The Sun. — London, England, 1860-03-16 00:00:00

long a time, for he must have expected this annexation as the result of his own counsels and acts. It was not till the press and Parliament of the country had spoken that the noble lord seemed to take up the matter, and then he ad mitted that the noble lord spoke in the proper tone. But he did not think that the noble lord acted in the matter with the views of a statesman, or like one conversant with the public law of Europe, and with international obliga tions. England, Russia, Prussia, Austria, Sardinia herself, were co-trustees to the Treaty of Vienna, and it was the duty of the noble lord, when he became acquainted with this proposition relative to Savoy, to inform the co-trustees to that treaty, and take their opinion with regard to it. When frontiers most important to the safety of all Europe were to be altered, which had been guarantee d by all the 'great Powers—that Lord John Russell should have satisfied himself with addressing some not very strong remonstrance to the Emperor of the French was to him wholly unintelli ble. The opinion of Europe was that this country had been indifferent on the point, and that Savoy had been sacrificed to the treaty. He (Lord Malmesbury) had a greater right than any man to remember what were the promises of the French Emperor when he established his Government and took the title of Napoleon 111. It was necessary to ascertain whether he took that title as the direct descendant of Napoleon 1., or by virtue of popular election. The Emperor at that time most candidly came forward and declared that he would observe all the acts of 1814 and 1815 that had been passed, and he had kept his word most faithfully. (Hear.) It was, therefore, with the deepest regret and apprehension that he saw the Emperor for the first time step out from the straight and honourable path which he had hitherto pursued, and a continuance in which would have ensured to him the respect of all Europe, and the utmost desire on the part of this country for his friendship. (Hear, hear.) Earl DE GREY and RIPON was confident that their lordships would take the view which had been taken in the other house, and aid in that extension of commerce which was sure to be attended with great blessings to both nations. (Hear, hear.) Earl STANHOPE said if the noble lord persisted in dividing the house, although he agreed with his views, still he could not, under existing circumstances, vote with him. Lord OVERSTONE said he entertained grave doubts as to the wisdom of the treaty. Such arrangements were full of difficulties with respect to our own internal arrange ments, and danger as it regarded foreigners. Let this country confine its attention to her own fiscal arrangements, and if every other country did the same, there would be a commercial emulation between all countries which would be productive of advantage to all. (Hear.) Those treaties could only have the effect of depriving us of that freedom of action so necessary for our welfare. With re spect to the coal question, and as to whether an export duty should be imposed on that commodity, he was of opinion that it was legitimate on the part of any country to preserve to itself any exclusive advantages which it might possess, and not share them with foreig ners . (Hear.) The tea and opium duties clearly showed t hat the removal of a duty was not always an advantage to the country im porting the article. Coal did not resemble commodities which could be re-produced from year to year—its supply was limited. It was not an article the supply of which could be increased in proportion to the demand. It was, on the contrary, constantly becoming lessened in quantity. On these grounds, he thought the propriety of imposing an export duty on coal should be left an open question. (Hear.) With respect to Customs duties generally, considering the heavy amount of revenue which this country was obliged to raise, he saw no impropriety in imposing reasonable duties on all foreign imports except the prime necessaries of life. He thought those tariff arrangements were calcu lated to produce feelings of jealousy and suspicion between nations, rather than feelings of amity and good will. As to the proposed address, it was because he feared that this commercial treaty, in connection with their fiscal arrange ments, would greatly damage the country, that he could not give his vote in favour of the address. The treaty might disappoint those who thought unfavourably of it, but most sincerely he hoped it would have the effect of ex tending the intercourse between two great nations, and above all, that it would establish a virtuous feeling of com merce, instead of an accursed feeling of national jealousy, and contribute to the social confidence and industry of the people of this country. (Cries of "Hear, hear.") The Duke of ARGYLL said the scope of the debate had extended far beyond the limits of the motion, at the same time that he fully admitted that the present was an occa sion upon which noble lords had a right to enter into the discussion of the whole commercial policy of the Govern ment. (Hear, hear.) He complained of the noble lord who had just sat down, that while he accused the Govern ment of carelessness, and Mr. Cobden of carelessness in negotiating this treaty, he himself had shown that he had not read the articles of the treaty with due atten tion. Mr. Cobden was not aware of the intention of Go vernment to repeal the paper duty ; and if he had been aware of such intention he could not have known that the House of Commons would have acceded to that proposition. There seemed to be some misunderstanding in the minds of some noblelorda as to the changes made by the treaty, and how far their fiscal arrangementawere affected by the treaty. They were not adding at all to the deficiency under the existing law. The tea and sugar duties were to lapse alto gether this year, and that was caused by a mistake in the act, for such had not been the intention of Parliament. (Hear.) He had been anxious, in listening to the speeches of that evening, to ascertain what other course than that taken by the Government would be recommended, but the Opposition had been silent on that subject. They had con nected the income tax with remissions on trade and com merce. The great difficulty they had to meet was the large amount of military and naval expenditure. Looking at that, it was impossible to get rid of the war income tax. That tax had gone through various stages, and those stages had reference chiefly to the necessity which existed for naval and military expenditure. The policy of their predecessors had compelled them to levy an increased, income tax within the half year at the close of the last session. The estimates for the army and navy had largely increased, and it was impossible, in the face of those estimates, to get rid of the income tax. There was nothing in the address which called for any hostile expression of opinion on the part of their lordships, and he sincerely hoped that no attempt would be made to do so. It did not pledge noble lords to the adoption of the financial operations of the Government. He believed himself it was a good one, founded not on theory, but experience, on which, for the last few years, the country had prospered. The Earl of DERBY said that at that late hour of the night ho was very reluctant to trespass on their lordships' attention, the more especially as the ground on whioh he intended to enter had been already completely occupied by the able and eloquent speech of the noble earl opposite, and the speech of the noble baron who addressed their lord ships a few moments ago, and who,, although a general sup porter of the Government, was opposed to them on the pre sent occasion. There were some things which fell from the noble duke who had just sat down which he could not pass over. He did not wish to say anything with reference to his little song of triumph for the majorities recently obtained ix the other House of Parliament, nor trouble himself to inquire whether they were obtained on account of the actual confidence in the wisdom of the financial statement, or whether, through united councils, or whether the baits thrown out to various interests did not induce them to obtain advantages for themselves, and look with an indulgent eye on the faults of her Majesty's Ministers. The noble duke must acknowledge, whatever may be the peculiar opinions entertained by their lordships, that there was nothing in the debate of a party character, and if ho looked at the state of the benches on his (the Earl of Derby's) side of the house, he would at once be convinced that no party motives actu ated their lordships. Indeed, two of the most powerful and eloquent speeches made in the course of the evening came, not from the opponents, but the supporters of the Govern ment. They were not on that occasion about to pass a vote on the financial policy of the Government, or commercial intercourse which might be necessary with France, or the policy or propriety of extending their commercial relations with that country. But they were asked to take a course which was not unusual; they were, by the address then be fore the house, called upon to volunteer to signify to her Majesty their approval of a treaty which they might t other- Ilse pass over. N ow, if their adoption of it did not bind em, what was the use of asking their lordships to accept it 2 There was, he thought, a particular stipulation in the treaty, which required the assent of Parliament before it was carried into effect ; ho did understand that that article existed, and that her Majesty's Government , instead of laying it on the table of both Houses of Parliament, thought there w as something. peculiar i n it which rendered it necessary to get the assent of Parliament . But the noble duke said the address had nothing whatever to do with the treaty, that it was carefully draw n up so as to ensure the approval of all their lordships. Well, then, if the treaty did not require the assent of Parliament, why waste the time of this lordships' house, though certainly, on the present occasion, it was anything but wasted. H e (the Earl of Derby) wished to know precisely how the mato ter stood. The noble earl opposite asked the noble and learned lord on the woolsack a •question, to which the noble lord had not as yet given a reply. The noble and learned lord was asked whether if the address WAS attended to or not it made the slightest difference in the ratification of the treaty. If the noble and learned lord were prepared to say that the rejection of the address was a rejection of the treaty, then, indeed, their lordships ought to consider whether they would incur such a responsibility; but if, on the other hand, he believed that, so far as the treaty was concerned,.the ad dress was mere waste paper, then, in point of fact, the blame lay on those who unnecessarily and gratuitously brought it before them. For his own part, he confessed, that after the best consideration he could give to the treaty, it appeared to him that the introduction of the address was absolutely useless. It was said, no doubt, that unless with the assent of Parliament her Majesty could not enter into the engage ment; but as regarded those articles contained in the commercial part, they were disposed of in the com mittee on Customs, and the address, as regarded them, was entirely unnecessary. There was, however, another article, namely, the 11th, which referred to' coals, and would require more than the assent of Parliament. That Was not in the slightest degree affected by either a reso lution or bill car r i e d i n th e H ouse o f C ommons . B y th e aw as it now stood, her Majesty, by an Order in Council, was empowered to prohibit on certain occasions, and under certain c ircumstances, the exportation of certain articles. That was a power conferred on the Crown by the two Houses of Parliament for the ad vantag e of the country , and he (the Earlof Derby) contended that , without the sanction of another act of Parlia me n t , consti tutionally dispose itself of the Crown could not a t, to or th g e ive its authority away. Without saying ono word export of coal, or whe ther the duty on it be or be no t a legi ti m ate of en source of taxa tion—still more, without the lea s t into the a matter of how long the supply would last --an d theh noble lord opposite said 5 , 000 years—he did not believe ug i t would last 250 ; but without pretending to di scuss any of those points, it was not in the power of the Crown to give export to that article without authority of an act of Parlia ment. The address now moved, however, would have n o effect one way or another. The noble earl who so ably opened the subject, entered into the question of the budget and the commercial treaty, and very properly, because after all, the great question was, wore the finances of the country in such a condition as to justify what had been done ? The case of the budget was clearly brought bafore their lord ships, but the noble duke throw quite a new light on the subject, for ho said the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not ~=--. in the slightest degree create a deficit by his financial ope rations. Well, he (the Earl of Derby) could not really see in what light he saw that subject. The acknowledged deficit Was £9,400,000, the income for the year being £60,700,000, and the expenditure£7o,loo,ooo, leaving the deficit to which he alluded. He should, however, be very m teh surprised if that statement be accurate, because he believed the right bon. gentleman had over-estimated his revenue, and did not take into account what the real expenditure would be. Take, for instance, the case of China. That was set down at £500,000, and if that only exceeded the estimate by £400,000, then the whole of his surplus was gone. By the proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer there would be several large deficits amounting altogether to £12,500,000, and he proposed to make up for these by reimposing the war duties on tea and sugar, and by taking into the service of the present year £1,400,000 of malt and hops credits, which should have gone into the calculations of the next year. Now supposing all the cal culations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer were correct, instead of having a surplus next year of £470,000 by his re mission of the wine, paper, and other duties, there would be a deficit of £10,000,000. Ho (Lord Derby) would ask her Majesty's Government whether they had contemplated any other means for Implying that deficit, except by an in creased income tax ? (Hear, hear.) The noble duke op posite said the Government project was in accordance with the principles inaugurated by Sir R. Peel in 1842. He (the Earl of Derby) did not believe that. The object far which the present remissions were made remained in great dark ness. (Hear, hear.) Sir Robert Peel reduced taxes, in the confident expectation that the relief thus afforded would cause increased consumption, and thus indemnify the ex chequer for the remission. But the coarse now pursued was strangely at variance with that pursued by Sir Robert Peel. Why, the present Secretary of State for the Homo Department, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, said, " We cannot take off the duties on French wines—we can not take off the paper duty, because these are increasing duties, and also because we think it a wiser policy to distri bute the taxation over a. large number of small articles than concentrate it upon a few." But the present Chancellor of the Exchequer was taking the opposite course, for he was concentrating the whole burden of taxation upon a small and insignificant number of articles. (Hear.) Let their lordships look a little further, and ask themselves whether a House of Commons elected under the auspices of the new Reform Bill would not be likely to relieve the labouring classes from a large amount of indirect taxation, and place the burden on the shoulders of the other classes ? (Hear, hear.) Why, there would bran almost irresistible temp tation on the part of the House of Commons so elected to increase direct taxation. (Hear, hear.) He foresaw that this was the first step towards a large and per manent increase of the income tax. He saw not only serious danger to the present system of taxing in times of peace, by making those unnecessary remissions, but absolute ruin, by throwing away that which would be a most powerful instrument for raising an immediate and ex traordinary revenue in time of war. (Cheers.) He was not now going to discuss the budget as a whole, but he would ask their lordships whether this was the moment for in creasing our deficit? (Hear, hear.) If her Majesty's Go vernment had come forward with a proposition for such an amount of income tax as was necessary to support the honour of the country and maintain its naval and military arrangements, there would not be a whisper of opposition against an increased income tax— (hear, hear)—because they would be able to say that this was the time to put those establishments on a proper footing. But suppose this treaty were advaiitageous to England—and he believed the con trary—was this the occasion to make so large a sacrifice of revenue as they were called upon to make by this treaty ? It might be said that those who objected to the treaty should oppose the address. Why, so far as fiscal arrangements were concerned, there was no practical purpose to be answered, for the loss had already been incurred. They had thrown away the wine duties, for example. (Hear, hear.) Then why should they bind themselves for 10 years ? Why not negotiate about the rag duties ? On what plea of economy could the Governmenthave entered into an arrange. ment with France, by which the silk manufactures of France could be admitted at a very low duty, or free of duty, while we had to pay a-duty of 30 per cent. on our silk, if France was disposed to impose it ? Why should not the raw materials of England be placed on the same footing as those of France? (Hear, hear.) The fact was, we obtained hardly anything by this treaty. We had already signed away our part of the treaty. We havegiven our assent to the stipulations with re gard to the duties to be imposed by France so long as they were not above 30 per cent., and we had reserved to ourselves io power of altering that arrangement. (Hear, hear.) There were, it was true, a vast number of articles on which the duties ranged below 30 per cent., and it appeared that good care had been taken of the cotton manu factures. (Hear.) But what was the case with regard to linen and silk P Why the duties imposed on those articles were enormous. The duties on some articles ranged as low as 5 per cent., it was true, but there was no provision in the treaty to prevent them from being raised to 30 per cent. (Hear, hear.) But it appeared that almost all the duties were to be levied by weight, and the consequence of this would be that the heavier and coarser articles would be charged with a duty absolutely prohibitory, while the ad valorem duties would press with equal severity on the finer qualities. (Hear.) He did not deny that this treaty would confer some advantages, nor did he consider that it was the absolute duty of her Majesty's Government to exact any pledge from France with respect to the annexation of Savoy and Nice, before agreeing to the treaty. He could not help arriving at the conclusion that the completion of this treaty at the present moment would lead to serious misconcep tions. Had the Government not a knowledge at the time they were making this treaty that England and France were pursuing a different policy ? Did they not know that France had declared that in the event of a certain contin gency she would annex Savoy and Nice ? And yet with that knowledge the Government of this country went on exciting the people of Italy. (Hear.) But they did more, they abstained for the period of three months from commu nicating to the other Powers the danger of Savoy and Nice being annexed to France, and calling upon them to commu nicate with the French Government on the subject. Under these circumstances, the conduct of Government was most unfortunate in every point of view. He looked on this treaty as a sop given to England, or rather to the Government of England, to enable it to obtain the support of certain par ties—(hear, from the Opposition)—and to secure the Government from having any very serious. opposition from those parties. (Hear, hear.) That was a painful position for England to be placed in to have a treaty entered ,into under such circumstances. He supposed that in spite of the representations of Government— in spite of the assurance given elsewhere by the noble lord (Lord Palmerston) that no step would be taken by France without consulting the great Powers, France had deter mined upon a different course of action; for they had been told that very day that whatever might be the votes of the people of Savoy—whatever might be the feeling of the peo ple of Savoy, that territory was to be annexed to France despite the remonstrances of the great Powers. As re garded the King of Sardinia, he (Earl Derby) would as k, was he warranted in rejecting the allegiance of his subjects and breaking through the treaties of 1814 and 1815? (Hear, from the Opposition.) And that was the moment which Government had selected for committing a union and iden tity of action with France by means of this commercial . treaty. (Renewed cries of Hear, hear.) He deplored thebe , ginning of the war of last year, though he did riot, under the circumstances, blame the Emperor of France. But if the Emperor selected the present moment to annex a small ter ritory against treaties, on the pretext of its necessity to pro tect the French frontier—a pretext which he could not un derstand being put forward by any one—if he persevered in that resolve on a pretext too palpable and transparent to deceive any one, he would throw all Europe into a state of alarm, in the face of the declaration he had made, that the Empire was peace. If the annexation did take place, it would Ue more unhappy for tho Emperor than for Europe, for all confidence would cease in the French Government, and every country in Europe be preparing against a future contingency, the nature of which no man could foresee. (Hear, hear.) He would say a word or two on the fear which had been expressed against their dividing on the Ad dress. Now if the Address would have any effect upon the treaty, and stop it from being carried out, much as he dis liked the treaty he should be sorry to see their lordships reject the treaty which had been accepted by the House of Commons. Now it might be wise not to press the motion to a division, because a small minority on that side of the boase or not a large majo rity Oct th e o th er s id e, might' produce a misconception place,t hr o ug h h :s u h t o t ui h cfooeunl it to h l e f ah v is d i u s t i y o n t e s h v o e ul t e d , w h i o t h w eh his s e r n , take friend cn Tehare ((Earl hLecoa GI fromry)e CH , thA a e n N d ocp t E o poL s sL a it y coie n nn o content to the motion. . ) t surprised than t o h ear the noble earslaisdayhtehwe that it was ne cessary to have an act of Parliaaomsthenneertveaevprepmnrioonvreg picnrager lw o i a f nm a c e t en r u e tl a .d t te I N he a o ad w n by , e b t i enasta3 h i e ,da c t i d n a stitution of England the it required no assent of the treaty which provid e d th at it shat there was an article in s. ould ar n h o a t til t e a n k t e u e p ff e e n ct t u ha n- t less the Queen had the auth or i ty of p point. But that referred to certain ongagemu ts which could not be carried out without the con sent of Parliament, e with reference to the alteration of duties. The noble and learned lord then referred to the article with reference to the export of coal, and said that in the eve nt of a war with France, if coal should be exported for the use of French steamers, the article could then be declared contraband of war. (H en.) The House of Commons had given their assent to the treaty, and yet their lordships had been advised by the noble earl to reject the address in its support. He . (the Lo r d Chancel lor) considered that it wou ld be a very lamentable thing ii there should be a division between the two houses on the o were t ant they placed, shouldan and subject. (Hear, hear.) u Ld a C n i i d E t h L e M p S o F s i R o n p i s n a d w i h t i c w h a s til l m e y i what would be the consequence of their conse t n h t i i e ng ad t da o r jo s i s. n the other House of Parliament in agreeing to For his own part, although he was told that the address had been prepared with great care, he should not consent to vote for an address which, as far as their acquiescence was concerned, was of no effect whatever. If so, he would not share in the responsibility of an act which had in reality been settled for their lordships by the other House of Par liament. That house had commercially accepted and sanc tioned the treaty, and it alone had the power of dealing with those financial points involved. He must say that he did not concur in the opinionof his noble and learned friend on the woolsack, that it was not necessary for Parliament to &anything to carry out the 11th article ; on the contrary, he thought it was necessary in ordinary cases to have an act of Parliament; but this article referred to a different mat ter. It referred to the exportation of coal upon which there was no ditty, but which , might become contraband of war, and he thought the noble and learned lord had overlooked the 16th and 17th Vic., by which her Majesty was em powered to prevent the exportation of naval and military stores. That power being conferred by an act of Parliament, could only be dispensed with by an act of Parliament. They knew that an address was not equivalent to an act of Par • liament, to which the Sovereign was a party in her legisla tive capacity. He thought, therefore, that with respect to t rn l i i: e e lail l eo l etu t ot h fw a i r t t h i e a l u e t , i a t a w p e as e i a q i v a i t c e t c e l f e ar p a t r h l e t n could not be car with any of h er LORD ParliamentCH A CHANCELLOR e d repeated u h e e i s n o p d d i n inoent par t h a t t prerogatives in any shape whatever. Lord CHELMSFORD cumplamed of the conduct of his noble and learned friend as being irregular. The Earl of HARDWICKE said it was clear, from the THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 16, 1t.60. papers on the table, that the Government had very much neglected their duty in not urging upon the French Go vernment the necessity of giving up those differential duties upon British shipping. The steam shipping of this coun try could no doubt compete with all the world, but the other shipping was in a state of greater depression than it had been for many years. The shipowners therefore complained that their interests had been overlooked, while American ships entering French ports paid a much smaller duty than British shipping to the extent of three francs per kilo gramme ; and in many cases they paid no duty whatever, and to that extent they would give a great advantage to our great competitors, the American shipowners. That was a point to which sufficient importance had not been attached. Lord WENSLEYDALE made some remarks with respect to the 11th article, which were inaudible in the gallery, but was understood to differ from the Lord Chan. cellor. Lord CRANWORTH said he felt that he would not Joe doing his duty if he did not say that, in his opinion, his noble and learned friend on the woolsack was quite right in the view he had taken of this matter. The Duke of NEWCASTLE said that, under any cir cumstances, he should feel great difficulty in rising to take 1 part in a debate of such duration, but he felt still more the difficulty when he had to fellow the speech of the noble earl (Lord Derby), and also ,the speach of his noble friend (Earl Grey), who had spoken with more than his usual ability and force. But he felt it to be his duty, however difficult, to answer the objections which had been urged withrespect to the latter part of the !speech of the noble earl opposite. He would say that while he did not admite the political sig nificance of the treaty in the sense of the noble earl, he fully admitted its political importance and bearing. He had to learn that they were not to bind the relations between the two countries still closer, unless there were special reasons to the contrary. He would remind their lordships that this treaty was negotiated at a time when the question of the annexation of Savoy had not been raised. He next came to a much graver charge, but let him first state that it was not the fact that the Government were in possession of the intentions of the Emperor three months before they made representations on the subject. As soon as the intention of the Emperor assumed a tangible form they made represen tations to European Powers on the subject; and whatever might be their course on the treaty it would not in the slightest degree influence their action on the question of SaN ay. It was by no means an unusual course to propose a joint address of both Houses of Parliament to her Majesty, and Mr. Pitt's precedent • was followed on a similar occasion and for the same purpose, namely, of affording an opportunity of fully discussing the subject. It was said that the treaty was a bargain, but it was not a bargain in the sons intended, although it was a bargain in the sense of the interchange of gifts. The treaty was useful, if not necessary, in assisting France to trace her steps in the course they had been so long treading. They had taught France her protective and pro hibitive system, and the result had been the disappearance of various articles of French produce from our markets. Those articles were exported to Spain and other countries where trade flourished, while it languished here. We should, by our present course, get back our old trade. From 1830, every Government had endeavoured to improve their com mercial relations with France. The late Government had exerted themselves on this subject, and they wished for a treaty that would embrace the whole course of commercial transactions—much, in fact, like the treaty just concluded. , (Hear.) The wine duties had been touched upon. After Mr. Pitt's treaty a large consumption of wine took place, and now a much larger and more rapid consumption was antici pated. If malt suffered by the introduction of wine it would be no fiscal misfortune at all, however it might be lamented on other grounds. Then came the question of coal. He had some official returns on that subject, and it appeared that there was such a supply of that important commodity that it was hardly worth while to calculate how long it would last. They had not that monopoly in coal which would jus tify them in putting on a large export duty. There was coal in Belgium and in other countries ; an export duty would materially affect the trade. The noble baron said that they were using free trade in an unfair sense, and that they were oontracting the sphere of indirect taxation. His noble friend was mistaken if he supposed the proportion between direct and indirect taxation was greatly altered. They had not con tracted the area of indirect taxation. The noble duke here referred to certain revenue returns in proof of his statement. Notwithstanding all the reductions made since 1842, the amount of indirect taxation was six millions more than it was in that year. It was also an error to suppose that they were introducing a new system by extending direct taxa tion, but the truth was, that indirect taxes amounted to nearly 75 per cent. of the whole taxation of the country. There was no groundfor apprehending that the Government had given up the power of imposing Customs' duties at any future period, should the necessities of the country requite) it. The noble lord opposite wished Government to explain how it was that there came into the treaty a clause founded on the repeal of the paper duties; but the noble lord knew perfectly the danger a Cabinet ran in letting strangers be come aware of their intentions ; and therefore they would not make known to their own negotiators their intentions with respect to the duties in question. He believed that the treaty would, independently of its effect upon the French people, increase the comfort and happiness of his fellow countrymen, and tend to the prosperity of the country. (Hear.) Earl GREY stated that, having pledged himself to give noble lords an opportunity of recording their opinion upon the treaty, he could not acquiesce in the suggestion made to him by the noble earl opposite, and withdraw the amend ment which he had conceived it to be his duty to submit for the consideration of their lordships. Their lordships then divided, when the numbers were— Contents Non-Contents Majority —3o The address was then agreed to, and the house adjourned at 10 minutes to two o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The followiag bills were read a third time and passed : Belper WraCT Corp.watioll Water; Llandaff and Canton District Markets ; Midland Railway (Station in St. Pancras, &c.) ; Midland Railway (use of railways in and near London; Shrewsbury and Welchpool Railway; West Somerset Railway ; York Improvement, &c. ; Man chester and Buxton Read ; and North London Railway. made there had ben nan enormous amount of official per- , sons introduced into the establishment of bankruptcy, and at the present the a spenses of administration of an estate by the court amour ted very nearly, if not quite, to 33 per cent upon the property administered. (Hear.) It was hardly possible to bring "home to the mind a correct idea of the enormous amount: of error or impropriety of management which was involve sd in that administration. He might men tion that in ordinary life the cost of collecting debts was about 5 per cent.,, while in the case of an unfortunate cre ditor whose debt amounted to £6OO, he had to submit in bankruptcy t'.) a deduction of £2OO, to satisfy the claims and to provide for the maintenance of persons who had been appointed by the State to conduct the admi nistretion of estates taken out of the hands of creditors. Those were unquestionably evils which standing alone, would be sufficient to demonstrate the utter impropriety of the system. Therefore he came before the house with great confidence as to the necessity of a change; but he was admonished by the failure of those who had for merly attempted the same thing. The measure now pre sented had . .been prepared with the utmost knowledge and labour which he could bestow upon it, but he would ask the house before coming to a determination upon it to examine it with minute care, and to take nothing upon trust. He hoped the house would have a full discussion upon the pre visions of the bill, not only by the legal members, but by those hen, gentlemen who represented mercantile commu nities, and then hetrusted they Would pass a measure which would be in conformity with the views generally of those who best understood this important subject. It would be impossible to understand the measure unless he gave a nar rative of the different provisions he proposed to introduce. The first subject was one upon which, although not sinwil ling, he had been afraid to venture, he meant the subject of the entire abolition of imprisonment for debt. He would gladly have made that part of the present bill, but he was afraid that it would have encountered much diversity of opinion. It might, however, be put in another bill, should the house feel inclined to favour its introduction. Ther6 being in this country two different systems of administra tion of bankrupts' estates, viz., bankruptcy and insolvency an anomaly had arisen purely from accident. The result was the bankruptcy law partook more of a criminal than a civil character. No provision was made for the discharge of an insolvent debtor who was not a trader, and for a long time, as any one who wasconversant with the history of the country was well aware, our gaols were crowded with insol vent debtors, for whom there were no means of deliver ance. At last a bill was introduced, not founded on any principle of administration, but suggested merely by com passion, for insolvent debtors. By degrees this was en larged, until now, when the existing system provided for the administration of the estates of insolvent debtors, but only throttgh the medium of their imprisonment. This was a vice in principle, because the insolvent debtor who. acted with honesty, and give up all his property to his creditors, was as much entitled, on every principle of the just admi nistration of the law, to obtain his discharge without im prisonment as the bankrupt was. What had they done P They had sent him to prison, to be degraded and incarce rated, while at the same time there were no means of dis covering those who refused to give up their property to ad ministration. He proposed, then, having taken the opinion of all who had considered the subject, including the most distinguished men in the other House of Parliament, to abolish entirely the distinction between insolvency and bankruptcy, and to make both one law and one course of procedure. The result would be that the creditor would have no inducement to send the debtor to prison, as he would be able to obtain the property without difficulty, without the necessity of incarceration, whilst, on the other ' hand, the fraudulent debtor who wished to remain in prison without surrender of his property would be defeated in his object. He proposed that any person committed to prison ) for debt should be entitled to present a petition for adjudi cation in bankruptcy. In 1849 a law was passed providing that no debtor could obtain an adjudication in bankruptcy , unless he could show that his estate would pay ss. in the L pound; and in 1854 a gross sum of £l5O was substituted. Still, however, in one year 3,413 debtors applied to the In solvent Court, of whom 2,183 were persons called traders, who were consequently obliged to submit to imprisonment. He proposed that every insolvent, if he made a full surren ) dm, should be adjudicated a bankrupt, and should not be obliged to produce any certain sum of money to entitle him ' to adjudication. One great feature of the insolvency law ' was, that the insolvent after his discharge was still liable to his creditors. In the case of a fraudulent debtor this was L perfectly immaterial, whilst in the case of an honest man it was most oppressive. He had therefore provided that this , system should be entirely put an end to, that there should he no incarceration, and that the adjudication should be final. Without this it would be better for a. man to have no dis • charge at all, than to have all his future exertions para lysed by the fear of renewed demands, It was also pro vided by this bill that if a man should not have the means of paying the expenses of adjudication he should be allowed to plead in forma pauperis, the house being aware that there was an annual grant from the Consolidated Fund for that express purpose. He provided also that remaining 14 days in prison constituted an act of bankruptcy, and that at the end of that time the bankrupt should be brought up ' for adjudication, whether he would or no. His property would be distributed amongst his creditors, and himself discharged. This he thought would practically abolish im prisonment for debt. (Hear, hear.) He abolished all tech nical acts of bankruptcy, by which persons, without being aware of it, were often entrapped into expense, and substi tuted a few plain and simple rules of procedure. If a man absconded in debt and remained abroad with a view of de • feating his creditors, there would be no doubt as to the manner in which he should be dealt with, as the same rule should apply to the trader and the non-trader. If he per mitted part of his property to be sold under execution, or procured his own arrest, these were acts of bankruptcy, and his creditors could summon him before the court. These were all incontrovertible and intelligible criteria of insol vency. These were the main provisions by which he pro posed to introduce one uniform mode of administration for bankruptcy and insolvency. He came now: to the next evil of the existing system, namely, the manner in which the administration of the law was provided for, and certainly so inoperative, so absurd, so singular a compound and admix ture of the judicial and administrative functions had pro bably never been witness e d i n th e di spensat i on of justice. If they went into the Bankruptcy Court in London, they would find five commissioners who were all judges, and the result was that having five heads and five mouths, out of which issued the law, they had of course every possible variety of principle, and rule, and mode of administration. But if they went into the court they found probably also a meeting of creditors for the choice of assignees, but the judge who presided, having no judicial functions to dis charge, would be sitting amidst all this confusion and hub bub, reading the journals of the day. (A laugh.) There was no necessity for these five administrators of the law. He had made inquiries, and he found the time devoted by these administrators to strictly judicial duties was three hours each per week, or fifteen hours per week for the whole number. He should propose to sweep away altogether the commissioners in London—(hear, hear)—but to leave them their existing emoluments, and if an emergency arose they would be required to give their assistance, and still to be auxiliary to the administration of the justice of the new court. The several commissioners received, each of them, a clear salary of £2,000 a year, and ho believed they were all appointed in 1832 or 1833. He proposed to substitute in the place of those commissioners one single judge, so far as the principal court was concerned, to be on a par in every re spect with the judges of the courts of equity and the courts of common law, and to receive the same emolument, mid he thought there would be no difficulty in finding numbers of men well qualified for the office, and capabls of discharging with the utmost ability the whole of the duties now per formed by the five commissioners. This judge would take the judicial business properly so called, and there would be a power of appeal from the country commissioners to him. He proposed to divide the business of bankruptcy into that which was purely judicial and that which was partly of a judicial and partly of an administrative character, which would be discharged by the judge in chambers. The remain ing business would be partly ministerial, and that he pro posed should be discharged by the registrars in bankruptcy. There were in the Bankralitcy Court a number of officers called registrars, who were barristers of considerable ability, and who sometimes sat in the room of the commissioners. The course of procedure proposed was that all undisputed adjudications of bankruptcy, all meetings of creditors for the choice of assignees, all private examinations of witnesses or of the bankrupt, all,audit and dividend meetings, and all exLmination of accounts, should be conducted by the regis trar, filling tie same relation to the judge as was now filled by the masters in the courts of common law, or by the judge's clerk in the case of the Master of the Rolls and the Vice- Chanoellors, but with an immediate power of appeal in any oase of controversy to the judge in chambers. With regard to the business in the London district, there was, of course, business to an enormous amount, but a very large portion of it consisted of matters relating to small estates. He there fore proposed, that in the London district there should be an auxiliary court, for the purpose of dealing with these small estates. (Hear," hear.) In the London district the court in Portugal-street, under its denomination of an Assistant , A Court to the Court of Bankruptcy, would be conti nue d by the bill for the purpose of administering the estates of all bankrupts where the assets did not exceed £3OO. (Hear.) He wished he could say that he had been able to arrange the country districts in a manner equally satisfactory. The district courts of bankruptcy were first established in 1842, and antecedently to that time we were in the habit of send ing down a fiat in bankruptcy to the local commissioners. That was a very fruitful source of expense and trouble, and accordingly the district courts were established. He believed that if the county court system had ex isted in 1842 there would never have been an establishment of the district courts in bankruptcy. He must say there was a painful contrast between our system of bankruptcy and the Scotch system. The latter had ad hered to the old original Saxon constitution of the sheriffs' courts. He should have been exceedingly glad to be able to devise a plan which would satisfactorily remove the whole of the existing district courts, but it would be im possible to do so at the present time. To sweep away the district courts it would be necessary to deal with the exist ing commissioners in the same liberal spirit in which it was proposed to deal with the London commissioners, and it would be impossible for the Government to do that with the present means at their disposal. He had, however, in troduced into the bill a provision to the effect that on the occurrence of any future vacancy, it should be in the power of her Majesty, by an order in council, to make a new arrangement and distribution of the district so circum stanced, and to appropriate it in such a manner as might be deemed right in favour of the county courts, and invest the judges of these courts with the powers previously enjoyed biwnyaatift2deaainsttdmritce this led (Hear, hear.) If they took any one of th e di s t r i ct courts of bankruptcy, they would gr find there w as a tt ac h e d to i t an immense area. For in stance, to the co u r t o f B r i stol was given nearly the whole of measure ur ethat a delays,t inconvenience expense expense. would be prevented by the jurisdiction being transferred to the county courts. (Hear.) These were the principal subjects upon tho head of the administration of the Bankruptcy Court and the constitution of the new tribunals. He would only say on the subject of the expense, that the constitution of the new court, when it should come into play in London, would be very much less in point of expense than the con stitution of the existing establishments —(hear, hear)--and therefore, on the groun of expense, there would be a very considerable gain by the alteration. 'Under the present system a person who had once gone into the Court of Bank ruptcy could not escape from it until it had adminis tered, the whole of his estate. This led to very great inconvenience. A debtor owed a variety of debts, and his creditors wished to invoke the aid of the bankruptcy law for a particular purpose, but they were unable to do so, for when the debtor was once put within the walls of the court he could not leave without permitting the whole of the estate to be wound up and administered. That was a very great injustice, and therefore he (the right lion. gentleman) was anxious to propose that if creditors were compelled to resort to the Court of Bankruptcy for any particular purpose, they might at any time they pleased, provided chat a majority of the creditors consented, suspend the proceedings in bank ruptcy, and take the whole of the estate out of the adminis tration of the court, and have recourse to other measures. (Hear, hear.) Another rain would be obt a i ne d by this bill. At present if en hone s t trader were in difficulties and wished to make a disclosure of his affairs to his friends, and lay be fore them the account of his estate, and the friends were desirous of making an arr i pngement and preventing the necessity for a bankruptcy, the debtor would put himself in the power of some particular creditor, who, to pursue a private end, might throw him into bankruptcy, and thus defeat any attempt at an amicable arrangement. According to the plan embodied in the bill, immediately, on the adjudi cation of bankruptcy a meeting of creditors would be called, and if a majority of them should think it advisable not to go on, or only to a limited extent, they would have the power of coming to a resolution t o th a t effect. The way this would operate as a protection to and relief of an honest debtor would be this—ha would have the power, without having committed any act of bankruptcy, of presenting petition for an adjudication of bankruptcy. (Hear, hear.) The creditors might then bo called together, and the debtor wquld make a proposal for a compromise, and if it were found to be one they could justly entertain, then the creditors would have the power of making a conclusive and binding arrangement, without the possibility of its being interfered with by any envious person. (Hear, hear.) In this way he-proposed to make the law of bankruptcy, and the principles of that law, a part of the law of debtor acid creditor generally—(hear, hear)—which it ought to be, instead of its being a special judication, to be purchasers only at great cost and suffering. (Hear, hear.) The next point to which he wished to call the attention of the house was the security proposed by the bill to be given to all these compositions, assignments, andprivate arrangements. They were perfectly well aware that a great stigma had always attended the very name of bankruptcy. He would refer to the statistics on the subject, and the house would be sur prised to find that the contrast between the number of ad judications in bankruptcy and the number of trust deeds and deeds of arrangement was immense. In 1858, and for a series of years antecedent, the adjudications in bankruptcy were not more than ono in seven. In 1858, the number of adjudications was 660, and the number of trust deeds and deeds of composition and arrangement was computed to have been more than 8,000. Now, what was the reason that in cases of insolvency creditors were content to put up with the imperfect relief of a trust deed, where they had no supervision of the law, no power of examining the debtor, and no authority to compel an investigation of the accounts? Why, the answer was, of course, partly the expense, partly the inconvenience, and partly the cruel and stringent pro visions of the bankruptcy law. All these circumstances in duced creditors to prefer the imperfect trust deed to proceed ing by adjudication in bankruptcy. (Hear; hear.) But was it not possible to give him still the benefit of that pre ference, and at the same time to give him the whole benefit of the law of debtor and creditor with regard to his claim against the bankrupt's estate ? Now he (the Attorney- General) endeavoured to accomplish that purpose by provi sions of the following nature. If a trader was in difficulty and desired to meet his creditors and they him, by a deed of composition, a deed of arrangement, or an assignment of ' his property, he would be enabled to do so. He would be secured against adverse persons destroying the whole plan of arrangement by resorting to' an adjudicailin in bank ruptcy, but then the following conditions would bo im posed upon him. The deed of arrangement or composition was to be registered in the Court of Bankruptcy; the debtor was to pay both for the registration and adjudication—and as soon as the deed was registered in bankruptcy the debtor, trustees, and creditors would be placed mutually in the same relative position to one another as if the debtor had been adjudicated a bankrupt, and the trustees had been duly ap pointed trustees of the estate. There would be no public proceeding, save so far as publicity might be deemed requi site by the creditors, and being requisite, then they might resort to the Court of Bankruptcy for the personal exami nation of any party whom they might desire to examine. The whole law of bankruptcy therefore would be at once incorporated in the law with regard to debtor and creditor under trust deeds and the administration of estates. The creditors might thus under a deed get the same benefit as if there had been adjudication in bankruptcy. The import ance of this particular part of the bill in respect to financial considerations could not be over estimated. At present the principal source of revenue of the Court of Bankruptcy was an injurious and oppressive tax levied in the shape of a per cenfraga upon all estates brought into the court. By the bill of 1849 power was given to tax every estate administered in bankruptcy with a per centage of between ss. per cent. and £.5 per cent. Any rate between those two termini which the commissioner might deem it proper to inflict upon the estate, according to the exigencies of the case, he had the power of imposing. The result was, that very large es tates had of necessity been driven out of the Court of Bank ruptcy. They would never go to that court to administer an estate of £lOO,OOO, £150,000, or £200,000, if there was any possibility of avoiding it ; and the small estates which went there were subject to a per centage in a less degree, probably, but yet to an extent which left very little for those interested in them. With regard to the revenue of the court, the state of the case was this. In 1858 the per centage paid into court by the official assignees was £41,407 125., but in 1859 it was only £29,922, thus show ing an immense falling off in the business of the eourt. The stamp duties paid upon certain proceedings in 1858 amounted to £21,201, but in 1859 they yielded only £13,850. In fact the Court of Bankruptcy would have been in a much worse position, in a financial point of view, if it had not been for a very fortunate provision made some years before for the appointment of official assignees, who at once applied themselves to recovering and getting in assets which had been lost sight of and neglected under the ante cedent administrations of bankruptcy, and who had suc ceeded in recovering many hundred of thousands of pounds. (Hear.) That sum of money was invested in the Bank ruptcy Court; and under another provision it was paid as received by the accountant-general in bankruptcy into the Bank of England, where there was always upon this account a large floating balance which, in 1858, yielded an income to the court of £49,605. But then that fund was obliged to be drawn upon in order to supply the deficit aris ing from the failing business of the court, and accordingly the interest arising upon that fund in 1859 was only £46,070, showing a diminution of £3,500. Now there were three principal supplies to meet the wants and expenses of the court. From .a Parliamentary paper, dated the 14th of February, 1860, it appeared that the whole expenditure of the court in 1859 amounted to £112,469, which included com pensations and retiring annuities to the extent of £20,200 odd. These compensations were the penalties paid for errors in the constitution of the court in former times, which were atoned for by the bill of reform in bankruptcy which abo lished certain offices. The house would recollect that under the Testamentary Bill they were obliged to make some pro vision for Mr. Moore's annuity of £BOO. There was ano ther difficulty, via., the sinecure office of . one of the accountants in bankruptcy, which yielded no less a sum than £7,352 per annum. (Hear.) Now these compensations and retiring annuities had been thrown on the funds of the court, and he thought the house would agree with him, un justly. (Hear.) Why should the present suitors pay for the errors of former times ? They were encumbered with every description of burden, but they added to their burdens pay ments which ought to be borne by the country itself, seeing that it was by their predecessors that these errors had been ommitted. On his representation, therefore, his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer consented to transfer, if the house should approve of it, two sums of £17,161 and £3,066, making together L 20,200, which would be a relief accorded to the funds of the Court of Bankruptcy. But they had this consolation, that those charges would only endure for a few years, though ho must confess ho found that sinecurists lived for almost an indefinite period. (Laughter.) That relief to the funds of the court would enable him to diminish most considerably the charges made upon suitors. (Hoar, hear.) He proposed that all the fens of the court should be removed, except the mere entrance fee. He calculated that there would b a a great increase in the business of the court. §upposing he succeeded in bringing into the court 5,000 or 6,000 trust deeds. Upon these he proposed to attach a tax. Where the estate was under £l,OOO, a tax of £5 only was to be paid upon registration ; between £l,OOO and £3,000, £10; and over £3,000, £l5. He calculated that this tax would yield an income of £60,000 a year, and he proposed to abrogate all the per oentago fees which were at present levied on estates, and the registrar's fees, and to reduce the fees payable to the court to the smallest possible amount, so that the suitors would have to pay less than perhaps was at present paid by suitors in any of the courts of Westminster Hall. (Hear, hear.) Another tact, at which the house would be surprised, was, that the Bank of England received as remuneration for keeping the account of the accountant in bankruptcy no less a sum than £3,100 in one year, although the quarterly balances amounted to between £5,000 and £6,000. Those balances, he thought, were a sufficient remuneration for the manage ment of the account--(hear, hear)—and he hoped that some arrangement would be made to get rid of that charge, thus giving a still further relief to suitors.' The learned Attorney- General then proceeded to give a description of the details of the bill. The adjudication would be made immediately on the petition being presented, but time would be allowed the bankrupt in case of a contested adjudication to controvert the conclusion of the court, and in the meantime precautions would be taken for the immediate preservation of the property. He proposed to abolish the office of messenger altogether. That functionary discharged his duty by deputy, to whom he paid 3s. 6d. a-day, and yet he found that some messengers had received in the shape of profits sums as large as £1,296, £1,361, and £1,767 a-year, land some had been oven more fortunate. (Hear.) The official assignee would be charged with the custody of the estate up to the time of the choice of the creditors' assig nees, and he proposed that the official assignee should have power to go to a judge at chambers and get authority to keep open the trade for the benefit of the creditors, until the creditors should have determined am ong themselves what should be done with it. (Hear, hear.) The principle of the bill was that the estate of the debtor belonged to the creditors, and the whole of the machinery was and ought to be for the benefit of the creditors exclusively—(hear, hear) —and they should have the right, by a recognised majority, of determining to what extent and in what manner it should be applied. (Hear, hear.) The ielativepositionof the offi cial assignee and the creditors' assignee was a subject on which there was a great contrariety of opinion. The official assignees, in their present position were the men to receive monies and give discharges for them. In one respect this had been convenient, by creating those large floating bal ances in the Bank, the investment of which had enabled the Court of Bankruptcy to keep its head above water. But on the other hand, it had justly been complained that the official assignee reduced the creditors assignee to a mere cipher, usurping all those functions which the auditor ap pointed by the creditors might discharge. He had there fore devised something between the two. He proposed that immediately on the choice of the creditors' assignee, whether they chose one of themselves or any other per son, the official assignee should ,be bound to render to him a full and particular account of all his receipts and payments, and hand over to the creditors' assignee the whole of the property. But then he proposed that the official assignee should afterwards stand in the position of the auditor of the creditors' assignee. The ob ligation of paying all the monies received into the Bank of England would devolve on the creditors' assignee, which was a proper and necessary caution. At present the official assignee was trusted in everything, but he was sorry to say that several defalcations had been discovered, to the amount of £llO,OOO or £120,000 altogether, and what others there might have been it was impossible to know. He also pro posed that the great invention of printing, one of the last things to find its way into the administration of the law, should be employed here. An enormous amount of saving and convenience, he had often said, would result, if print ing were substituted for the mediaeval barbarism of written parchments in many cases. (Hear.) . One fourth part of the existing litigation would lee entirely annihilated, if the contents of deeds and documents could be more readily and correctly ascertained, as might bo the result of using the printing-press, instead of the present cumbrous and expen sive mode of producing them. He proposed, then, that iu accordance with the practice of the great railway and other companies, the creditors' assignee should render quarterly accounts of the whole of his receipts and payments, and of all the circumstances of the estate; that the quarterly ac count should be audited and examined by the official assig nee ; that immediate recourse shonld'be had to the registrar or judge, if any question arose thereon; that the account should be vouched by the creditor's assignee, and the official assignee should be charged with the duty of seeing that all the moneys which had come into the hands of the creditors' assignee were faithfully paid over into the bank ; and he then proposed that a printed copy of this account, in the form of a belance-sheet of the bankrupt's estate, should be sent to every credit or . It was a l ready provided that, when the creditors had been ascertained, a printed list of the cre ditors should be sent to each creditor ; and within three months after the bankruptcy each creditor would also get a printed account of .the administration of the estate, with out having to carpi y an attorney, or to travel from his own home. (Hear, hear.) In this way the creditors' assig nee would be kept in check by the official assignee, and the official assignee, having to discharge a very important duty, would also be kept in check, and the creditors them selves would receive, by these printed balance-sheets, a se curity for the faithful management of the estate. As for the emoluments of the official assignees, they were not to suffer materially by this ch ange. It appeared from a return that the average of those emoluments was £1,500 a year in Lon don, and £1,200 in the country. He therefore proposed, under the recommendations of the commission of 1854, to give to each official assignee, independently of tho allow ance for clerks and other expenses, a certain annual salary of £BOO, and give power to the judge to augment that salary, according to the work done, until it attained the maximum of £1,500 a year. He had no doubt that the quantity of business, from the number o f cases now di spose d o f b y trust assignments, which would come into the court, would be so considerable that every official assignee might safely reckon on this income of £1,500 a year, because his duties would be.sufficiently onerous to justify that remuneration. Power would, however, be given to the creditors, in case the estate should appear to them to be ono that could better be administered in a more simple and economical form, to come to a decision for that purpose. Wherever an estate had been ascertained not to exceed the value of £l,OOO, a cer tain majority of the creditors might, if they thought it right to do so, transfer the administration of it to the County Court ; though, if he succeeded in reducing as much as he hoped, the fees in the Court of Bankruptcy, the power ' would, he thought, seldom be exercised. But he proposed that all the very small estates, not exceeding £3OO in their assets; would at once be relegated, if the creditors desired, to the County Court, since th registrar and treasurer, the County Court officers, could amply perform all the func tions that would otherwise have to be discharged by the official assignee and registrar of the Bankruptcy Court. One great alteration of the law which he proposed was this : In the law of bankruptcy, at present, there was a strange mixture of the civil and the criminal law. There was a criminal jurisdiction of the most sin gular kind. It treated the bankrupt as a criminal with out any accurately defined offence, and with no - thing more than a description of moral misconduct, extra vagance, recklessness, or great want of pr u d en ce, all these being subjects of the most indefinite and elastic kind, on which no two men could be found to agree. (Hear, hear.) The administration of this penal law was therefore marked by the most painful uncertainty, inconsistency, and contra diction. The classification of certificates, as granted by the Commissioners in London, showed a remarkable variety lii their determinations. Mr. Commissioner Evans, out of 479 applications for certificates during five years, only granted 17 first-class certificates, or but lin 28. In the same time, Mr. Commissioner Fonblanque, out of 453 ap plications, granted 31 first-class, or 1 in 14, while Mr. Com missioner Fane, out of 628 applications, granted e l6l first class, or lin less than 4%eases. (Hear.) Now, what an in consistency appeared in this I Of the other two Commis sioners in London, the one granted a first-class certificate once in every 10 cases, and the other once in 11. If he con trasted. the proceedings of the courts in the country with the decisions of the judges of appeal in bankruptcy upon them, he found still more painful contradictions. The whole system of the classification of certificates, which was a doc trinaire principle introduced into the bill of 1849, was in jurious in another point of view. It led to immense litiga tion and discussion when the bankrupt applied for his cer tificate. Then occurred those long examinations which were reported in the daily papers, and hence those appeals afterwards to the courtabove, with those continual reversals of first decisions which had been observed so much He thought it was impossible to draw the line between impunity for the debtor and criminal punishment by the criminal law. Lot the criminal laws in regard to any fraudulent contracting of debt be made as stringent and severe as you pleased, but let there not be something set up be tween the two, which was ,neither law nor certain justice, but which was a singular discretionary power, applied in a very indefinite manner, which reminded one of the old reproach that the bankrupt's conduct was measured and determined according to the size of the commissioner's foot. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He proposed, therefore, to lay down vest strict rules with regard to fraudulent con duct in trade, and to leave those rules to be applied by a court of criminal jurisdiction, but to give to the commis sioner where the bankrupt Was prosecuted the power of suspending the discharge of the bankrupt, making the sus pension of the discharge co-existent with the amount of the punishment inflicted on the bankrupt in respect of his offence. He would not advert to some minor provisions of the bill and alterations of the present system. It was rather in deference to the opinions of others that he had introduced a series of clauses which might be called the death clauses, providing that where the debtor, having committed an act of bankruptcy, died without having been made a bankrupt, the creditors, after his death, should have the same power of administering his estate in bankruptcy which they would have had if he had remained alive. These clauses were originally devised before the great change that was recently made in the administration of the estates of deceased debtors in the Court of Chancery. The alterations which had been made in the operation of that tribunal in this respect would, in a great measure, answer the same purpose as these clauses in the bill which he now proposed. He believed the estate of a deceased debtor might now be administered in the Court of Chancery in the simplest and most expedi tious way, and at an amount of cost very little exceeding 5 per cent. of the amount of the estate. In fact, one of the eminent judges in the Court of Chancery had once said that he would lay a wager that any estate could now be ad ministered in Chancery at a less coat than it could possibly be done out of court by the agency of private hands ; and he (the Attorney-General) believed that there was a great deal of foundation for that statement. He did not then him self consider that these death clauses would practically be of much utility. That was a matter, however, which he would leave to the investigation of the house in committee, as well as other points for the improvement of the bill. He trusted they would be able to estab lish by this means a simple, uniform, expeditious and econo mical system. He would ask the house to take the second reading of the bill, on which he did not expect a very long discussion, some day before Easter, in order that the com mittee upon it, in which a great deal of.laborious attention to details would be requisite, might be fixed as soon after Easter as possible, or else the bill would be in danger of not passing at all, unless it got into the upper house by the be ginning of June. It might occur to some hon. gentlemen, as a great omission in the bill, compared with former measures, that it did not advert to the winding up of joint-stock com panies. That matter had been left out here because it formed the subject of a very comprehensive measure, which was in tended - to accompany this bill, and which had already passed the House of Lords and come down to that house; and he` intended to move the second reading of it upon an early day in the next week. He now moved for leave to bring in',llhe bill. (Cheers.) Sir F. KELLY congratulated the house upon this long desired measure, which had at length been brought forward. It would not became him to enter at length upon the consi deration of the bill, but he would just call the attention of the house, and of his hon. and learned friend, to a few points which seemed to deserve attention. It was with great satisfaction he heard that it was intended to sweep away the whole present system of courts of bankruptcy—(hear)—but whilst expressing his entire concurrence in the abolition of the metropolitancourt, he would remind his hon. and learned friend of the great difficulty there was in carrying a some what analogous measure for the abolition of the Ecclesias tical Court and in the establishment of a Probate Court, for which, indeed, they were mainly indebted to the Attor ney-General. (Cheers.) For four successive years the measure was before Parliament in one shape or another, and he now warned the Government against attempting to pass any bill which would bind the new court of justice to adminiseer a separate branch of the law without intro ducing into it the .system of common law procedure. He urged the expediency, not to say the necessity, that existed that the new court should have the power of exam ining viva voce, of, examining in open court, of trial by jury when such a course was desirable, and of formal reports of the proceedings of the court, so that the country might be satisfied the tribunal possessed the double jurisdiction of a court of equity and of common law. With these he doubted not but the scheme of the Government would, with suit able machinery, be valuable and effective—and be in a great commercial country a most desirable improvement in our mercantile laws. The bill would destroy all distinctions between trader and non-trader, and one of his (Sir F. Kelly's) great wishes on this subject was, that the estates of insolvent persons might be administered to the satisfac tion of creditors, in many, perhaps, in most cases, without resort to the Court of Bankruptcy at all. His hon. and learned friend did not, he presumed, intend to abolish the office of official assignee, but to confer upon him an impor tant position in all cases, if he rightly understood, whether in voluntary liquidation or in bankruptcy. He believed he rightly expressed the meaning of the Attorney-General. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL explained. The official assignee would represent the estate until the creditors' as • signse was appointed; then he would give way to the cro ditors' assignee in receiving and auditing the creditors' accounts. Sir F. KELLY observed that the more he considered the cases either where the estate was to be managed, or where there had been bankruptcy, not a transfer to voluntary liquidation or where there was no bankruptcy at all, but where the creditors at a meeting resolved upon liquida tion, and where the Court of Bankruptcy would not, ex cept in case of necessity, be called in at all, the more he became convinced of the absolute necessity there was of affording every facility to winding up voluntary liqui dation. He was glad to hear that £20,000 a year (it used to be £45,000) paid out of debtors' estates, paid as pensions to persons who had held certain office 35 years ago, was about to be transferred to the Conso lidated Fund; for there was no more justice or equity in taking such money out of the pockets of creditors than there was in burdening it upon the estate of any private gentleman. (Hear.) This had been a most flagrant abuse, and its proposed abolition was highly creditable to the Go vernment. He believed this would be the beginning of a system of economy which every man interested in the mer cantile affairs of the country would hail with very great satisfaction. He could not very distinctly understand from what his hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General said, what connection there was between this bill and the proposed winding-up bill for joint-stock companies. This latter was no doubt a question of great difficulty and com plication, but he would venture to remind the house and his hon. and learned friend that there was the greatest dan ger lest there might be any inconsistency in the provisions of the two measures—fur great inconsistencies were fatal blots in legislation. It was essential that both measures should be substantially the same, and that they should work together in entire harmony one with the other. The hon. 'and learned gentleman concluded by again expressing hi s satisfaction at the measure, to which he hoped to be abl e to give an earnest and a hearty support. (Cheers.) Mr. E. JAMES said that the preparation of this measure had no doubt required the most unwearied industry, as well as great courage in its introduction. The subject was so vast, and the legislation which had taken place on the sub ject way so intricate, that the administration of the law of bankruptcy in our jurisdiction had become a scandal to the nation. No judge, scarcely any lawyer, could tell what the law was, or, such was the infinite var i e t y o f ac t s upon thi s subject, where to look. With reference to the application of the new law in the country districts, some defects in the bill might be remedied in committee. It seemed to him that the bankruptcy laws should not be subject to commis sioners sitting at Liverpool, Leeds, and Bristol: and this was a part of the measure to which the attention of the house should be directed. He believed, too, the county court jud`ges were not the persons to have this jurisdiction committed to their care. (Hear, hear.) Mr. MALINS congratulated the house and the country that at length they were likely to have a rational system of bankruptcy, and he rejeiced that the distinction which ex isted between non-traders and traders would be abolished, for the distinction was most anomalous and unreasonable. He had long since urged upon the house that, this distinc tion should bs no longer allowed to exist. He was glad to find that the bill would sweep away all classes of certificates, for at present the commissioners took wholly different views of very similar cases. The true policy was that a man should, after ceding th e w h o l e of his property for th e b ene fit of his creditors, be allowed the opportunity of paying his debts, -and should have the capacity of trading restore , ' to him: (II ear.) He would give his cordial assistance in Making this bill a complete measure, and he hoped the Go vernment would give every opportunity to his hon. and learned friend in order that it might be passed this session. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in reply, said that ho was much indebted to the house for the very kind manner in which they had received this bill. In so great and in tricate and difficult a subject, he was perfectly conscious there Were a number of provisions which, in point of ex pression, in matter of fact, and in congruity, might receive con; id arable improvement, but he could assure the house he should receive all suggestions with a most grateful mind. He trusted they would not object to the second reading of the bill being taken that day fortnight, seeing that it was a measure upon which rsuch discussion must arise on its de tails in committee. The bill was then read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on that day fortnight. CUSTOMS ACTS COMMITTEE—HOPS. The house then went into committee on the Customs Acts. The UTIANCELLOR of.the EXCHEQUER begged to propose an amended resolution, reducing the duty on hops from the Ist of January, 1861 (not undertreaty), "That on and after the Ist of January, 1861, in lieu of the duty of customs now chargeable on the article undermentioned on importation into Great Britain and Ireland, the following duty shall be charged, viz. :—Hops, until the Ist January, 1862, the cwt., 205.: hops, on and after the Ist January, 1862, the cwt., 15s. Mr. DODSON moved, as an amendment, that it should remain for the present an open question for the house to deal with, whether there should be any and what duty levied on hops from and after the Ist January, 1862. The excise duty on hops was peculiar and oppressive to the producer, and he wished to remind the house that this duty and the customs duty on hops were inseparably connected, and that they must stand or fall together. The excise duty was peculiar, because the con sum pti on o f h ops was s t r i c tly limited to the extent of the malt duty ; but owing to the uncertain nature of the crop the amount of hops produced was uncontrollable. The only element under control was the extension or reduction of the acreage ; but even that was most inefficient. In 1842, 46,000 acres yielded five times as largo a crop as 54,000 acres in 1854. The result was that by no fault or improvidence on the part of the producer more hops were produced than were required for the con sumption of the year, and as the excise duty was l ev i e d, not on the manufactured article, not on the hops which found their way into the brewer's vat, but on the raw material at the source of supply, the producer had to pay out of his own. pocket a duty on the quantity in excess. Ho contended that this was contrary to all the doctrines of political economy. His moderate proposition was that the right hon. gentleman should take the duty for one year only, leaving it to a future session—and probably a future Parliament—to determine in 1861 whether any or what duties should be levied on hops ; and he hoped that by economy and retrenchment, together with the increased re ceipts from other sources of income, they would be enabled to dispense with this impost at the end of the year. Sir B. BRIDGES seconded the amendment. Lord HOLMESDALE, who addressed the house for the first time, urged that excessive hardship was inflicted on the hop farmer by this unjust and vexatious tax, and that the loss fell upon the hop growers, not upon the hop factors. He believed this was, except the tax on chicory, the only duty levied on any raw unmanufactured article the produce of the soil of this country. The amount of the tax was some times more than the price which the grower could obtain, and it was a fact that in many cases lately hops had been exported merely for the sake of obtaining the drawback of excise allowed for exportation, and then the hops had been thrown overboard in mid-channel. Mr. JOHN LOCKE said that many of his own consti tuents were hop factors, and he could not admit that, as the noble lord had said, they threw the whole burden of this duty on the planters. The average cost of growing hops in this country was £26 an acre, whilst the foreigner could grow his hops at from to £l7 an acre. He (Mr. Locke) being a free trader, would not, however, rely upon any pro tectionist arguments ' • but the British and foreign producer were unequally dealt with ; for whilst the former, as soon as the hops were picked and pocketed, was obliged to pay the duty, the foreigner could choose his own time, and send his hops to be bonded in this country, until the market rose for them, and then, by paying the duty, he could let them loose against the English grown hops, which enjoyed no such facilities, No doubt thi s was f ree trade, but his con stituents did not like it. (Hear, hear.) Mr. DEEDES, on the part of the hop-growing district with which he was connected, begged to say that they were ready and willing to stand the test of perfect and entire free trade—(cheers)—they would stand or fall by it whatever might be the result ; but he must say it was strange to see a Government, which avowed itself a free trade Government, refuse to entertain a proposition so much in accordance.witil their general professions. (Hear, hear.) Lord PEVENSEY expressed his entire astonishment at the course which the right hen. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer meant to pursue. He could not conceive how the committee could refuse their sanction to the prin ciple which they had ratified over and over again. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER assured the hon. gentleman who proposed the amendment, as well as the noble lord who supported it, that it was a great mis take to suppose the hop duty was maintained because Chan cellors of the Exchequer found it convenient to themselves. On the contrary, he did not hesitate to say that if the mea sure of the matter were to be the comfort of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, this duty was the dearest money that came into his pocket. (Hear, hear.) There was no reason why the hop duty should be a terminable duty. The same argument would apply to marine and fire insurances. He objected, however, to Parliament in 1860 dealing with the finances of the country which were applicable to the year 1862. The Government, must, however, oppose the motion of the hon. member, as they h a d no desire to embarrass themselves in reference to the financial branch of this ques tion, as they thought the proposal an unsound one. The Government had shown every disposition to deal with the details of this question in a manner calculated to meet the wants of gentlemen opposite by a reduction of the duty some 30 per cent., at a loss to the revenue of £lOO,OOO a-year. _ _ the committee, after a few words in vindication of this course, F d o i r v t id h e e d r , e a s n o d lu t t h io e n re appeared -138 Against it Majority —34 The amendment was consequently lost. The CHAIRMAN reported the resolution,and the house resumed. Several members having appealed in vain to the Chan cellor to adjourn the consideration of the malt duty, Mr. LYGON moved the adjournment of the debate. The house then divided, and there appeared— For the adjournment Against it Majority ENCLOSURE BILL. This bill was read a second time. PROBATE AND ADMINISTRATION BILL. This bill was further considered on the Lords' amend ment. ADULTERATION OF FOOD AND DRINK BILL. This bill passed through committee. CONSOLIDATED FUND BILL. This , bill was read a third time and passed. MARINE MU TINY BILL. This bill was read a second time. The house then adjourned at twelve o'clock. [ADVERTISE MENT.I---liolloway's Pills and Ointment.— Consequences of Neglect.—ln our variable climate the larger proportion of diseases to which mankind is liable depends on tbenegleJt or inefficient treatment of coughs, colds, influenza, and rheumatism. The prudent will pay attention to the first symptoms, which are removed at once by the use of Hollo way's Pills and Ointment. In chest complaints, while taking his Pills, their effect is quickened and increased by briskly rubbing the Ointment , on the back and breast twice a day for five minutes, or longer ifconvenient. The friction causes the Ointment to penetrate the skin, whence it passes to She lungs, and purifies the whole mass of blood as it flows through those organs in its circulation. L ADV ERTISEMENT. — Fiftythousand cures without medi cine, by Du B arr y' s delicious Revalenta Arabic* Food, of indigestion (dyspepsia), flatulency, constipation, nervous, bilious, and liver complaints, debility, cough, asthma i con• sumption, &c. Cure N e . 71, of dyspepsia, from the Right Hon. the Lord Stuart de Decies,— I have derived consi derable benefit from Du Barry's Revalenta Arabica Food, and consider it due to yourselves and the public to autho rise the publication of these lines.—Stuart de Decies." Cure No. 49,832.—" Fifty years indescribable agony from dyspepsia, nervousness, asthma, cough, constipation,' flatu lency, spasms, sickness at the stomach, and vomiting, have been removed by Du Barry's excellent food.—Maria Joly, Wortham Ling, near Diss, Norfolk." Cure No. 4,208. — "Eight years dyspepsia, nervousness, debility, with cramps, spasms, nausea, for which my servant had consulted the advice of many, have been cured by Du Barry's health restoring food. I shall be happy to answer any incpirise. —Rev. John W. Flavell, Ridlington Rectory, Norfolk." In tins, at ls. 6d. ; 11b., 3s. ; 21b., 6s. 9d. ; 51b., 12 5 . ; 121 b., 265. The 101 b. and 121 b. tins carriage free, on receipt of post office order. Du Barry and Co., 77, Regent-street, London Fortnum, Mason, and Co., 182, Piccadilly; Abbis, 60, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 63, and 150, Oxford street; 330 and 451, Strand; 49 and 60, Bishopsgate• street ; 85, Tottenham-court-road. Also at Dublin. Re s wley 'and Draper ; at Edinburgh, Raimes and Co. at Liverpool, Nixon and Thew; at Manchester, Sharp and Scott; atiCork, Raimes, Blanchard, and Co. ; at South ampton. Randall and Son. ELECTION COMMITTEES. The committee appointed to try the merits of the peti Lions against the sitting numbers for the borough of Ber wick-on-Tweed were sworn at the table. CHURCH RATES. An unusually large number of petitions were presented in favour of and against the abolition of church rates. CITY OF NORWICH. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE gave notice that, on Monday next, he would move for a writ for the eleetion'of two burgesses to serve in Parliament for the city of Norwich. THE SHIP FAWN, &c. Lord A. CHURCHILL asked the Secretary to the Ad miralty whether her Majesty's ship Fawn, which had re cently sailed for Australia, had been sent there as an aug mentation to the squadron at present on that station, or for the purpose of relieving another vessel ordered home ; whether the attention of the Government had been called to the fact • that France had, within the last year, reorganised her military and naval establish•. ments at New Caledonia, and had now made it her princi pal station in those seas : and whether it is intended to place oar naval commanding officers upon a more equal footing with the French, by creating the Australian station into an admiral's command ? Lord C. PAGET said that the vessel in question was not sent out for the purpose of augmenting her Majesty's squadron, but merely to replace another war ship. With regard to Australia, it was intended to send out a commo dore, but not an admiral, to the station in question. NEWSPAPER PROPRIETORS. Sir S. NORTHCOTE asked the Chancellor of the Ex chequer whether newspaper proprietors who may have in their possession any stamped sheets on the day when the proposed new regulations for the abolition of the impressed stamp take effect, would be allowed to use them, and to re tain the privilege of sending them free by post ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that some arrangements would be made to prevent newspaper proprietors suffering loss under the alteration proposed. In consequence of the illness of Sir Rowland Hill it was im possible to carry out the alteration in question at once, but it would be shortly effected. RESTS FOR P ORTERS. Mr. SLANEY asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if provision could be made for rests for porters and others carrying heavy burdens, on or near the great lines of public thoroughfares, in plaeo and in addition to those removed. Sir G. da r EIVIS could not give any information . on the subject, for ne ith er t h e S ecretary o f S tate nor the police had any authority in the matter. LICENSING. In reply to Mr. HARDY and Sir S. N ORTHCOTB, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the second reading of the Licensing Bill would not be brought forward before next week, and to-morrow he would be able to state the day when it would be moved. The wine merchants of the country were considering the subject, as it was calculated to affect their interests, and in tended to call a general meeting of the trade. Withregard to that body, he could •not make any communication until after the meeting. CHINA. *ln reply to Mr. BAILEY, Lord J. RUSSELL said that he would make a short statement on the subject of China to-morrow. (Hear, hear.) BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL laid on the table several petitions from merchants, bankers, and others in the city of London, Nottingham, and other places in favour of his bill on this subject. He then moved for leave to bring in the bill to amend and consolidate the laws relating to bank ruptcy and insolvency in England and Wales. He said most unaffectedly that he had had considerable hesitation in bringing forward a measure, not so much from the in herent difficulties and extent of the subject, although they were sufficient to deter the most sanguine legal reformer; but it arose from a recollection that the House of Commons was now asked once again to listen to what promised to be a reform of those laws which they had from time to time been led to believe were effectually reformed by measures which had been repeatedly introduced and passed by the house o t reformed, svere with that i n t ent i on. (Hear, hear.) The evils of the bankruptcy l aws h ad been complained of from the earliest time alt ho;gh They andcomplainneod country of by in Lo E rd uro E pe l , do h n e , believed he might say, had so bad a law, or one which could be so justly complained of, as the law of bankruptcy and insolvency in this country. Various attempts to re form the law were made in 1831, 1842, and last in 1849, but he was sorry to say that the existing evils were now com plained of more loudly than at any previous period, and ho felt bound to admit that the present evils were greater than the former. He would address himself to the subject as he found it, encumbered with the relics of the various altera tions of the law which he was not at liberty to sweep away, but he must adapt a new building out of the old materials. In principle nothing could be more simple than the law of bankruptcy, wlEch was nothing in the world ,more than taking the whole of the debtor's property in one universal execution, or surrender, for the benefit of the creditors, and all that was required was a tribunal simply for the purpose of ascertaining the rights of those interested in the distri bution, and the construction of some simple machinery for the purpose of realising the property, and to divide it among the parties entitled. In theory it would be easy to construct a tribunal which should devote itself to the task of realis ing the property of insolvents and bankrupts, and one might imagine that the business might be done at a reason able cost, In consequence of the alterations which had been B I I T H S. CAREW.—On the 12th inst., at Bariand, Radnorshire, the wife of George H. W. Carew, Esq., of Crowcombe Court, Somersetshire, of a s on and heir. FIENNES.—On the 14th inst., at Broughton Castle, Ban bury, the Lady Augusta Fiennes, of a daughter. MARRIAGES. HARDING - 110USE.—On the Bth inst., at St. Paul's, Knightsbridge, Mr. W. Harding, late Station-master , Henley-on-Thames, to Miss Sarah Frances House, of Grays, Oxon. DEATHS. CARNEGIE.—On the 13th fast., at Kinblethmont Housed near Arbroath, W. F. L. C arneg i e , E sq ., o f S pyn i e sad Boysack. GRAY.—On the 13th inst., at Addison-terrace, NottinV hill, John Gray, Esq., of Newport House, Lincoln) aged 61. STRONG.—On the 14th inst., at Bath, the Rev. T. Strong; M.A., aged 90. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG' of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the countY Middle:an., Friday, March 16, 1860. A T I Resol Govern, Rank o i this cor Order Daily jd Eco This COURT ] !iamb, port of 1 the year , -_____ ME A.seuri itamedii agre. E r Credit g- Three-fi Polici es 2fo char ?r, We'll/1111U aPprc dote, in WE eharo-e RUE an, fc for L lloor% Card p lkote pan, fo atam wpst ri rarde 13 UR: The Pr. of the tra, to their e tiat Publ Plate VITA I S PERI n Ar IStASE SYSTEM. af .prod it.ENG7. fans and I Wily these t hey can 1 together faction. BY A P AledteftlAc Street, Lon poster-row CUR A. MBDIC Jt!st Pabll in a seal - sent post MANI MA Perfect Re 1 5, Alberni INTRO' Structure a CRAPT] Early "Via CHATT. of liarriai Follies oil elliPT: and Moral, over a pert _MUTT] Uonorrhesa fliTifo w oi eases, to wl Lotion. • "Cs should b ti et 234 March, " mil /ittle The work Which prod old age.,,_ At home cundays 1 ~~ _`~