime ate est these bills, in which considerable atm dos Ind Mmosas. He was anxious to elate that the pm am, merit of those bills wm due to Mr. Cre, S Q.C., aid Mr. Pitt Taylor,* grandma of the great jeer wlso had pupated the MI alder hie Campbell's) auspices. He had also the pleasure of Mating that he had received stetter from Chief Justice Dlaekburne. the Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Dosch in Ireland (one of the greatest judges who had ever sat es the beach an Ireland or England)—(hear, hear)— and who informed him (Lord Camp b e ll ) that his leveed brethren and himself highly approved of the bills. proposed that the bills should be reprinted with a view - lo their beige re-committed. —Agreed to. MESSAGES WITH THE COMMONS. Lord ItEDESDALE moved " That in eases in which the Commons disagree to any amendments midi by the Lords, • or Moist upon any amendments to which the Lords have dimmed, the Lords are willing to receive the reasons of the Commons for disagreeing or insisting, as the case may be, be message, without a conference, unless at any time the Commons should desire to communicate the same at a .Deference." The resolution was then agreed to, and a meteor to that sleet sent down to the Commons. APPRENTICES' AND SERVANTS' BILL. Oa the motion of the Earl of CARLISLE, this bill, after a short convenatioa, was read a third time and passed. - CHURCH EDUCATION SOCIETY IN IRELAND. Legg DUNS.tNY, in presenting the petition above no- Seed, referred to the paatoral which had heen issued by Arch bishop Cullen, deterring Roman catholic children from attend fag the society's schools, and said the inhabitants of several parishes were placed at a great disadvantage. The num ber of schools excluded from participation in the public Brut was I,SIiS, and in them there were taught 111,877 Children. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. Oa the motion of Earl GRS,SVILLI, the Exchequer-hills Dill, the Stamp Duties Assimilation Rill, and the Indem nity 13il1 wen: severally read a second time. 'The home adjuunsed at a few minutes atter six o'clock. HOUSE OF commoNs.-111URADAY, MAT 8. The SPSAKEIL took the chair at 4 o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Taunton and Blarkwell Railway (from London and Blackwell F.stension Railway to Tilbury) NU was read a third time and pawed. PUBLIC BUSINESS. PETITIONS I'IIESENT ED. Peret Ann unistus.—lTy Mr. ALEX AN DER IT ASTI E, from (11,Airow, signed by A 6,000 piths. inhabitants, and com plaining of the ineffective manner in which the aggreesion of the Pope has been met, notwithstanding the assurances enntait.ed in the letter of Lord John Rumen; the petition went on to pray that all government grotto for Roman oattedie purposes he withdrawn ; that convents and reli gious homes should be open to impection, and that the law of mortmain he amended; By Mr. COWAN, from Edin burgh, a petition 700 yard. lout—(a laugh)—and sMned by 43.734 of the inhabitants; Mr. ELLICE, jun., St. Andrews; Sir 11. DAVI F. I I adding ton ; Mr. S. WOILTLEY, Rotheeay ; Mr. BEAMS . ..ION, Eons: ; Mr. COWAN. from one of the Western Ides; Mr. 11. DRUMMONI), Blair Athol'; Mr. H. H. CLIVE, Salop; Mr. MILNER, York; and Mr. THOItNIIILL, Leighton, against. ItAtimo.—lly Sir J. WAT.MSLEY, from the owners and occupiers of homes in Great Bolton, as bead at and under rii. per annum rent. praying that a clause may be inserted in the sma ll tenements rating hill, which will confer upon the occupiers of homes not ammo d at more than Gi. all the privileges hitherto enjoyed by such iteespiere. TILAPLI on KNowterw.e.—lly Mr. M. GIBSON, Man aging (3 petitions); Mr. T. DI•NCOMBE Di petitions), Figeleary ; and Mr. TUFNELL, Devonport, against. CEYLON. Mr. 11. BAILLIE pesdponeil his motion in reference to this colony to Tui . sslae. May 2 7. CltoWN LAND REVENUES. Lord SEYSIOCIt gave notice that, on Monday neat, he would Loring in a hill for the better management of the land ITVCIIIII.II of the rritifll. SEWERS COMMISSION. Capt. EITZIMIY wished to pot • question to the right bon. S. co tart' for the Dome Department. A new rate of Oil. in the lo.Und hail been evil.' for by the commissioners of *ewers, and eteited runsiderahle alarm. In coneequence of the very un,stisfaelory answer given lip the thief tow eling of that deportment to a question put to him the other tight, be (Capt. Fiterov) wiehill to kn..w when it wee the Mt. ntion of government to bring in a bill to renew or re the rommi....ion of newer. Sir D. GREY aid at that moment he was not prepared le say when the bill would he brought in. DANISH CLAIMS. Mr. ROEBUCK gave notice that, oft the fleet night of apply, after Monday night meat, be would stove a resolu tion novenae the Danish claims. BLIC 111.1 VENT K AND EKI'ENDITURE. On the ',unman( Mr. lIVISR, certain return. were ordered of mildle mei nue and nip !Witmer, from 102'2 to 1330, both inclusis... REPEAT. OF TIDE MALT-TAX. ..... .—..... Tt titi.m• in tarnur of the repeal of th.• malt tax having Urea rn....nteol by Mr. Frearn, &not Suw•a ; and Mr. Damn h, tn.= a farmer holding 2,000 .arna iu Cambridge 'hire ._ . _ , Mr. rA LEV one to volonit hi. motion for tlw repeal of the mali•tas, than which, h.. no :Isar.• short of a nioni to the .y.tem nt r 1111 l legislation we had un happily atiand •I, •1011111 gift' Po much relief to the airri el&nuul interest. N. kiwr the commutation of the window tax for tlii bona-tan, wir the reduction of the duties upon till, r mot entree, diminished the special bunlans upon the land; whereas the inaltdaa WU 40 oppressive, olatructive, mid tilawaiouv, that the late Sir Itohert Peel declared that that tat must ht repealad if the eon, taws werw removed. mad oohs, fn.-trade ailvileat.•• had echoed the deelaration. Le TWIE 11W1110 taunted with wishing carried was shown by the fact. that a very short time ago to disturb psi& coedit, and to bring hack protection. seven publicans in Loudon were fined 2001. each by the Now, no person wee more deeply attached to the mainte- Excise for that While°. Ile was not one of those who asked LUNN of the purse faith and honour than he was, anal he or espy , teal that 4.010,0001. of money should he at once we. stir, that the beet security the public creditor could taken from the Excheimer. ' Hear, hear," from the have was to h e found in the pnisnerity of thole from whom Chancellor of the Exchequer.) Hu should he satisfied if his m / was drawn. (Hear, licer.) But the agriculturist. the right ham. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer were now in • state of great distress—a distress which they would say I admit you have a certain portion of justice neither would nor could hear up against any longer. (Hear, on your side, and it is only proper and fair that we should bear.) It would be said that he was looking for protection. endeavour to approximate towards the total repeal of the There woes nn man untitled to claim more credit fur exiled- malt tax as fast as we nut, and as I cannot do all I could log himself from any direct attempt to restore pmtertion wish for you at once I will begin by reducing the tax 10 than ha. (Mr. ('ayley). lie always told the farmers that per cent. this year, '2O per cent. next, and so on, [year by they must endeavour to adapt themselves. to the present year, until it shall altogether cease." (Hem.) state of things by looking to a reduction of taxation; that Mr. PACK E einuckled with Mr. Cayley in considering they must look to and exhaust every other means of relief that the British farmer laboured under overwhelming dis bef ore they could ask for a return to protection. Ile tress, which he was anxious to relieve ; but a fallacy ran knew, mad he regretted to hose to state that there through his argument, owing to his not distinguishing the was no chance of a return to protection till the interest of the farmer in his two capacities of a consumer physic hail work. il more. But it was working. and a producer; far every is. the farmer would gain in one (Hear, hear.) No later than ten days ago, at a capacity he would hie 20s. in the other. Thu importation peddle alanner in Glasgow, eempsised of persons, of whom of malt was now prohibited, and Mr. ('ayl ev had tailed in three-tourtlis were free traders, the otagnation of commerce showing that, if the tax were repealed, malt would nut be wan complained of, and it was admitted that no serious dis- invented from abroad. His (Mr. l'acke's) conviction, on tress could fall upon onegred class of the community without the contrary, was that, if the tax were repealed, there affee ting the others. 'she free trade party might now, in would not only be a large importation of malt, but an in his of hi• divided into certain classes —viz., those creased importation of foreigu wheat; and for this reason who admitted free trade to he a failure anal acknowledged he opposed the motion. privately and secretly indeed that some change was naves- Mr. AGLIONBY likewise opposed the repeal of any sag —those whine opinion, had changed from confidence part of the tax, because the finances of the country could to ,)aunt —anal thine fanatics who would rather go to the not at present bear such a sacrifice of revenue. oratfold or to rain than admit they were in error. Mr. FLOYER supported the motion mainly on the (Hear, hear.) They had remitted no less than amorist. ground that the maintenance of this tax was at complete of taxation since the repeal' of the corn laws, varianee with the financial policy of the government, namely, but thew remissious were all in one direction. It was said that on all articles of prime necessity taxation should be as that the hon. member for Burks wished to return to the much as possible natured. If barley were not an article of Breton of protection, but the propositions made by that prime necessity, why was it relieved of duty when the hen. gentleman, es well as those made by himself. were corn laws were repealed t if it were such an article, as he made a ith the view of adapting the new system to the old contended it wan, how could such a tax, tenfold greater interests. if they were to have no corn law legie- than the am o u n t re p ea l e d, be justified ? Mr. Eag ha er cepa tenon they must ve no corn law taxation. (Cheers.) tided at sonic length upon what he regarded as sure spiv- Now, what was the question before the house? They tem. of agricultural distress. imposed a burden upon an article of agricultural pro- Mr. SEYMOUR bore testimony to the diminution of duce amounting to between 70 and 100 per cent. (Cheers.) pauperism in Dorgetshire. But it WU said lay the free traders that this bunlen was Mr. BENNET considered this to be a question of justice paid by the consumer, and not by the producer. Well, if to the agricultural interest, and that upon the principle of that were so why was the cotton interest so clamorous to free trade our beverages should be ea free front tax as our east off the duty on raw cotton ? Was not that also paid by corn. the consumer ? (Hear, hear.) The reason why the free Mr. TRELAWNY denied that the repeal of a tax which traders ware so mations to get rid of the tax on raw cotton was ultimately paid by the consumer could benefit the agri- Was that the tat raised the price and so diminished the cultural elegies, who must be taxed to supply the de consumption of the article. (thou.) Bat was not that the ficiency. case with the proalueer of the elements of beer? In Mr. WODEHOL7SE should vote against the motion. His consequence of the credit which was given to the malt- main objection to it was that at present there was an &boo ster, a bondsman was required, and the large =haters lute prohibition of the importation of malt, and that, if the being able to get a bondsman more easily than the smaller duty were removed, though large quantities of foreign malt ones had, in fact, a monopoly in consequence: anal one might not immediately come in, the finer qualities of bar reason why the tax should &e altogether repealed was that ley would be immediately affected. that was the only way of getting rid of the gigantic mono- Mr. FREWEN supported the motion for the repeal of a poly of the maltaters and the brewers. (Hear, hear.) Ile tax which operated as a strong inducement to country dial out propose that the tax should be repealed at once. brewers to drug their beer, a vast quantity of liquor sold as Ilia proposition was, indeed, to bring in a bill to repeal the beer being not pure malt and hops. A further reason was tax, hut if he were so fortunate as to get a committee it that malt might be most advantageously used in fattening would be for the committee to say in what manner the cattle, which would bring many thousand acres into culti remission should take place. He had no wish to embernus vation. the Exchequer; and though he wished to see the as repealed Mr. J. SANDARS said, Mr. Cayley bad given no sufll at the earliest possible period, be would be contented cient reason for concluding that the repeal of this tax would with the reduction of one-half the duty in April next. and increase the consumption of barley threetold. The sta the remission of the remainder in October following. What onary consumption of malt, compared with tea and coffee, he contended was, that the tax should not be allowed to was owing to the habits of the people having changed,—to continue. It wee impossible for the farmers to carry on their being less addicted than formerly to fermented the domestic productions of the country under free trade liquors. Mr. Sandan showed that Mr. Cayley had cxagge unless their own hands were set free. There must be some rated the obstacles to the importatioa of foreign malt, as uniform system of taxation, which ...mid enable labourers, well aa many of the evils incident to the tax, the amount of through the low price of what they consumed, to live as which was too large to be relinquished. well under a diminished scale of wages as they hail don* Mr. 11. DRUMMOND, oa the part of a clam not repre before. Agriculturists could not be expected to go on em- seated in that house, claimed relief from this tax, because playing labour without profit. It was said that wefts* it premed almost exclusively upon tho agricultural labourer. were not reduced in portion to the reduction The deficieug might be supphed by a house tax, an 'Wall in the price of corn. B u t cou ld any man in tional income-tax, or any tax, so that this tax was taken his erases imagine that the present tale at wives of the labourer. would matinee if the farmer continued M envy on The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had been his operation. without • preit ? It ems lowly surprised to hear this tax described as of so objectionable a and the hibusiring classes /mew it. Me INS MAirbi, ei mature. He had seen many parties who had inquired into Oleg down into Yorkshire at Itaitsr, le we lie esesees the subject, and they uniformly agreed with him in opinion, rate at which ensigestian will rim e.—pew. bete)—sei• that where so large an amain( of novenae wise to be raised, rbo tiz . of tb.• bone and um tele of the esastiyolf • diet of there was hardly any tax which could be collected so re who had peewleady bees is ewe empiarant es cheaply and with so little ineenverdeace as the malt tat. pew them a command of dark to ashy them amass the The malt tax had last year is round numbers produced pi ew:e , r eie Stleor, bear.) INS MAIM to see the Mee arch 5,400.0001., and the eouweilliosars of emit* reported that the Warn wvlsi his. to thslr limit by seri- no tax was less objectionable the* the melt tea, and that colts: el It wa labourers atter hay balsellai hi Amelia sr Altus. the paying of it woe low felt and law *trim than may tuba. s a mos shwa se Aga ail sod, le the she: tax. The ocitaathicests se Raise slid get IM for the GREAT Picesiiilly (by fileginastred), costal= 10 bouses of II apartment. each. and is quite ailment to Hyde-park Comer, end only 3 or 6 p totem' walk from the Crystal ?slam. It has been ell newly painted an 4 furalthed for the sewn asedation of respectable parties and chimes, hoot or foment, a guilt ier residence sad board, during short periods of the Exhibition, at bud moderate slaws for liberal arrangements.—Appbeations for circulars, term; sad any telorreatim, to be fuldmard to Mr. RAIN. BON, 11, Pall Mall-east, Trafalgar.square, Loudon. Cite vrortoo. TO CORRESPONDENTS. A Sewed Edition of •' The Eapresa" teoutaialag the roe •,ehintsr Gesetta," is published every Tuesday and Friday steel, In Urns . - fee pod. Attest twetweato intended for " The Ez peer,. tondo' Evrp:lng pow. suit be et the Unice, 1 0 , foulerte•stroet, by Two o'e . .Ptit ea tee de of publeation. MGR WATER AT LONDON BRIDQE. TM'S DAT—Morning. lb. 48. a Afternoon, Mt. Mi. Saitentnow—Morning, 9b.11m Afternoon, 91. LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 9. A FULL and correct account of how much of the national revenue is annually spent for the mere pur pose of punishing crime would be an instructive comment on our defective system of penal law. But it could not be easily drawn out, for the process would require to ascertain the expenses•of local police throughout the kingdoms, and would involve the difficult question of what proportion of our ex• penditure on courts of law is to be attributed to the administration of penal and what proportion to the administration of distributive justice. It is, however, worth while to cast a glance over sonic of the item* of our criminal expenditure, as they appear in the Miscellaneous Estimates for the year 1851-2. Under the head of " Law and Justice" in these estimates we find the following entries : Criminal prosecutions, &c., in Scotland .07,11.10 Do. do. Ireland Prosecutions at assizes and quarter sessions in England 200,000 Inspection and superintendence of prisons in the United Kingdom Government prisons and convict establish ments at home 4;l ,263 Maintenance of prisoner. in county gaols and lunatic asylums 117,190 Expenses of transportation Convict establishments in the colonic% Total of the above.... CI .0!3,661 A part only of what the country pays yearly for the sole purpose of punishing crime amounts to up wards of one million. How much of the whole of what is thus spent might be saved by the adoption of improved methods for the prevention of crime P Bow much of it might be saved by the adoption of an improved system of penal discipline ? If sects could agree upon some common, all-embracing sys tem of moral, religious, and intellectual education for the nation, or if statesmen would set themselves in earnest to introduce one in defiance of mere secta rian opposition, might not great part of this ex. pense be saved to the country, or at least the money laid out in a way more likely to increase general security and happiness ? These arc questions that deserve more attention than they appear to receive at present, either in parliament or out of doors. Recent circumstances impart a particular interest to the proportional expenditure apparent on the face of the above account fur the punishment of convicts at home, and their punishment by transportation to the colonies. It is estimated that in 1851-2 the convict establish ments at home will coat the country 251,260/. This expense is to be incurred for the maintenance and superintendence of 10,876 prisoners ; we have not found any estimate of what it costs to hang the con victs annually put to death. It is estimated that in the same year the maintenance and superintendence of convicts in the colonies will cost 183,0301. The number of convicts in New South Wales, Van Die men's Land, and Western Australia, is not men tioned ; but, as 1,750 convicts at Bermuda are to cost 40,6001., the 128,813/. to be spept in the three colonies we have named may be takft to indicate the existence there of at least 6,000 convicts, maintained at the expense of government. This, added to the 1,730 convicts at Bermuda, and the 916 at Gibraltar, would give a total of about 8,660 convicts under co ercive treatment in the penal colonies. The mainte nance and superintendence of a convict in the colonies would therefore appear to cost nearly the same as his maintenance and superintendence at home. But to the expense of transportation must be added the 98,6604 which it is estimated will be spent this year in conveying the annual quota of convicts to the penal colonies. Nor is this all: for a sum of 10,0001. for the removal of convicts under sentence of trans portation in Great Britain and Ireland has unac countably been entered upon the estimate of what will be required for the convicts undergoing penal discipline at home. The number of convicts proposed to be sent to the penal colonies in 1852-3 is estimated at 3,650. Making allowance for the diminution of the number under restraint already there, this would bring the number of confined and coerced convicts in the col°. nies nearly to an equality with that of the number at home. And from the above data it appears that the convicts undergoing their punishment at home will cost 251,269; while the transported convicts will cost 391,89 W. The balance in favour of home punishment, on the score of economy alone, is there fore almost 110,0001. per annum on a total expendi ture of 6-13,1591., or more than 20 per cent. We readily admit that mere economy of money is a very subordinate part of this important question. If it could be shown that the more expensive mode of punishment is the more efficacious for deterring from the perpetration of crime, or for the reformation of tho criminals, the additional money would be well spent. But it is not so. The fact is that the punishment of transportation has little terror for the great majority of the crime class. Under any system of transportation, the remoteness of the infliction, the difficulty of making its nature and bearing apparent to rude and hardened minds, would disarm it of half its terrors. And in addition to this the actual system of transportation is so imperfect as to disarm the penalty of great part of the terror that remains. For the purposes of intimi dation, the more costly mode of punishment is the less efficacious ; and for the purposes of reformation, all the accounts from the colonies conspire to impress conviction that it is utterly worthless. There still remains a consideration well worthy of attention in this matter. A system of home punish ment exposes us to be inundated with a dangerous class of liberated convicts; from this, it must be admitted, we are relieved by transportation. But then the ques tion arises, are we in common justice entitled to liberate ourselves from this nuisance by imposing it upon the colouics ? A good system of scavenging and sewerage is an excellent thing of itself; but the inhabitants of Woolwich might reasonably complain if the aggregate muck-heaps of London were merely carted out of it to be laid down at their doors, to offend their noses, and poison their atmosphere. What such a mode of proceeding would be in the physical world, the shovelling out of our convicts 111 heaps upon the colonies is in the moral. Human laziness and human selfishness are so in veterate that this doctrine might be preached till doomsday with little prospect of bettering our prac tice in the matter of convict transportation. But the attitude which is being assumed by the colonies is likely to be more effectual. Tho extension of the anti-convict league in the Australian colonies has been rapid, and is likely to be accelerated by the in timation that it is intended to send them 3,050 addi tional convicts (600 of them being females, the moat intolerable of all) in the course of the present finan cial year. CAREFT:LLT selected and well manipulated portion. of a correspondence between the Bishop of MA CHESTER and one of his clergy, and between that gentleman and the Archbishop of YORK, have been recently published in a journal into which tracta rianiam empties its turbid waters; and, undoubtedly, the effect of the correspondence, so Eartially pub lished, has been prejudicial to Bishop LEE. It ha. given the impression that he is at least an arbitrary, perhaps, also, an uncourteous prelate; and that the complaining incumbent is suffering persecution at the hands of his Ordinary. It is further calculated to create the belief that, in the diocese of Manchester, there is the same episcopal tendency to r&trict tolo ration of opinion, when opposed to its bishop's per sonal views, which Bishop Prm.Lverers has, in the diocese of Exeter, emphatically announced to be the ~` _ ~. .505157 In which they had lived, the l iirofs. * hen the *dithers= of the fever • • sa l to tke interests of British egneal. i p heir.) He maintained, then, th-,4 mi „, when tide tax =said ewe; and s g mime time 1r elew thee is the reeeitelea efAhis pig Asp was • lad bleageteg the egvieehteralintstiertr an exile' wield asset oempeasale it• he whit it bed l ost." Tide Utz Weer* the d ye et the poor man's beer, rt . i r feet. It NOM set *ea= be contended, at all "that ft side sieielibeed ler the lake of the consanier. Thane who prellemed a Amite to improve the morale of the peer, mild net esedietagy vets for the maintenance of this taz. - •No had Wahl whet wadi be the price of beer drunk by Wm labourer at hle town bean if the tax were repealed. Beer, l at any public brewery, would be Bd. per gallon, or Se. for 36 gallons. The yeast and the grains would pay der the brevting, and the cottager would also be able to fib his own barley. In most public breweries 32 lbs. of I areharize matter was allowed to one barrel of 36 Woos of dal. that retailed by publicans at 64. per quart. Without the Oft this beer could be brewed by the cottager at lid. MIN; *as saying 600 per cent. Suppose one acre of palmed five quarters, that one quarter of barley predated Ma quarter of saccharine matter, that would make three barrels, allowing for waste-101 g allons of beer under sold at 64. per quart for the acre of barley. This wield give 501. 10e. worth of beer. If it were untaxed, *at hem' could be brewed for 101. 14e., including the law Thus the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the man lier, and brewer, made 391. 16s. out of an acre of I teary ; while the landowners receive, perhaps, 255. for rent, and the tenant, if he now got anything, never got more probably, on an average, than 15s. for the same acre. There were tse who said the repeal of the malt tax would not afford vary great relief to the agriculturist He would meet that affection by a hypothetical case. Suppose beer had UMW hoe, known, and was now introduced for the int tlma, awl that the taste for it became so general, that of barley were required to meet the demand. =l rs not that increased coosumptionof barley be an advantage to the agriculturist? What caused in digene of price but increased consumption, out of proportion do the supply - and what caused the present low price of epeulturel iroduce but the large supply of grain in pro portion to the demand for it ; and what better remedy could they have fur that excessive supply than a new and excessive demand ? But suppose this new demand for 20,000,000 quarters of barley had sprung up, and the Chan cellor"( the Exchequer came down with • tax which bad the effect of increasing the price, and reducing the demand to 5,000,000, would any man say that that would not occa sion a se-ious injury to the agriculturist? (Hear, hear.) Again, it wee said this was a barley question only, and that the repeal of the tax would not benefit the cultivators of wheat soils ; but if an increased demand for barley were created, there would he an additional number of acres laid down in barley; and if in consequence the production of wheat and oats were decreased by four millions, and that quantity were withdrawn from tho market, would not the price o! those articles rise and the farmer who grew wheat and oats num the advantage? It had also been said that if the malt tax were removed we should hare large imports from abroad, as we had now bap importations of flour. One reason why the importa tion of flour was large was that the freight was very low, owing to the smallness of bulk 411 compared with grain; and with regard to France, from whence a large proportion of W foreign flour came, she had the advantage in growing wheat of a light soil and dry climate ; but as barley required a damp climate and a heavy soil, she would lie under con eitersible disadvantage in competing with this country. And in retelitien to this, we hail, in regard to malt, the ad tesuatage of fuel at hand, and experience in what with us lies an old-e.t.bli.hed manufacture. He was satisfied, Then, that foreign barley or malt would not come in in any quantities sufficient to alarm or injure the British grower. 11. moved that the house resolve itself into com mittee, to consider the malt-tax, with a view to the intro- duction of a bill for its repeal. (Hear, hear.) Should he be fortunate enough to succeed, it would be for the committee %determine when the repeal shnuld take place. Ile had no desire to embarets• the Exchequer. Already the house bad abolished fire millions of macs since the repeal of the asen•law., but for which there would be no ditficuly in taking off the malt duty at once; he, however, whiled to rHt in hi e claim that it should come the next in succession. e.er ' hear.) The question having been put, some moments elapsed before any hors. me mber rime to addrxis the house ; but, the wry of " diside " being raised, Mr. AIA:OCK one. He was not astonished, he said, that this subject of the malt tax should have been brought forward again in the present session by the hon. member for the North Riding of Yorkshire ; and he hoped that the hon. member would continue to bring it under the notice of the house each succeeding year until something definite was done by the house in regard to it, either by repealing it al together, or by Dome act which should afford the agrieul turiets some hope of gradual relief from this unjust im post. Was it to be wondered at that the farmer should is.mplain when he was called upon to contribute to the re ...nue on the single article barley on its transference into malt as much as was paid on the whole of the property of the country, or about 61 millions ? (Cheers.) Out of 7 7 million" of acres, one million only was de voted to the production% of barley ; and ipon this single million of acres this enormous tax of t, millions was levied. (Mae, hear.) The firmer, had cause to com plain not only that there had been held out to them no hope of relief, but of the apathy evinced by the louse iu the debate on the subject of this tax het year, and that =bawd those members who represented agricultural dis trict% there were many who opposed the motion, both by their epeecheoiand their votes. (blear) Ile as, glad that . . public. opinion hail, in some places at . least, bee n brought to bear with good alert upon the boo. gentlemen who took that course. The hon. member opposite, the member for - '—oaralsire (Mr. l'ai kr) ICY one of time who hod voted against the motion ut last year, but now he was happy to see that this year that hon. member had given notice of a mo tion to reduce the malt duty by one half, in the event of the failure of the motion of the bun. member fur North York shire. lle agreed with the hoe. member fur East York shire. that if the malt tax were removed 10,000,090 quarter. of barley might be grown and brought into consumption in this country beyond the quantity now consumed. Again, it was the high price of malt that caused the adulteration ut be_r and the drunkenness which resulted chiefly from that adulteration. The extent to which adulteration was the irdditiois of Colonel Dunne, Mr. Reynolds, and Mr. Sadleis . , to the committee. IMPROVEMENT OP TOWNS (IRELAND) BILL. The committal of this bill was postponed. COMPOUND HOUSEHOLDERS BILL. This bill was read a third time. On the motion that the bill do pass, Mr. BRIGHT moved the following clause : " Provided always and be it enacted, that in cases where by any com position with the landlord a less sum shall be payable than the full amount of rate which, except for such composition, would be due in respect of the same premises, the occupier claiming to be rated shall not be bound to pay or tender more than the amount then payable under such com- position." The clause was read a first time. On the motion that the clause be read a second time, lir. SPOONER objeetvii to elt inn moved that the debate be adjourned. Mr. BRIGHT explained the object of the clause. He had no desire to press the clause if the Attorney-General told him that the object he had in view was carried out in the bill, without the clause. He only asked the house to do that which was consonant to the Reform Bill—merely to give the franchise to those who were bond fide entitled to it. He believed the government had no objection to the clause. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HENLEY thoufht that the clause was mere surplus age, and therefore be did not much care whether it was in serted in the bill or not. He was afraid, however, that it would endanger the bill if the clause were passed, because it introduced a new principle. Sir G. PECHELL hoped the hon. member for Warwick shire would not press his amendment. Mr. SPOONER assented. The clause was then agreed to. The bill then Nosed. ST. ALBANS ELECTION. Mr. ELLICE brought in the bill for the issuing of a com mission of inquiry into the St. Albans election. The house adjourned at a quarter to 2. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. HOUSE OF COMMONS. REPEAL OF THE MALT TAX. Nome made, and questios put, " That leave be am en to bring in a .4.11 to repeal th e malt tai: - (Yr. C.oley). The owe dnied: Arts. 122; Noes, 2311. ; AYES. --- - - - Adderley, C. B. Parohara7Edward B. Newdegate, Chu. N. Akoek, Thomas rellowen, Edward O'Brien, Sir Timothy Bane, W.lliana Floyer, John O'Ckinotll. John Bagot, Hon. W. Forbs, William O'lliherty, Anthony Perron, Sir 11. W. Prewen, Chat to IL Palmer, Robert Barrow, W, ii. Fu:ler, Aux ostus IL Peewit, air George B. Base, Michael T. °idiocy, Sir W. P. Plurupt re, .1, hn I'. Bennet, Philip Galway, Visoount * Porial, Mehl le Beregiford, William Ga.kelL James M. Prime, Richard Bat, John (Silvio, Col. Pugh, David Illockston..,WilliamS. Chore, E. S. Rrollevlioui, Lord Bloke, Marlin J. Granhv, Marquis of Renton, John C. Blondford, Marquis of Greene, John Itersolde, John Booker, Thane. W. Guernsey. Lord Rutford, Francis Booth, Sir Robert U. Halfwit, Sir Henry Rushout, Captain Braindon. T. W. Harris, Hon. Capt. /ladled., John linwilley, Ileory Ventage, Edward savoy, Caonel Crooke, I,rd ll , nley, Joseph W. Scully. Francis Buck, Leww. W. Higgins G. G. 0. Seyiner,llenry K. Bungli:ey, Lend Iliidyard, Thoe. B. T. Sibthorp, thlonel harraughes, IL N. lid!, Lard Edwin Somerset, Captain Cabbell, B. B. flornby, John Spooner, Richard Chid, !lrnitli Jollilfe, ,ir Wm. G.IL Stafford, Aug iPtws Cholmeloy, Sir M. licoting, Robert litephersan, Robert Christopher, R. A. Keogh. William Stuart. John Cobbold, John C. Koightloy, Sir Charles Mart, Henry G. Cole, Henry B. Roos, lion. W. S. Sullivan, Michael Coleus, Charles R. LAwlew, lion. Cecil Tolivit, J. If. Lesinvon, Henry C. Lennox, Lord 11. 0. Trollope, Sir John Conuily, Tomas. Leeiohom, Twoount Tyler, Sir George Colt m, Hon. W. 11. S. Long, Walter Tyre:l, Sir Joan T. Crawford. William la Meths, Nicholas V. lira., Richard 11. R. Cartels, Herbert M. Meagher, Thomas Waddington, David Deveteux, John T. Mariam, Lord G. Waddington, 11. S. Diana, Benjamin M inoet o Lord John Watley, Thomas Clod, John W. March, Minor,', of William., John Dodd, lieurge Allaunsell, Thomas P. Williams, William Drummond, Henry Milo, William 'kora., llon. E. T. Dunwri.bo, Hon. A. Mil iri, Vireount Dunne, col. Moore, George If. TILLRIN. DU Pre, C. tieorge Mut ism% Jo-eph R. Cayley, E. S. Eveljn, Wm. J. kik/inlay, William Him., Joseph -- - -- - ..„ -. Abdy, Sir nouns N. Gladstone, Stan. W. Paget, Lord Clarence Ad 'rid, Sir T. D. Glyn, George C. Palmer, Roundel! Adair, Ro'iert A. 8. Grsbatn, lion. Sir J. Palmerston, Vsioaunt Aglumby, Ileory A. Greene, Tiromu Parker, John Anson, Ilon. 0310.1 Unenteil, Charles W. Piet, Colonel Armstrong, RAS. 11. Grey, Kt. Hon. Sir G. Peel, Frederick Ashley, lard Grey, Ralph W. Perfect. Hobert liagrhaw, John Gr....senor. lord B. Petri. Samuel Morton Baines, Rt. lion. %CT. Guest, Sir John l'ieott, Francis Banng,lo.lln.SirY.T. 11411, Sir Benjamin Pilkinston, James Baring, TbOrtlai Ilallyburton, Lord J. Pinney, William baring, lion. F. Hamner, Sir John Plowden, W. 11. C. Hell, Jacob 11,rib:wile, Jorsmli A. Power, Nich ilat Bellew, Richard 38. Bards, Richard Fowler, lord W. Beratlcy, Admiral lla.tie, Ales:miler Bawd .n, Colonel Berkeley, llos. 11. P. 1-Listle,.Srchitsdil Reid, Colonel I;;iii,i;F,EE. U. Bernal, Ralph Hawes, IteeLimin Ricardo, Osman Birch, Sir Tasman B. Hayes, Sir Edmund Rice, Edward }Loyd Blair, Stephen Ifewilam, Thos. E. Rich, Henry Itlakeinore, Richard 11..14 James Richndn, Richard tunverie, lion. Edw.l. Headman. John Itoinilly, Colonel Bowles, Admiral Heat hcote, Sir U. I. Holiday, Sir John Boyle, lion. Col. Wweage, G. 11. W. Rwoetl, Lord John Bright, John Henry, Alexander Ruvw.ll, Hon. E. 5. liswidchund, John Llvetert, Rt. How. 8. Raised, F. C. H. Brockman,Edward D. Hervey. Lord Alfred &Leda's, George Brother ton, Joseph Heywood. James Scrape, George P. Brown, Williain Heyward', Lawrence tieyni , ,ur, Henry D. Bulkeley, Sir N.B. W. Huntley, Charles Seymour, Lord Badeild, Widiam Ilubhouse, T. B. Shelborno, Earl of Cardwell, Edward Hodges, Thomas L. Stu ridan, Richard B. Qui:di/kid, " '' ,B hi. Itstgea, T. Twiaden Nancy, Hobert A. Caiventli.b. kiln. C. Hoar, Sir Jame. W. Swab, Rt. ILw. R.V. Cavendish, Iron. U.H. yomol, L ord R. Smith. John A. ... -. ..., ... - - .... • Cavendisti, W. O. Howe, d, lion. C. W. Smith, M. T. Ch osiers., Me. V. Hutt, William Smith, John B. Childers, John W. Inglis, Sir Robert N. Snio'lett, Alexander Clay. James H. Jermyn, Earl Homers, John P. Clay, Sir William Kershaw, Janis Somerville, t i n.sir W. I kmmts, lion. C. 8. Lahnuchere,RLlßLlL Spearman, Henry J. Clitforl, Unary M. Langston, James H. Stanford, John F. Cockburn, Sir A. J. E. Ls wley, lion. B. IL Stonier, Hon. W. 0. Coke, lion. E. K. Lemon. Sir Charlet, Stansliold, W. It. C. Clekrootr, Sir T. E. Lewis, lin. iiir T. F. Manton William G. Collin., William Lewis, George C. Strickla nd, Sir 0. Cowan, Marten Lindmy. Hon. (hi. Stuart, Lord James Cowper, Hon. W. F. Litt eton, lion. E. li. Tenni, C. R. Si. Grin, nit William O. I ech, James Tancred, Iteory W. Crowder, Richard B. L eke. Joseph Tensor, Edward K. Currie, It Wire Lockhart, Allan E. Tennnet, Robert J. Da.rymplc, John Invades. Puss Thickneree, It. A. liar e, Sir li. R. P. Lerhington, Charles Thompson, Col mel Dawes, Hon. T. V. Lygon, Hon. General Thornley, Thorna. Dennos, John E. Mackinnon, W. A. Tolim.he, lin.F.J. trEynacurt,lin. C. T. li`Gregor, John Townley, R. 0. Douglas., Sir C. E. MiTaggsrt, Sir John Train, George Drulnlsnrig, Vise. Mahon, Viscount Trelawney, John S. Drummond, 11. H. Manilas, Rosa D. Trevor, lion. T. Doff, lie age S. Marshall, James G. Vane, Lord 'tarry Duff, James Mirnball, William Verney, Sir Harry Duke, Sir Jams Martin, C. W. Vow. lion. 1 has. Duncan, George Matheson, Alex. Villiers, Viso runt ',annuli, John Matheson, Sir J. Villiers, lin. C. Dundw, Admiral Matheson, Colonel Vivian, John H. Dunda., ItLita.dir D. Wilde, Rt. Hon. San Wahneeley, Sir Josh. 'Aringt on , woo rn i n t )(erupt, Viwount Walter John Eg. rton, Sir Philp Mile., Philip W. 8. Watkinn, Col. Lloyd Ellice, Rt. lion. E. Milner, William M. Want, John T. Ellice, Edward Mines, Richard M. Welby, Glynne E. Ellis, John Mitchell, Thomas A. Wellesly, Lord C. El iot, lion. J. F. Mudd, Genesis West, Frederick R. Evelyn, Vowount Moody, Charles A. Werdhesd, J. P. IL Enfield, Viscount Morgan, li. K. G. Willcox, B. hrOhle Eltoourt, J. B. B. Morris, David William., Huraphry Euston, Earl of Mostyn, lion. E. Williamson, air H. Evans, John Mowatt, Freed. Wilson, James Evans, William unigrane, Earl of Wilson, Mathew Swart. William Nichol', Right fien.l. Wodehousr, Edmond Few" John Norreys, Lard Wont, Rt. lion. Sis C. Ferguon, Sir Bob. A. Roney a, Sir 0. J. Wood, Sir William F. Foley, John H. 11. O'Connell, Morgan .7. Wrightson, W. B. Fordyoe,Alesander D. Ogle, Saville C. H. Wyvill, Marmaduke Forster, Matthew Ord, William Yonne, Sir John Fortescue, lin. J. W. Owen, Sir John TILLItiI. Fox, William J. Parke, Charts. W. Miter, lion. W. G. Gibson, Itt.lln. T. M. Paget, Lord Al fr ed HILL L oad Marcos AVERAGE OF TEE TUERISOMETER AND BAROMETER FOR THE FIRST SEVEN DAYS OP MAT IN TILE FOLLOWING YEARS: Highest In Highest In the Suife Lowest Barometer, Shade. Aspect. at Night. Taken at 9 a.m. IMAM. 1847 .. 59.28 .. 73.7 Deg 8 .. 45.85 .. 29.72 1848 71.44 .. 90.10 .. 50.07 .. 30.09 1849 .. 68.43 .. 87.79 .. 49.00 .. 29.87 18.50 51.00 .. 67.21 41.86 .. 29.8.5 1851 .. 51.71 .. 66.57 39.49 .. 29.72 TILE EAST INDIA HOUSE.—Captain John Shop herd and Sir James Wcir Hogg, Bart., M.P., have been re-elected chairman and deputy chairman of the board of directors of the East India Company for the ensuing year. This renewed honour is but of rue occurrence, and is con sented to but under extraordinary circumstances, the last occasion when it was conferred being shortly prior to the renewal of the company's charter, in 1833. ADMISSION TO WESTMINSTER ABBEY.—In conse quence of the large increase in the number of foreign visitors arriving daily to inspect the abbey, the dean and chapter have appointed two interpreters to assist the ordi nary officers of the sacred edifice in explaining its chief features. There is no charge for admission to this venera ble structure, the whole, with the exception of the Chapel of Henry VII., having been opened to the public several years ago, when the servants were also expressly forbidden to accept fees from visitors. FRENCH SHIPPING. Sailing vessels: 6 line-of battle ships of 120 guns each; 4 of 100 guns; 9 of from 82 to 90 guns •' 6 of 80 guns; 12 first-clan s frigates of 60 guns ; 14 of fromso to 52 guns; 11 of from 40 to 46 guns ; 30 cor vettes; 44 brigs; 43 mall armed vessels, and 32 transports. —Steamers: 1 line-of-battle ship of 90 guns, of 960 horse power; 20 frigates, of from 4.50 to 650 horse-power; 5 cor vettes, from 320 to 450 horse-power ; 22 from 220 to 300 ; 57 smaller steamers of different powers.—l 9 sailing, and 8 steam-vessels are now bulling at the different ports. MORE PAPAL INTOLERANCE—The Jews of Fer ran, in the true spirit of charity, contributed to the main tenance of the infant uyla, al th ough they do not in a ny way participate in their administration, and during many years they had given large sums to these institutions ; but the Cardinal Vermicelli has to-day forbidden these asyla to receive the money of the Jews. There has, for fifty years, existed at Ferrara, a society called the Casino, to which the pontifical government has Just given order to refuse &dans , *ion to Jews ; but as in the statutes of the society there is no law to interdict the reception of persons professing a different religion, the presidents have declared that they possess no power to exclude Jews, and the pontifical go vernment has in consequence commanded that no Jew shall set foot in the Casino under the penalty of a fine. With these principles, we ask, what right has the Ro manhronick. pontiff to complain of Englishintokrance /—..fesvidi C THE EXPRES@, PRIDA? t r rtiprO, NAT •, 1851. th so • coseggiratiOa ex- • / ”Podt° 41 the intliettr the gg yeses age' a 'Use sat to 'Madder ,1 • land, sad ammo' others milt r,.. lay, anatiensive brewer, lad gi ven ev id ence that committers Mr. Barclay bad been asked if by repeal of the malt tax the manufacture of malt would he improved or rendered cheaper except as regarded the meant of duty ? To this question Mr. Barclay had replied 'duit he did not think it Would be improved at all, and that no regalatious existed to interfere with the manufacture of good melt. OW et the most eutonelve molesters in the iamb% St. T. Taft. at Memee 1111.064 WA also been camel tame the isommitt. Kr. Taylor had been aid Cr would have greater facilities for carrying on his m If the duty were repealed and if he were not liable be the domiciliary visits of the excise ? Ilia answer had bow, " I don't think we should." He (the Chancellor et the Exchequer) admitted that • tax upon anything sem not in itself a desirable thing. He was not Wood to prove that the tax was in itself desirable, neither was he bound to prove that this duty produced no inconvenience. His position was this--that, in order to obtain five millions of revenue, it was difficult to raise it in a manner less oppressive to the consumer, less burdensome to the producer, less injurious to the country, and less ex , pensive to the revenue. It was quite true that the con sumption of malt had not increased in proportion to the population. Tea, coffee, and cocoa had increased in a much greater ratio. But this ho did not at all attribute to the duty. (Hear, hear.) There had been a change in the habits of the people. They did not drink beer to the same extent that their fathers did. Any one acquainted with the habits of the labouring classes knew that tea, coffee, and articles of that kind were consumed to • much greater extent than formerly, and this had very much kept down the consumption of beer. (Hear.) If the present duty operated as • check upon the consump tion of beer, it had the same effect upon other articles. The duty on tea, for instance, was twice as large as that on malt, and as it wa. a competing article, if he reduced the tax upon one, he would be compelled in fairness to make • corresponding reduction upon the other; and, if ho did that, the case would be precisely the same as it was before. He was, however, happy to say, as he had stated last year, the consumption of intoxicating beverages was largely dimi nishing while that of the unintoxicatingwas as largely increas ing,a circumstance which he thought was very desirable for the habits and morals of the public.(Cheers.) Hon. gentlemen appeared to think that if the malt duties were repealed a large reduction in the price of beer would take place; and certainly their anticipations were, to say the least of them, somewhat sanguine. A gentleman whose name was well known in connexion with it, Mr. Baker, had anticipated that the result would be • reduction in the price of a hun dred per cent. Now the hon. member for Essex had given him (the right hon. baronet) great credit for having dis covered that the proportion of 300 to 100 was as three to one ; but he should certainly be glad if some one would explain Mr. Baker's calculation to him; for he should have thought that if the were reduced 100 per cent. it would be equivalent to there being no price at all. (Laughter.) But the hon. member for the North Riding (Mr. Cayley) bad gone further even that, for he had fixed the reduction at .500 per cent. (Renewed laughter.) Ile did not know what the hon. member for Derby (Litr. Baas) would say to that, for if this expectation were re alised the hon. gentleman would, he supposed, have to f ore persons five times the value of his ale to drink it. (Loud laughter.) These were specimens of the wild assertions which were put forward in support of the motion; but what ever force they might have with gentlemen who drank beer, with sober minded men they would he quite powerless. (A laugh.) But would the repeal of the duty really cause a corresponding fall in the price 1 Before the duties were lowered they amounted to 70s. per quarter on strong beer, sod on ordinary beer to 501. Now they did nut probably exceed 214., but when thi• great reduction was made the price of the beer was not lowered according to the evidence of Mr. Barclay, more than a halfpenny per quart. (blear, hear.) Was it worth while, then, to give up • revenue which amounted to tire millions, when • reduction so much larger then than • total repeal would be now, did not make a greater difference than a halfpenny a quart ? (Cheers.) Besides, as the hon. gentleman opposite had said, the present duties were, in point of fart, a protection to English growers; and therefore to repeal them, with a view to their benefit, would be one of the most ridiculous things he had ever heard of. (Cheers.) An hon. gentleman had stated that fineign malt was prohibited for the benefit of the Chancel lor of the Exchequer; but really he must demur to such an extraordinary assertion. He would get just as much by the customs on foreign, as by the excise on home made and therefore while it did benefit Ric English malting into rests that foreign should be prohi bited the result would be precisely the same if it were ad mitted. (Hear, hear.) Nor could he grant that the repeal of thy duties would encourage home brewing—milting at home lie considered was entirely out of the question--for at present in some parts of England the practice was com mon enough already. In his own village and for four miles round every labourer did snake his own beer ; and, therefore, in districts where such was not the case there was nothing to prevent them if they wished. (Cheers.) Ho considered that the repeal of the duties would increase dissipation, as well as cause a larger consumption of ardent spirits; and, therefore, the cause of public morality would suffer much front the proposed change. Here was a tax which yielded live millions, very easy of collection, and as equally distributed as was possible. It was Wlt true that the agricultural labourers paid it, as uscrted by the hon. manlier for Surrey (Mr.Drunimund) ; for the coal-whippers of London probably drank snore porter than the labourers of two or three counties. Here, he repeated, was a tax equable in its distribution awl easily levied; and he asked the h o use nut to give it up, for, independently of financial considerations, he was convinced that its repeal would not be nefit the country, but, on the contrary, it would be full of mischief to the community at large. (Loud cheers.) Mr. DISRAELI was surprised at an expression which had fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Ile said— " What is a halfpenny in a quart of beer ;" But when a halfpenny was talked of being added to the quartern loaf, he said there would be a rebellion. (Cheers.) Ile (Mr.l)israeli) looked upon this tax with reference to its influence upon the capital of the most suffering class of the community. (Cheers.) Their position had been placed before the con sideration of the house, under circumstances which demanded their most attentive eonsiderati a ; for the suf. tering. of the occupiers of the soil had been universally and authoritatively recognised. (Hear, hear.) It was difficult to estimate the degree of those sufferings, hut night after night various estimates had been offered to the house, mostly by hon. gentlemen on the opposite benches. (Hear, hear.) never they had boasted of the amount which had aserued to the community as they called it. they did in point se fact make an estimate of the loss of the occupiers. What was the situation of that class which, according to the go , vernment statements, and estimates, and data was the class experiencing a dilapidation of capital nut equalled in the experience of any class in the country ? And what was the remedy offered by the ministry of the country to that class ? It was to give up the cultivation of wheat. But they could only sustain that position by sustaining the argument founded on the principle that political economy contradicted. They could only maintain it by proving that restriction was a benefit. They could only encounter it by demonstrating that large importations did not check culture. (If car, hear.) lie (Mr. Disraeli) was willing to admit that that was a rash hand which would pull to pieces too rudely the financial system of this country. Ile had never concealed his wish that this tax should be main tained. Ile had never concealed his wish that the whole system of their local taxation should be coutinued if possible. lie asserted it was impossible they could maintain the malt talons' continue to race from the people of this country • large revenue separate from the general revenue otherwise raised. (Hear, hear.) It was impossible they could con tinue to do that if they established • system of equal taxation. If they were not prepared to do that by agriculture which Mr. Ricardo sanctioned, and Mr. M•Culloch recommended, and which the first lights of political economy had sanctioned in their speeches and writings, namely, to put the cultivators, the owners, and occupiers of the soil on the same level as the other classes of society', all other attempts were futile. (Hear, hear.) They hail. been told the other night, very much to his (Mr. Disraeli's) surprise, by an hon. gentleman from whom he did not expect to hear such a sentiment, that he recognised no difference between a protective duty and the new-fashioned term of a countervailing duty. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Disraeli), however, should protest against any such assimilation. (Hear, hear.) The question of protection had nothing to du with an adjustment of taxation that would place the cultivator of the soil on a level with the other ciartes. If hon. gentlemen were willing to adopt • system of protection, whereof the benefit or disadvantage resulting therefrom the cultivator of the soil would have kis share--they, on that side of the house, hal nothing to do with it ; but if they wished to establish a system of taxa tion in which they raised a large amount from one class that others did not contribute to, they should place the extra contributing class on the same level of taxation. Inasmuch as by a system of taxation they raised from the soil a large revenue for the purposes of tho community to which the community did not contribute; therefore, the agriculturists sought, under • new state of affair', to be re lieved from those burdens. But if they preferred, thinking it better that these burdens should remain ' • if it were the opinion of the house that it was for the goo d of the eom , munity that the extra taxation of a clam should exist ; if they thought that, beyond financial advantages, the blessings of self-government were considerable, and the facility with which five millions—as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated—were raised from the land, was not to be lightly lost, then it was for hon. gentlemen opposite to some forward and offer the terms on which they wished to retain these advantages. (Hear, hear.) Never should it be reproached to hon. gentlemen em his (Mr. Disraeli's) side of the house, that they asked for a countervailing duty, on account of these disadvantages. They accepted the new principles of the new system, and asked to be made free of the grievances which at present pressed heavily upon them. (Hear, hear.) It was Ceder the induct:ice of that view that he (Mr. Dieraeli) amid record his vote In favour of the motion of the hon. Member for the North Riding, who on the present, as on hauler occasions, introduced the subject with a real and ahiliey worthy of the highest coma non. After • few words from lit. I , 'mum, which ware totally baaelible in the galley?, Kr. HUME should support the motion of the hon. weber for the North Riding. It was then twenty /Ana years since lye (Mr. Hume) brought on the splallism of the repeal of the malt tax, and called Wit the country gentlemen to supaort him. On that occasion he demonstrated as plainly as figures could demonstrate, that the tax on malt, heavy as it was, had a most injurious effect as well on agriculture as on the morals of the people. He also demonstrated that as much malt had been consumed in IT&S as in 1625, notwithatand- Eis great 111“111110 of population. He aimed it lest ' tin an administration that had =Width° bread sad meet et the walking classes to seek to matinee the tax upon their drink. ("Hear, hear," end a laugh.) He, there bre, would say away with the duty ; for although it brought them Ave millions annually, yet whatever source th ey raised revenue treat it should not be from the beverage of the working man. (Hear, hear.) If the proposition of his hon. friend were carried it would give a cheap and a not intoxicating drink to the people, and would be a relief to the agriculturist at the same time. The house should not pay much regard to the pecuniary arguments of the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, because he (Mr. Hume) could tell the right hon. gentleman where he could get 6,600,0001. (Hear, hear.) If the government would only reduce the army. navy, and ordnance estimates to the extent at which they stood during the administration of the Duke of Wellington they would exactly save an amount of 6,500,0001. Let the government put on a fair and equitable income tax, and it would nearly give them the means of getting rid of the malt tax. There were other sources from which the right hon. gentleman could obtain money. During the last 60 years there was no less than 78,000,0001. paid upon the transfer of personal property, w hilst real property had not contributed one shilling to the revenue. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BASS supported the motion, believing it would con duce to the interest of the labouring class. Mr. BROTHERTON, who more than doubted that re sult, opposed it. Mr. 1 ENLEY, who apprehended that real property paid more than its fair share of the public burthena already, wished to have the malt-tax taken out of the schedule. Lord J. RUSSELL—Before the house proceeds to a di vision I wish to make an observation in reply to a statement of the hon. member for Montrose. The hon. gentleman stated that in 1826 he brought forward a motion on this subject, and be now says it is extraordinary that the tax on malt should never have been reduced whereby its con sumption would have been increased. But some years atter that it became a question whether this tax or the tax on beer should be reduced, and the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, the hon. member for Cambridge, preferred taking off the tax on beer. Thus 3,000,000/. was taken off beer. (Hear.) That tax existed for more than a century, so that this country is not now more taxed for malt than it was taxed for malt and beer 70 years ago. My hon. friend the member for Montrose says, without entering into par ticulars, that he would at once take 5,000,0001. front the charge fur the army and navy. Now, I totally deny that the amount proposed for the army and navy this year is greater than the amount was in 1845. There has been an increase in the ordnance; but, looking at this matter as a whole, I do not believe there has been any increase made by the present government beyond the estimates of 184-5. But the house would not be prepared to make that great I diminution which the hon. member would propose, and therefore I come again to the assertion which seems to me undeniable, and which is the main reason for voting against the motion, that it would leave the finances of the country in a ruinous condition, by taking .3,000,00:'l. front the revenue without having any source from which to supply the deficiency. Ir. CAY LEY replied. lie said he must remind the noble lord that he had already thrown away 5,000,0001., and that if it had not been for the cour,e of legislation in which he had taken part the malt tax might have been re pealed without any inconvenience to the revenue. The house then divided— For Mr. Cayley's motion Against it 258-136 SCOTCH UNIVERSITIES. Mr. COWA:4no;Ctifo;lC,;;etObilniina bill to regu late adminiou to the lay or secular chairs in the Scottish univenities. . . Mr E. ELLICE and Mr. F. Matu supported the motion, which was opposed by Sir It. INULIS, upon the ground that it would overturn a wholesome system, and leave the youth of Scotland to be educated by professors of any religion, or of none. Lord J. RUSSELL cordially approved of the bill, for which, after a few words from Mr. CILUITERItI and Mr. FORBES, leave was given. BOARD OF CUSTOMS. Mr. MITCHELL moved, " That all petitions complain ing of the hoard of customs, which had been presented in the present session of parliament, be referred to the select committee on customs." A g reed t:,7 --- INCOME AND PROPERTY TAX. On the motion, by Mr. Hume., fur the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the present mode of assess ing and collecting the income-tax, Mr. GLADSTONE observed, that this was a question of importance, which had not been discussed. There wan reason to fear that the inquiry might be whether or not faith should be kept with the public fundholder. lie mimed that the debate be adjourned. After some discussion, Loral J. RUSSELL said the house having agreed to limit the tax to one year, for the purpose, as clearly stut,il by Mr. Hume, of appointing a committee to inquire whether the tax could he made more equitable, the country would be disappointed if this course was departed from. Mr. DISRAELI considered that the house was morally pledged to appoint this committee, and declared he would not join in any attempt to get rid of it. Some further diveus,ionensucd ; after which the motion was agreed to. THE KAFFIR TRIBES. Colonel DUNNE objected to the formation of the select committee on the relations of Kaffir tribes, upon the ground that there WA 'I no Irishman upon it. Lord J. RUSSELL saia that nu intention had existed on his part of excluding Irish members from the committee. It had not even occurred to him until that morning that there were no Irish members on the committee. If the hon. and gallant member fur Portarlington(CoLllunne) had any desire to be placed on the committee, the name of tho hon. and gallant member fur Greenwich (Admiral Dunilas) might be withdrawn, and that of the hon. and gallinit mem ber (Col. Dunne) put in its place. (Hear hear.) Mr. lIOBIIOUSE characterised the constitution of com mittees in the house as most partial, inequitable, and un just. (hear, hear.) This opinion he was prepared to de fend at all times; and if no utherperson brought the question before the house he would do so either this wasion or next. The committees were formed by a certain number of gen tlemen over the table, who coos red lists and virtually nominated them. (h ear , hear.) pa Many of the most able and intelligent members of parliament were in this manner altogether passed over. Ile begged to ask the question whether members who were not nominated might look upon it in the light of exemption or exclusion. It was either the one or the other Mr. REYNOLDS considered that there ought, at least, to be three Irishmen on that committee. The home con sisted of OS memben, a hundred awl five of these were Irishmen, about one-sixth, and the fair proportion would therefore have been three on a committee of this kind. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER denied the charge that Irishmen were systematically excluded from the committees. In fact, there was not a single committee which had not one or two Irish members upon it. (Cheers.) In this very case was not his hon. fciend, the Under-Secre tary fur the Colonies, an Irish member? (Cheers.) Ile (the right hon. baronet) had insisted on the exclusion front a committee of an hon. friend of his, the member for Stoke, than whom a more proper person could not have been sc lectml, simply because he wished Irish members to be upon it. (Cheers.) Mr. KEOGH replied, that the hon. member for Kinsale represented, not an Irish constituency, bat his department. (Hear.) Ileobjected, however, to the committee altogether, on the ground that it was an unfair one. (Cheers.) With respect to the Chancellor of the Exchequer's statement he had only to observe that last session, up to a period when the attention of the house was called to it, there had been 21 committees, on 11 of which there were no Irish members. Mr. SADLEIR acquitted the noble lord at the head of the government of any intention of leaving out the names of Irish members from committees; but when be found that no Irish member was appointed on the committee to inquire into the proper situation of the transatlantic packet station, he could not suppose that there had been uo systc matic exclusion. (Loud cheers.) Colonel DUNNE moved the adjournment of the house, which was seconded by Mr. HOIIIIOUSE. Lord J. RUSSELL had had no intention to exclude Irish members, and would therefore, on Monday, propose the names of three to be added to the committee, making it thus consist of seventeen hon. gentlemen—(loud cheers)-- whereupon Colonel DUNNE withdrew his motion. M. REYNOLDS, amidst cries of " spoke," hoped that in the selection quality u well as quantity would be con sidered. Mr. KEOGH would oppose the nomination until they saw who tho three Irish numbers were. (Cheers.) He therefore would move that th house be adjourned. The SPEAKER decided that Mr. Keogh was not in order; but, on the name of the Marquis of Granby b e i ng proposed, ' Mr KEOGH repeated his motion. . _ )4r. HUME iuldressed a few words of remonstrance to the hon. gentleman, amidst the loud cheers of the house. Colonel DUNNE also hoped that Mr. Keogh would not persevere in his opposition. Mr. SADLEIR suggested that no inconvenience could arise from the postponement. They were practical men of business—(loud cries of "Oh")—and had no ideas of ob struction. 1;;;d v Si AAS hoped Mr. Keogh would not persevere. Lord J. RUSSELL said the hon. gentleman seemed to take it for granted that he would pursue • reasonable course on Monday. (Loud cheers.) lie thought it very hard on the Marquis of Granby that he should be objected to because the Irish members to be proposed on Monday might be exceptionable. (Cheers and laughter.) Mr. BRIGHT doubted whether the Irish members had suffered exclusion, or that any questions had suffered by their exclusion. (Loud laughter.) As, however, the had desired to take part in the committee wo r k h e h o t h at they would be allowed to do so, because be thoug t there was no branch of imperial interests in which they had not the same concern as the other members. (Cheen.) Mr. KEOGH, after the peculiarly friendly sneer of the hon. member for Manchester, should certainly follow his own views and should insist on a division. After a few words from Mt. Moog and ode or two other members, The house divided— For the adjournment Against The committee was then nominated as follows :—Mr. Se cretary at War, the Marquis of Granby, Sir Edward Bux ton, Mr. Stanley, Colonel Thompson, Mr. Cardwell, Viscount Mandeville, Mr. Evans, .Mr Mackinnon, Mr. Carter, Sir Joshua Welmsley, Mr. Books?, Admiral Dun dee, Colonel Estcourt, and Mr. Hawes. Mr. LBOO.ll gars mottos that to-roorraw he would move