The Sun. — London, England, 1852-12-15 00:00:00

30 - 29i - 1 13° 30 "o 29 .09 111 53 " - 1f 41 119 1 33 49 33.2 5 561 5l 2 8 27 1. 4 J 14 2 8] 251 0 19i -- 2 2 5 23 -- 3 3 -i ••,, 1 6 7i _ 101 65 64 _ 66 .. -- i 2 -0 --IJ I ;9 - 1° .., ' fa i ' .. i 3) di 06 Prices erdal• - -xED laolls. Closing Pric es yesterday - 3- . 1 2 P 1 ma: _ 10 P 'i; _3 P 2 . P - 1 1' - if 41 _ _ tj _ 10 P - 3iP . 7i - 341 150 67 38 32 5P P 22 12 111 Zn tPI I p i i P 5 P / 4 31 1 P P 3 o a 4 " 3 0 3p43 Id 41 gar A P )ar lip d P P 0 ; 1 P P 13 ?3 'O - I si Si ,_Tv...."..-I,l_--- ) 17., fe l L oto masko - a d e steady . r a o r forT ilb rattle l g co n Z 10 1° gt kin be o 0 " 11 04) Si , 1,12.. 131 ico r s, th e PI g ito ,ur W 35 90 10. Per f' Poo oats. 74 0 /0 700 ess a c/1 9 e' u Place. t ti° ll o, c rao -$ ; aSe• ss io J o ,tt, c J o°,l rd lic"' f3 , d Perlo l yta l' 101'14 ~a e o Th , - - kel,t. ed aecharg ct)I 0 lli r a t 60 co e a - ci 1104 ,1, acheo IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ROUSE OF LORDS—{YESTERDAY.) • Their Lordships met at 5 o'clock. ( At. r h e motion of the Duke of NORTHUMBER •Lord Lyndhurst presided in the absence of the Lord Chancellor. the Duke of NEWCASTLE presented petitions from l Mechanics' Institutions of Nottingham and Mans aeld, praying to be furnished with copies of the reports and other papers laid before the house. t . The E ar l o f S t. GER MANS presen t e d a s imilar peti tion from Saltash, and the Duke of Northumberland ckle from Derby. INCOME TAX ON IRISH PROPERTY. ; The Earl of WICKLOW moved for returns respect 'ng the p ayment of i ncome tax i n t hi s coun try in respect °.I property in Ireland. The noble lord said that . 2 8 object in moving for these returns was to re re the erroneous i mpress i on th a t p r operty in Ireland Treiguot pay i ncome t ax . Th e re al fact was, that though Ireland Was nominally exempt from the income tax, yet t h er sons residing in this country had to pay the tax for ?ir property in Ireland ; and Irish property, therefore , 144 no inconsiderable amount, though, owing to the Tanner of making up the accounts and returns, the fact ne not actually apperr on them. It was much more t es sary that such should no longer be the case, now h at there was every probability that the income was abo ut to be proposed as a permanent source of revenue. pia lordship expressed himself as favourable to the ex nslon of the tax to Ireland, provided that such a course We re Coupled with a removal of other inequalities exist mg with regard to the financial burdens of the country. The Earl of DERBY said—l can have no objection ° l l the part of the Government to lay upon the table the papers moved f or by the noble lord, if they will afford bu n, which I doubt, the information he requires. I re !et that my noble friend did not favour me with his pre eise ' v iews before this, in order that by inquiries I might hav e ascertained whether the return he desires contains t he desired information. My own impression is, that the ille°ll le tax p a p ers re main on the same footing as they , on former returns, and consequently he will not find a TY distinction drawn between Irish property and colo 11411' I only speak from a vague recollection of having seen the income tax returns when presented for my sig ilatare- I was obliged to return nil for my property in I 41 4", not having received a single shilling from my esta tes in that country for the last four or five years ; but, on the contrary, I found the balance considerably t he other way, being obliged to remit considerable sums st ead of receiving them. My lords, I hope you will ih -le nse me from entering into the policy of changing the L e° nle tax, or of extending it to Ireland. There will be abu ndant time for the discussion of the details arising °tit of the income tax when that measure will be sub mitted in the shape of a bill from the other house. The noble lord has correctly stated the principle he believes it e o Government to be guided by in the various measures tight forward by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He °as to correctly stated that it having been deemed expedient . . dinumsh to a considerable extent the amount and pressure of indirect taxation, it follows as a necessary th n sequence that a considerably increased proportion of f lll e revenue of this country should in future be drawn ni the sources of direct taxation. (Hear, hear.) The S i ?ble l or d has, moreover, correctly interpreted the wish ti t he Gov ernmen t, that as far as jDossible just exemp -4°llB should t a k e place, avoiding those only which are °' f ounded in justice, and the excuse for which can only there the impossibility o of feir collection. Thus are a numerous portion needy proprietors who Ze not exempted so much upon the ground of strict jus ele' as upo'n the impolicy, as well as impossibility, of Fuecting the tax. Subject to the exemptions I have re trted to, I quite agree that in direct taxation the exemp °llB should be as few as possible, and that the area of taxation should be as wide, as general, and as equitable 11 7 Possibl e . (H ear , h ear .) O n th e p ar t o f th e Govern ent *we have thought it was inexpedient, and, looking k is Te distressed position of the landed property in Ire t7u, that it was inconvenient and impolitic, to subject t country to the burden of a tax from which she has one heretofore exempt. The question, after all, is only Il se of time. If the income tax is to become a perma- C 4 source of revenue, it cannot be expedient that so e a portion of the empire as Ireland should be L a t eulpted from it for more than a temporary. period. e ar, hear.) There was a claim made upon the part of d e landed. property in Ireland for exemption, and it was th at th a t s h e s h ou ld b e exempted so far as relates to t description of property which has suffered so severely the circumstances of late years. (Hear, hear.) The to q u estion, namely, the extension of direct taxation, subject this few exemptions as possible, is the subject which at Zs moment e ng ages the attention of the House of Com- O s * It is a question, in the main, which I hope will solved in the course of the present week. It is a question of deep and vital importance to the permanent toterests of the empire. Ido not now speak of any per eal consequences from that solution attaching to the ituivernment, although I am quite sure that your lord -4,,,Ps will think that the decision of the House of Cora -4,,",„n5) 'whatever it may be, cannot be without important immediate consequences upon the position of the ti: v ernment itself. But lam speaking upon the ques- II with relation to the permanent interests of the gantry, with regard to which I hold the decision of the ° use of C ommons t o b e o f th e mos t v it a l i m p or t ance . "ZY lords, I earnestly hope, as soon as practical, Parlia- Z i ellt will re li eve th e coun t ry from the anxiety under Ircli she now labours, while awaiting the decision of the ° llse of Commons on this question. For, undoubtedly, not desiring to hurry or accelerate the proceedings of the C'ther Rouse of Parliament, so as to preclude them from 4 e ci t tl „e or full consideration , not of each petty and minute au, but of the great and broad principle involved in tie present deliberations, I think it is of great import ee to the country that she should not be kelft long in a lal , s Pense a s t o th e course w hi c h P ar li amen t w ill adopt ; ,LLI I with regard to the hands by which that system ill be likely to be carried out. (Hear, hear.) As far , n t he House of Lords is concerned, I regret that, in 4-a,sequence of the discussions which have taken place, l e ; tile delay which has occurred— but I do not cora ahrl that--that it is necessary for your lord to PS to meet, day after day, with little or no business ta t transact, and, after sitting for a few minutes, fi t. e 4 a , to adjourn. lam anxious, as soon as the decision aS ":;_e Rouse of Commons shall be pronounced—as soon b °\ ' n ese resolutions are affirmed, if affirmed they are to atto release you from what I cannot but consider an ga ll eeessary attendance. (Hear, hear.) But while the ab,, esti nu, and the questions contingent on it, are still in la,nce and are still undecided, I should not, I think, e n e „, l ° lng my duty to deprive the Crown for any length- Cm . Period of the possible attendance of this house and b e e other house of Parliament at a time when it might ai n :i le eessary to have recourse to their immediate advice tp, a ssistance. (Hear.) - ,-lute returns wer e then ordered. MONTEAGLE said that they were not now N i , e ' e r r ing for the first time into a course of peril, but they t ut .' Persevering in a course of great danger by substi- Iti g the principle of direct for that of indirect taxation. noble friend the Postmaster-General would remem pei t hat this was not the first time that he had raised his th e rhi protest to this principle. He did not say that et sc ! Should be no direct taxation, but where a revenue 8 A 4,000,000/. had to be raised annually, and where MO AA sh,„ ,ouo/. of that was not subject to reduction in any thj e, ,he did consider that indirect taxation would be stn,„. °ll tY means to accomplish it without ruinously pres ent'', u pon the industrious classes. He was not an advo tut against direct taxation, but against the entire sub pe;titlon of direct for indirect taxation. When the pro lt bland income tax was proposed iu 1842, he supported attZuse he thought it was justified by the circumstances tie ß . :' n g upon its proposal. By a combination of par the In the other house last session, it was agreed that th e income tax should be voted for one year only, with vi , h o i'tinet pledge from the Government that the ce ra e subject should be fully gone into by a select lamlllittee. Was the direct tax, now proposed to be to r : Perpetual , called for ? The Government was about 1 1 - P e al the, malt tax by one-half. At whose bidding ? or w a d not been demanded by the petitions of the people, th e th earnestness on the part of any one. It, as well aq su bstitutio n o f a direct tax, were the mere gratuitous e apa r the Government. If ever there was a question the l e of being reasoned to demonstration it was that Inilir n te sent Government were making a sacrifice of two vronf d an and a half of revenue under circumstances which Pos al „ Yield them no corresponding return. The pro- C ontained in the budget would neither benefit the Po k e nor the lower classes. The Government pro but n n °t only to substitute direct for indirect taxation, natin.: substitute for a direct tax, temporary in its °Pp o ,,L.' one that would be permanent. If the noble earl Rrent:" e had a personal enemy, he could not wish him a sur e evil than the carrying of the whole of his mea payi a nd being re p resen t e d in consequence in every tax gouszleguse as the author of the hew property and wast e ta x, and as a member of a Government which had i.twaili2,soo,oool. in an act of kindness to a class which th not benefit. The noble lord concluded by mo . v the e following returns :—Detailed accounts showing St ata g t p ° B B B and net amounts received of the revenue ofExcise, e°ll and Taxes during each of the -last ten-years_;_ac ten , showing the -amount applied during each of the last sho wi jea rs in reduction of the National Debt ; account the g t ile amount advanced and repaid during each forksl . ast ten years by the Commissioners for Public alade, account showing the state of the national debt fr . % t _ ___up to January, 1852, distinguishing permanent tie s 'mlinable debt ; account showing the several du last to t axes imposed and repealed during each of the of eae , s Years, showin g th e actua l or est i mate d amoun t Wh etl nd distingui s hi ng t h e durat i on of such taxes, eatlll7., a Ltemporary or permanent. e 4 s arl of DERBY considered it a very inconveni- Ril najeeetelfi°l Of e4. th oi e linlizai. tillthieeouaoszuftrietohsti mere motion for papers, to which no opportunitybeoffe enter r n a t n e y r i n n o t b o le a l d o i r a d eu ' to t.° :t o la h r e e r s eat not evenlt wouldyet have the he e n c o ths n s a s ndanevuraaeoihfl res'e the plan if the noble lord had proceeded by to have condemned, by way of anticipation, posed Whole course of policy which the Government pro '-eed to/ irti ons Pursu e , or had waited till the substantive pro , i t ne before their lordships for consideration. F;NhiLl'red, herefore,. that his noble friend would not t he p ren _ r rn as treating him with any disrespect if, in Uoz e , e at state of the house (there were about half a .!:at e d rers s present) he declined to enter into an elabo ortTl slon of the consequences of the financial po aliestue Government. He declined to enter into the It t a i,,,,,Gt e the extension of direct taxation, or how far the e6uuri‘!) considered desirable to rest the revenue of c illesti oa 7Y upon direct or indirect taxation. The whole had been admitted to be merely one of degree, . ~. THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 15, 1852. and it was not denied that direct taxation must be had recourse to, in order to make up the deficiency of indi rect taxation ; and the only question, therefore, was the extent to which direct taxation should be increased, and the proportion which it should bear to the whole taxation of the country. There were but two modes in which the large amount of the revenue of the country could be raised—by direct taxation affect ing the largest possible portion of the community, and affecting them as equitably as possible, and by raising a large amount of taxation upon those articles which en tered into the most general consumption of the people. The principle of free trade would not admit the Govern ment to levy a large amount of the revenue upon those articles which entered into the general consumption of the people. Parliament had taken as its proposition, that the food of the people and the necessaries of life should be as cheap as possible. Having laid down this proposition, the alternative was clear, viz., that they must raise the required amount of revenue by the other system of taxation to which he had referred. Upon these principles he would defy any of the noble lords to vindicate the imposition of duties' upon malt and tea amounting in the one case to 100, and in the other to 200 per cent. Her Majesty's Government were then driven to this course by the adoption of the principles forced upon them by the other side. The Government, acting frankly and honestly upon those princinlc - 3, had felt it to be their duty to take the course of reducing the amount of duty charged upon necessary articles of consumption in this kingdom. With respect to the effects of the repeal of the malt tax, be recollected that very high authorities had declared on past occasions, that after the final repeal of the corn laws it would be impossible, if not unjust, to maintain the existing amount of duty upon malt. Sir J. Graham also intimated very strongly his opinion that the repeal of the corn laws and of the malt duty must be the necessary concomitants of each other, and that they could not, in justice, repeal the one without repealing the other. To repeal the whole of the malt duty was an act which, with due regard to the finances of the country, her Ma jesty's Government would not think wise or just. Act ing, however, in conformity with the views which the country has sanctioned, the Government had considered ,that a partial repeal of the duty on malt would be just and expedient, or, if the phrase was better liked, "wise, just, and beneficial." It had also been objected that the Government were continuing in its most odious shape the income tax. So far from that being the case, if there was one measure more clearly laid down than ano ther by the committee appointed last year in respect of the income tax, it was that there was a plain and palpable distinction to be drawn between temporary and precarious incomes. To the middle classes also material relief was offered by the reduction of the tax upon incomes of a temporary character When the late Government were in office, it became a question whether the window tax should be repealed, and it was deeided that it should, upon the ground' of its injurious effect on the sanitary condition of the country. At that time the late Chancellor of the Exchequer was desirous of imposing a house tax which would have been equivalent in its amount to the window tax, and exceeding by 200,000/. the amount of the tax which it was now intended to propose. But with regard to the house tax, he was at a loss to understand on what principle of justice it was possible to stop short at houses of the value of 201. a year, thereby leaving the vast majority of the houses of this country wholly free from taxation, the occupiers of a great number of which were at present exercising the privilege of the elective fran chise, which, according to the principles of the Liberal party, ought to be coterminous and coexistent with the payment of taxes. But there was one other point in his noble friend's speech to which he must refer—namely, with regard to the maintenance. of the public credit. If he (the Earl of Derby) thought there was any one thing in that measure calculated to shake the public credit or to interfere in any degree with the good faith of the country, their lordships might depend upon it that his noble friend would not more warmly oppose that measure than he would. But he saw no symptoms of any such apprehensions for the good faith of the country. At no period of time were the funds of this country in a higher, more prosperous, or a more steady condition than they were at the present moment, and his noble friend was compelled to have recourse to some such excuse for the state of the funds as that if they were not high now they ought not to have been high. (Hear, hear.) Now, really his noble friend need not have had recourse to the old stale joke of Sidney Smith's, " that the three per cents. were the greatest fools in the world," for, without stopping to discuss the question whether the funds were or were not a tolerable barometer of the public confidence or the want of confidence, he might remind his noble friend that he had not heard, in any expression of the public feeling on the part of the monied and commercial interests of this country, the slightest apprehension ex pressed with regard to the consequences of the measures proposed by her Majesty's Government, nor did he find any ground for such apprehension in the state of the funds themselves. He should like to know why the funds did not fall under the apprehension that the Government would introduce those hyper-dangerous measures referred to by his noble friend ? He wanted to know why it was that under the pressure of those apprehensions the funds did not go down ; why it was that the funds, which when the present Government came into office were about 96, had been steadily and gradually creeping up from a few months after that event, and were now for the first time up to 100 ; and why it was that from that time to this, notwithstanding all the apprehensions of his noble friend, they had never been below 100 ? (Hear, hear.) He thought that was a tolerably fair indication, making full allowance for all other circumstances tending to keep down the interest of money, of the public confidence ; and he ventured still to think it was clear, from the state of the funds, and from the absence of anything like an expression f hostile feeling on the part of the great com mercial classes, that there was no apprehension of any failure of the public credit in consequence of the measures of the present Government. He ventured also to ex press his belief that the funds would be much more likely to fall from an apprehension of the consequences arising from an unsettlement of the present state of things, and from the dissolution of the present Government, than they would be by carrying—what he hoped to carry— into effect, not without modifications in the details, but in substance and as a whole, those propositions which had been submitted to the other house of Parliament by his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and which he trusted would in due time come under the consideration of their lordships'.house. Lord MONTEAGLE made some explanations across the table. The Earl of DERBY said he supposed his noble friend's motion was not to mind the justice of a tax, but to take it where he could get it. He must protest against such a mode of levying taxes. He would also state that he never said that free-trade necessarily contemplated the absence of all imposts. What he did say was that free trade contemplated the absence of disproportionate im port duties, more especially on articles of general con sumption. He knew not what his noble friend's views might be of proportion or disproportion, but he (the Earl of Derby) could not help thinking that 2001. or 2501. per cent. upon articles of general consumption, fell within the definition of disproportion. (Hear, hear.) Nor did he think that the class on whom, partially at all events, one of those heavy taxes fell—the producer, sharing to a great extent with the consumer—had a right to be termed a privileged class. Lord LYNDHURST (addressing Lord Monteagle from the woolsack)—Does the noble lord really wish these returns (A laugh.) Lord MONTEAGLE.repIied in the affirmative, and The motion was agreed to. PUBLIC WORKS. Earl POWIS moved for a retura of the amount lent in each year since 1830 by the Pablic Works Loan Com missioners to England, Scotland, and Ireland ; return of the several loans now outstanding in each kingdom : 1. On security of county rates ; 2. Railroads ; 3. Roads, canals, docks, and harbours ; 4. Other works and build ings ; and of the years in which each of such loans will be paid off, together with the rate of interest now paid on each loan. The noble earl also asked whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Ministers to provide for the ratepayers in counties, any facilities for borrowing money for bridges, shire halls, gaols, asylums, &c., cor responding to those which they have hitherto enjoyed under the Public Works Loan Commission ? The Earl of DERBY said there could be no objection to grant the rcturns moved for by his noble friend ; but he found since: his noble friend had given notice of his motion, that 'there was a return made to the House of Commons on. the Bth of July, 1851, which would give up to that period the whole information which his noble friend asked, for ; and probably there might be some little variation of the terms of his noble friend's motion, so as to include the return made to the House of Com mons—a course which would probably suit the public convenience, and at the same time effect the object which his noble friend had in view. With regard to the ques tion which this noble friend had put, he imagined that his noble friend: adverted to the declared intention, on the is sue of of the 'Gove rnmen t t o sus p en d the continuous of a sum amounting to 400, 000/. or 500, 000/. a year, under the management of the Exchequer Loan Commissioners. It was the opinion of the Government that in the present state of the Money Market it was not desirable that the sys tem shouldbe continued which was introduced under very different circumstances, and at a very different time, for the purpose of meeting a great public distress, and of facili tating the 1 ending of capital by private persons. With respect to the reluctance of private money lenders to advance money which would be paid by temporary in stalments, and the consequent inconvenience not only with regard to public works, but various others, such as land drainage, the Government had reason to believe that the Exchequer Loan Commissioners had gone to as great an ex teut as they thought it prudent to do in lend ing money on that particular security ; but the Govern ment had voider their consideration a mode by which they might to a certain extent intervene between the borrower and the lender, without introducing any actual advance from the public Treasury, for the purpose of relieving the difficul ties now experienced by those parties. The motion, as amended on the suggestion of the Earl of DERBY, was then agreed to ; and the house ad journed. HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. PETITIONS. Mr. SCLIOLEFIELD presented a petition praying the house to interfere in the case of Edward Murray. Several petitions were presented praying the house to grant papert3 to literary and scientific institutions. Several petitions were presented praying for the re peal of the -taxes on knowledge. Mr. DIVETT presented a petition from Exeter, against the 'Budget. Mr. LOCKE presented a similar petition from llo niton. Mr. HE TWOOMpresented a petition from the gra duates of the University of London, praying the house to confer ( )ne of the vacant seats on that institution. Sir J. Z T, SHELLEY presented a petition from the teetollers of Westminster, against the reduction of the malt and hop taxes, and also against the proposed in crease of the house tax. Several other hon. members presented petitions with a similar prayer. Mr. PIGOTT presented a petition from the beard of guardians of Reading union, against the recent poor-law order. Mr. W. WILLIAMS presented similar petitions from St. Mary, Newington, and the Borough of Lambeth. Mr. WILKINSON presented a similar petition from the parish of St. Mary, Lambeth. Mr. ADDERLEY presented a petition from Canter bury in New Zealand against the measure for charging the debt of the New Zealand Company upon that Colony. Mr. OAKESi presented a petition from Bury St. Edmunds against the Budget. Mr. SCHOLEFIELD presented a petition from Bir mingham praying for the repeal of the Newspaper Stamp duty. Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Stoke-upon- Trent praying for the repeal of the Newspaper Stamp duty. Sir J. GRAHAM presented a petition from Carlisle against the Budget. HEALTH OF TOWNS. • Sir J. GRAHAM said as the Health of Towns' Bill now stood the local authorities had no power to prevent interments in towns, or to provided cemeteries outside the town. Now, he wished to know if it was the intention of Government to bring in any bill after the recess that would remedy the defect. Lord JOAN MANNERS said the attention of the Government had been called to this subject, and a bill would be brought forward after the recess. THE CAFFRE WAR. Mr. ADDERLEY wished to ask the right hon. gentleman, the Secretary for the Colonies, if he were pre pared to put the house in possession of any information he might have received by the Queen of the South, on the subject of the Caffre war. He wished to know if it was true that the war was extending itself in the north east of the colony, and whether the right hon. gentle man had received any memorial from the colonists, com plaining of the postponement of their constitution. Sir J. PAKINGTON had hardly had time to look carefully through the disptches, but he had read enough to satisfy him that the Caffre war could not be con sidered as terminated yet, though from one despatch of Gen. Cathcart he collected that the Waterkloof had been entirely cleared of Caffres, and there was no prospect of its again falling into the possession of the enemy. Hos tilities are even still going on in the Amatolas, but the enemy there was confined to a very small number, while with regard to the other part of the question he had no reason to suppose that the war was extending itself in a north-easterly direction. With regard to the latter question of the hon. gentleman, he begged to state that he had received a resolution, but no memorial on the sub ject. A deputation, however, from the lieutenant governor led him to believe that no excitement pre vailed in the Cape, as to the intentions of the govern ment, and it was anticipated that there would be no difficulty in carrying them out. In reply to a question from Mr. VERNON SMITH, Sir J. PAKINGTON said, the papers which had been moved for on the subject of the constitution were in preparation and would be laid upon the table forthwith. Sir DE LACY EVANS wished to know if the boundary question was yet settled, and if it was, whether government would have any objection to lay the corres pondence upon the table. ' Sir J. PAKINGTON said that was still an open question, and he was corresponding with General Cath cart upon the subject. Mr. HINDLEY wished to ask the Secretary for the Colonies, if the statements which had appeared in the Cape newspapers are true, viz., that Kafirs taken in the clearing of the Waterkloof were immediately hung ; and if so, whether this was justified by the laws of war. Sir J. PAKINGTON said he had no official knowledge of the subject, but with regard to the latter part of the hon. member's question, he apprehended that when an enemy showed no quarter it was considered justifiable to treat him in a similar spirit. On the other hand, however, if the rules of war were followed out on both sides, it would be against military practice to exe cute a prisoner, but it should be recollected that in this case a considerable portion of the Kafirs and Hot tentots, who were contending against British arms, were British subjects, and, therefore, were liable to be dealt with as rebels against the Crown of England. He had heard from a private source, that in clearing the Waterkloof lit had been found necessary to hang two persons, but nothing in the shape of un necessary cruelty had been resorted to. (Hear.) Mr. HINDLEY wished to know if the right hon. baronet would make inquiry into the subject. Sir J. PAKINGTON had no objection to make in quiry, but he might state that he had received one of the general orders of the Governor, in which the officers and men were enjoined to allow no unnecessary loss of life. Looking at the nature of the enemy which General Cathcart had to contend against, it was evident that they must have confidence in his honour and integrity, or the war would never be brought to a close. (Hear, hear.) was obliged to take an opposite view to that of the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of Oxford, in whose general policy he had hitherto concurred. (Hear.) He confessed that he came to this conclusion in a spirit altogether different to that exhibited by those, around him. He had been returned to assist in maintaining that fiscal policy which had so improved the condition of all classes, and it was with no small degree of vexation that he found the Go vernment had made no attempt in their budget to reverse their policy, which they seemed to him to have fairly and loyally accepted. (Hear, hear.) There was nothing, in his opinion, so injurious as a Government on suffe rance. Of that they had experience during the last three years of Lord J. Russell's administration, but he could not believe that the present Gevernment were actuated by any great desire to continue in office. ("Hear," from the Ministerial benches.) As a memberof a shipping com munity, he tendered his thanks to them for the care and attention which they had bestowed to the wants of the shipping interest. The hon. member for Halifax (Sir C. Wood) had said that the measures in- irocluced by the Government to relieve the shipping trade, were prepared by their predecessors. Now, if that were so, they were greatly to blame for not having the courage to bring them forward ; but as the present Government had taken them in hand, they were en titled to the thanks of all the community for the credit belonging to the adoption of such a course. As to the income tax he thought that its principle ought to be at once reconsidered, and that the proposed alterations of the Ministry were in the right direction. (Hear.) He considered that it was unjust to levy the same rate of tax upon precarious as on permanent incomes. (Hear.) The noble lord then referred to the various propositions in the budget, and said, as he be lieved it would be generally advantageous to the com munity, he would, without pledging himself to all the details, give the resolution before the committee his support, thereby affirming that direct taxation ought to be adjusted, and the system of reducing duties on articles of consumption continued. (Cheers.) Mr. OSBORNE said, that so far from having any wish to review the financial scheme of the Government in a captious spirit, he was willing to give credit to the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer for two main points in his budget. He felt that he was entitled to credit, in the first place, for the relief he had. afforded to the shipping interest. He lamented, indeed, that he had not gone further, and taken the duty off timber ; but at any rate he thanked the right hon. gen tleman for' what he had done in that line. (Hear, hear.) He thought likewise that the right hon. gentle- man had taken a sagacious and statesmanlike view with respect to the tea duties. He was not disposed to quar rel and split straws with him because the reduction was to be effected in six years, instead of a less time, as pro posed by the hon. member for Glasgow, but he would at once say that he thought the right hon. gentleman deserved credit for these two improvements. (Hear, hear.) He was even disposed to go further, and say that the statement of the right hon. gentleman in bring ing forward the budget was as clear a statement as had ever been put before the house. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Osborne) knew no man in that house who combined the two antoganistic qualities of lucidity and obscurity so much as the right hon. gentleman—(laughter)—but he was bound to admit that in placing his 'financial state ment before the house, he had done so without any re serve or mystification, and that there could be no mistake on either side of the house as to what they were about to vote for in the present budget. Having made these admissions, he trusted he might be allowed to look at the budget as a whole. And if it was true, as the hon. member for Taunton (Mr. Mills) stated on the previous night, that there was universal disappointment through out the country at the contents of the budget, he would take the liberty of asking what that disappointment had arisen from ? Was it not from the magnificent promises which were held out by the Chancellor of the Exchequer? (Hear.) The promises of the right hon. gentleman were so magnificent that the people in the country actually thought he had obtained possession by some means of the philosopher's stone—that a fiscal millennium was about to ensue—that the time was coming when tax gathering would cease, and when the consolidated fund would be converted into a refuge for distressed agricul turists. (Laughter.) What was it that "loomed in the distance "in the month of June last ? If he understood the promise which was held out by the right hon. gen tleman in his address to his constituents, as advertised in The Times of June last, and again in his speech at Aylesbury, as reported in the same paper, it was just this,—that in his forthcoming budget he undertook no less a task than the total revision of the taxation of the country not a mere shifting of taxation from the shoulders of one class to another. (Hear, hear.) In his address to his constituents, dated June 2, 1852 and he begged the house to remark that that was not a common address, merely soliciting the votes of the electors, but an address in which he propounded a policy conveyed in beautiful language and most indistinct terms —(laughter)—in that address the riglA hon. gentleman said : " One of the soundest means, among others (to diminish the cost of production), is a revision of our taxation : juster notions of taxation are more prevalent than here tofore ; the possibility of greatly relieving the burdens of the community by both adjustment and reduction seems to loom in the future." Well, what had happened in December ? Had they had a revision of taxation ? (Hear, hear.) No. All that they had was an'. ingenious attempt to tranfer a large portion of 2,500,0001., which was now raised through the means of an Excise duty, to the shoulders of a class who were not supposed to be very favourable to the Government. (Hear.) And he begged the house to remark, that while the remission of taxation was left to "loom in the future," the increase was to be sudden and immediate. (Hear, hear.) He denied that the Budget would at all conduce to reconcile conflicting interests, as the noble lord the member for King's Lynn seemed to suppose. The noble lord, he observed, had succeeded in catching the jargon of the other side of the house. It was merely " the area of taxation that was to be in creased" by the present Budget, they were told—which, to ' 8 ) mind, looked very much as if a c his (Mr. Obo portiosnorfntehe Budget were about to be with drawn. (Hear, hear.) The Budget seemed to him as if it had been conceived in a hostile, if not a revengeful spirit, against the middle classes. (Cries of "Oh !" from tir say ste in rialists .) What did the Chancellor of the E t x h c e Exchequer that singularly lucid and clear speech of his ? He said, th a t " t h e t en - poun d ers were revelling in the relief which th ey enjoyed from the re peal of the corn laws." These words conveyed some thing very distinct to his mind, and convinced him that the right hon. gentleman had framed his Budget, not as a healing measure to reconcile conflicting interests, but as a scourge "to the backs of th ose w h o were "revelling in the relief which they enjoyed from the repeal of the corn laws." With respect to the question of direct or in direct taxation, he begged to say that he had never been one of those who had theorised much on that subject. In his opinion direct taxation might do very well in a new country, but in an old country like ours, with a large debt, and a purely artificial system, he thought we ought to proceed with great caution in laying on direct taxation. He now came to the speech of the Home Secretary last night, and he must say that he thought the criticism of that right hon. gentleman upon the observations of the right hon. baronet the member for Halifax (Sir C. Wood) was most extraordinary. The right hon. gentleman (Mr. Walpole), alluding to the house tax, said that the right hon. member for Halifax had imposed a most unjust tax upon houses ' • and what was the remedy proposed b y t h e H ome Secretary ? Why, he thought the tax so unjust that he proposed to double it at once. (Laughter, and cheers from the Op ' position.) [Mr. Walpole was understood to say that he had described the tax as unequal.] Well (continued Mr. Osborne), but how did the right hon. gentleman render it more equal ? The Government adopted an arbitrary line, and proposed to extend the tax to 101. houses, but, if the tax was just in principle, why did they stop at 101. houses ? (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Osborne) was not one of those who were particularly enamoured of the house tax. He doubted the justice o that tax, and he thought the honourable member for the West Riding had succeeded last night in making out a very strong case against it ; but he asked the Home Secretary, if the house tax was unequal under the dynasty of the right hon. member for Halifax, how he (Mr. Walpole) made it more equal by extending it to 10/. houses ? Why wer e such large numbers of cottages in the country to be excluded from the opera tion of this extended tax, which would tell almost exclusively upon the towns ? He contended that if this tax was just in principle the Government were bound to apply it equally to town and country. (Cheers.) What was sauce for your town goose was equally sauce for your rural gander—(loud laughter)—and it was not by cutting the feathers of the one bird that any com pensation could be given to the other. (A laugh.) Let the house mark that " compensation" was the term, and he was prepared to argue that this plan of laying on the house tax was nothing more than compensation to the agricultural inter • est, (Some cries of " No," and "Oh!" from the Ministerial benches , met by cheers from the Opposition.) Now he would, with their permission, in form them what were the opinions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, expressed in the months of March and July last, as to his plans for the compensation of the landed interest. It was a very curious thing that the right hon. gentlemen had fixed upon the exact amount of compensation which he was ready to give. The right hon. gentleman said : " It is quite clear, by your system of local taxation, la- d is subject to 2,500,000 1 . more than any other property in the Country." Now this was the exact half of the malt tax which the right hon. gentleman proposed to take off. " If Parliament will not, in the manner I recommend"— namely, by countervailing duties, which were now given up, "do justice to the agricultural interest, they must submit to a revision of the taxation of the country, and they may depend upon it the redress which their own sense of justice will ultimately prompt them to accord to the agricultural interest will be obtained in a manner fax more coarsely, and by moans much more expensive." . . "The policy of her Majesty's Ministers is to do justice to the land ; to bring in measures of redress for all those great producing interests which are now suffering injusticf, ; if the country will not have recourse to these remedial measures we bow to their decision ; but, though we may not be Ministers, still, as members of Parliament, we will labour for other measures of redress ; we will, though in opposition"—in which situation he (Mr. Osborne) hoped soon to see them—(laughter)—" exert ourselves to obtain those countervailing and compensatory regulations which justice demands." That was in the month of March ; but, at a dinner of his constituents at Newport Pagne], on the 14th of July the right hon. gentleman said : " It is in reviewing the system of taxation, in the re-ad justment of that system, that the cultivators of the soil find that compensation which they have a right to expect from the abrogation of the corn laws." - - - That was the opinion expressed in the month of July last by the right hon. gentleman at the head of the go vernment. (Some laughter from the Ministerial side.) Well, the right hon. gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was at the head of the Government. (" Hear," and some cheering from the Opposition.) There was no doubt of that, and he was glad to see the right hon. gentleman, on account of his abilities and talents, in such a position- (Hear, hear.) But what did a right hon. gentlemen say who was at the tail of the Government? (Laughter.) He would inform the house what were the opinions of that right hon. gentleman, which were so far valuable, because he was almost the last of the Romans—the last of the Protectionists. (" Hear," and a laugh.) Whenever the right hon. gentleman wrote a letter he (➢Sr. Osborne) was always delighted to see it. (Laughter.) It was true that a great many letters had been forged in the right hon. gen tleman's name, but in order to secure correct copies, he (Mr. Osborne) did—what he recommended every hon. _ _ Member to do—he took in the Stamford Meivury— (great laughter)—a most excellent paper—(a laugh)— and, having the advantage of being the right hon. gen tleman's organ, no fictitious letters were printed in it. (Renewed laughter.). Well, _what did the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster say ? He (Mr. Osborne) was going to read them. Mr. Christopher's very last—(laughter)—his very last letter to the electors of Lindsey, is which he expressed his opinions upon the present budget. The right hon. gentleman, writing to the poor deluded Lincolnshire farmers, said,— " The Government have presented a financial scheme, which, although there is only a surplus revenue of 1,300,0001., will relieve the agricultural interest of a vexa tious impost to the amount of 2,500,0001." (Laughter.) Well, the right hon. gentleman did not seem particular to a shade or two. (A laugh.) He did not tell those to whom he wrote that in his way of stat- ing the question he was leaving a deficit of 1,200,000/., but he endeavoured to persuade the electors of Lincoln shire that the financial scheme of the Government would, from a surplus revenue of 1,300,000/.,—the Go vernment, he (Mr. Osborne) supposed, being so gene rous as to make up the difference from their own sala ries —(a laugh)—enable them to remove a vexatious im post of 2,500,0001. Now, he (Mr. Osborne) asked any gentleman whether, after hearing these statements of the head and tail of the Government—(laughter)—com . bining all shades of opinion, they could doubt that the house tax was laid upon the middle classes as what the right hon. gentleman called a compensatory regulation for the suffering agricultural interest ? (Some cries of " Oh !" from the Ministerial side, and cheers from the Opposition.) He thought there could be no doubt that this house tax was laid on for no other reason than to compensate the agricultural classes for what they had lost by the repeal of the corn laws. (Hear, hear.) Now, they had heard a great deal about the malt tax, and he must say that if the Exchequer was overflowing, and other more oppressive taxes were taken off, he for one would have no objection to vote for the repeal of the malt tax, but at the same time he thought it was one of those taxes which ought not to be removed, unless the country was in a state of great prosperity, and there was a real, and not a fictitious, surplus in the Exchequer. The right hon. Secretary for the Home Department, in dealing with this question last night, had argued as if there was a great surplus in the Exchequer, and he did not seem for a moment to consider that by taking off the malt tax he was making a deficit. The right hon. gentleman kept steadily out of the consi deration of the house the fact that in taking off the malt tax he was making such a deficit that the Goiern ment were obliged to extend the house tax, and to lower the income tax to 1001. of precarious income, and 50/. fee simple. The right hon. gentleman had argued the matter as if he was doing all this from an overflowing Exchequer, instead of commencing by making a deficit . He (Mr. Osborne) thought the right hon. Home Secre tary, when he was arguing as to the effect of repealing the malt tax, and looked back for something like 100 years, quite forgot the altered habits and ta stes of the people of this country. He seemed completely to have forgotten that the people of this country now consumed upwards of 60,000,0001 b. of tea, and 40,000,0001 b. of coffee, and that the taste for those beverages was un questionably extending. He (Mr. Osborne) would not stop to argue this question upon sanitary grounds, for he believed that to be purely nonsense. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) He believed it would be just as possible to prove that there was a great increase of nervous dis orders in consequence of the use of tea, as to prove that there was any harm in good wholesome beer.—such beer as brewed by his excellent friend the member for Derby (Mr. Bass). He (Mr. Osborne) believed beer to be a good, wholesome, and national beverage ; and, there fore) he at once dismissed all sanitary considerations on the subject. (A laugh.) He must deny, however, that this proposed reduction of the malt tax was a consumer's question. He denied that the price would be materially affected so far as the artisan and mechanic were con cerned. (Hear, hear.) What had every gentleman who was acquainted with the brewing trade, and who had spoken during the debate, said on the subject ? The hon. member for Derby, who, he thought, had sailed rather near the wind with regard to protection, had admitted last night, that although barley had been fall ing s in price for many years, the brewer was the only man who got the benefit. Indeed, that hon. gentleman said in effect, "If you'll take off the whole malt tax, we will give you something handsome ;" and it seemed that this "something handsome," if one-half the malt-tax was repealed, would be a farthing a quart upon the price of beer ! ("Hear, hear;" and a laugh.) But, if it did not benefit the artisan, how would this partial remission of the malt-tax benefit the farmer ? Now, he (Mr. Osborne) was himself a considerable bar ley-grower. He had taken some pains in considering the subject, and he did not believe the proposed measure could benefit the agricultural interest generally. What portion of the agricultural interest was chiefly suffering at this time ? Not the producers of barley. (Hear, hear.) He knew that the barley-producers were never better off than they were now. He had himself sold bar ley last week, and he never got a better price since he had been farming. (Hear, hear.) But what was the description of agricultural land, the occupiers of which were now complaining ? The heavy clay lands, the wheat lands. (Hear, hear.) Well, he might be told, perhaps, that this land would be forced into the produc tion of barley ; but what sort of barley would they get from such land? (Hear, hear.) Every one at all ac quainted with the subject knew that the inferior sorts of barley had no sale with the brewers, but the brighter kinds of barley, such as the best chevalier barley, were what they bought. It was then absurd to suppose that the partial remission of the malt tax could be of any be nefit to the farmer. Then something had been said about the advantages which would be derived by the farmer with regard to the fattening of cattle ; but the opinion of all the practical men of science,—of Liebeg, of Dr. Lyon Playfair, and of others, which were quoted before Lord Monteagle's committee in 1846,—was, that cattle might be fattened much better upon ground barley than upon malt. He (Mr. Osborne) denied that this partial remission of the malt tax would benefit either the consumer, by lowering the price of beer materially, or the agricultural interest as a whole, by allowing the farmer to grow a high class of barley, or to fatten his cattle to advantage. But he could adduce on this point the evidence of a gentleman who had applied his mind to these matters, and who was well qualified to form a judgment on the subject. In the year 1851, when the hon. member for Derby brought forward his motion for a reduction of one half of the malt-tax, the hon. member for 'North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate) expressed himself in the following terms : " No man had voted more steadily than himself for the total repeal of the malt tax ; but its partial remission would neither diminish the expense of its collection nor remove the restrictions which it imposed upon agriculture or on brewing at home ; in short, it would afford none of those indirect advantages which the agricultural sommun ity valued. He would rather support the partial reduc tion of a customs' duty than that of an excise, because a reduction of the first would lead to a diminution in the staff for collecting customs, while no such advantage could be obtained by the partial repeal of an excise tax." Now, if he (Mr. Osborne) were to speak for five hours —if he were making a budget speech, and he did not say so sneeringly, for he had listened with great delight to the whole speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer —he could not adduce better reasons against the partial remission of the malt tax. He therefore claimed the vote of the hon. member for North Warwickshire on this occasion. He had, however, a still higher autho rity against the partial repeal of the malt tax—that of the late Sir R. Peel, who summed up most compendi ously the advantages and disadvantages of the tax in a speech which he made in 1835. (Hear, hear.) In that speech the right hon. baronet proved most con clusively that no tax was collected at so trifling a loss to the revenue, and he showed that 5,100,0001. of revenue was collected at an expense of only 150,0001., and warned the house in the most emphatic language against tampering with that tax. He (Mr. Osborne) found that whenever the house had made any changes in the malt tax they had always come back to its reimpo sition. In 1816 one half of the malt tax was removed, and in 1819 it was again imposed. In March, 1821, the tax was repealed, and in the following April the vote was rescinded. On a Friday in 1833, also, the malt tax was repealed, and on the following Monday the resolu tion for its repeal was rescinded. He thought that if the house adopted the proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer they would enter upon a most mischievous course, for they would remove a tax which was collected at the least possible expense, which was onerous and oppressive to no one, which would not relieve the agri cultural interest as a whole, and which would not cheapen beer to any great extent. They would, in fact, be repealing a tax in order to keep up a delusion that it would benefit the agricultural interest, while, in fact, it would only benefit the brewer and the publican. (Hear, hear.) He must say he regretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer appeared to have forsaken all his former schemes. He wished to know why the right hon. gen tleman had not moved for a committee of the house to consider the peculiar burdens affecting land. (Hear, and alaugh.) What had become of the right hon. gentleman's schemes for the growth of tobacco in Ireland ? (Hear, and a laugh.) What had become of the right hon. gentle man's proposal for placing the establishment charges of the poor-rate on the consodated fund ? The right hon. gentleman had given no reason the other night for not having stood by his colours, and for not bringing forward some motion to place the establishment charges on the consolidated fund. He (Mr. Osborne) would not pro mise the right hon. gentleman his vote, but he would tell him this, having some interest connected with land—that he thought it would be a very fair subject of inquiry whether there were any peculiar burdens affecting land, in order that the question might be finally set at rest. He thought the right hon. gentleman was bound, after all his promises, to have held out to the agricultural interest something more solid than this partial repeal of the malt tax, which was, in fact, no concession to the agricultural interest. lie (Mr. Osborne) entirely dissented from the manner in which the income tax had been treated by the Government. He regarded that tax as most inquisitoria,l in its nature, and as extremely de moralizing to the people of this country. It was only necessary to read the evidence of Mr. Pressly, and of the other witnesses examined before the committee on the income-tax, ,to be satisfied of its demoralising tendency. He (Mr. Osborne) must; however, deny the statement which had been made, that that tax had been imposed in order to maintain free trade. He understood —when the tax was brought forward by the late Sir R. Peel—that it was proposed as a temporary expedient to make up a deficit. (Cheers.) It was merely a temporary expedient voted for three years—(hear, hear)—but Par liament had since gone on voting it for three years at a time. It had been said that the public had become habi tuated to this tax, but, for his own part, he hoped the public would not become habituated to it—(hear, hear) —for he regarded it as a most odious tax, because it was both inquisitorial and demoralising, The Government were bound to state their views upon this subject, and as to the length of time for which this income tax was to be imposed ; for they had at other times given very strong opinions upou it. Lord Derby said, on the 28th of February, 1851, in the other house, that " any surplus revenue that might arise should, in the first in stance be applied towards a reduction and final extinc tion of the income tax ; " and that was followed up in the House of Commons by a motion to that effect, made by the President of the India Board (Mr. Herries), whom he (Mr. Osborne) was sorry not to have heard upon this Budget for the right hon. gentleman was an able financier, and his studied abstinence from assenting to anything in this budget was remarkable—(hear, hear)—when he was appealed to, there had been nothing but a grave shrUg and a very suspicious silence.' (Hear.) He (Mr. Osborne) would not go into the distinction attempted to be drawn be tween precarious and certain income ; he did not feel qualified to give any_ opinion as to the justice or the scientific accuracy of the discriminating duty proposed. That question had puzzled many wise men. He remem- tiered hearing the late Sir R. Peel say that if you deter mined to interfere in that way, you would have to do away with the tax altogether—that you never could make any approximation to a discrimination. He (Mr. Osborne) wished to look further into the subject before pronouncing upon that part of the scheme. (Hear.) He would proceed now to advert to some very remarkable opinions which he had heard uttered the other night by the hon. member for Hertfordshire (Sir E. B. Lytton), whom, however, he begged to assure, when venturing upon any criticism of those opinions, that no one more admired his literary talent—(hear, hear)—he read him with delight by day s and listened to him with pleasure by night—(laughter and cheers)—he was a man who must do honour to any assembly of which he was a mem- ber. (Cheers.) But this must be said of that distin guished member of Parliament and of the literary world, that he gave somewhat original reasons for his change of politics—a subject into which he (Mr. Osborne) should not have thought of entering, but that the hon. baronet had considered it necessary, to make a defence not only for the Ministers, but for himself, when his conduct was not impugned. (Hear, hear.) The hon. baronet said he had always abided by the Liberal party till it was in a state of exhaustion, and then he left it. For what ? Because he differed with them on the principle of free trade. And what did he do ? Why, he joined the other party just as they had given up the principle for opposition to which he had left his friends ! (Laughter and cheers from the Opposition.) A singular reason for so eminent a member of Parliament to give ! (Hear.) Singular that he should have left the corpse of the noble lord without consigning it to a decent funeral—(laughter and cheers)—but more singular that he should have left the noble lord upon a difference on the principle of free trade, and joined the right hon. gentleman opposite just as he had given up the principle for which the hon. baronet forsook the noble lord! (Hear.) He hoped the hon. member had not forgotten his speeches for the ballot and triennialiParliaments. He hoped the air of Herts had not had that enervating effect upon him that he had forgotten his vigorous youth when representing Lincoln. "Hear, hear," and a laugh.) But he chiefly referred to the hon. baronet because he gave an extraordinary opinion, for him the other night, in favour of direct taxation. Probably one of his books, by which he would live longest in the world, was that admirable work upon the institutions of this country " England and the English." (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Osborne) would advise every new member immediately to get a copy of that work—(laughter)—because there was a chapter on the formation of a national party which, at this particular epoch, was well worthy of study—(hear, hear)—and in which he gave his opinion upon taxation ; and here were his views on taxation. They were a little curious, as compared with his present views. This was in chapter 8. The book was published in 1840 : " I have little faith in the virtue of any commutation of taxes. I have studied the intricacies of our finance; I have examined the financial systems of other countries ; and I cannot discover any very large fiscal benefit as the probable result of new combinations of taxation. House and win dow-taxes are less just than property tax." (Cheers from the Opposition.) He then went on, in re ference to direct taxation, of which he was now enamoured, " An immense national debt renders direct taxation a dangerous experiment." (Hear, hear.) And here was a most extraordinary note ; he (Mr. Osborne) believed it was only appended to the fourth edition. [Sir E. B. Lytton.—" The book was written twenty years ago."] This was published in 1840. [Sir E. B. Lytton—" 1833."] But had the hon. member forsworn all his opinions of 20 years ago ? Then he did not tell the whole secret the other night. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) He (Mr. Osborne) thought the hon. member quitted his party only for free trade. (Hear.) But at any rate this note was worth listening to, and was most instructive. This was revised by the hon. gentleman ; it was the last edition he revised, and here was the editor's note ; let county members listen to this : " I firmly believe that if the national debtor be ever in danger, the fatal attack will come less from the Radicals than the country gentlemen"—(loud cheers from the Oppo sition)—" who are jealous of the fundholder or crippled with mortgages. The day after the repeal of half the malt tax (leaving a large deficit in the revenue) was carried I asked one of its principal supporters, a popular and inde pendent country gentleman"—he (Mr. Osborne) believed it was Mr. Cayley—(laughter)—and he had nothing to say against the account of him—(cheers)—" how he proposed to repair the deficit ? 'By a tax of 2 per cont.,' quoth he, ' `upon Master Fundholder.' If that does not suffice,' asked I, 'Why, then we must tax him 4 per cent.,' was the honest rejoinder !" The hon. member, transplanted from the h ealthy atmos phere of Lincoln to the rather sickening and enervating soil of Hertfordshire, came down and said it was written 20 years ago. He (Mr. Osborne) supposed the hon. member was now a convert to direct taxation, and very probably he would go upon " Master Fundholder." (Laughter and cheers from the Opposition.) In this de bate very little comparatively has been said upon the Irish part of the question. (A laugh.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in his address to the Buckinghamshire constituency, eloquently alluding to that country, said that " Ireland had irresistible claims." He (Mr. Osborne) was one of those who, though representing an English constituency, but not from any paltry considerations merely of property in Ireland, would never shrink from saying that he thought, under the circumstances of Ire land, it was neither wise, beneficial, nor politic, to ex tend any additional taxation to that country. (Hear.) He would go further, and say the " consolidated annui ties " were a gross injustice to that country, and the labour-rate, by which money was forced upon the people of that country, and no option was given them in the spending it, but their roads were broken up and the people demoralised, was a bad and unjust system. (Hear, hear.) He would say further, that the famine ought always to be looked upon as an - imperial calamity—(hear, heir)—and Ireland no more charged for it than she would have been for the expense of a de fence, if a foreign invader had landed in Ireland—(hear, hear)—and till these accounts were upon a juster footing he, for one, would r.e no party to an increa se of taxation upon Ireland. (Hear.) But, if the arguments of the hon. member for Belfast (Mr. Davison) last night were to have any weight, one could have little hope for Ire land. The hon. member, who said ho was no orator, but a simple man of business, gave as a reason for sup porting the budget, that there was a most popular lord lieutenant, a most amiable chief secretary, and most intelligent law officers. (Laughter and cheers.) It was true enough—(ministerial cheers)—but was that any reason why the people of this country were to be loaded with the house tax ? (Cheers from the opposition.) If he (Mr. Osborne) might speak respectfully to the Irish members, who he thought in the main always voted right—(hear)—for the advance of great and liberal prin. ciples—(hear)--p - he would say to them, " Beware how you inflame the mind of the English people by laying on a tax you refuse to bear yourselves." Loud cries of "Wear, hear.") But the virtues of the Irish function aries were no argument for laying on a tax, and would be very little consolation to the English householder when the collector called. (Laughter.) The Home Secretary wound up his most interesting and spirited speech by an elaborate panegyric upon his colleague the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He (Mr. Osborne) was not prepared to say that in many points of that pane gyric he did not fully concur. (Hear, hear.) He would grant all that was said as to the energy, the ability, the great powers of the right hon. gentleman—(hear, hear) —he would grant it ungrudgingly and fully. (Hear, hear.) He thought the right hon. gentleman had the ingenium velox, audacia perdita, sermo 20 take niPt (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) Butlie of mu s t him as the ex ception when the Home Secretary talked most bold and prudent financier the world had ever seen. (Laughter.) With regard to finance, he of that House (Mr. Osborne) was of opinion that the g reat majority would incline to think that in financial proects "discre tion was the better part of valour. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) But th e ri g ht hon. gentleman went on to say, following in the footsteps of the hon. member for the North Riding (Mr. Cayley), that this budget must be a most popular budget, b eca use there was such a cor dial reception at Guildhall —(laughter)—and he quoted a passage from Lucretius, as he (Mr_. Osborne) believed ; but he was irresista bl y reminded of a parallel scene in the life of two illustr ious men in b yg one da y s at Guild hall, he alluded to the reception of Buckingham, an d Richard 111., when Duke of Gloster, at Guildhall. Gentlemen would remember the quotation in Shah. speare : " When he had done, some followers of mine own, lAt lower end o' the hall, hurl'd up their caps, And some ton voices cried, ' God save King Richard ! " And thus I took the 'vantage of those few,— ." Thanks, gentle citizens, and friends,' quoth I This general applause and cheerful shout ,• Argues your wisdom and your love to Richard. " The passages were somewhat parallel. (Great laughter and cheering.) He would venture to suggest to the Home Secretary, when he quoted the reception at Guild hall, that it was not very probable a set of well-to-do gentlemen, who were met to discuss the tender merits of turtle and venison, would be inclined to criticise with LETTER-CARRIERS. Mr. SCHOLEFIELD wished to ask the Secretary of the'Treasury, whether it is the intention of the Postmas ter-General, whilst permitting the letter-carriers in the metropolis to receive Christmas-boxes, to prohibit the receipt of these gratuities by letter-carriers in the pro vinces ; and if so, whether the latter are to receive com pensation for the loss of such gratuities ? Mr. HAMILTON said it was the intention of the Postmaster-General to prohibit provincial letter-cnrriers from receiving Christmas boxes, but the Postmaster did not consider that prohibition gave them any claim to compensation. THE HOP DUTY. Mr. A. PELLATT wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is his intention to allow the drawback upon hops the same as upon malt (held on the 10th day of October next) of the growth of 1852 and preceding years. The,CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had al ready answered the question. It was not the intention of the Government to allow any drawback. Sir J. V. SHELLEY said a porLion of the stocks on the hands of growers would not be liable to duty until November next, at least the , duty would not be collected until then, and he should be glad to know if a draw back would be allowed in that case. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the duty on those stocks were already due. Sir J. V. SHELLEY—Yes, but not collected. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Just so, butit is not payable until November next, simply because an indulgence has been granted to those from whom it is due. PUBLIC WORKS. • Sir R. FERGUSON wished to ask the Chancellor of he Exchequer whether, co nsidering that the Twentieth Report of the Comialssioners of Public Works in Ireland for the year 1851 was distributed to members on the 6th day of December, 1852, the Chancellor of the Exchequer would take steps to have the annual account of that board laid before the -house at the• commencement of each ces sion, as required by the act 1 and 2 Will. 4, c. 33, s. 13; and generally whether he would endeavour to have the reports of the Irish commiissions delivered before the salaries of the departments were voted in the estimates. The CHANCELLOR o:f the EXCHEQUER had already had his attention dixected to this subject, and he would take care that the r. sport was laid on the table in due time. REVENUES Or THE CHURCH. The Marquis of BLAND:FORD gave notice that on an early day after the recess he should move for leave to bring in a bill to make better provision for the manage ment of Church property, with the view of providing clergymen for populous dis tricts. LONDON UNIVERSITY. Mr. HEYWOOD gave notice that in the event of any measure being introduced lElor the extension of the fran chise, he should call the attention of the house to the claims of the University of :London to one of the vacan seats. THE ADJOUWNED DEBATE. On the motion that the SPEAKER do leave the chair, for going into Committee of Ways and Means, Sir DE LACY EVAN S, adverting to what passed at the close of the debate last night, reminded the house that, as yet, the debate hat I. only lasted two nights, and the matter under discussiout was too important by far to admit of its being terminated to-night. It should be remembered that the Ohancellor of the Exchequer occupied a whole night in opening the budget, and it was hardly possible, looking to the feeling of the country, and the fact that only one metropolitan member had yet stated his views upon the subject, that the matter could be brought to final issue within the space of three nights' debate. (Hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I am sure, sir, there is no me-rher in this house who is less inclined to throw any difficialties in the way of gentlemen expressing their opinions than myself, and I am sure I have never exhibited any desire to restrict our debates. (Hear, hear.) lam perfectly aware that when measures of this extent are brought forward, it is extremely de sirable that a sufficient interval should elapse to enable the country fully to consider them, and that there should be ample discussion in this house ; but I cannot but re member the moment at which we are assembled, and the absolute necessity that, there is for the hohse ad journing for some period. I assure the house that nothing is more foreign to my nature, or more repug nant to the wishes of the Government, than in any way to precipitate a conclusiom upon any point on which the will of the house has not been perfectly ex pressed. (Hear, hear.) The hon. and gallant gentle man referred to my statemaient ; bu't he must recollect that that statement included a great many subjects. I do think it would be fair to the Government if; before the holidays, we could have one vote. Ido not want in any way to narrow the issue. I wish, if I possibly can, to put it on a principle. Ido not ask any gentleman on either side of the house, by voting on this occasion, to come to any direct vote in favour of the repeal of the tea duties, or the hop duties, or the malt duty, or of any de tail of the income tax, or even of the mere details of the vote on which we are to come to-night. All I ask the house is, that it will at least affirm what we consider a vital principle, and that it will allow us to bring forward measures of financial reform (not merely with reference to the particular plans we propose) which depend upon the country being agreed to bear a certain quantity of direct taxation. Ido not ask any gentleman to be in the least pledged by the vote he may come to to-night to any details of this resolution. I only ask you to agree to this, that the area of direct taxation should be ex tended. (Cheers.) The house then went into committee. Lord JOCEYLN regretted that he was compelled to differ in opinion with regard to the financial measures of the Government from those with whOm it was his pleasure generally to act, and more especially that he j).41 , ..'~l' _ // ("151:11fa \ ..---------••• ...„ " ‘, A -:' v,- :. i': • 'z'''‘, p . ....-- any severe eye the dry details of a financial proje ~ , 4 •.: , (Hear, hear.) No, those were not the classes the st,) Z. ...., : l. ;; . 1 i 7. 4 ' quote as giving a cordial reception to their x , :e4 , 2-::;! .; '. . 1 ~_,,. .. f .. (Hear, hear.) It was the industrious clerk, striving,to , .ki i ..... support his family upon an income of not 1501. arStalff-:•'..:.-.. : ,,;;11 . c (cheers)--it was the energetic mechanic, just emergiiii,.. i .?.f...-`!.ii ft. . . . . into indepe n dence--(cheers)—whom they must ask wlii-'2.,..J 5.5 they thought of the budget. (Hear, hear.) Sure he was 7 \EN .. 7 .• this budget could never be popular with those classes in this country ; and he called upon the house, in the name of those classes, to resist a budget which was based at once upon tyranny and injustice. (Loud cheers.) Mr. Alderman THOMPSON observed, that if the hon. member (Mr. Osborne) was disappointed in the budget as meagre, others, such as the members for Hali fax and Cambridge (Sir C. Wood and Mr. Goulburn), complained that it contained too much, and that it would have been wiser if he had divided it over two years. (Hear, hear.) He (Ms. Alderman Thompson) conceived that the budget was a bold, and wise, and statesmanlike budget. (Cheers from the Ministerial side.) It was one which, in his opinion, deserved the confidence of the country— (hear, hear)—and, he believed, with the ex ception probably of the persons assembled within those walls, it had it. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The hon. member said the budget was framed in a revengeful spirit. Did he mean to say that the working classes would receive no benefit from the reduction of the duty on tea, and from the reduction of the sugar duty in July ? [Mr. Osborne—That is not in the budget.] Well, but when be complained of the hardship upon those who occupied houses at rents between 101. and 201., it was proper to show that they found relief from the course of legislation adopted of late years, and that th e y • had more than an equivalent in the reduction of duties on foreign commodities requisite for their comfort. (Hear, hear.) Of all investments, capital invested in 201. and 101. houses was the most productive. They generally paid from 10 to 20 per cent. ; but parties always calculated what the taxes were, as well as the rent, and the tax was a landlord's tax. An hon. mem ber (Mr. Cobden) attempted last night, but failed, as he (Mr. Alderman Thompson) thought, to draw a distinction between the tax on land and that on houses. He (Mr. Alderman Thompson) did not mean to say that he was prepared to vote for a double house tax, but he was pre pared to go the length of voting that the tax should be extended to houses of 101. rent. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Middlesex expressed his approbation of that part of the budget which related to shipping, but intimated that a reduction of the timber duties would be deemed a greater relief than the remission of dues. He (Mr. Alderman Thompson), knowing something of shipowners, was very much startled at that pro position. Yesterday, he met with the largest ship owner in England, and when he said so, he must be taken as meaning the greatest shipowner in the whole civilized world. That shipowner, on' being asked what he thought of the proposition made by the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, said, " Nothing in the world can be better." " Not better than the repeal of the timber duties ?" he (Mr. Alderman Thompson) replied ; " Pooh, the repeal of the timber duties would be a mere drop in the ocean," was the response. With respect to that part of the Budget which had reference to the sugar-growing colonies, he must say, that though relief would be given to a small amount by the facility given for refining sugar in bond, he was of opinion that the course of legislation which had been pursued with re spect to those colonies had been unjust. For the last year he admitted that the import of sugar grown in the British colonies had been considerably increased ; yet that increase might be attributed to the great quantity which was planted in 1850, when there was a differen tial duty of 7s. per cwt. He was afraid that in the next two years, when the Duties on British and foreign grown sugar would become equalised, it would be found that the West Indian colonies would fall off greatly in respect of production. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the duty on tea, he had always laboured under the apprehension that if that duty were continued at a rate equal to 240 per cent., while the Chinese admitted British manufactures at a duty of 5 per cent., and America, which was the next importing country, in point of quantity, to the United Kingdom, admitted tea from China without duty, the time might come when the Chinese Government might say they would charge more than 5 per cent. on the cotton manufactures of this country. With respect to the income tax, he admired the courage of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in propo sing a modification of the present uniform rate of charge. When he heard the Secretary for the Home Department allude last night to terminable annuities, he hoped that the injustice which a uniform rate of income tax involved in that case would be considered, and relief afforded. With reference to the censures cast on the Chancellor of the Exchequer by the right hon members for Halifax and for the University of Oxford, in consequence of the pro posal to extend the income tax to fundholders in Ireland he (Mr. Alderman Thompson) agreed with the noble lord the member for Lynn, that the debt was the debt of the United Kingdom, and not of England solely. By the 6th clause of the act sth George IV., passed to facilitate the transfer of stock in Ireland, it was enacted that each stock should be deemed, reputed, and taken to be one capital or joint-stock. It was not the poor shopkeeeper or the landowner that was the stockholder in Ireland. It was the banking interest; and the joint-stock banks in Ireland were carried on not by Irish but by English I capitalists, who were making large profits. (Hear, hear.) Sir B. HALL said, that the question the house had to decide in the first instance was, whether the house tax should be doubled, or should continue at its present amount. He was surprised to hear that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not disposed to take issue upon that question, but only wished the house to determine that the area of taxation, as regarded houses, should be extended. But that was not the question. The real question was, should the house tax be doubled for the purpose of repealing the malt duty ? He would en deavour to show that the increase of the house duty was unfair and unjust, and that the distinction drawn be tween the tenant-farmer and the tenant-tradesman was invidious, and ought not to be carried out. He would show that while by the proposed . plan the inhabitants of towns would be additionally taxed 4 or 5 per cent., the inhabitants of rural districts would be relieved 50, 60, or 70 per cent. The noble lord the member for Dur ham (Lord A. Vane) said last night that if any unpopu-, larity attached to this tax it would be owing to the mem ber for lUarylebone, who had excited the people at public meetings against it. He could assure the noble lord he was extremely mistaken. The Chancellor of the Ex chequer, in his speech on Friday week, spoke of the intelli gence of the inhabitants of the metropolis ; and he assured the noble lord that they at least had sufficient intelligence to understand subjects that were brought under their consideration, and were able to see whether they were likely to have a tax inflicted upon them that was unjust. It was the conviction of the people that to double the house duty would be an' injustice, and they were deter mined to oppose it. It was therefore, to a great extent, a matter of indifference whether the present proposition was carried or not. It the tax were imposed, it would be only for a short time, as petitions would flow into the house in numbers similar to those of 1833 and 1834, and the Government would be obliged to abandon the tax. He was in favour of direct taxation, so far as it could be justly carried out ; but, if they ma de direct taxation un just, they would render the system odious, and this, he maintained, they were now proposing to do, both in re ference to the house tax and the income tax. In refer ring to the window duty, the Chancellor of the Exche quer said that the people of the metropolis urged its repeal solely on sanitary grounds. He (Sir B. Hall) was surprised to hear that statement, not only because it was wholly unfounded, but because the right hon. gentleman ought to have known that it was so. The right hon. gen tleman was at the time one of the loudest declaimers against the tax. It was one of his earliest propositions in reference to political subjects that the window tax ought to be re pealed. The sanitary question had not been raised till re cently, whereas 20 years ago the window tax was con sidered a very vexatious impost. According to a return which he had before him, the alteration of the house duty in the city of London alone would impose a tax upon the inhabitants to the amount of 73,108 L, whereas the window tax amounted only to 69,300/., so that there would be an increase of taxation to the amount of 3,8081. in that portion of the metropolis only. But if he went further, and compared the amount of window tax paid in 1851 with the amount of house tax to be paid in 1853, and then also compared what was paid by the towns • and what by the counties, he should be able to show that the proposition was most unjust towards the inhabitants of towns. The Government might c arry their resolution in committee, but they never would b e able to pass it int o a law. He would just statethheowhotulsiee s seeevening his mhue,,i ic o aahe f fn t t h h e aet b eu u udgtr country, intelligence t: case would stand in St. George's, Hanover-square. The increase of damutoyunint Bws i 3 nd w ow eu d ld ut h y e in 6 l 3 B , s 2 l l2 w i. a_s 4 b 7 e , in 3s g o a z. n; budget speech eor(si2rsapHerance)nte.xp Thfheaewrewevaewrrrof town ap . • it was fot°r°the this success of the the commencement o a a m nd on h a e said the so still . scheme ; they would never consent to and he was quite sure that if they taxation, and sition in the house, they would carried their propo sition be able to carry it into.effect in the country. (Hear, hear.) Sir J. DUCKWORTH said he was desirous to accept the invitation of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to ro gard the budget as a w h ole er comprehensive scheme of taxation •and, and as one light, ookmg on it i n that he was prepared to give his support to it and to the prin ciples it involved. Representing a city deeply interested in the welfare of our shipping, it was unnecessary for him to say he approved of all that portion of the budget which related to that interest, which was admitted by all persons, as well as by shipowners, to involve a just re laxation of the taxation and burdens which pressed upon that important class of the community. On the whole, it did not appear unfair or unreasonable for the Chan cellor of the Exchequer to impose direct taxation on the country to the whole extent of the reductions and advan tages of his scheme. But a large imperial question was involved in the vote they were called upon this evening to give, which would be one ex p ressive of their opinion as to whether or not the Government were desirous of treating all classes of the community, as respected taxa tion, fairly and justly. Now, though he confessed that the class among which his constituents ranked would have been treated unjustly by so large an increase of taxation as that proposed, yet, as he understood that that increase of taxation was not affirmed by the resolution now before the house, but that, on the contrary, it would be open to them hereafter to discuss the extent to which this taxation should go, he Was prepared to give his vote in favour of maintaining the Government in the position which they now occupied, and which he believed was - ~, :15 ({