The Press. — London, England, 1853-05-07 00:00:00

suffer, though they may new reap'an undue and an unholy harvest from the power they possess; nor can an electoral system endure which will permit such scenes as are now almost yearly enacted by the House of Commons. (Cheers. )" Ministers and their members encountered remon strant landowners not only with a denial of justice, hut with taunts and jeers. The Secretary of the Board of Control had indulged in that exercise, fol lowing the example of a greater man, Lord John Russell. lie had taunted the country members with having refused an its. duty, which they should lime taken when they could get it :--- " That jeer has now become so frequent—it is so stereo typed—that I think it necessary to say what will probably prevent its repetition. I A laugh.) I think it would be but decent in the noble lord to remember under whose ad. vice and at whose urgent instance we did refuse en Ms. fixed duty upon corn. It is far from my feelings to depre cate t►e comprehensive mind which could conceive so vast an idea as an Me. fixed duty. I A laugh.) I give him full credit for all that he deserves in that respect ; but when he remembers who the statesmen was under whose tulviee and at whose urgent instance tlust proposal was refused— and when the n ob le lord remembers those by whom he is now surrounded—( loud cheers from the Opposition )—wheu the noble lord remembers that he has thrown away the Whig party, anal that he has accepted u subordinate office under a subordinate officer of Mir Robert Peel—(renewed cheers from the game quarter )—I think the noble lord may find that the time has come when these secs& and sneers should cease. (Cheers.(" Another section of members assumed a tone of great authority on these questions of finance. This was composed of men who boasted themselves as being representatives of the great towns, and had eulogized the budget as a triumph for Manchester. Ile (Mr. Disraeli) had hoped that the old feud between town and country was now defunct. There might be a difference of natural interests between them, but he could not believe, as they were told, that there were moral, social, or political differences also. But it was from the land, after all, that the national gran deur had sprung - - _ " What makes this country great then ? The Hatband character of the country—(cheers)—the natismal charac ter of the counitiy that has been created by its institutions and by the traditionary intlueiwes that have invested those imititutiona with incontestable authority. (Cheers.) But these institutions spring from the dual—they are tbsply and broadly planted in the soil—and that soil is not in the possession of any exclusive class. (Cheers.) The MO' chant or the manufactiimr may deposit within it his mete ululated capital, and he may enjoy those privileges which its pusseaaitsi entails, and perform those ditties which its posiaeisaion also enjoins. (Cheers.) Why. then, this hostility to the land? 1 say that every, man in this house is deeply interested in maintaining the prosperity of the land of this country ; 1 say there is 110 man in this blouse who wishes to secure that prosperity by unjust legislation. 1 adjure those gentlemen who are the representatives of large towns to condescend to ponder over these observa tions, and not to he led away in our present debates by the prejudice of former discussions, but clearly to under stand the position in which we now stand, our different relations to each other, mid that we are alike interested not only in the greatness of this country, but in the ex latency of the institutions of this enuntry. is them take another course--1 trust they will not—but of this I feel convinced, that if they are still alienated front us—if they still proceed in the way of illusory progress they may arrive at the goal which they contemplate--they may aehieve the objects which they have set before them hot I believe they will be greatly disappointed in the result. and they will find they have only changed a first-rate king dom into a seeend-rate republic. ( Loud cheer. 4.)" Lord Jolts RussELL rested the question upon this issue---Was the budget in tofu advantagtsms to the country or not? The speeial interests or individual burdens of particular classes or persons he judged to be of very small accoimt in comparison with the general balance of its consequences upon the welfare of the whole community. First of the ineomo tax : he contended that the perplexities and controversies to which it had given rise were wisely settled by enacting its continuance for !WWII years, thus romov ing this exciting question from the class of those which are annually to be battled fin• in Parliament, and at the same time assigning a period, though not. an early one, when it should tinnily expire. l'pon other points included in the scheme he defended the policy of remitting taxes upon articles of necessity, almost, or quite, the last of which would disappear with the excise duty upon snap. The duties upon spirits required the tabustment which the (;overnment now proposed to effect; and the change in the assess ment of duties upon carriages and servants not only removed an absurd sumptuary regulation, but would confer an essential benefit upon the classes of work men and artisans. {{everting then to the income tax, the noble lord reviewed and combatted the prin cipal objections that had been urged by previous speakers, addressing himself at much length to the allegations that the present equality of assesalnetit WWI unjust towards temporary mid industrial incomes; and that an undue burden was laid upon the land. Regarding Ireland, he urged that the exceptional circumstances of that country hail now disappeared; that the leader of the Opposition had some time since proposed to Wand the tax to the sister island, THE PRESS and that the surrender of the consolidated annuity debt was more than a full equivalent:— " The only reason why Ireland had hitherto been exempt from it was, the distress which had pervaded certain poi , tions of the country ; and now that distress was removed, and the burdens it heal entailed were to be taken off, there was no reason why Belfast should not be subject to the same tax as Liverpool. In 184$, when the country wee far more distressed than it was h ow, the right hon. gentle man opposite (Mr. Disraeli) had supported the extension of the income tax tat Ireland without any relief from the consolidated annuities. The income tax, it was true, would impose on Ireland 450,000 L, the succession tax 60,0001.. and the tax tan spirits 1104,00 I.—total, K 58,000/. ; but the relief would be to the amount of 070.000/., and in 1860 the income tax would be repealed, and the balance in favour of exemption would be 1A4,000/. It was not enough to consider, however, the mere figures upon this question. It was essential to consider the effect of the removal of d ut i es on articles o f co nsumption in a pour country like Ireland." Denying that the legacy duty to be imposed upon land was unjust, seeing that some landed proprietors were already subject to it, and citing Mr. Huskisson for the opinion that indirect taxes enabled the rich consumer to escape paying his fair share, and we ought therefore to proceed in the work of abolishing them, Lord John Russell concluded by warning the Legislature against any attempt to disturb the on ward march of democracy :--- It was said last year—Red it was a proof of little wis dom in the man who said it—that we ought to endeavour to rule the country so us to check the advances of demo cracy. Depend upon it. the ruler who dues that will only increase and greatly irritate the power which he wishes to check. (Cheers.) By adopting the opposite course, on the contrary, the minister will make the democracy con servative. insteed of its opposing hint as an enemy. ( Hear, hear.) 'Chat is the true policy for Parliament to pursue., neither neglecting the interests of land or trade, hut consulting the interests of all--giving nu undue favour to any, but pursuing a course which an must admit to be just." On the division there appeared-- For the original resolution .. 323 For the amendment .. 252 Majority for the liovernmout -- -71 THE IltinttET CuNTINITED.—A SCENE IN THE HOUSE. The resolution being again proposed on Thursday night, Mr. Lvwt.esti moved the omission of the words by which Ireland was to fall within the scope of the income tax. Ile approved of the entire budget, ex cept as to that particular point, and supported his view by gi‘iug various details respecting the present condition of Ireland, and referred especially to the weight of the poor-rate and other local taxes, which amounted to only 2s. -11 d. in the pound in England, while averaging :Is. 71d. in the sister isle. Colonel Deseie thought the motion useless and inopportune, and welcomed it solely as evincing a spirit of repentance on the part of the mover, who had voted in the Government majority on Tuesday. 31r. SCILLY looked at the question as one to be settled in the interest of classes rather than of coun tries. It was not whether England or Ireland should pay most taxes, but whether they were to be paid by the rich or the poor. Taking this ground, and review ing the probable consequences of the income tax in aceordance therewith, he was willing to accept it for his constituent.s. Mr. GAVAN Ift'yFv, disliking a " sham battle," examined the speeches and votes of the mover of the resolution, and drew the conclusion that his motion was not bowl fide, or was tut absurdity and inconsistency. Leaving personal topics for the gene ral question of Ireland r. the income tax, he declared that when Peel first proposed the tax, and relieved Ireland from paying it, that country was more pros penl..., and England less so, than now. At this moment the Government intended to mulct Ireland with the tax, though England was richer than she had been within the memory of man--when there was a surplus in the Treasury---and when the Irish state of things was such as the world h a d neve r s een before—multitudes flying the country, because they were starving in it. There was no consolation to them to know that by the help of this tax turtle, anchovies, brocade, jewels, and artificial flowers were made cheaper. The man who canted 100/. or 130/. in England was often a prosperous artisan, living in a comfortable way, but. in Ireland was a struggling trailer or professional man, barely able to make both ends meet. Professing much curiosity to learn the exact means by which " the gentleman who takes members out to vote" managed to secure for the Government so ninny Irish representatives, Mr. Duffy proceeded to state by way of explaining the mystery---" Short as my experience in Parliament has been, I do not think that in the worst days 14 the Walpoles or the Pelliams a more unscrupulous cor ruption existed than I have seen practised, under my own eyes, of corrupting Irish mentbem." [An explosion from the Irish members here inter rupted the butt. member, who attempted in vain "to pass to another brand' of his argument." Cries of " Name !" "Explain !" "Oh, oh !" and "Chair, chair!" SATURDAY, effectively stopped all further discussion, until at length the general indignation found a voice through] Mr. JOHN BLit., who moved that the objectionable words used by Mr. Duffy be " taken down." A confused discussion ensued as to the proper mode and time of proceeding, and it was suggested that the Speaker should be recalled. Sir DENHAM NORREYS interposed with a suggestion that perhaps Mr. Duffy would retract ; but this meeting no re sponse, and the chairman having no note of the words, Mr. Ball wrote them down, from recollection, and Mr. Duffy, being appealed to, " did not quarrel with the version." Lord J. RUSSELL informed the committee, and es pecially the Irish members, that they were justified in treating the expressions with contempt, as words dropped in debate, unless the hon. member who vented the offensive charges would declare himself prepared to give names and proofs when the Speaker had resumed the chair. Mr. Lucss corrected the noble lord. It was rather the Government than the Irish members against whom the charge of corruption was laid. Ministers must have taken the initiative in attempting to cor rupt representatives, and it was to them the infa mous comparison with Walpole and Pelham was ad dressed. Continued confusion, which the Chairman (Mr. Bouverie) vainly attempted to still or reduce to order, was quieted for a moment by Mr. DISRAELI, who endeavoured to place the ques tion of order" in its true bearings before the com mittee. It was disorderly, no doubt, to impute cor rupt practices to any member of that House. But it was not disorderly to allege corrupt conduct. This was what Mr. Duffy had done with regard to Minis ters. He was, in so doing, quite right; and, if he could substantiate his allegation, had but performed the highest duty which could devolve upon a repre sentative. Lord PALMERSTON accepted the words as a direct charge upon the Government of using corrupt arts, and challenged the accuser to prove it; otherwise he suggested the propriety of his retracting with a good graSir ce. G. GREY and Mr. HERBERT having also at tempted to extract an apology from the hon. member, Mr. DUFFY, after complaining that the language and conduct employed towards himself " were not creditable to a society of English gentlemen," en tered into some explanations of his meaning, but concluded by asserting that he was not prepared to unsay anything he had said or might say in that house, and was ready to abide the consequences. Mr. BRIGHT endeavoured to persuade the com mittee that the offensive words ought to be inter preted merely in a " figurative sense, according to the Oriental latitude" of expression which Irish members were somewhat apt to indulge in. The confused debate continued some time; but at length the Chairman procured an affirmative to the resolution, that the words in question should be taken down and reported. The Speaker accordingly took the chair, the house resumed, and Mr. Bouverie brought up his report. The SPEAKER, taking the report, read the words again, and then said," Has the hon. member anything to say in explanation or retractation of these words r Mr. Deere I have already explained, in the ab sence of Mr. Speaker, the general circumstances under which I used these words. I do not know whether I may be permitted to ask the house to tell me the course lam expected to take. (Loud cries of " Oh, oh !") The SPEAKER informed him that he might either explain or retract, and that the house would then decide what should be done with him. Mr. DUFFY, pleading much ignorance of the forms of the house, offered, if a committee were given him, to bring forward the evidence on which he had founded his allegations. He then withdrew, and, after some discussion as to the next step to be taken, Mr. STUART WORTLEY recommended that P day's time should be allowed for the hon. member and the house itself to cool and reflect. This proposal being adopted, the debate was adjourned, and Mr. Duffy ordered to attend in his place at four o'clock yes terday (Friday) evening. CHARITABLE TRUSTS. The Lonn CHANCELLOR 0 n Tuesday carried the second reading of this bill in the Lords, and ex plained the machinery by which the measure was to fulfil its assigned purpose of " better administering and making more useful the charitable trusts of the country." During forty years, and through the me dium of more than one commission, who had issued between them thirty-eight folio volumes of reports,the abuses attaching to the present system had attracted attention. More than four hundred prosecutions had been instituted on the same account, and bills been brought in year after year, which, however, had al ways fallen through from various causes. The gross number of charitable trusts now existing was no less than 25,540,0 f which 22,760 were below the value of 301. per annum. Owing to yaricui causes, the hese- I