The Sun. — London, England, 1860-03-27 00:00:00

(Continued from our first page.] keep ourselves apart from the other nations of Europe — (loud cheers from both sides of the house)—but that, when future questions may arise—as future questions may arise —we should be ready to act with others and to declare, always in the most moderate and friendly terms, but still firmly, that the settlement of Europe, the peace of Europe, is a matter dear to this country, and that settlement and that peace cannot be assured if it is liable to perpetual in•• terruption—(loud cheers)—to constant fears, to doubts and rumours with respect to the annexation of this one coun try, or the union and connexion of that other—but that the Powers of Europe, if they wish to maintain that peace, must respect each other's rights, must respect each other's limits, and, above all, restore and not disturb that commercial con fidence which is the result of peace, which tends to peace, and which ultimately forms the happiness of nations. (Loud cheers.) Lord J. MANNERS said the cheers which rang through the whole house when the noble lord made the observa tions with which he concluded his speech furnished a com plete justification of the hon. gentleman who had originated that discussion. (Hear.) He could only say, for one, thdt when he heard that portion of the noble lord's speech he hailed it as an augury that her Majesty's Government were about to return to those alliances and that friendly co-operation with the other Powers of Europe which, in his opinion, ought never to have been for one moment dis turbed. (Cheers.) The announcement just made by the noble lord was of such paramount importance, and fraught with such infinite gratification to all lovers of their coun try, that he was quite content to overlook anything that could raise controversy in the previous parts of his speech. (Hear, hear.) Having from the first taken a deep interest in this question, he (Lord J. Manners) could not sit down without expressing his thanks to the honourable mem ber for Bridgewater, the honourable baronet the member for Tamworth, and the right honourable gentleman the member for Stroud, for the bold and honest stand they had made, and the thoroughly English spirit they had manifested in bringing this subject under the consideration of the house. (Hear.) The noble lord had given utterance to that which would vibrate from one end of England to the other ; and, if it became their duty to discuss this ques tion again, he trusted they would do so in the spirit of the noble lord's concluding observations, and that the country would feel they might still have confidence in the manner in which our foreign policy was conducted. (Hear, hear.) Mr. BRIGHT—I am unable to say how many times this subject has been before the house during the last month, but I am sure it has been more times than was convenient for the house, or for the despatch of public business. (Oh, oh.) I may not have been able to remember all the speeches that I have heard made, nor to recollect all I hare read of those which I have not heard on this subject; but I have come to this conclusion, that those gentlemen who have been so anxious to introduce this question to the house have entirely avoided that which appears to me the most important point—viz., what clear and direct interest this house has in the matter under discussion. I contend that we are here for the interests of England. (Oh, oh.) I repudiate altogether the views of the hon. baronet the member for Tamworth, whose interest is clearly of the warmest with regard to Switzerland. I repudiate the course taken by the hon. member for Bridgewater, who has taken Sardinia under his particular care. (No, no.) Now that Sardinia is proved to be the only Power that is not trust worthy in this matter, the hon. gentleman probably wishes to discourage discussion. I repudiate the course taken by the right hon. gentleman below me (Mr. Horsman), who appears to find every question a suitable one for attacking the mem bers of the Government; I am here as the representative of a great English constituency, who have no kind of business with this question except in so far as it affects the honour and interest of England. (Hear, hear.) I can conceive men, being great Englishmen—and lam astonished that it has not struck some of these ingenious gentlemen in their re searches on this question—viewing very favourably the transfer of Savoy to France, and I will give one reason why I think England should rather be glad at it. Sardinia agrees to the transfer as a compensation to France. Has it not been matter of talk among Englishmen and in all the clubs during the last year that Sardinia has been placed in the power of France, and that in consequence France has been aggrandised by the acquisition of Sardinia in an almost perpetual alliance ? But if Sardinia be able by the cession of what may be called politically a worthless pro vince —(oh, oh)—understand me, I say " worthless" poli tically only—if Sardinia has compensated France by the cession of that territory, and has, therefore, disengaged herself from any feeling of what I may say created that supremacy of France in consequence of what France had done for her in the Italian war, then I say, on your own principles'and on the policy of the noble lord, that Eng land should be glad that the score had been settled in this manner rather than that for the future Sardinia should consider herself greatly indebted to France, and bound by a perpetual political alliance with that country. (Hear.) France is now acknowledged even by the right hen, gen tleman near me to have acted in the transaction with per fect good faith. (Oh, oh I) I thought I was stating that which was admitted on both sides of the house the last time his matter was discussed. I heard it said by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), though I see that gentlemen opposite have no faith in his statements ; but that he did say so I call the right hon. gentleman himself to witness. (Hear.) This house, the English people, and the English press have for the last nine months been exciting the English Go vetal meat to take that precise course which rendered the cession of Savoy inevitable, and therefore we are not in a position to complain of what has taken place. The noble lord has •; told us 4n a manner perfectly charming, when we recollect the somewhat hot despatches he has written, and the hotter despatches gentlemen in this house have desired him to write, that he has communicated with all the Powers who were parties to the treaty of Vienna. It is a delight- ful thing when all the Powers of Europe slumber at their posts that the hon. member for Bridgewater should be wide awake. (Hear.) No doubt gentlemen opposite fully appreciate the course he has taken. But the noble lord tells us that Austria in reply says—what ? Why, that no body cares about the treaty of Vienna, and when her pro vinces were wrested from her they were not taken by treaty, but by force of arms, and tlitit Europe looked quietly on, while the English Ministers almost applauded, and4the English people welcomed with enthusiasm every intelli gence that was received of the destruction of an Austrian army in Italy. (Rear.) Then not only is Lombardy taken from Austria, but those pet duchies over which Austria has exerted so much influence are also gone, and that patrimony which is held by Austria to be sacred—the patrimony of the Pope—is in part wrested from the Papal Government ; and all this is transferred bodily to Sardinia, which has tripled in extent since this time last year. All this has been done with the sanction of the English Go vernment and the English people. (" No," from Mr. Bow yer.) Did hon. gentlemen opposite, or did the hon. member for Bridgewater think that the Austrian Government would join in a quarrel about Savoy when they had not a word to • say when Austria was dismembered ? Then you go to Russia, and you ask her to join you. Russia replies, "As there is no question involved affecting the principles on which Government rests, it does not concern us." And then, if you look back seven years, is there any man such an idiot as to suppose that the Russian Government would step out of its path to join you upon a miserable question like this; remembering the course you took with regard to Russia seven years ago ? Then I suppose the noble lord appealed to Prussia, and the Court of Prussia is particularly allied to the Court of England, and is, for many reasons besides, rather disposed to side with England. Well, what is the answer of the Court of Prussia ? I am not sure that the noble lord has stated exactly that answer to-night, but the general impression is that, as the French Government do not insist upon what are called the natural boundaries of empires, Prussia has no interest in this ques • tion, and does not desire to take any steps with us. Then it comes to this, that no one has any interest in this matter but Eneiand • and yet every one will admit that whatever interest England has is necessarily smaller than the interest ' 4 4 „ / of the ether Powers of Europe, for it is sheer folly and child ishness to say that we who live in this island have a greater interest in this question than the great nations which in - habit the continent of Europe, and which are nearer to that point where the boundary touches. But I ask, who in Eng land is so far interested in this matter ? I have looked in vain to the English press to find any considerable alarm on this question. There is, of course, some following of the rumours spread in this house, and there is one newspaper in London which is celebrated—l should rather say noto , xious—for a mixture of piety and ruffianism which has never before been equalled in the press. (Laughter, and cries of "Name, name I") Day after day that newspaper—(Name 1) = endeavours to stir up the passions of this country by vitu perating everything connected with the French people and their Government ; but beyond that I am at a loss to find t , • any that express any serious alarm about the question. I '. do not hesitate to express a suspicion that has filled my Anind. It should be remembered that at this moment there is in France, as there was in England 150 years ago, a great question of dynasty. The partisans of deposed dynasties are restless and unscrupulous ; and I am not at all certain that y,., means have nut been taken by those partisans who had no -awe friendship for England while they were connected with the Government of France—means which do not come to the light °E day—for the purpose of influencing the press and public opi- Ilion in general throughout England against the existing Go 'yen:anent of France. And this is done not with any good in . tentions towards England, but for objects good only to a family or a faction who, when they were in power, were not able to maintain themselves in it. and who have no claim whatever upon the influence of this cou I try to re dace them in the posi tion they hav e l ost. (Oh, (!lt.) I cannot, I say, find any one in England who really feels alarm upon this question, and the only people who I believe are really in a state of great trepidation are the right hon. mernber for Stroud • (Mr. iforsman), the hon. member for Bridgewater (Mr. Kinglake), and ono or two others, (No, no.) Well, that is my opinion. (Laughter.) The right hen. member for Str oud has this evening touched upon a question which it is a great pity that he did not further explain. It occurred in the right hon. gentleman's defence of freedom of speech. -' Now, lam not about to contest that point. The house allows me to use freedom in my sr eech. I shall not corn ' plain of any one else using it. But the right hon. gentleman 1 has intimated by what he said, that diplomacy having failed, ?!) • parliament had power to do something that diplomacy had -net. Well, what has parliament power to do wider such circumstances? It must either succumb, or proceed to a mode of compulsion which is different from that of diplo macy. Did the right hon. gentleman refer to that latter course ? Mr. HORSMAN said he did not. Mr. BRIGHT—No; because he has told the house that he does not mean to make war upon France. But the right hon. gentleman is determined to make war upon those who sit on the Treasury benches; and I have not the least ob jection to his doing so, though, if the right honourable gen tleman will permit me, I will give him a piece of advice. When he wants to make war upen the Treasury bench, he should not begin his assault when they are in the right. (Laughter.) I have been opposed to governments, and I hope I have on such occasions done something to render their position unpleasant —(hear, hear, and laughter) —but I have always acted upon this plan. Every Govern ment—even that of Lord Derby—sometimes does things that are right—(laughter)—and then I have always been happy to give them my support. But on the other hand, even such governments as that of the noble viscount ara apt to make great mistakes, and my course has been to attack them upon those mistakes. (Cheers, and laughter.) But the right hon. gentleman not only makes war upon the go vernment, but upon all the party with whom for the last 20 years it is supposed that he has been acting. The right hon. gentleman makes war upon all the past of his own life ; and for a gentleman of his power of debate, of com prehending questions, and of being usefulboth to the House of Commons and to his country, it is a lamentable thing to ice hint committing, as I think, so great a mistake. (Cheers.) With regard to the main object at issue, I am opposed to the house placing itself in the humiliating position which it has so often of been invited to occupy—that of bark ing when it does not intend to bite, and of making itself, not the guardian of the powers of Europe, for that would be foolish and impossible enough—but making itself the common scold of all Europe. (Cheers and laughter.) Nothing could be more humiliating, nothing more hopeless than such a position. lam not sure that some of our de bates, pernicious as they have been in other respects, have not rather affected the judgment of the noble lord at the head of foreign affairs. Ido not perhaps quite understand the observations with which the noble lord closed his speech—(oh, oh)—but the noble lord opposite (Lord John Manners), always glad to ally himself with that which ci vilisation is day by day departin g from, namely, privilege and despotism—(renewed cries o" oh, oh")—rose imme diately to compliment the noble lord the Secretary for Fo reign Affairs, and to say, what I have heard him say be fore, viz., how grateful he felt to the noble lord for the opi nions he had expressed, and for the course which the Go verntoent were about to take. The house are aware that I have more than once expressed an opinion that a close per sonal alliance between the Sovereign of this and the Sove reigns of other countries is not, in my opinion, advanta geous to England, nor indeed to Europe. I think the noble lord means to take that course which, in the impartial opi nion of every one, must be admitted to be wise and good— he intends, namely, that the policy of England shall in fu ture not be such as to estrange England from any of the Governments of Europe—that it shall not be such to France on the one side, or to Austria on the other, as shall make one of those powers the embittered enemy of Eng land ; but such as will enable England to take an impartial position among the Governments of Europe, giving her opinion, as she is only bound to give it, when the question does not immediately affect her own interest—only when she is asked for it. If this were the proper occasion I should take the noble lord to task for the course which has been taken with regard to Naples. There is nothing which I believe is more firmly and more unchangeably established than that the past policy of England with regard to various matters connected with the Governments of continental Europe has been a policy not tending to her honour, not good for her people, disastrous to her finances, needlessly meddling, and of no advantage to her whatever. (Opposi tion cheers.) lam not asking for a policy of entire and absolute isolation; but I believe that a policy of isolation would be better than a policy of incessant meddling. (Cheers.) I hope the noble lord will take this course—that he will move with France, when he has to move with her, clearly, frankly, honourably, and in a manner that cannot be mistaken. I know the noble lord will never truckle to any power in Europe, but I hops he will so conduct the policy of this country that all the nations of Europe may say that which I believe they have heretofore not said, that England is a power that regards its own great interests, namely—that it interferes not in Europe where interference can be avoided, and that when it does interfere, it inter feres, not for the sake of degrading one power or of exalting another, but in favour of those great principles of justice and moderation which it is necessary to observe if the peace of Europe is to be preserved. (Cheers.) Lord CLAUDE HAMILTON said he could not think it possible that the statements which had been made by the hon. gentleman were in accordance with those sentiments entertained by the English people. If the question of the annexation of Savoy had been passed over sub silentio they would be liable to the imputation of giving encouragement to still further encroachments in that course of policy. England would be wasting in its duties if it did not com plain in the strongest terms of the annexation of Savoy. The hon. gentleman. (Mr. Bright) had, however, said that it was a matter of very little importance. Did that hon. mem ber wish then to see the glorious republic of Switzerland shackled on one of its frontiers by a great military Power like that of France ? He (Lord ( 1 . Hamilton) denied that ; the general sentiments of the people at all accorded with those which had been expressed by that hon. member. The subject of complaint was, that the noble lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had not raised his voice when he had first been made aware of the intentions of the French Government. If they were silent on such a subject they would be sanctioning a most odious policy, and would be worthy of strong condemnation. He was bound to say that the policy puisued by the noble lord at the head of the Go vernment, since 1830, when he was called to the Foreign Office, had been such as to irritate and alienate the old Allies of England ; and he was rejoiced to hear, by the speech of the noble lord (Lord J. Russell), that it was found necessary to draw closer the intimacy with foreign Powers, a a r epeh whip}, 'had been loudly cheered by a crowded house. (Hear, hear.) Mr. KINGLAKE said he was very sure he would not have addressed them but for the language which had been used by the hon. member for Birmingham as to the conduct which he (Mr. Kinglake) had thought proper to pursue with reference to these transactions. The speech of that hon. member had been truly characteristic of the man, be cause he had disclosed in every sentence the assumed in fallibility of his own opieions, and his ignorance of the views which were entertained by other men. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Kinglake) denied that he had acted in these matters in the character of a friend of the King of Sardinia, which the hon. member might have known if he had paid any attention to what he had said when he came down to the house and disclosed to hon. members the family compact which had been entered into between Franco and Sardinia. The hon. member had alleged that those who had spoken had not shown him how England had any interest in this matter; but that only showed that he had paid no atten tion to the discussions on the subject, for it had been proved that military considerations made it of great im portance that England should endeavour to prevent the an nexation of Savoy. (Hear, hear.) He wondered at the audacity of the hon. gentleman coming forward to give a military opinion, and speaking with his usual confidence that Savoy and Nice were only worthless provinces. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) Hon. members in speaking of these provinces were influenced principally by military con siderations, and of course the hon. member must mean that they were worthless provinces in a military sense— Mr. BRIGHT.—I said politically. Mr. KINGLAKE said it must depend on the degree of strength which these province gave to a nation, and there fore it was not right in the hon. member for Birmingham to speak of them as being worthless in a pelitical sense. The hon. member had said that there was great danger of the house degeratiug into the position of being the common stole of Europe, but the language and the demeanour of the hon. member was such as would prevent England being the scold of Europe. (Opposition cheers.) He (Mr. Kinglake) was glad to say how much he had been gratified with the speech of the noble lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and he congratulated himself in being, to some ex tent, the cause of that speech by the notice of motion which he had given. He was also glad to say that, happily, the views which he entertained upon so important a subject were now entertained by the Government. (Hear.) Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said he would venture to recall the attention of the house to the subject which was im mediately before them when this discussion arose, he meant the income tax. lie had already said he thought it very doubtful whether the house would not object to pay a lid. income tax for the sake of a mere financial experiment. But he thought it was now his duty to make some remark upon the inequalities which deformed this tax. Tha house was aware that it was of very unequal pressure, taken with reference to the various schedules. For in stance, with respect to all the property in Schedule A, which included all the land and house property of the country, people paid the tax upon their gross rental. This was clearly a great injustice to the owners of real property in this country. He proposed, therefore, that some reduc tion, by way of per centage, sh ou ld b e made upon this gross rental, and that the income tax should be calculated upon the reduced amount. He begged also to ask the right hon. gentleman whether he had any objection to give to owners of landed property a right of appeal to the commissioners. Sir J. PAKINGTON said that before the right hon. gen tleman rose to answer the question, there was one or two points on which he thought it desirable that he should give the house some further information than it had yet received. The Chancellor of the Exchequer having thought fit to im pose a 10d. income tax, with a remarkable inconsistency, in the very year in which he had promised it should cease al together, had omitted to state to the house what would be the estimated proceeds of the tax. He had told the house what they were to pay, not what he was to receive. The right hon. gentleman, in his statement on the budget, had estimated the produce of half-a -year's income tax at sd. at £2,400,000 ; this would give £960,000 for each penny of tax. But a few sentences later in his speech, he had said that the actual produce of the tax in 1858- 59 at sd. was X 6,140,000. That would make each penny to produce £1,258,000. He gave a third and different statement when estimating what would be the receipt front the three quarters of the tax which he proposed to collect in the ensuing financial year ; this he estimated at £8,172,000, and the fourth quarter at £2,250,000; givingan a gv-egate of -C10,722,000, or i. 1,012, 200 for each penny. If the second calculation was correct, the 9d. tax proposed on a former evening would actually produce a larger revenue than what the Chancellor of the Exchequer now estimated front a 10(1 tax. Another point was the mode in which he proposed to collect the three quarters within the year. There would be considerable practical dif ficulty in this; and he should be glad to hear some explana tion. He also hoped that some alteration would be made in the remuneration allowed to the collectors. They were extremely well paid, and as the tax was to be doubled, their ought to be some reduction in, their poundage. Mr. DE EDE S expressed his disappointment at thefinan cial statement. Mr. L. BLAKE expressed his conviction that the income tax pressed unjustly on the commercial classes, as compared with farmers, who were exempt up to £2OO a-year. Mr. LONGFIELD asked whether any augmented tax was to be levied in Ireland on a new assessment, as Pro mised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He found that THE S. on the schedules B, C, and D, there had been an actual de crease of receipts between 1854 and 1857. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER referred to the inconvenience of re-opening the question on partial grounds. Sir H. Willoughby had complained that the pre sent arrangement of the income tax bore unjustly upon those in schedule A. Another hon. member had opened . . another source of complaint, one that was much more rife, and much more serious and difficult to deal with whenever the subject was fairly broached—its unequal pressure upon schedule D. The truth was that the-great battle of the in come tax was between schedules A and D. The question of remissions in favour of the farmers under schedule B was a very small one, the real question was between schedules A and D. If the hon. baronet made the motion which he promised, with a view to improve the terms for schedule A, he would find other members on his right and left up in arms for schedules D and E, and he might be left to be dealt with by these gentlemen. (A laugh.) There was no doubt that the tax was full of inequalities ; but there would be no advantage to any particular interest in opening the question of those inequalities, except at a time when the house could give to the subject an attention bearing some proportion to its extreme difficulty, its vast importance, and the immense financial and social dangers which, ho hesi tated not to say, would infallibly attend any precipitate pro- cecding in regard to it. (Hear.) He was not afraid of any such precipitate proceeding ; but he thought it his duty always to keep in view the extremely perilous and critical nature of the whole question, which would, in fact, open something like a soramble between class and class in this country, and for the opening of which he did not wish to be responsible, though he fully admitted the right of members to give their attention to the subject and to bring it before the house. If Sir 11. Willoughby made the motion he pro- posed, it would be convenient to both houses, with regard to the progress of the public business, if he would make it either that evening or on the report of the bill. What he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had said with respect to assessment was intended entirely in favour of the tax-payers. It had reference exclusively to schedule B ; and the object was not to increase the burden on leaseholders. It had been asked whether any relief could be given under sche dule Ato the tax levied on mines. He had not had any recent application on that subject, but he should be happy, either in or out of the house, to hear any statements which might give an opportunity of adjusting the tax in propor- tion to the receipts of the owners of mining property. speaking of the unfavourable result that might happen to schedule A, from a general discussion of the subject, he was quite aware that the matter was a grave one. He himself had laboured in that house to show that the tax fell upon schedule A much more heavily than was generally sup posed, as all house proprietors in particular were aware, for on them it fell with a weight that was really extreme. (Hear, hear.) He had been so distinctly charged by Sir J. Pakington with breach of promise with regard to the in come tax, that he must quote to the house the substance of his statement in 1853. The right hon. baronet appeared to think that he had promised that a certain course should be pursued in 1860 irrespective of what might happen in the meantime, and the demands of the public service. Had he made so rash a promise as that, it would have been the act of an insane man to attempt to keep it. But he did not find, from the authentic records of their proceedings, that he had been guilty of such an excess of folly. He had said in 1853 —" I think it also desirable that effective measures should be taken to mark this tax as a temporary tax. My own opinion is decidedly against the perpetuity of this tax as a perma nent ordinary portion of our revenue. But while I state the wish of the Government to propose it as a temporary tax, I do not ask you to rely upon their words as binding -either them or yourselves, irrespective of what may occur in the interim, to put an end to the tax entirely in a given year." The answer to those who said that such expecta tions ought to be fulfilled was to point to the increase of fourteen millions in the expenditure of the country. How far that was a sufficient answer he pretended not to say ; but it merely showed how foolish it would have been in the Government of the day to make such a pledge, or in the Parliament to accept it, supposing they had done so. As to the figures quoted by Sir John Pakington, he thought ho should be able to show that they were strictly accurate. He was not aware that he had referred to the produce of the tax in 1858-59, or that he had stated it at £6,140,000. But the produce of the tax in that year, whatever it was, did not represent the value of a sd. tax; it really repre sented the value of a 7d. tax for the first half-year, and a sd. tax for the second half-year. He had stated, as was truly said, that there was due of the present year's tax, in respect of the law expiring en the 31st March, £2,400,000 ; also that there would be obtained by collecting three-fourths within the year, if the tax were voted by the house, a sum of £8,472,000. He had likewise stated the sum which would remain to be collected after the Ist April, 1861, at £2,250,000. There was an apparent discrepancy, but no real one. All the calculations were as accurate as could be made in the form of estimates. The reason of the apparent discrepancy was this, that the collection was not quite equally distributed. In Scotland, for example, the whole annual tax under sche dules A and I), and he believed B also, was collected about January. That was one reason. It so happened that owing to the lateness of the period at which, from other circum stances, the financial statement of last year was made, the July dividend, which ought to have paid an income-tax of 13d. in the pound, escaped with an income-tax of only sd. That consequently deraggeL the collection. Instead there fore of getting £9,000,000 within :the year, they got zo,trz,ooo i. Rai. (Liu y cal , awl £2,260,000 boyond tho year, making £10,7'29,000. T1.....i ....,..... kl. . ~,....-. ~.e 41,- ~„.--4. discrepancy in the figures. With regard to the collection of three quarters of the tax in lieu of one quarter within the year, there was no alteration of the law. The collection was not uniform as it now stood, it being paid in some cases quarterly, in others half-yearly, and once for all, as in the case of Scotland. With regard to another point of consi derable importance which the right hon. gentleman touched upon, namely, the per centage on the collection of the tax, there was only one change which they proposed to make, and that was to take the assessment on the railways from the head office of the railways, and transfer it to the head office of the Government at Somerset-house. It was absurd, for example, that because the head office of the North- Western Railway, which had its revenue of so many mil lions, was in the parish of St. Pancras, the collector there should have the per centage on the whole amount of its in come tax. They proposed, therefore, to make this a matter of direct arrangement between the Government and the railway companies. And he felt no scruple in doing this, because the poundage afforded ample and adequate remune ration to the collectors. (Hear, hear.) The whole question of the poundage on collection required revision, when the House of Commons was in a position to vete the tax for a term of years. (Hear, hear.) When the income tax was at sd. in the pound, the poundage did not give adequate remuneration for the trouble. On the other hand, when it was 16d. the receipts were much larger than they ought to have been. It was desirable, therefore, to adopt a better balanced system. Another reason why he did not make a proposal of this kind, and one which the right hon. gentle man would appreciate, was this, that in the present se lion it would be the duty of the Government to propose a mea sure to Parliament bearing on the very important question whether the assessed taxes should be continued to be col lected by local authorities or by officers directly responsible to the Government. (Hear, hear.) He did not propose to submit to Parliament any plan by which a general and coo pulsory change should be made in the present system ; but there was so strong an expression in many quarters of a de sire to be freed from the responsibility of the collection of these taxes, and to put them under the control of the Execu tive Government, that they thought it right to submit a measure for the purpose of transferring the function to the Executive Government. (Hear, hear.) After a few words from Sir J. PAKINGTON in explana tion, Mr. DISRAELI said he had already expressed his opi nion that the financial scheme of the right hon. gentleman was improvident and unwise, and had an opportunity of voting against the repeal of a particular tax—a portion of that scheme—on a subsequent occasion. The house, how ever, approved of the general policy of the budget, and de cided in favour of the repeal of that particular tax. This being the case he did not think he would be justified in voting against the 10d. income tax. But he could not understand the remarks of the lion. member for Kent (Mr. Deedes),who voted in favour of the general financial policy of the govern ment, and he believed in favour of the repeal of the tax on paper, and now seemed alarmed at the dangerous financial policy of the country. The hon. member for Kent was ready with his warnings against the consequences of events which he himself assisted in accomplishing. (Hear, hear.) They were now called upon to vote an income tax of very great amount, without any prospect, as far as he could judge, of a speedy.releaso from what he still believed was an unpopular burden. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman, not for the first time, referred to what took place in 1853 in order to prove that he entered into no compact with Parliament, or with the country, that there should be an absolute abolition of the in come tax in 1860, when by an unfortunate coincidence the right hon. gentleman was the Minister to make the proposition for its continuance. Of course no one supposed that any Minister could enter into an absolute compact, or that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was to be held to the " letter of his bond" apart from all financial considerations, and the circumstances of the country. But the right hon. gentleman would not pretend to deny that the scope of his policy was not—that in 1860 the termination of the income tax should take place. (Hear.) He could not deny—for he must feel— that upon the expediency of that policy and the hope of its realisation he enjoyed fur seven years the reputation which that statesman-like scheme was calculated to afford. (Hear.) He could not forget that he particularly referred to the Ter minable Annuities, on which he might calculate on £2,000,000 or more as affording positive data for his calcula tions, and to show that his estimate was not based upon mere transient and illusory speculation. (Hear.) What he complained of now was that the Chancellor of the Exche quer, having all the credit of a policy which proved so frail and fallacious, was the person who having power to appro priate these £2,000,000, had not appropriated them to the relief of the country, but on the contrary, opened out new schemes which, if it were improvident and unsafe at any time, as he believed, wer e re p lete and rife with danger un der present circumstances. (Hear.) That was the cause of the dissatisfaction in the publ ic mind, and it was a point which the Chancellor of the Exchequer always evaded when he came to the consideration of th e question. He could not help contra,sting the present position of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with the position he took in the end of 1852. He still remembered the fierce denunciations of the right hon. gentleman against the Government of that day, on ac count of their policy with regard to this particular tax and their financial propositions on that occasion. The right hon. gentleman then called on the house to crush the budget of 1852, on the ground that it was immoral and dangerous to appropriate to the service of the year £lOO,OOO that had not been furnished by the revenue of the year. But what was the position of the right hon. gentleman now ? The right hon. gentleman proposed that there should be appropriated to the service of the year not £400,000, but £1,500,000, which was not furnished by the revenue of the year. (Hear.) With regard to the income tax, the right hon. gentleman said no Minister was justified in proposing a continuance of that impost without providing for its final termination. (Hear, hear.) What was the position in which they now found themselves ? The income tax was double the amount at which it stood in 1852, and was there any one who could say that provision was made for its final termination ? The right hon. gentleman next charged the then Government with proposing to make a difference in the assessment of s3hedules A and D. But he learned with surprise and asto nishment that the right hon. gentleman promised when this important financial proposition was taken into consi- deration next year, that he would consider the policy of greatly increasing the whole scale of exceptions, and reduc• ing the scale of assessment in the different classes. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCIIEQU ER here made a remark across the table which did not reach us. Mr. DISRAELI said it was a pity the right hon. gentleman had been represented to have so spoken ; he was not in the house at the time himself. The right hon. gentleman, how. ever, must have stated something, and if such was his policy the proposition of 1852 shrinks into entire insignificance in . . comparison with that of the right hon. gentleman. It was very true, as was pointed out by the hon member for Kent, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had embarked in as important an enterprise as could be. He had, he was afraid, succeeded in substituting direct for indirect taxation to a great extent, and he laid down principles which, if followed, would lead to measures of greater imi ortance. He placed on the Minister who would have to deal with the finances of the country next year the task of meeting a deficiency o from £12,000,000 to £15,000,000; and the manner in which the finances of the country were to be re-established was to be reserved, to use the right hon. gentleman's own phrase, for the representatives of the masses. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated that he had not used such an expression. Mr. DISRAELI—Did the right hon. gentleman mean to deny that he had used the word " masses ?" The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I contra dict you entirely as to the phrase. Mr. DISRAELI—The right hon. gentleman said that the masses were about to become Possessed of the franchise, and he should be sorry if their representatives were to be deprived of an opportunity of deciding on the principles on which the taxation of the country ought to be levied. That is a very serious state of affairs when you were promised a system which was mainly to depend on direct taxation and at the same time were informed by the same minister that a new constituent body was about to be formed who were themselves no payers of direct taxes. (Hear, hear.) A position more dangerous to the country could not be con templated. They had discussions in that house whether the Emperor of the French was influenced in his policy by what was stated in the House of Commons, and whether he might not be irritated and offended by what was said of him there. But he did not think the Emperor of the French had any cause to complain of the House of Com mons, for it appeared to him that the House of Commons was doing his work as expeditiously and as completely as any minister of his own could do it. (Hear, hear.) A system of direct taxation, which was not to be paid by the great majority of the constituent body, appeared to be a policy which, if anything could break down this country, would break down its free spirit and that salutary influence of ancient property which so often exercised a great and powerful weight in the vindication of their rights and liber ties. With such a policy pursued by the Government, and supported by the House of Commons, the Emperor of the French could not feel offended at anything which was ex pressed in that house. (Hear, hear.) When such was the financial policy avowed:and pursued by the right hon. gen tleman, and such was the political policy working in unison with it, Necker himself, in all his glory, could not contem plate anything so enduring for the monarchy, and so advan tageous for the people. (Cheers.) Mr. LAING said that all the visionary pictures which had been for some time in circulation had been brought to a climax by the right hon. gentleman who had just sat down. They had been told that they were throwing away all that annual taxation which formed the mainstay of our revenue, and substituting direct taxation to the extent of confiscation of the rich as against the poor. But in speaking on matters of finance there was only one sort of figures al lowable, and those were figures of arithmetic. (Hear, hear.) They wire told that they were throwing away an immense amount of indirect taxation in their budget, but the fact was that the amount of indirect taxation next year would be greater than ever it had been before. (Hear, hear.) Let them for example go back to the year 1856-57, when the Russiaa war was at its height. In that year the amount raised from the Excise and Customs was £41,486,000, and in the same year the income-tax was £16,089,000. Now, in the budget as prepared this year the amount of indirect tweetio., ha -C42,970,000, being a million and a half more than in the great year of th,e ~\ whilst the ato,am, taxation, which had been de scribed as something so extraordinary, would be £10,900,000 against £16,000,000. (Hear, hear.) Therefore, comparing the indirect taxes with 1856 they were a million and a half less, and the income tax a reduction of something in the shape of £5,000,000. He put it to the house and the coun try whether this was a wholesale abandonment of indirect taxation. (Hear. hear.) The fact was that the object of the present budget was to increase the fruitfulness of indi rect taxation, because experience had shown that by reduc ing the duty on an article of direct consumption, and by similar reductions on raw materials so as to lighten the springs of industry, your indirect taxation would go on in creasing until it far surpassed the amount it had returned before reduction. In 1842, £12,000,000 of indirect taxes were repealed, and the result was that they now produced £5,300,000 more than when we began. Therefore, if the last 20 years showed such a result, it was only reasonable to ex. pect something similar as a consequence of the reductions that were now proposed, whilst they started now with a larger amount of indirect taxation than at the former period. Mr. MALINS complained that, after the emphatic decla rations of former years against the income tax, the Chan cellor of the Exchequer should now be found, in 1860, the year in which he promised it should come to an end, about to reimpose the burden. Last half-year he levied 13d. in the pound, and now he reimposed it without giving thorn any prospect of its abandonment. The right hon. gentle.. man forgot, perhaps, that the weight of this tax would fall on Schedule D, comprising 260,000 persons, of whom 200,000 had incomes of less than £3OO a-year. These were the people upon whom the tax fell heaviest, and to whom the reductions on French wines, or the abolition of the paper duties, were matters of not the slightest consequence. In th. paper duty the right hon. gentleman was sacrificing £1,200,000, of which nobody had ever felt the burden, and all the alleged difficulties of collection had been cleared away by the evidence that had been taken, whilst the ad vantages which the French Emperor had promised us in the import of rags turned out to mean an export duty of 100 per cent. He hoped that as hereafter the taxes were to be levied by the classes who did not pay them, the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, if he should be in office next year, would remember his promises of 1853, and endeavour to do something for the income tax payers, who would then be no longer able to protect themselves. Mr. PIGOTT was anxious to get some intimation from the right hon. gentleman respecting a future re-adjustment of the tax which, while it pressed but lightly on the wealthy men of Manchester, was heavily felt by the members of small trading communities. In towns such as that ono which he had the honour to represent the amount of the tax was a matter of very great importance. Mr. BARROW said it was most desirable the mode of assessing the income tax should be considered as early as possible, and he thought a great improvement might be made in assessing small incomes. Mr. PEASE must unite with other hon. gentlemen in disliking the income tax, but he thought, failing other sources of revenue, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was bound to levy the only tax which he had at his command. The charge against the right hon. gentleman at the pre sent moment was, that he was levying 3d. in the pound more than was necessary on the income tax for the sake of taking the duty off paper. Mr. It. HAN B URYthought an income tax was about the best tax that could be inflicted, but he wished to urge upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer that if he had any desire to obtain a majority of the house in favour of the tax next year, lie must take means to levy it more justly. Mr. NE WDEGATE thought that if the house had made up its mind to an income tax, it was absolutely necessary something should be done to remedy its inequalities. Ile confessed that having studied the question, he had not been able to surmount the difficulties which defeated Mr. Pitt and Sir R. Peel. Ile believed it would be impossible to establish a just system of gradation. They would not be able to define strictly between the accumulation which created capital and income itself, and for his own part, he thought the Government were launching into a system of taxation which was fraught with injustice. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had undertaken the task of adjusting the income.tax, a task which defeated Mr. Pitt and Sir P. Peel, and he (Mr. Newdegate) only hoped the house would exact from the right hon. gentleman the fulfilment of that task. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Sir, I just wish to explain, after what the hon. gentleman said who had just sat down, that I was certainly not aware that any person was under the impression that I had undertaken to re-adjust the schedules of the income tax. That is a task far beyond ray strength, and the utmost I said was, that if there was a disposition on the part of the house to institute an inquiry on the subject, it would not be my duty to oppose it. (Hear.) Mr. J. LOCKE thought that the income tax was carried a vast deal too low in being levied upon incomes of £lOO a -year. He considered it ought to be limited to incomes of £l5O a. year. Taxation should be made as equal as it could be on every class of the community, but under the present system the income tax fell much more heavily upon the small trader than upon the large one. Mr. W. WILLIAMS begged to Say that when the bill went into committee, he should take the opportunity of moving that the charge of sevenponce on incomes from £lOO to £l5O should be altogether abo:ished. (Hear.) Mr. HUBBARD thought it must be obvious to every one, that if they cut off the means of indirect taxation they would have cothing left but to resort to such a scheme as that entertained by the Government. They would cer tainly have been justified in levying a tax upon the export of coal. What we had omitted to do for our exchequer the Emperor of the Frenoh had taken care to do for his, for ho had imposed an import duty of ls. 2d. per ton on coals. (Hear.) If the Chancellor of the Exchequer had imposed an export duty of that amount on coals, it would have pro. duced a comfortable sum of £lO,OOO, and enabled him to get rid of a great mass of aggravating taxes which now in terfered with the operations of trade. With regard to the income tax, he thought we were bound by no antecedents avowed that those who represented the National Temperance Society had much more in view than the acquittance of their consciences and the liberation of their souls, in wash ing their hands of all responsibility in connection with a measure of this kind, than the prosecution of a real and earnest opposition to it. Indeed, apart from their general objections, they did Rot hesitate to say the bill was a great improvement upon the existing system. With regard to the other class, he would only say that he was quite sure the house might pass an impartial judgment upon the bill, both as it effected public policy and public morality. Those who were adverse to the principle of the bill varied greatly in the grounds of their opposition. But the answer of the Government was, that there were two conditions which they could not depart from. One of these conditions was, that they could not consent to leave the sale of wine at the mercy of the restricted channels now in existence. That was a fundamental proposition. It rested en the ground that the channels of consumption wore ludicrously alarm. restricted. The other fundamental ground was, that the Mr BENTINCK said that having refrained on a former channels for the sale of wine were unduly restricted in pro occasion from trespassing on the time of the house he would portion to the channels for the sale of other strong liquors. now offer a few observations. The Chancellor of the Ex- It was stated to him by a deputation of licensed victuallers, chequer was about to propose the repeal of the 7th Geo. as a plea for the efficiency of the present channels of con 11., an act which was passed in the first place for three sumption, that there wer e s i x ty-th ree th ousan d h ouses years as an experiment, and then made perpetual, li cense d for the sale of spirits. It appeared unreasonable to and was still in operation. The r i g ht honourable deny that in quantity at least such a number ought to be gentleman intended to propose its repeal. The preamble of sufficient. But he found that though about 100,000 houses the act recited the evilsJattending stockjobbing, and ho (Mr. licensed for the sale of strong liquors to be consumed on Bentinek) was well aware that the practice of what was the premises, though beer was the natural drink of the called time bargains was sanctioned by custom but not by population, and after that wine, no house could get a license law. Custom, however, had not removed the evils in con- for the sale of wine which had not also a license for the nexisn with time bargains. But there were many other sale of spirits. That was to offer a premium on the sale of things which society tolerated, but which the Legislature spirits. He appealed, therefore, to the advocates of tem could not sanction. It would be remembered that the Le- perance and sobriety as to whether it was possible to justify ' gislature had suppressed gambling houses, and it had exer- that state of the law. But how did that state of things cised a sound discretion in so doing. Now he should like work? The houses licensed for the sale of spirits were to know upon what ground the police wore to be autherised 63,000 in number; but of that nnmber only 23,000 had by the Government to break into houses of that description licenses for the sale of wine. Under these circumstances to see whether gambling was carried on or not, when the he felt confident by anticipation of the judgment of the Legislature was about to sanction a more extensive and a house when they were asked whether it would not be wiser more mischievous system of gambling by many degrees t o give increased facilities for the sale of wine than to ad than any other ever invented by the mind of man. Upon here to the present system. Then as to the quality of the what possible ground could the present or any other Go - wine sold in public houses ; on that ground alone it would vernment continue to suppress the practice of gambling if be requisite to alter the channels of sale and consumption, they were now to sanction, by legislative enactment, time so as to admit of free competition. Every one knew the de bargains ? There was a name not to be mentioned to ears scription of wine sold in this country, and that with the ex polite applied to gambling houses, but he thought it was ception of the high priced wines to be had in hotels of a cer strictly applicable to the Stock Exchange. It was a perfect tain alass, what was sold as such was a mixture that no pen Pandemonium. But whore did this proposal come from ? or tongue could describe. White wine, as sold in public Why, from the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the houses, was a mixture of fire and water ; and red wine was Exchequer, who represented one of the seats of learning composed of the juice of the sloe, or Of other substances which and virtue, piety and religion. (Laughter.) He proposed ma, be more baneful, with a strong infusion of some deserip to the Legislature to sanction one of the most mischievous tion of spirits. The second proposition was fundamental practices which ever prevailed in this country, and he (Mr. in respect of a useful and salutary measure such as that be • Bentinck) thought that such practices could not be held to fore the house—namely, that whatever might be done with be consistent with good order and public morality. (Hear, the control of the police and magistrates, the Government hear.) would not be responsible for the extension of the present ThoCH.ANCELLOR of the E XCHEQUER saidhe would licensing system. He made no reproach to the magistrates. in the first place answer the appeal of the hon. gentleman Indeed, the bill was framed on the principle that confidence the member for Norfolk. It was true he represented one of might be fairly reposed in them, in so far as intelligence and the universities, and he would assure the hon. gentleman integrity went. But the licensing system imposed duties on that although his constituency were among the most dis- the magistrates which it was impossible they could satisfac tinguiehed supporters of piety and virtue, yet they had not factorily discharge. It made them the judges, for instance, —and they numbered 3,Boo—sent him a single remon- of the quantity of liquor which any number of human be stranco against the proposal, which had been published to ings could consume ; and so led to absurdity and inequality. the world fora length of time, t o r e p ea l the act 7 Geo. 11, In some places the magistrates determined the capacity of —Sir John Barnard's Act. Whether it would have the the population to consume strong drink was limited, and effect which the hon. gentleman imagined he did not know, they accordingly limited the number of licenses. In other but the principle upon which the Government had acted places the contrary principle prevailed. In Liverpool, for was this that it was not wise to keep on the statute book a example, with a population about the same as Manchester, pretended prohibition, which was constantly violated by t h e number of public houses was threefold more. If, then, the sanction of that branch of the community which stood this matter was to be regulated by authority, it should be in connection with those practises. There was a great con- regulated on a definite principle, so as to ensure uniformity fusion of ideas in what had been stated by the hon. gentle- of action, and to give satisfaction and content to the people man. The hen. gentleman lamented and deplored the of this country. But it was not only because the present great temptations offered to young men on the Stock Ex- licensing system gave rise to inequality, and produced change, and no doubt many resorted to that place who had heartburnings and discontent, that it was objectionable; it less di: ception than means, from a desire to acquire a for • was, moreover, entirely inefficient. He (the Chancellor of tune rapidly. The mutter was one to be regretted, but the Exchequer) had received a statement from certain li these things were not bad in themselves, but made so by tensed victuallers of Liverpool in opposition to the bill, those who resorted to the Exchange for the purpose of which showed the moral tendency of the system of licens speculating. But that observation did not apply to the ing. These persons stated in that memorial that there were Stock Exchange only, for all descriptions of dealing in the in Liverpool 1,526 licensed public-houses, and that in that funds and in mining s p ecu lati o ns, an d i n joint-stock banks, number there were 178 known to the police to be the resort and in a quantity of other things, involved the principle of of thieves and prostit u t es . A n d yet th ese h ouses were regu gambling when taken to by persons who had, from their l ar l y li cense d b y the magistrates. That was the state of limited knowledge and means, no business with them. things, and that was the system which, on moral groan's, (Hear.) With regard ito time bargains, the question was the Government were asked not to meddle with. (Hear, hear.) whether they were so had in themselves that the legislature The tendency of the present licensing system was to create a ought to interfere with private discretion and to prohibit monopoly. Where there was a monopoly there were proprie them. This prohibition was perfectly ineffectual ; the law tary interests—or rather what were called vested interests ; in question was an absolute dead letter, and had been so and, accordingly, such an interest had grown np in the almost over since the day it was enacted, and for the sake licensing of public-houses, apart from the interest on the of the respect in which laws should be held by the whole premises. The existence of that vested interest was one of community, the laws ought, practically, to have some force the most formidable opponents to the effectual control of in them ; they ought not to be passed by the legislature as the police and the magistrates over public-houses. When, mere expressions of abstract opinion, but as instruments of therefore, it was proposed to him to rear up a new c l ass o f government. The question was not whether foolish persons h ouses of the same description, his answer was it would be might be tempted to ruin themselves, both in their fortunes to raise up the same system, and to make wine houses the and morally, by dabbling in these time bargains, but nucleus of fresh vested interests, and so to impede the ope whether they were so essentially immoral as to make it rations of the power of the police and the magistracy. That proper to proscribe them, like the practices carried on in a conclusion was the reason why he declined to present any gambling-house. Even the transactions in a gambling-house hill to the house for placing wine licenses under the same were not easy to define or describe, when it was sought to system as public-houses. Short of these two propositions, put down the evil by law, and as no great philosophical however, to rest satisfied with the present licensing system, nicety could be attained, it was requisite to include every- in connection with the sale of wines, and to create a new thing which bore a resemblance to the evil in question. system of vested interests, such as had been created under With regard to these time bargains, he was not prepared to the public-house licensing, there was no proposition for the say, on the face of the facts within the knowledge of every- maintenance of good order in these houses that he was not body, that there was anything essentially in the nature of willing to receive and entertain. So much for the general a time bargain which was vicious or immoral, so that it view of the question. He would now describe the main °b ought to be proscribed by law. As for the class of gentle- jects of the measure. They were three in number, in two of men who dealt in money, he did not believe there was a which he anticipated the unanimous concurrence of the more respectable class of men in the commercial world than house. One of these was for the sale of wine not to be con those who were connected with the Stock Exchange in sumed on the premises. The sale of wine in that form was London ; and time bargains were a part of the regular busi- both unexceptionable and desirable for the supply of fami ness of the class of gentlemen whose business it was to deal lies, and he therefore proposed that, subject to a moderate in money as their trade and daily occupation. These trans- license duty, every retail shopkeeper should have the power actions could not be divided by any difference of principle to take out a license for the sale of wine not to be consumed from transactions in the funds. No doubt that they involved on the premises. Passing on to a more socially important a greater degree of hazard, but that was just as the insur- portion et the bill, it proposed to obtain one object, viz., an ance of high risks involved greater hazards than low risks, efficient police control in connection with the sale of strong At the time when Parliament attempted to proscribe these liquors. To that effect it proposed that any house wherein time bargains, an idea prevailed that all dealings in the strong liquors were sold should be under the direct control stocks and funds were deserving of reprobation, and there- of the police. The ground of this was that so m e o f th ese fore stock jobbing was called cca wicked practice." In those h ouses m i g h t b e th receptacle of disorderly characters. days, also, what were called forestalling and regrating were He believed there was no second opinion as to the propriety considered moral offences ; the forestaller being a man who of bringing these houses within the scope of the bill. There bought corn when a scarcity was coming on in o rder to sell was, however, an important exemption, viz., of houses be it at the time when the scarcity was a t i ts h e i g ht ; and it low the value pf 10. in /Aar,. th. Population .s , whirl, wa . woe now considered that the conduct of such a man. by . 0 . 4 3 , --a— e certain number. That wou l d include those vil •_,, ~ ,_ • _,._ .. ._ A.—l.-1....A..6 taLC consumption, had a lage shops where ginger wine and other things beneficial effect. These things were quite elementary, and were sold. He believed this exemption would also he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was almost ashamed be generally agreed to. The third portion of the to dwell upon them ; but if the hon. member objected to the bill referred to licensing eating-houses for the sale of wine. repeal of Sir John Barnard's Act, let him go back and re- The idea had got abroad that all refreshment houses were rive all the other old statutes of that good old time in to be licensed for the sale of wine, but there could he no George 11. 's reign, of which this act was a remnant, greater error. The fundamental principle of the bill was Mr. BOVILL remarked that in the eighth and ninth year to draw a distinction between refreshment houses and eating of the present reign an act had been passed to prevent wager houses. In licensing eating houses the bill h a d i n v i ew the contracts being enforced in courts of law, and the legisla- creation of a system more healthful and natural, and less liable to the contingencies of evil than the present system. tion against time bargains, which it was new proposed to repeal by a simple resolution, was based on the same prin- Obviously Nature intended that the functions of eating and ciple. In India, where wager bargains were legal, enormous existing law did everything to separate these functions, the drinking should be carried on together. (Laughter.) But the mischief had resulted from speculations in opium, by which Kane of the largest mercantile houses bad been placed in one from the other. Th ere were some 70,000 or 30,000 drink jeopardy. He had heard of one firm which stood to win a ing houses in England, and not one eating house among million and a half of money upon a single operation. Ways them all. The law had constituted a monopoly for the sale of drink, but not for the sale of victuals. The result was The resolution, as reported from the Committee of . l and Means, was then agreed to, and so were the resolutions that the trade in drink was fostered and promoted, to the neglect of the trade in victuals ; and so the business of eat of for a penny stamp on dock warrants, delivery orders, bills exchange, and sundry other instruments. ing and drinking had been separated. People of te higher In reply to a question from Mr. HUBBARD, classes took care of themselves in that respect in chubs; but The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said these the licensing system laced it beyond the means of the mid resolutions did not at all affect the question of law which d i e and poorer classes p . The operation of the system of sepa had been raised with regard to the liability of coupons and rat i on was against sobriety of habit ; and the consequence dividend warrants, under the act passed in 1858 , to bear a was, not that the desire of drink was of rid of q b p en ny stamp. It was well know that, in conseq uence o f g ,ut that men were compelled to go to places wh e r e d r i n ki ng was a busi a decision against their liability, it was 'not intended to en- ness. If it was desired to devise a scheme for the promo force it. tion of drunkenness, it would be impossibl e t o d ev i s e one The next resolution, imposing a stamp on cer tifi cated more effectual. He was told that the bill ought not to be copies of registry:of births, deaths, baptisms, and marriages, supported, becaus e th e B eer Bill h a d f a il e d ; but nothing transfer of mining shares, certificates of probate, and lease could be more inaroriate, as the objects of the two bills ag reements, were then repo r t e d. pp p In reply to Mr. PULLER, were widely different. In Sweden, wher e th e p eo pl e , though The CHANCELLOR of th e EXCHEQUE R said that intelligent, were prone to th e v i ce o f d run k enness , gre at it was hard to draw th e li ne as regar d ed foreign stocks, and and one measure to had been made of la c e effe ate c years to t, which ba rest rain d b that vice ; been very suc levying a probate duty u p on th em. However, he thanked cessful, was a provision in the law that spirits should not his hon. friend for calling attention to the matter. The be sold •in any house except that victuals were sold also. difficulty was in levying probate duty on property not ab- He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not think the solutely English. The matter would be anxiously consi- use of wine would cause any decrease in the consumption of d ered by the Government. beer and spirits, as there was a population increasing in The report was then agreed to. number and wealth, whirle affbrded a legitimate sphere for REFRESHMENT HOUSES AND WINE the consumption of that article without trenching on these. LICENSES BILL. But the bill would give the people an easier access to a mild On the order of the day for the second reading of this liquor than they heretofore enjoyed, and ho looked upon that bill, as a matter of great consequence. He had had letters stet- Petitions were presented against it by several members, ing that there were many drunken people in Paris, but he including Mr. J. Ewart, f rom Li verpoo l ; S i r C. Nap i er, wou ld w illi ng l y exc h ange the drunkenness of Paris for the Mr. Ayrton, and Mr. Ker Seymer. drunkenness of London. It was a universal principle that The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in rising where wine was abundant there w as little or no drunken to move the second r ea di ng o f t h e b ill, said his hon. ness, and though he was not likely to insist on the converse friend the member for Liverpo o l h a d j us t presen t e d a pet i- o f th a t propos i t i on, he was obliged to admit that in many tion which described the measure before the house as a con•• instances it held good. Besides the advantage of reuniting fiscation of the property of the licensed vietuallers. Now eating and drinking, which he p re sented to the house as he was anxious to say that it was e x t reme l y diffi cu lt t o di s - th e ma i n o bj ec t o f t h e b ill, he thought he might say it pro cuss the question before them without more or less indi- vided a much better and more effectual system of control eating the opinions of the Government a s t o th e p resen t than any at present in exist e nce. Every one who kept a system under which drinking houses were licensed and refreshment house, subject to a limited exemp t ion , would managed ; and he was afraid that, so f ar as hi s op i n i ma be required to make out a license, and would thus co me license might become apparent, it would be very unfavourable to under the control of the police. Every one who kept an the system. But at the same time the Government were eating-house would be enabled to apply to the Excise for a very anxious, in framing a bill which had in view a cem- wine license ; but the officer of Excise, before the put an al, • paratively limited object, to avoid everything like the feel- issued, must make known the fact _tn the magistrat es, aw l ing described in the language of the petition from Liver- the magistrates had the power to object, and to an eating-house pool. There was much that been pressed upon the Go- solute veto on the issue of the lioense, ptrovided that they vernment by the sellers of beer, and there was much au- could assert either that the housew t a h s at i rt admitted that that thority due to the report of a committee of that house, which within the meaning of the act, or He was a house kept be called an warned them that some time or other they must deal with or frequented by disorderly persons. h could not be the whole system under which the sale of strong liquors was a large power, that it night almo s t_c the integrity and arbi hadintel- been regulated. It was not their intention, however, trary power, and that it was one :whi .) the reason for giving justi upon that occasion to propose a complete and final settle- fled, unless they had confidence in went of the question, but a measure of much more limited ligence of the magistrates. (II the s r term B tendency. The question was one of very great practical that stringent power to of t with respect to the ap importance, and one which no consideration of a party or plication of the definition "eating -house" with purely political character could interfere ; and the measure in the meaning of the act, was, that if th ey were to enable which he had to propo se was un d ou bt e dly a l so o f consider- persons on undertaking sell .to bread an d c h eese, or articles able fiscal importance, bec ause it or i g i na t e d i n a fiscal pro- of that kind, to call their establish men t s eaeing_houses, and posal, for it would have been absurd to propose a great di • to entitle them to take out wine licenses, the practical effect minution of the wine duties and to hold out a hope to the would be to give wine licenses to drinking houses instead house that the revenue would be rapidly recovered, unless, of to eating-houses, - whereas the object o f t h e bi ll was at the same time, the Government w as p re pared to submit to give wine licenses to space w h ere the business of a measure to Parliament by which the channels for the drinking was subsidiary to tat of eating, (Hear, hear.) sale and consumption of wine should be greatly altered and The magistrates would alto have the power to object enlarged. But although' fiscal considerations formed the to granting a license, on tb ground that the house did not immediate occasion of the measure, it had undoubtedly an correspond with the rental or value prescribed by the act, or important bearing upon the social condition of the coin- th a t th e person applying had been disqualified in another cient netraints upon any undue facilities munity—(hear, hear)—it had a decided hearing upon the place in consequence ofeeisconduct. He hoped that these great question of public sobriety ; and the ground on would prove etel for which he earnestly commended it to the house was not be- the first issue of thesclicenses. (Hear, hear.) The licenses cause of its importance with respect to fiscal ends, but upon must be renewed hem year to year, and the bill gave the the ground that it was a good and wise measure, with re - magistrates the sane power in cases of renewal as they had gard, first, to the enlargement of the comforts of th e upon receiving the notice of the first application. Besides people, and, secondly, with reference to the promotlon de of d th e a ta t h t s h e e f re w w hi a c s h lenotevhe bill a system o f p ena lti es; w i t h t h e would not now weary th e h ouse. Th ey temperance and sobriety as opposed to drunkenness and . moralisation. (Cheers.) In the discussions which hehad h a d had been tepid, for the most part, from the Beer Act, with the various parties who viewed the bill with more or which °entailed very stringent penalties, but had been ins loss aversion and suspicion, he was obliged to hold fi rm ly proved and..endered more workable. Ho should propose, for by two conditions. The opponents of the bill had been two example, ti disqualify, under certain circumstances, the parties who for the nonce bad acted in co nj unc tion, and yet "house" is well as th e "i ndividual ;" and lie should' also it would :teem a jest to mention suc h an al liance in that propose hat the penalty inflicted s h ou ld b e w i t h out appeal, house. One of them had been the licensed victuallers, who except .in the third conviction. On the whole he thought represented in some degree the humbler sellers of beer and that ifthe penalties erred, it was not on the side of laxity. of wine, but, at the same ti m e, the sellers of ard en t sp i r i ts, P ossely, in some cases they might b e cons id ere d t oo stria which sale was by far the favourit e portion of their trade. gent, but that might he discussed when they got into corn. The other party had been a body of gentlemen, of whom he mitee. He had VOW explained the general scope and effect was unable to speak either there or elsewhere save with the of be bill, and the principal provisions which it contained. profoundest respect, inasmuch as they were gentlemen who Aid, as he had said at the commencement, so he said at the were anxiously - endeavouring to lay the axe, as they tho ug ht, c o re : h e did not propose this measure with the intention at the root of a great social evil. ( Hear, hear, hear.) He rf making it th e precursor of an attack upon the privileges spoke of them, then, with the utmost res pect, and he refs rred now enjoy e d b y li ceneed v i etnallers or beer.bouse keepers. to " the Temperance Society," But at the same t i me he at That question stood on entirely distinct and independent once avowed a broad difference of opinion between the grollnde, and would no doubt some day or other call for the i society and himself. He believed that so far as the article Attention of the house. But this bill he reeeinnien.ded as of wine was concerned, there was a use apart from an bit one which had a deleiled tendency to the promotion of of wine ; whereas those gentlemen drew no distincti on b e _ habits of sobriety in the people, and which would have that tween the use and abuse—and in their view it would be ju s t effect both by establishing a better system of contra than as proper to talk of legalising the use of perjury or theft as anYnese , existing, and by °fleeing to them the means of rea to propose the introduction of cheap wines. He was boun sealable n d eess to liquor anci iite refreshing influences in con- ' however, to say that of hose wo classes of opponents, le juileiion with the weeds which they required to take. He had not the slightest doubt from which the most formidahe i hoped that th house wouldsanction the second • be ea eted 14 opposition was to tee , ( 7 .ear k hear.) a He cr.„ i l v t ie leill, aiming as it did at Watt ol no comm on import- , ' to respect it as it now stood if we could find anything better as a substitute. But such was our present position with regard to revenue and expenditure that unless we trusted in some degree to direct taxation, he did not know where the revenue was to come from. We could not re impose indirect taxes, and the inevitable conclusion them fore \NA that we must resort to direct taxation. lie trusted that another year would aot pass without this question of the income tax being taken into the deliberate considera tion of the house, and that the house would not be dis suaded from dealing with it by any feeling of despair as to the results of its labours. Lord 11. VANE said that the c)mmittcc of 1853 arrived at the conclusion that the difficulties in the way of a real adjustment of the income tax, so that justice might be dealt out to all parties, was impossible. He was not opposed to direct taxation, yet looking to the st a t e o f our re l a ti ons abroad, especially after the discussion in the earlier part of the evening, he confessed he viewed the budget with some ante with reference to all its social and its moral bearings. (Cheers.) _ Mr. iirYLD moved the adjournment of the debate. (Cries of " Go on.") Mr. WYLD moved the adjournment of the debate. Mr AY IRON seconded the motion, on the ground that as the bill was a taxing bill, it could not be conveniently discussed until the house had considered the tax itself in committee. It was hardly possible to imagine a more im portant question than that which the measure involved ; for it was really whether the house should impose a tax upon a particular class of shopkeepers ; and at the proper time he should bo prepared to state at length the objections which he entertained to it. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would agree with the hon. gentleman's conclusions if he could agree to his premises. There could not be a greater mis take than to suppose that this was a taxing bill. The licenses were wholly incidental to the great social objects which the measure had in view with respect to the use of wine ; and it would be absurd to consent to a tax of this kind until the house had had an opportunity oi considering the plan of granting the wine licences. Tinder these cir cumstances, he could not consent to the adjournment. Mr. LIDDELL expressed the objection he felt to the which he thought would prove injurious to the public morals. As for it being conducive to the public comfort and convenience, the answer to that was the 1,700 petitions that had been presented against it, while no petition had yet been laid cn the table in its favour. (Hear, hear.) Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR contended that the bill WO certainly a taxing measure, and that in accordance with the forms of the house the tax ought first to have been con' sidered in committee. Mr. NE WDEGATE thought the measure must be con sidered as a whole. Its meaning was to recompense the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the revenue which he had given up. Mr. HADFIELD said he had presented a petition from his constituents, who had assembled in public meeting, with the Vicar of Sheffield in the chair, to protest against it. He thought that it would diminish the control of the magistrates over the sale of liquor, and would prove as per- . nicious as the bill which permitted the establishment a beer-shops. Mr. E. JAMES said it was quite clear from the language of the bill that it was a taxing bill. Mr. CRAWFORD said that the hon. and learned gentle man could only have formed that idea from his inexperience of the forms of Parliament. The house was precluded from considering, on the second reading, the taxing clauses, which were printed in italic on that very account. The house then divided on the question of the adjourn ment of the debate, and the numbers were— For the adjournment Against The motion was consequently lost. On the question that the bill be read a second time, Mr. AYRTON moved that the house should adjourn. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, as he understood that several hon. members wished to express their sentiments on the bill, he would consent to the ad• journment of the debate. Mr. AYRTON hereupon agreed to withdraw his motion for the adjournment of the house. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Then I fear I shall be under the necessity of asking the house to meet at 12 o'clock on Thursday. (Oh, oh.) Mr. HARDY protested against this proposal, on the ground that several committees were now sitting. Lord PALMERSTON said that that was a reason against any morning sitting. He urged the importance of forward ing the business as much as possible before Easter. Mr. DISRAELI said that morning sittings before Easter were most unusual. (Hear, hear.) Without this there vise ample time for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to earl all his financial measures before Easter ; and if the Govern' ment chose to bring on other business, in which the house was not at all interested, the sittinel, of the whole of the committees ought not to b e suspended on that a c co unt. (Hear, hear.) This ought not to be done in ordet that some caprice of legislation might be again held up to the scorn and derision of the house. (A laugh.) He should suppor t the bill before the house, but would not consent to a morniai sitting on Thursday, as th ere was am pl e ti me t o di s p os e o! all the real business. (Hear, hear.) Mr. E. JAMES said that the Government had bee n warned of the inconvenience of allowing the discussion on the Reform bill to be mixed up with those on the budget' They ought to have brought forward that great constitu tional measure, the Reform Bill, at an earlier period. Mr. S. HERBERT said the right hon. gentleman oppe: site did not state what was the important measure to wince he made allusion, and which he appeared to treat withise much scorn and contempt. But if he was not wrong ie supposing that the measure thus d ar kly i n di ca t e d w as the i Bill for the Better R e p resen t a ti on o f t h e P eop l e, h e b eg ge d to remind the right hon. gentleman that there was a Be" terra Bill last year, and that the right hon. gentleman the: thought it so important th a t h e su b m itt e d i t t o s gen e election. (Cheers.) He hoped the House of Comma! would have the decency to show that they did not regale that measure as trifling, paltry, and contemptible, by sr senting to the proposition for meeting on Thursday mar ing. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. MANNERS said that if the right hon. gentleris e ,. had shown that the Government measure was a considers's; amelioration of the representation he would have made et some claim for his demand. But l o oki ng t o th e wa y in wht the Reform Bill was introduced, and the way in which it 3 in fer that by the Government, it was not u nreason able to al'a that it was not regarded by the Government o r the housel so much importance as to require its being read a wee!, time before Easter. (Hear, he a r.) Th e p ro p os iti on that th7 t should meet on Thursday mo r ning was one o f the al? k h astounding he ever heard. The noble lord treated it trl os that charming indifference with whi c h h e treated teSa questions, but it was a proposition quite unusual, and wow be most inconvenient to the members of committees. „, Me'. BEAUMONT did not understand the right h ( , ) 4, gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) as referring to a reform of t he representation of the people of England, but to the Rd ,_r;a Bill of the Government. (Hear, hear.) He voted for the i . :t of last year, but he did not think that the bill of the pros be Government was of such a nature that the house should forced to agree to the second reading before Easter. _„, Sir G. GREY complained that the right hon. gentlem e n rtlr ot the inth having ffean 3 1e . c p la p re .ai d ti t o ha n t • to nei t t he her se t n n d or rea ls in pa g Bill, Wafi 2.10 W sttouttAine• to aelo v thy r•S Derby's bill was rejected by large ma o 111 , b w er b t e h reas a ! D : ;$ .Ineelghthon. gentlem a anshou t ld reme m ber present bill had met with no opposition. lie thought present conduct of the Opposition unprecedented. th intended (Hear.) Mr. WHITESIDE denied that Lord Derby's f°7l : Bill had been rejected by the house. The noble lord t i/ . member for London succeeded in carrying an abstract " position, and th us p reven t e d an y di scuss i on on the , They would not, h owever , b e preven t e d disensaing,the p ra t 3 , sent bill, as there were 25 gentlemen of great ability on Tor o side of the house who meant to address themselves W merits. (A laugh.) lre ° Lord FERMOY said that the Ministry were theme° t , to blame for all that was now taking place. They had r.. 0( poned the bill for six week s , an d th us h a d go t everytill_k connected with the busine ss o f th e h ouse i n t o a d ea d lo' lie thought that there was a great deal of good in the R 1 of the right hon. member for Bucks, and some good, much that was not good, in the Government measure. 11 ,_, should certai n ly o pp ose th e proposa l f or a morning Bitty', on Thursday. Mr, BENTINCK advocated the postponement of t i r, measure until after East er . H e must protest aga i nst carrying out so unusual a proceeding as to have a mortal* sitting before the holidays. Mr. BRISTOW said that he for one would give up e s amount of time for th e di scuss i on of this question. Jul should certainly support her Majesty's Government. , Mr. S. BOOTH h ope d t h e Government would not pe t severe in pressing a morning sitting on the house. Mr. SALOMONS also opposed the morning sitting. Mr. W. E. D UNCOMISE said that considering Wq money bills whi c h mus t b e passe d b e f ore Easter, he thoug ht it would be imp oss ibl e t o di scuss so i mportant a measure "' , this of Parliamentary Reform. Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, as the general feeling of 111° house appears to be in favour of a postponement, the Cle; vernment will go on with thi s bill on M on d ay. ( H ear. ) f may possibly involve the necessity of sitting on Wednesdsl and Thursday, but I am sure the house will not object to that. (Hear, hear.) That is the usual course, and therefor e we will take the bill on Monday. (Cheers.) CUSTOMS ACTS. The house went into committee on the Customs Acts. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the Exeuee t nalt; the resolution No. 22, respecting spirits in the Channe l Islands, was agreed to. PAPER DUTY This bi ll was postpon UT ed untiI REPEAL Thursda y ILL. REP RESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE BILL , The adjourned debate upon this bill was fixed for Frideis MINES REGULATION AND INSPECTION BILL' After a brief discussion, this bill passed through conunir tee pro forma, with a view to the insertion of certain *mane' meats. The other orders of the day having been disposed of, th e house adjourned at one o'clock. [ADVERTISEMENT.]-It is ever a pleasing duty for journalist to introduce to his readers some discovery cilia, lated to benefit that v as t p or ti on o f our fellow creature! which has the stronge s t c l a i ms upon our sympathies. , with tLis feeling that we call the attention of inval id to the followin g ex t rac t s from Du. Barry's interest s* report of cures without medicine of indigestion (d/ r 4 pepsia), flatul enc y, cons ti pat i ou , nervous, bilious, sli d liver complaints, cough, asthma, consumption, sla debility by Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica Food . „,.:"" Cure No. s'2,422—Bridgehouse, F r i m l ey, 3d April, 1117 A I have suffered these 33 y ears continually from ffisealu lungs, spitting of blood, liver derangement, deafness, aU'%, ing in the ears, constipation, debility, shortness of breath? ) cough, which have been removed by your Revalenta Arabic"; My lungs, liver, stomach, head, and ears are all right, 0 hearing perfect, and my recovery is a marvel to all 0 1 acquaintances. Jam es R o b er t s, timber merohal! In tins, at 18. 6d. ; 11b., 3s. ; 21b., ss. 9d. ; 51b., 125.; 121, 0 : 265. The 101 b. an d 121 b. tins carriage free, on receipt of poi'. office order. D u B arr y an d C o., 77 , Regent-street, Londoll° Fortnum, Mason; and Co., 182, Piccadilly; Alibis, 6 , 1 1 ) ; Gracechurch-street ; 4, Ch ea p s id e ; 63 , an d 150, Oxfor,.. street ; 330 and 451, Strand ; 49 and 60, Biahopse,,r street ; 85, Tottenh am -court-road. Also at Dum" - .. Bewley 'and Draper ; at Edinburgh, Raimes and C°l at Liverpool, Nixon and Thew; at Manchester, Sharp 613 , 1 „, Scott; at York, Raim es , Bl anc h ar d , an d C o.; at Sou"' ampton. Randall and Son. BIRTHS. GOFF.—On the 26th inst., a t 25, Grosvenor-place, the Lady Adsla Goff, of a eon. LlFFona.—On the 16th inst., at Mean Glas, co. Doneg the Viscountess Lifford, of a daughter. MARRIAGES. CRITTENDEN—CHARL IEL D. the 17th inst., J. —• C riof tendon, sculptor, to Laura Elizabeth, eldest daughter Professor Charlier, of Camden-town. sh HALL—StssoNs.—O n the Vd inst , at Sculcoates P s— A rbe church, Joh n Edwd. Hall, Esq. , Barton-on-11 11 w to Ann Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Thos. Sissons, Esq., of Sculcoates. DEATHS. irs AusTlN.—On the 25th inst., at Bath, Brigadier-Ge ne John Austin, aged 85. Bucx.—On the 25th inst., at 215, Maids-hill, the Rim I. ' Buck, aged 70. HARRIS.--On the 23d inst., at Updo w no EsstrY, C o l o n s Sir Thomas Neel Harris, K.C.H. SHEARD.—On the 24th inst., at his residence, Kausirigt°3l - Henry Sheard, Esq., aged 39. LONDON : Printed and Published by IVIIIII,DO YOUN''t of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the oonAil ° bliddledez, Tueeday, Mani 27, 1860. C' don._ O'cl from •lame Mr. i; T' This elegm With }NE aPI7c P - ait kthilli Al , i • ;,. COmm ~• o'cioc :t term DOW'S the L; W RITE j chart ( for De 60, m o Carc note p Stamp, tbrwar GI AND pi 4 - ttnzes tc haTe afro able to si oevepy t To Mr, 'het Pa Plt VIT/ pE iti ? l l ] brs icAs sirsTE l x it m bMs he y thei they can together ost i lv a .731 tOPOPt street, I, floater-r X ar being th in Grea &fent' fl %TENT, practise coBt, thu The COVER Debility of Enerr Self-Dis Groundl tread an and n e 'Whole 7 33 ITINTs Ord the Anti ampshe Will ed 4tP pfor ly td