The Sun. — London, England, 1865-03-08 00:00:00

THE MALT TAX. Several petitions from different parts of the country, and from every class of society, were presented in favour of a reduction of the duty on malt., or its entire repeal. The presentation of petitions for this purpose occupied the greater part of the time of the house this afternoon. PUBLIC-HOUSES CLOSING ACT. Mr. LAWSON moved for a return of the Town Councils and Boards of Commissioners which have adopted the Public-houses Closing of 1864, with the date of its adop tion, and the population under the operation of the Act in each municipality and district. BRAZIL. Mr. WHITE gave notice - that this day week he would ask a question in reference to the affairs of Brazil. QUESTIONS. The only question on the paper for this evening was one by Sir H. Bruce in reference to Ireland, and this post poned, the Chief Secretary for Ireland being absent. s REPEAL OF THE MALT-TAX. Sir F. KELLY rose to draw the attention of the house to this subject embodied in the formal motion, which was in the following terms :—" That in any future remission of indirect taxation this house should take into consideration the duty on malt, with a view to its early reduction and ultimate repeal." The right hon. and learned member said that people who considered themselves competent autho rities upon certain matters found out their mistake, and he believed the present question was one that would be satis factorily answered. He denied that ho aimed at the repeal of the malt tax, even though it might render necessary an increase of the income tax, prevent its reduction, or involve the substitution of another tax upon other articles that entered more or less into general consumption. His simple purpose was to urge upon the attention of the house the claim of those who suffered from the burden of the duty on malt to some relief, as soon as the financial condition of the country would admit of a remission of direct taxation. The main ground upon which he invited assent to his motion was the . principle which had governed commercial legisla tionraw material and times--namely, that of remitting duties on his own malt , _ em. nal, and especially on home produce. He reminded tihouse of the declaration of the late Sir R. Peel, in 1839, nhefavour of the agriculturist manufacturing and consuming c o o f rn ev . er n y member t a h t e the principle received the approval amviagbeanimadvehrtoeuaseupwohnothaeavimocapotedli:oeef thistrad e par ticularin proceeded ea,l to describle its nature and in impost, itselfci ilen cal. everylt Its effect , eta g o h oef thei , manufacture, to increase and multiply until, when the rHE SUN, LONDO.N, WEDNESDAY EVENiNG, MARCH 8,186 k DEPERIAT, PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF LORDS—LAsir EVENING. The Low) CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at the usual hour. The School for the Indigent Blind Act Amendment BM was read a second time. THE CASE OP MR. EDMUNDS. The LORD CHANCELLOR said he felt he should make a statement of all he knew of the matter respect ing the resignation of Mr. Edmunds, as Reading Clerk to the House of Lords. He stated that Mr. Edmunds had held the office of Clerk of the Patents, an office with a salary of £4OO a year, created by a statute in the year 1833. Since then, in the year 1852, a new office had been created for certain patents—the office of Clerk to the Com mission of Patents--with a salary of £6OO a-year. This it was deemed right, and for several reasons, to give to Mr. Edmunds. The obligation is thrown upon the clerk of the patent's to pay all :the fees he receives by virtue of his office into the Exchequer. In 1864 it was found great confusion had arisen in the Patent-office these . M any complaints were brought to the noble lord touching complaints, and Mr. Edmunds was one of the first to demand the inquiry which followed. The report made by the committee of inquiry stated that Mr. Edmunds had received and misapplied public moneys which had come into his hands, as Clerk of the Patents, to the extent of £2,681. Since that Mr. Edmunds paid in the sum of £7,872, notwithstanding the committee had reported that he was a defaulter only to the extent of £2,681 ; and accordingly further inquiry was made in January this year, and the commissioner stated that Mr. Edmunds was still furthei indebted in the sum of 1'9,100. Mr. Edmunds has not yet made his answer to that report. The noble lord first took the opinion of the Government upon the question whether he should lay the matter before their lordships. The Government was of opinion that he should; and he therefore in tended to lay the report and Mr. Edmunds's reply upon the table of the house; and to move for a committee of inquiry into the subject ; and to advise the house as to the course it would be proper to take upon that information. But Mr. Edmunds made to him an earnest request that he should not make that com munication for a few days longer until he (Mr. Edmunds) had received some communications from abroad. At that earnest request he postponed the communication for four or five days. Then Mr. Edmunds sent in a petition , Praying to be permitted to resign, and also stating that as he had been a servant of the country for eighteen years, he hoped he should have granted to him the usual pension of £BOO a year. The resignation was, therefore, laid before their lordships and accepted. The matter was laid before the committee, and it was a ques tion for his lordship to consider if he should pursue Mr. Edmunds before the committee. As the inquiry had not fully come to an end, he could not bring his mind to pursue Mr. Edmunds. The law officers were of opinion that there was not ground for criminal proceedings. If it should be found in the end that Mr. Edmunds is still a defaulter, the pension is liable to be taken and will be taken, in satisfaction of the debt. The noble lord concluded: It was necessary that the lesser office, that of clerk of the patents, with a salary of £4OO a year, should be immediately filled up. The patronage was with the Prime Minister, but on my advice the Prime Minister presented the appointment to a relation of my own. The other office, that of Clerk of Commission of Patents, in the Lord Chancellor's patronage, it was not ne cesssary to fill immediately, and it will not be filled until the matter is settled. The noble lord moved that a com mission of their lordships be appointed to inquire into the whole matter. The Earl of DERBY—My lords, I cannot pretend to feel any surprise, considering the amount of observation which the resignation of the office of Mr. Edmunds in this house, and the pension granted to him, have called forth in the public mind, and also in the minds of the parties concerned. I'say, I cannot feel surprised that the noble and learned lord should take the earliest opportunity of making the statement which he has done this evening. And, my lords, the concluding sentence of the noble and learned lord's speech, following up the intimation which he gave at the commencement, will, I think ; satisfy your lordships that it will not be expedient on the present occasion to enter into detail as to the circumstances, with which we are at present but very imperfectly acquainted. My lords, there are three parties on their trial before the public in this inquiry. There is the case of Mr. Leonard Edmunds himself ; there is the case of the committee of your lordships' house, who, upon imperfect information, as it would appear to me, recom mended the grant of the pension ; and lastly, if I may be allowed to say so, there is the course that has been pursued by the noble and learned lord on the woolsack himself. The noble and learned lord has invited the fullest investigation by your lordships into the course which has been pursued, and it would be premature and highly improper, with the limited information we have before us, to go into the question. Ido not doubt that the committee to be ap pointed to inquire into the merits of the case will also be desirous that the matter should be fairly placed before the public through the medium of your lordships. I am informed that Mr. Leonard Edmonds, whatever may have been the amount of indiscretion or imprudence, or even, if you choose to use so hard a word as criminality, may be imputed to him, is himself anxious for the fullest inquiry, and to make a statement before the committee of the cir cumstances connected with this matter. But your lord ships will observe that he comes to this discussi on , if th ere be any discussion, at a great disadvantage. The noble and learned lord has had the oprortunity of making his state ment, and I do not in the slightest degree complain that he should have made it in the way that he has thought it de sirable to do. But the one point on which the whole matter turns, namely, the amount of indiscretion or criminality which attaches to Mr. Edmunds, is not at this moment be fore your lardships, although that is an essential condition on which alone you can judge as to the propriety of the course which the noble and learned lord has pursued. I am told that there are extenuating circumstances with regard to the defalcations in the Patent Office. No doubt there were irregularities, and lam informed—it may be mere rumour—that the charge against Mr. Leonard Edmunds is that instead of handing over a sum of money to the Govern ment he had placed it in a deposit bank, when until it was called for he was receiving on his own account interest ; but as a claim was made, he paid over the whole sum due to the public, certainly a larger sum than he was a defaulter for, to the best of his judgment. Now, it may have been extremely imprudent and extremely improper that money should, even for a time, have been placed to such an ac count, for Mr. Edmunds's own benefit ; yet I must say that if this is the whole case—l know lam speaking in entire ignorance of what the case may be—but I say if that were the whole case, it falls very far short of that whichhasbeen imputed to him as a criminal act. Now, I do not for one moment dispute Mr. Leonard Edmunds's own statement. He made a report to the commissioners, which we have not seen, but which of course the committee of your lordships' house will see. lam now alluding to the preliminary report. Mr. Leonard Edmunds, I understand, at once re signed the office of clerk of patents and the corresponding office of clerk of the commissioners ; he then remained in the office of reading clerk at your lordships' table, and I confess I am not altogether satisfied that, with regard to that office, a somewhat hasty course has not been taken with respect to Mr. Edmunds. The noble and learned lord informs us that, in the first instance, ho was under the impression that th e di sm i ssal from that office rested not with your lordships' house, but with himself as Lord Chan cellor, and no one could complain that, with that responsi bility attaching to him h e should havefelt it such advice duty to make most stringent inquiries, and to take the subject as might justify him hi m us to the cour se he ought to pursue ; but it subsequently a pp sthawtht.hhe dismissal from the office was not the act of the Lord Chan cellor but of the house itself; and here I think th ere i ; ground for inquiry whether the proper course was pursued or not, because, if I am not misinformed, the Lord Chancel lor, previous to the meeting of Parliament, informed Mr. Leonard Edmunds that it was his intention to bring the whole case under the consideration of the House of Lords, but that if Mr. Edmunds consented to resign his office in stead of being dismissed by the House of Lords, in that case the Lord Chancellor would place no obstacle in the way of his receiving his pension as reading clerk. Now, my lords, if the dismiisal from that place was in the hands of the House of Lords, the question ought not to have boon put on the footing that the resignation of the office should have secured to Mr. Edmunds the good offices of the Lord Chan cellor in obtaining pension to which he was not strictly and fairly entitled. But the question out to have been fairly put-. The LORD CHANCELLOR—I beg to assure my noble friend and noble lords that that statement which has been ra ate!_ to him is utterly without foundation : it is utterly and entirely untrue. I cannot account for its having been co dcated to him, excep t from the • umstance that I h ave mentioned, namely that an application e was rew ade da t y o , m i e t t t e. e postpone my statement to the house for a ;told me that it was Mr. Edmunds's in tention to resign got a communication from abroad. I consented to Withh old my statement and the laying of the consequence of that communication; but that I ever held out .r. Edmunds that I would with libld the statement if he resigned, isquite destitute of foun dation. The Earl of DERRY —I am bound accept, without holding the high positimenton which h e o and learned l or d; d bi publicly in your lordships' house ; but a tot hesitation, the state of the t s h ta e tement made no oe a am bound to Bay that I should never have ventusarenacltehontimsuechl s a uggestion if it had not been stated to m e in pOsitive manner that the very notice was sent in e a moat declaration on the part of the noble and learned lored,th t the if Mr. Edmunds would, resign his office the n o bl e and learned lord would place no obstacle in the way of his ob taining his pension. Of course I accept the denial of the noble and learned lord, but that is one of the questions which the committee will find it necessary to satisfy them selves upon. The parties concerned will be brought face to face with each other, and all the circumstances brought fully before the committee. Now, my lords, I would say that the course which in my mind ought to have been pursued was this—that inasmuch as the House of Lords, and not the noble and learned lord, is responsible for the dismissal or the acceptance of the resignation of Mr. Leonard Edmunds—for I will put it in that light—it ' should have been brought before the House of Lords with the two parties before them, and their loalsl ips could have decided, not whether, having been dismissed, he should receive his pension, but whether the amount of blame imputed to him in another office justifed his dismis sal from the office he held in this house. (Hear, hear.) This case was prejudged ; he was compelled to resign, and the question that was alone raised was whether he was entitled to a pension. We are in this dilemma, either the criminality was not so great that it ought to entail his dismissal from the office in your lordships' house, or if the criminality was sufficient to justify their saying he (Mr. Edmunds) was not fit to be employed in the public service, then he ought not to have received a pension. But the pe tition for a pension was presented by the noble and learned lord himself. The noble and learned lord had himself ad judged or decided that it was the duty of the house to dis miss Mr. Leonard Edmunds ; and he must, consequently, have been of opinion that he was not entitled to receive the pension. Yet, being so convinced, he is the person who presents the petition to the House of Lords. (Hear, hear.) He is the person who lays the petition on the table, and by his sanction the committee is appointed to inquire under ordinary circumstances whether Mr. Edmunds, after 18 years' service in that house, is entitled to a pension. I say, under the circumstances, a committee of your lordships' house ought to have been appointed to consider first, whether Mr. Edmunds merited dismissal at all ; and next, assuming that he did, whether he was entitled to any pen sion. If the noble and learned lord will excuse me for say ing so, what he calls a case of notoriety is one with which we are even now very imperfectly acquainted, although Mr. Edmunds has been dismissed and another gentleman ap- pointed in his place, an appointment about which I hare nothing to say, knowing as I do nothing of the merits or de merits of the gentleman who has been placed very suddenly in the office of reading clerk. My complaint is that when the resignation had been accepted the merits of the case as affecting the petition for a pension were not laid before a committee, and we are now told that a pension having been granted, it may be applied in liquidation of any debt that may remain. There are various other rumours connected with this office, and the cause of Mr. Ed munds's embarrassment and resignation, to which I will not allude ; they involve serious charges against persons in very high positions ; and I think the inquiry _ _ should be of such a searching character that all the circumstances should be placed fully before the committee, and, if necessary, before the public. I know it is impossible fairly to discuss this question, but you will pardon me for saying that if the noble and learned lord has had an oppor tunity of laying his case before your lordships it is rather hard on behalf of a gentleman whose character has been impugned on such high authority, that even a suggestion should not be made to your lordships to mitigate, if not counteract, the ex-parts statement against him. (Hear, hear.) I have had no communication with Mr. Leonard Edmunds. I have seen a copy of the answer sent in to the first statement; but I have no motive whatever nor ill feeling against the noble and learned lord on the woolsack, from whom I have received nothing but personal courtesy and kindness, for which I am most grateful. I only ask you not hastily to condemn, in his absence, an officer who has not had an opportunity of making a statement to you, and that you will adopt the very fair, straightforward, and manly propositign of the noble and learned lord of allow ing the whole matter to be referred to a committee. The LORD CHANCELLOR—The noble earl has said that I had decided before the meeting of Parliament that Mr. Edmunds should be dismissed. That was the very thing that I did not decide, and the very thing that the noble lord should have felt that I had carefully abstained from deciding. I referred the subject, when I thought I had the power, to Lord Cranworth and Lord Kingsdown, and when I found that I had not the power I proposed to lay the papers before the house, and refer it to a commit tee to decide upon the matter. And yet lam told by the noble lord that he does not wish to discuss the matter otherwise than fairly. The Earl of DERBY—I understand that the noble and learned lord told Mr. Edmunds that the whole case would be brought before the house unless he anticipated this by resigning his office. Lord REDESDALE said that the committee to which Mr. Edmunds's petition was referred was one of the stand ing committees of the house, and not one appointed for the purpose. They had no information as to what had taken place in regard to the Patent-office, and their recommenda tion that a pension should be given to Mr. Edmunds was founded entirelyon the manner in which he had discharged his duties in that house. The Marquis of BATH understood that the Lord Chan cellor had charged the committee with having acted hastily. The LORD CHANCELLOR—I made no charge, nor did I intend to insinuate anything of the kind. The Marquis of BATH said that his Lordship had said that the circumstances of Mr. Edmunds's resignation were notorious, and that he expected to have received a request for information. The LORD CHANCELLOR--What I said was this, and the noble Marquis might have recollected it, that I did not for one moment intend to insinuate anything or to cast the least charge against the members of the committee. These were the very words I used, and I carefully abstained from saying that they acted otherwise than rightly. The Duke of MONTROSE thought there had been neglect on the part of the Lord Chancellor and of the Go vernment in not having laid such important information before the committee. Earl GRANVILLE depricated any further discussion of the subject at that time. It would be fully ihvestigated by the committee which would be appointed. The Earl of DERBY proposed that the reference to the committee should direct them to inquire into "the circum stances connected with Mr. Edmunds's appointment to and holding of his office." Earl GRANVILLE said that the Government did not desire to keep back anything, and he dared say these matters would come before the committee, but he thought it would not be a dignified proceeding to order the com mittee to inquire into rumours which were not even dis tinctly stated. Thy Earl of DERBY would not press his proposition if he received a distinct understanding that inquiry on the subject to which he referred should not be stopped, if it arose in the course of the proceedings of the committee. Earl GRANVILLE had no hesitation in saying, on the part of the Government, that not only had they no wish to stop inquiry, but they wished to promote it in every way. After a few words from Lord REDESDALB and Lord COLCHESTER, The Earl of DERBY proposed that the committee should be directed to inquire also into the resignation by Mr. Edmunds of his offices of clerk of patents and of clerk to the patent commissioners. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that he had no objec tion to that. The motion, with this amendment, was then agreed to. The Game Licences (Ireland) Bill passed through con• mittee. The Bankruptcy and Insolvency (Ireland) Bill was read a second time. The house adjourned at five minutes before seven o'clock HOUSE OF COMMONS---LasT EVENING. The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. NEW MEMBER. The O'DONOGHUE took the oaths and his seat on his election for the borough of Tralee, and was introduced by Mr. Longfield and Mr. Hennessy. PUBLIC BUSINESS. The following bills were read a second time :—Bristol and North Somerset Railway (Bristol and Bath Lines); Garth Quarry Railways ; Peterborough, Wisbeach, and Sutton Railway; Stonehouse and Nailsworth Railway; Goolei.Keadby, and Macey Junction Railway. article reaed,trchebelded,thoer e co v n en sum qu e a r dru in p t le h d e in sha am pe oun of t b . be was o it rdin was g to an estimate that bore the appearance of accuracy, the annual value of the beer consumed in this country amounted to £ 6 0,000,000 sterling, one-third of which, or £20,000,000, was attributable to the existence of the malt tax, whilst £5,000,000 only of that sum found its way to the Exchequer for the benefit of the state. Abolish the tax, then, and there would be at once a saving of £20,000,000 to the public, the advantage of which would be shared in not by a small section of the community only, but by the small tradesmen, artisans, and labourers, who constituted upwards of three-fourths of the consumers of bee; and were the least able to bear the burden of the tax. Since the peace in 1815 taxes had been either altogether repealed or reduced upon 800 different articles ; but that upon malt alone remained. Every principle of political or financial administration that should govern a minister of finance for bade the continuance of the tax, as it should have forbid den its original imposition. And he argued that, upon the same principle on which the duties on corn, wool, cotton, paper, wines, and other articles had been repealed, the malt tax ought to be abolished. The hon. and learned gentle man then pointed out the advantages of repeal to the far mer as a' producer of corn and live stock, by giving him the unfettered use of barley, and creating a better market for his produce ; and to the consuming classes, by supply ing them with a cheaper and more wholesome bever age. He also contended that it would greatly benefit Ire land and Scotland by encouraging them to grew inferior barleys fit for malting purposes upon tracts of land that were now altogether unproductive. In conclusion, he called upon the= Chancellor of the Exchequer to explain why it was that this tax upon an article of British produce and manufacture, and of universal consumption, should be left standing alone amongst hundreds of others the duties upon which had been either reduced or repealed. Sir E. B. LYTTON (who, upon rising, was received with cheers) said,--Sir, —I rise to second the motion of my hon. and learned friend. In his able and exhaustive speech he did not exaggerate the importance attached to relief from the malt tax by the great body of agricul tural producers ; and the amount of the tax, which, no doubt, seems to many gentlemen the strong reason for re taining it, seems to the farmers the strongest argument in favour of its repeal. (Hear, hear.) What the farmers say is this, " When you tell us that this tax produces six mil lions a year, you only bring more vividly before our eyes the extent to which we are defrauded in the fair exercise of our industry and skill. Here you call in free trade in order to compel us to vie with the corn-growers throughout the world, and when in this struggle we turn to that crop on which we ought most to rely, because in that crop we are most a match for the foreigner, your free trade resolves it self into a tax of six millions on our raw material ; and you make the very amount of the spoliation the reason why we should submit to be despoiled." (Hear.) But it is not only against the free cultivation of barley that the tax militates. Its tendency must be more or less to derange the natural process of agriculture in the unfettered selection of crops. (Hear, hear.) Agriculture is a course of tillage spread over a certain series of years in a certain rotation of crops ; and in that year in which the farmer would and ought to sow barley our common sense must tell us that the presence of this tax at once obtrudes itself on the consideration of his choice, and will often induce him to select another crop more exhausting to the land, less appropriate to a judicious place in the regular course of husbandry, and less lucrative than barley would be if barley were left free from the ex ciseman. (Hear.) You cannot, therefore, wonder to find many farmers declaring at the various meetings which have been held on this subject that they will not grow a bushel of malt as long as this tax lasts. And if the tax thus deters farmers from selecting a barley crop even in the barley-grow ing districts, how much more will it tend to prevent the in troduction of that crop in other parts of those kingdoms to which it would be invaluable as an article of cattle food, and from which it is now frightened away by a duty of 21s. Bd. a quarter! (Hear.) Thus, by a positive discouragement you give to a crop in which England naturallyexcels every other nation, you exclude it altogether from many soils to which it would be well adapted, and you stint the whole agricul tural wealth of the country to a far greater amount than the revenue benefits by so mischievous a tax up.= the raw ma terial. (Hear, hear.) The question becomes still more im portant as to the operation of the tax not only against the farmer but against every class of consumer, and against thci elementary source of national wealth, which consists in the fertility of the soil, when you consider its injurious effect upon the quantity of stock kept. For stock implies two things—first, meat to the consumer; secondly, manure to the soil. (Hear, hear.) Whatever tends to restrict the quan tity of stock kept tends to make meat less plentiful and of higher price—(hear, hear)—and tends also to rob the land of the manure necessary for its nourishment. (Hear, hear.) If you have no stock you have no farmyard heap—if you no farmyard heap you have no guarantee for the perma nent and continuous fertility of the soil. (Hear, hear.) Artificial manures are like doctors' drugs—they may do great good for a time, they act as restoratives or alteratives ; but they can no more supersede the necessity for the natural manure of the farmyard heap than doctor's drugs can super sede the necessity for food. (Hear, hear.) The farmyard heap is the fobd of the soil, and nothing can supply its place. Now, let me ask any of those distinguished practical agriculturist; of whom there are so many in this house, if I am not right when I say that just in proportion as, since the repeal of the corn laws, successful farming has ceased to depend upon the price of corn, it ought to depend upon the increased cultivation and keep of stock? And yet, I ask again, can there be a greater discouragement to the increase of stock than a law which restricts the farmer in the growth of his own food for it ? (Hear.) And what kind of food ? Why, precisely that which cAn be grown upon almost any 'soil. Therefore, this tax, which some consider only the grievance of the farmer, and others ridicule as a mere ques tion of beer, operates against every constituent you have in towns or boroughs, because, by discouraging stock, it raises the price of meat, and by defrauding the soil of the manure, which is its most lasting fertiliser, there is dothing that the soil can yield which it does not render dearer, while it diminishes the taxable wealth of the whole community. (Hear, hear.) But the Board of Trade has issued a report of a course of experiments on cattle food, by which report it is made to appear that barley unmalted gives more weight to cattle and more milk to cows than barley malted ; and thus, it is contended by a poweiful daily journal that one main argu ment for the repeal of the tax is destroyed. That those ex periments were made fairly the name of Mr. Lawes is to me a sufficientguarantee. As a Hertfordshire man, I am too proud of the fame of that eminent chemist to disparage his authority. But Mr. Lawes, were he here, would agree with me when I say that the whole history of physiological science shows how little faith is to be placed in any prelimi nary course of experiments howeverplausible. For instance, a series of experiments was made on the transfusion of new .blood into diseased subjects, which appeared at first so triumphantly successful that it created a profound sensation throughout Europe. Everywhere medical men adopted the practice, but the result so upset the theory founded on these experiments, and caused so many sudden and violent deaths that the Parliament of Paris actually declared the transfusion of blood to be criminal. The inventor, de= spite the unquestioned success of his early experiment; was sent into banishment, and the whole system fell into discredit till revived in our day and placed on a scientific basis. But how ? Why, by allowing that the first pro cess of experiments though apparently so successful was altogether fallacious and exceptional, that the subsequent course was equally wrong, and showing where, by new experiments made much more in detail, the process may be beneficial and where it must be fatal. But in the whole history of experiments nothing has required so many repe titions and undergone such revisions of scientific opinion as experiments analogous to those of the Board of Trade which have been made upon the relative merits of articles of nutrition. Here the deductions drawn from the first course of experiments, made by the ablest authorities, have been almost invariably disproved by a second course of experiments, and the second disproved by a third; and to this day the whole subject is one of the most mysterious and the most disputatious on which rival physiologists can engage. I think that one of the last a t these inquiries on the merit of comparative articles of nutri ment made bythe physiologists of the continent was whe ther, according to scientific experiments conducted on prin ciples of selection exactly similar to those adopted by the Board of Trade, only selecting varieties of men, instead of varieties in the inferior animals, more nutrition was con tained in the roast beef of Old England or in the boiled leg of a donkey. (Laughter.) 1 believe the first experiments were in favour of the donkey, but I am now assured that, on second thoughts, sound philosophers give the preference to beef. (Laughter.) Sure I am, however, that if donkeys yielded to the revenue £6,000,000 a year, a Board of Trade would never be at a loss to find a preliminary abstract report to justify its predilection for donkeys. (Cheers and much laughter.) Then, sir, with all respect to the Board of Trade, I object to take their report as in any way settling the ques tion. We are not to suppose that during all these years farmers themselves have not been testing the relative merits of barley and malt as cattle food, with every inducement to aatauthorityrckYorkshire—who, prefer barley because it is un t axe d . N um b er l ess persons have m a d e th ese experiments.l will singl e one , b ecause h e is as sh Mr. r _ L a w w h e o s , onaa thisthe s u largest bj ee stoc Mr k Booth, high of c n t e as r breeder in England, and perhaps, in the world, has tried both barley and malt in every conceivable combination, and found that though barley might require to be very slightly steeped, it must be steeped enough to be chargeable to the tax in order to bo of general advantage, and in that case he would have given it the most important place in cattle food, if the tax did not render it too expensive. (Hear, hear.) Thus, I am quite sure we shall shortly hear from num bers of persons of unquestionable authority, that the result of their experience is totally at variance with the report of the Board of Trade. But we will now assume, for the sake of argument that the report establishes the fact at whi c h it a i ms, and even then it will not affect, except to strengthen, our proposition that the Malt-tax operates against the increase of stock. And for this reason, assuming that unmalted barley is better than malted barley for the food of cattle, still it will be the inferior barleys devoted to that object. But the Malt-tax, as the leading journal I have before re ferred to allows, is a fine on the inferior barleys, and a fine which the sate authority admits is sufficient to discourage the sowing of inferior barley, that is, to discourage the growth of cattle food in barley, whether it be malted or unmalted. (Hear.) My right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Ex chequer, whose faith in the legitimate laws of competition, and whose vast information on all subjects belonging to philosophical inquiry must make him at heart somewhat sceptical as to the value of those experiments on which the Board of Trade seem to rely, saw that in the application of malted barley to cattle food there was an argument with which it was difficult to cope ; and, therefore, in his Bill of last year, he attempted to encourage the experiment of malting barley exclusively for the purpose of cattle food. I wish, like my hon. and learned friend, to do the amplest justice to the enlightened consideration for the interests of the meat consumer—in other words, for the whole popula tion of England, which is evinced by the intention of his Bill. But I am sure that his candour will at once allow that the effect of that Bill must be extremely partial. lam ready to concede, for the sake of argument, that it has done more good than is generally supposed; but, on the other hand, it must be quite clear to him, it must be quite clear to every man of sense, that only a very small number of farmers and stockkeepers will attempt the experiment of malting for cattle food; with all the vexatious restrictions heaped upon the experiment, with all their jealous dislike of the exciseman,with all their natural and excusable desire not to co-operate in assisting a contrivance by which the tax itself is to be retained—a very small number, indeed, compared with those who would grow barley for the sake of malting if malt were free from duty and they could count on the double profit of malting, both for the food of cattle and the drink of man. And out of that great increase in the quantity of malted barley the larger part would neces sarily go to the food of cattle, because that is the proper destination of the inferior barley's which at this moment are almost a drug in the market. (Hear, hear.) But apart from the direct application of malt to 'cattle food, and apart from the report of the Board of Trade, and regard ing only the application of malt to the popular beverage of malt liquors, the repeal of the malt tax would inevitably tend to the increase of the quantity of stock kept. For malt so applied, if free from duty, would be a new and large item of profit to the farmer; it would thus increase the general farming capital, and that increase of capital would find its natural, because its most profitable, vent in the in crease of stock ; while, if the working class paid less for their beer than they do now, they would, of course, have more to spend upon butchers' meat—(hear, hear)—and thus there would be at once created an additional supply of and demand for that main article of human food—meat, all tending to the encouragement of keeping stock, and by the manure produced from'the stock all tending to the increased fertility of our soil, even for wheat crops, and, therefore, all tending to the cheapening of bread itself. (Hear, hear.) For it is clear that the manure which the farmer would ob tain by growing untaxed barley he would devote to the land which is to grow untaxed wheat. Is it not a strange anomaly that you should say to the bread producer, "You must give us the cheapest bread which unlimited competi tion with foreign countries can secure ;" and then inflict on the bread grower a tax which directly frustrates your object of cheap bread stuffs ; because it mulcts the capital by which the bread crops are produced at home, and cheats the land of the nourishment which the bread crops require ? (Hear, hear.) If this tax raises £6,000,000 a year from the raw material of the agriculturist, what is it but £6,000,000 withdrawn from one of the most reproductive sources of the wealth of the nation ? (Hear, hear.) I ask, then, is not this relief essential to the consummation of free trade ? Is it not the fair demand of skilled labour to be free from a tax upon the raw material ? And if you wish that raw material to be worked up so as to contribute a fair benefit to the consumer, do you suppose that you can effect that object by the partial experiment of a handful of maltsters with the exciseman at their backs, and all the complicated machinery by which malt may be rendered unfit for the use of man? No; you can only effect your object in the common sense natural way, by the unshackled competition of the cultivators of the soil, by whose skill, industry, capital, and labour the raw material of the soil is to be raised and in creased. (Hear, hear.) Now there has been a strong attempt to prejudice the true merits of this question by narrowing them to the mere effect of the tax upon malt liquors. But quite apart from that article of consumption, I think we have shown that the tax affects the price of meat and of bread; that it affects the productive fertility of the soil, and therefore, of course, everything which the soil produces. But its effect on malt liquor is not a thing to be ridiculed. First, as to quality, I bring no charge against respectable brewers. Ido not believe that they adulterate beer by any deleterious ingredients. But the beer of the working class is bought reta 1, and we are told by an eminent chemist that the beer retailed to the working class is agreeably com pounded of quassia, wormwood, and coculus indicus, which last has the special advantage of being a poison that insures speedy intoxication. (A laugh.) So hero I grant that you may say to the working man, " It is true that the tax raises the price of your beer, but then it gives you these two bles sings in return—it accelerates the stupefaction of drunken ness and shortens the probation of mortal life." (Laughter.) Secondly, as to the effect of the duty on the price of liquors. I shall not hero attempt to add anything to the calculations of my hon. and learned friend. Whether it only tax a quart of malt liquor at 121 per cent., as my right hon. friend the President of the Board of Trade assures us, or as my hon. and learned friend contends, 50 per cent., that is a matter which I leave entirely to those more competent than myself to deal with. 1 may indeed think it strange that malt liquor is only taxed 12-i per cent., when the malt which we assume ,o be its principal ingredient is taxed 70 pm cent., but I am old enough to know there is no conjuring trick equal to that of figures in the hands of a clever Minister. (Hear, and a laugh.) lam contented to take my stand on the simple certainty, which the President of the Board of Trade is the last man to dispute, viz., that according to the law of compe tition, which affects the operations of trade, the repeal of the Malt tax would give to the consumer of malt liquor his most probable chance of having the best quality at the lowest price, and while the tax lasts he certainly has neither. But permit me to add that I think it would be difficult to per suade the working man that you apply your legislation fairly to him when, in the name of free trade, you so largely re duce your duties on the beverage of the rich, and then, in the name of the revenue, refuse all mitigation of a tax on bhe beverage of the poor—taking suc h special pains that the working man shall not have the best drink at the lowest price that your last legislation on this subject exhausts the ingenuity of mechanicians in order to exclude the man from the advantage you are willing to give to a cow or a pig. (Cheers and laughter.) But, sir, the malt tax is en titled to our first consideration, not only for the reasons I have stated, but because it now stands prominently fore most among the objects for which the income tax was first imposed. (Hear, hear.) What the farmers feel and say is this, " You have levied an income tax of which we pay a share, for the avowed object of establishing free trade as the mainspring of all fiscal legislation. Availing yourselves of this mighty instrument of the income tax, you have given relief to other classes of the community in the taxes or duties by which their energies were most crippled, or of which their complaints were most loud ; but, all alone, we agriculturists have been thrust out of the pale of your be nignant consideration. (Hear, hear.) The exciseman stands between us and the free culture of our soil, just as ho stood before free trade was an experiment tried upon ourselves, or the income tax drew from our pockets money which has gone to the relief of others. You have con ceded to fellow-sufferers far less numerous than we are all those arguments against the principle of excise duties to which you turn a deaf ear when they are urged by us. Bricks and soaps and paper have all had priority over our complaints. (Hear, hear.) But we now ask that the in come tax shall complete its object, and give us, however tardily, some share of the relief which our contributions to that income tax have so largely assisted to give to all industrial occupations except our own." " Oh," but it is said, "we do not dispute the justice of your demand, but then your grievance is so lucrative to the Exchequer. How repeal m all at er ereduction o woulddu t n h o a t t a y i t e i s l f d s y x ca 6 n ,o y o o o u ;oooa expect ye u ar s ? to A the agitators, and would not get rid of the exciseman." And, finally, reasoners of this kind sum up by saying, "Since we cannot give you all, we will give you nothing." (Cheers.) But is that the way Reformers deal with reforms ? —(loud cheers)—or is it in that way we ought to rest and be thankful ? Why, every abuse would last to the end of time if one party did not concede a something and the other party accept a something as an instalment of the whole de mand. (Hear.) Do not forget that in this motion we do not ask you to take off the whole tax all at once. We only ask you to begin to take it off by any instalment you have to spare, and continue to bear us in mind whenever you can take off old taxes without imposing new ones. I do not deny that I desire and that I argue for the ultimate and total repeal of this tax ; but I say this on behalf of the far mers, that they are like other Englishmen—show them that you are in earnest to redress their grievance, and they, in turn, will have confidence in you as to the mode and manner of doing so, without too sudden a derangement of your finan cial operations ; but do not dismiss them by the mockery of saying, "Since we cannot at once give you complete justice, we will give you no justice at all." (Hear, hear.) Instead of justice we give you a report from the Board of Trade. I respectfully entreat hon. gentlemen on both sides of the house to regard this question with that fairness and freedom from prejudice which I am sure is their natural desire upon all matters that affect the general interests of the com munity. Do not be biassed against the motion because it emanates from these benches ; do not suffer it to become a party question, and do not regard it as a mere farmers'ques tion, on which you have no interest if farmers are not your constituents. It is one of those instances in which the griev ance of the producer is the wrong of the consumer. (Hear.) And, indeed, if I have proved to you how the tax raises the price of meat, meat is much more consumed by your constituents in towns than by our labourers in the counties. (Hear.) And now as to the amount of the tax. Is it really so great a difficulty if you will but grapple with it ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer told us last year, on introduc ing his Budget, that since 1860-61 the real diminution in our taxation had been £6,668,000. That is within three years above £500,000 more than the proceeds of this malt tax which, we are now told is protected from even an ap proach by the sanctity of its colossal injustice ! Yet so safely to the revenue did you sweep away more than six millions and a half of taxes on industry in three years that last year you had two millions and a half again to give away, and this year I believe you have the same: All these great reliefs were effected because you wero in earnest to effect them while you could avail yourselves of the income tax. Be only as earnest to complete, by this relief, the ob jects of that income tax, and ways and means will be found in this case, as they have been found in others, on which a relief to the national industry has proved to be the readiest means to increase the national income. I have always said of this House of Commons, in which it is more than 30 years since I first had the honour of a seat, that there has never been a popular assembly, on the whole, so alive to the principles of political honour, nor an aristocratic assembly, on the whole more desirous of doing equal justice between man and man ; and it is from a respectful but profound conviction that neither according to honour and justice you can play fast and loose with those professions and pledges in free trade which makes the. repeal of the malt tax the logical and inevitable consequence of the corn law, that I entreat you not to reject the motion of my hon. and learned friend. (Loud cheers.) Mr. NEATE, moved, as an amendment, that considering the immunities from taxation now enjoyed by the owners and occupiers of land, they were not entitled to any special consideration on account of the pecuniary pressure of the malt tax ; and that if, on other grounds, that tax should be reduced or abolished, compensation to the re venue should be sought, in the first instance, by with drawing from landed property the advantage it now had over other property in the shape of total exemption from probate duty and partial exemption from succession duty and income tax. The amendment was seconded by Mr. WHITE. Mr. DUCANE supported the motion ; and in the reply to the remarks of Mr. Neate, observed that the landed in terest had special burdens from which other classes were exempt, and that the extinction of the malt duty ought in justice and good faith to be a consequence of corn law re peal. Mr. THOMPSON, in opposing the motion, contended that the removal of the tax would not confer the advantage upon the farming interest that was spoken of by its advo cates, for it was still a moot point whether barley was not as good as malt for feeding purposes, whilst the only land that would be reallybenefitedwould be the lighter descrip tions occupied by sheep farmers. Mr. MORRIT T said that if he were Chancellor of the Exchequer, in possession of a surplus, the course he should take would be to reduce the income tax a penny, sweep away the fire insurance duty altogether, and keep over the balance of the surplus for another year to enable him to remit £4,000,000 of malt tax. Mr. HARDCASTLE suggested the withdrawal of the amendment, to enable him to move the " previous ques tion," of which he had given notice. He also observed that, so far as the interests of consumers were concerned, there was every reason to believe that the tax was, after all, a very small burden, whilst it did not by any means injuriously affect the barley growers ; on the contrary, the growers of the superior barley received a large bonus through the operation of the duty. One result of repeal ing the tax must be an accompanying remission of 255. a quarter. They might, therefore, anticipate a vast impor tation of foreign malt, which would compete with the bet ter sorts of English barley, and though itself of an inferior description would force down the price of the native grown produce. Col. BABTELOTT characterised the argument of Mr. Hardcastle as a defence of the monopoly enjoyed by the brewers. His conviction was, and it was supported by the highest authority, that if the tax were repealed the best barleys would command a better price than at present, and the barley trade generally would be greatly invigorated. The maltster, being then untrammeled, would go into the market and buy different classes of barley at their real and full value. At present the poorer sorts of grain, not find ing purchasers, became a drug in the market. As to the feeding properties of malt, experiments conducted by Lord Leconfield and Mr. Rigden showed that it competed ad vantageously even with oil-cake ; and there could be no doubt that malt made a much better manure than barley. He asked the house to sanction a reduction of the duty as an instalment towards ultimate repeal. Mr. GIBSON admitted that the first portion of the mo tion bore a moderate aspect, but thought it was unnecessary to assume that this duty or any other would not be consi dered by a Government that was about to propose a reduc tion of indirect taxation. To ask the house, however, to agree to this resolution would be to tie the hands of the present and all future Administrations, and bind them to the solemn promise that, whatever might bo the claims of other interests, and whatever the circumstances of the country, a deaf ear was to be turned to all claimants except those who required the abolition of the malt tax. If the motion were carried, Parliament would be unable to dis regard it, and unless rescinded, it pledged itself not to re peal any indirect tax until this £6,000,000 was got rid of. Moreover, the abolition of the malt duty would be a mea sure of injustice to other parts of the kingdom; for whereas the relief it would give in England would be ss. sd. per head of the population, in Scotland it would only be ls. 10d. per head, and in Ireland is. I.d. per head. In his opinion, public feeling preferred a reduction of the duties on tea and sugar to that upon malt or any alcoholic drinks. Mr. HENLEY, treating the question as one of revenue, said that all previous experience showed that reductions of duty had been accompanied by an increased consumption, and there was no reason why a similar result should not ensue from the abrogation of tine malt tax. Comparing the operation of the duty on malt with that on wine, the right hon. gentleman contended that to the person who bought by retail the former was a charge of 30 per cent. as against only 7 per cent. upon the latter. He looked upon the question as equally affecting producer and consumer, farmer and labourer ; and seeing that the duty on wine and brandy had been reduced, he thought the claim of the poor man to a remission of say one-half the malt duty was an act of justice, whilst in the course of a year or two the revenue would be completely recouped. Mr. NEATE then withdrew his amendment, whereupon Mr. HARDCASTLE moved the previous question. The house then divided on the motion " That this ques tion be put." The numbers were— 171 251 Majority against putting the question —BO The question, therefore, upon Sir F. Kelly's motion, was not put from the chair. The announcement of the numbers was received with loud cheers. Ayes ... Noes ... Leave was given to Mr. BLAKE to bring in a bill to amend the act for the regulation of municipal corporations in Ireland ; to Sir R. PEEL a bill to provide for superan nuation allowances to officers in unions in Ireland ; to Mr. COWPER two bills for acquiring additional lands for im proving the sites of the new public of f ices in Downing street and the India-office. The other business on the paper was also disposed of and the house adjourned at half-past one o'clock. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES.—We seem to have arrived at that turning point of the American war which brings us, as it were, within sight of the final scene and the part we shall be called on to play in it. The almost undisputed progress of a Federal army through Georgia and South Carolina, and the successive surrender of strong holds believed to be impregnable at its very ap proach, are by no means the only signs of Confede rate exhaustion. The great maritime cities, for the defence of which such immense sacrifices had been made, have long been occupied by miserable rem nants of their former population. Two months ago, as appears from the letters of our correspondent, Charleston, the very cradle of the " rebellion," was a deserted and half-ruined city ; the cattle pastur ing, and even the partridge bringing up her brood, in the streets. No wonder that men could not be found to stay the progress of Sherman. Every place was under-garrisoned, and could not Spare soldiers without inviting attack. Material of all kinds was wanting. If the garrison of Fort Fisher, profiting by the experience of the first attack, had supplied themselves with two or three rifled guns of larger calibre, or had they completed the earthworks where the causeway from the river ran into the fort, or had they obtained the services of more officers acquainted with the works than the two who fell wounded early in the affair, or had the scanty gar_ rison not been raw recruits, then the fort ought not to have fallen ; but in all these " ifs" we read the lamentable condition of the Confederate cause. The men, the guns, the officers, the labou r were s i mply not forthcoming, and without them forts cannot be held, nor battles won. Energy, and even confi dence, it is said, are also on the decline. The Caro linas and their Southern neighbours showed the true Southern temperament at the o u tb rea k o f the struggle, when Virginia held back ; but it is she now that holds her ground in th e very f ace of the foe. History and military criticism, however, will have a good deal to say on the defence of Richmond when all is over. If that defence is now, as i t i s sa i d, maintained by only 35,000 against thrice that num ber, then the Confed era t es cannot complain of the capital; and, whate ver th e o bj ect, that force does well which keeps thrice its number in check. But the strength of the wh o l e C on f e d eracy has long been drained for the sake of the capital, when head quarters could as easily h ave b een esta bli s h e d i n a less assailable position. 'That, however, has been the case on both sides, and it is very remarkable that when the founders of the Union made it part of their plan to do as muc h as poss ib le w i thout a capital at all, except just for the convenience of common deliberation, the chief features of this war should be the obstinate defence of two capitals at a cost of blood and t reasure beyond all proportion t o their value. Th e ex h aus ti on we h ave ment i oned is the point to which speculations on the probability of peace have been most generally confined. The Con federate s b egan w i th a much less populat i on of whites than the Federals ; and this disparity was practically increased by the great distance of some of the States, and the want of communication. It was enough if the Southern and Western States of the Confederation could defend themselves. But as the war advanced the Federal cause was continu ally and largely recruited by immigration, a re source entirely wanting on the other side. Europe therefore saw with admiration the gallant stand made by the Confederates, their military genius, and their personal courage ; but it saw also that the end was only a question of time on one side or of weariness on the other. It appears as if the South is exhausted by the war before the North is wearied of it, and that the end is not far. The cause is simply bleeding to death. The Confede rates can make peace whenever they please by re turning to the Union, and they will find the way made easy. As to conditions of peace, it is need less to discuss more than one, and that is a joint stock of grudges against this country. As in many other quarrels, a common object of hatred is the occasion and ground of reconciliation. The .: trea suries of the two sides will not p r od u ce a l arge sum" but their grievances with England mount up to something considerable. We are prepared for this A bloody quarrel must leave bitter remembrances and much indignation. These must have an object, and if the combatants shake hands the next victim that can be found is an unconcerned and unsympa thetic bystander. Who better indeed than the po liceman himself, if he can be attacked with impu nity ? As the Federal Government maintains that it has a quarrel with us in the shape of claims which we do not acknowledge, and it has a great deal to gain by a successful war with us, the question to which we have to address ourselves is simply whether they can go to war with us with a fair prospect of suc cess. If they can, they certainly will. The first consideration that occurs is that if the Confederates are exhausted, the Federals are only less so ; and if the latter only succeed by the exhaustion of their Southern foe, they are not likely to find success easy by turning against a new foe, with untouched strength and resources. It is true that there is a large army, many of whom may be called veterans, and all in the hands of men with some experience of actual fighting. But the soldier, in all ages, after a certain period of hardship, pines for repose, and longs for his snug farm, even though after a brief interval he is again ready for fighting. Throughout the whole of the States industry is more or less at a standstill for want of men, and it offers wages that compete with the enormous bounties and pay of the soldier. The attraction of peace will be irresistible after five years or more of this desperate work. So we must consider whether the men will enlist again for a new war against a new and certainly not less vigorous foe. They must be paid first on the old account ; and there is not a soldier in the service whose pay is not many months in arrears. But that will be a trifle compared with the new bill. The American Treasury, hopelessly insolvent, will have to try conclusions with the Treasury which paid a hundred millions sterling for one war 10 years ago, and has been reducing taxation ever since. It would have to do this with a crippled commerce, for though both would play this game, America would have her full share of its forfeits. For every Alabama that has sneaked out of our ports a hundred would steam out with the British colours. New York, too, which has hitherto fought at a distance and given money rather than men, would have to bear the brunt of the new struggle, and might haply share the fate of Charleston, Savannah, and a few other of its victims. The Federal territory might not be inviolate, and if Canada can be reached it can also strike home. Long wars, distant enterprises, familiarity with com mand, the exercise of proconsular authority, the mutual jealousies of chiefs, and a real dictatorship at head-quarters, are sure in the end to break up a Republic. The statesmen of that Republic have lately had some reason to survey their past policy, domestic as well as foreign, and to apply to it higher and truer principles than those which satisfy the vulgar tests of everyday life. They may pos sibly have come to the conclusion that States are not to be founded on violence, aggression, and fraud. They may discover that, after all, the New World is amenable to the same moral code, the same poli tical wisdom, the same laws of providence, as the Old. On comparing notes, they may find that the men and the States that successively started with a very reasonable hope of conquering and annexing all Asia, all Europe, all Africa, and even all together, did not succeed, and had even to pay fearful penal ties, sooner or later, for the very attempt. So, put ting all things together, we are inclined to believe that the Government of Washington will not attack us immediately on the conclusion of the present war, and that it will therein show its wisdom. It would, however be most inconvenient, and costly, and dis agreeable to have the quarrel hanging over our heads waiting for American convenience and oppor tunity. When the time comes our statesmen will have to see that we are not placed under that pen nance. If that, indeed, is to be our fate, and if we are to live in daily expectation of news that the United States have marched upon our provinces for the satisfaction of some old claims vamped up for the purpose, we may be excused if we are less anxious to see the present war over than we other wise should be. POST.—If General Lee, in the carrying out of his plans for establishing the independence of his coun try, should find it necessary to abandon Richmond as Charleston has been abandoned already, and leaving to the Federals a worthless and anything but glorious acquisition, they will then be in posses sion of the principal places on the confines of the South—and of very little besides. The prosecution of the war by the invaders, without the aid, direct or indirect, of their ships, will be something very different to what it has been hitherto. The chief points on the circumference of the Confederacy having been secured, such as th e f orts on the Atlantic and in the G u l p h o f M ex i co, together with the Mississippi, and Richmond—if Rich mond should really fall the work of CPCCu pying the interior will have to be commenced. Of what value that occupation is likely to be we have some, though not adequate, illus tration in Louisiana. But, to overrun a coun try of the magnitude of the Southern Confederacy will be a work of time, even with Richmond as a base for Federal operations, instead of being, as it is now and may for an indefinite time continue to be, a bulwark which the Federals cannot pass. But the occupation of all the chief towns of the South by no means implies a cessation of the war. In the form of guerilla hostilities it might be prolonged for almost any length of time, even after the large armies had been disbanded. But it is not until after the regu lar operations of the war are at an en d , as well as after the convulsive efforts of guerilla tactics have failed, that the process of pacification can, in such a country as the So u th ern S t a tes, be commenced ; and this part of the task which the North has under taken would be the most difficult of all. If, then, we look a t the actu a l pos i t i on of affairs, the pro gress which the North fancies it has hitherto made towards what it c a ll s th e restoration of the Union is as nothi▪ ng compared with that which would have to be passed through before the South were reduced even to such a conditi on o f re l uctant pass i v i ty as that whic• h Poland ex emp lifi es at t h e present t i me relatively to Russia. Is it likely that even such a restoration of the U n i on as t hi s s h ou l d ever b e achieved ty the Federals ? Their armies, accord ing to the lat es t news, were i n an exceed i ngly critical position. There appears to be no doubt of the ability of General Lee to assemble under his standard the entire forces of the Confederacy long before there was any possibility of massing the armies of Sherman and Grant together for united action against the South. What, then, is to prevent Lee, thus reinforced, from overwhelming Grant and Sherman in detail? The discomfiture of Grant alone would be sufficient to stop the progress of Sherman, who would then have to seek the refuge of the fleet ; and General Lee might carry the war into the Northern States, with most important results. The time has unquestionably come when the South is about to make a supreme effort, which may have the effect of repelling the invaders, and which, even if it fails, will not leave - the Confederacy in any worse position than at present. Now that all the Southern armies are under the control of one mind, there is likely to be that har mony in their arrangements, and that adapta tion of means to end, which is not to be found in a divided command. It has been, at the very moment when the North has been upon the point, as it fancied, of striking the decisive blow, that it has found itself signally defeated, with all its work to begin over again. What has happened so often on a comparatively small scale may again take place upon a much larger one, with proportionatelylarger consequences. We have been just told by one of the highest living authorities, enforcing the doctrine of one of the profoundest writers of the last century, that if the fate of a country is decided by a single war, it was because there was a more general and permanent cause at work beneath the surface of things. If the resolution of the Southern people should remain firm for independence, is it feasible to suppose that the Federals will ever make so much progress as is implied in the defeat of the main Confederate armies, and the occupation of the country ? Will not the rising of the people en masse prevent this ? But even supposing that a combination of adverse circumstances should render it possible, still, if their determination and spirit remain firm, a people of six millions can never be permanently subdued and held by a commercial nation of three times their number. A commercial nation would soon discover that the experiment was not worth th e cos t. A nat i on o f patr i o t s six millions strong, who have been able to do what the South has done, are sure, if they retain the will, to find their way to independence. .There was a point i n h er hi story w h en R ome was in a far worse plight than the Southern Confede- - racy. Hannibal held for years undisputed posses sion of all Italy, and had shut the Romans up in their capital. Yet the spirit of the people remained unbroken, and their firm will enabled them to triumph in the end. The Federals and their parti sans appear to entertain very singular notions about the progress of the war. However slight or delusive the advantages gained by the North, there seems to be no end to their joy and congratulations. They appear to have thought that there was to be an end of the war and a restoration of the Union imme diately after Grant took Vicksburg, and when he uttered his boast about marching t o Richmond i n a given line if it took him all last summer. The son sanguine expectations were raised by the capture Atlanta, and then again by that of Savannah ; now that Charleston has been abandoned, and P, of a profound plan of defensive strategy, there iS a ir mid boasting in the North about the rebellion beiY upon the point of suppression. The Federals van, it may be safely asserted, have to gain more kaPe: c i tant victories than any which have yet oil: 111 ° 1 0 their arms before they have got possession of the the principal points even on the mere confin es e f a id Confederacy. A still more desperate ordeal vin be gone through before they occupied the South.' the sense of making themselves master of the p - ral cipal places in the interior. And aft.?,r that they. would find before them the most ardne us of all---the work of pacifying the connterY and restoring by force a Union the essence 01 rely is friendship and consent. But it is not his that matters will ever go so far as c.. point. The Federals cannot but know the h n ,Pg e i ticable nature of such an enterprise ; at least th ey would find it out by experience long before have even overrun the South ; assuming, of roe that they should continue successful instead 01 n l _, o f ing with some crushing overthrow at the hanushat Lee and his lieutenants. When it is suppose d t enough has been done for what the North call gill they will probably find it expedient to stop d estr oy career of bankruptcy anLi ruin, and cease to ti. themselves in the vain hope of destroying the S°ll COUNTRY MARKETS LIVERPO OL—T 17ESDAY. d a y, We had a pretty good attendance at Dur market fp s but it has resulted in only a small conmunptive busine either wheat or flour, at barely the rates of F rid tbiclt Indian corn held firmly at an advance of 3d per qr., buyers refuse to pay. Oats and oatmeal stegdy peas, and barley fully as dear. MELTON MOWBRAY.—TuEVAY• 36 cone. White wheat, 41s to 44s ; red, 36s to 40s per r Barley for malting, 31s to 35s per qr ; feed, 2 60 to "Ales; 30 stone. Oats a shade higher. Beans, old, 41s t° - new, 36s to 38s per qr. SHEFFIELD—TUESD. There was a numerous attendance, and higher pr i g buY e were asked for wheat. Millers were reluctant rg little business was done until toward 6 the close of the mat' ket, and sales were freely Made at - late currencies. f,„ at made late prices. Beans, barley, and oats sol d slowAais about the terms of last week. Inquiries for se ed 85 were numerous, the best samples making 270 per tir'escd Red wheat, per load of 3 'nip. bushels... •158 ou to ss a White do New red do 50 d 7 , cl New white do do l l7s 0 0 4 / 1 5 8 0 5 d d o do ..,.16 8 6d 160 tid Beans do Peas. per qr. Grinding Oa,. icy, per qr do .. 1 34 5 00 8 1,8 ( w0d 4 o(sz - t p : rad. Malting barley, ( o 32s Od •,-_ od Oats, do 2ls Od Oa F10ur....1s 5d to 13 lid per 141 b. LEEDS—TU E. 312 We have certainly more doing inSDAY w h ea t to -dg th e 0 ,1 11- , Friday, and the rates of that day are in all in s nts ° 1 " . ceeded ; barley as before, beans quite as dear, o --. other articles without material alteration. _ endre' • The average prices fof the week ending March OO4 Wheat, 38s 51d. per qr. ; barley, 30s ad ; 21s O'd. CORK—MONDAY. The following were the quotations this morial u b • 60 v" 64 wheat, 7s 6d to Os Od ; white, 8s 8d to Os Od; b a rlef/ 4d t° c.a to 7s Od ; oats, 5s 3d to 6s 8d ; black oats, 68 bere, Os Od. Foreign Mail Packet List• gar. " Australia and New Zealand, via Southam pton ..... l5. Ditto, via Marseilles .......................... 6. Brazil and Cape Verde, by British pac; et ........... far. Ditto, by British packet . ............ 21. Cape of. Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena.- ••';:-; r 4. China, Penang, and Singapore, via Sou hampton•''` a Ditto, via Marseilles ........................••• Falkland Islands ........ ...... • 101. " a. Gibraltar, via Southampton. ..... ... _ ......... India ( Calcutta ), and Ceylon, via Southampto n ** . 1 , 4 0. 1 5 ' Ditto, via Marseilles ..... ........ . - ......;j r 14. India (Bombay), via Southampton.. ............... gar. 8 : Ditto, via V arseitles .. ..................... • • .. 110 lt• Mauritius, via Southampton .................... . I f a r. S' Ditto, via Marseil e •,.. ................... •• • li g . 1 6 . Newfoundland ......... . °' Portugal •• • •• • .........gar. Ditto, by private ship to Lisbon - • • • • Un;ted Mates and British North America, .by Bri" a r 15 . Lr . tish packet ........ • • '' Ditto, by United States packet, via Southarar t, n .. Ditto, via C rk gar. i 0• Ditto, by Canadian packet, via Londonderry.....- r )3. West Ceast of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe •ft' ll * West Indies and Pacific (except Bahazhas, Cuba , 16. and Mexico g a t Bahamas, via New Y ork. .................................. 3 , an Bermuda, ditto .................................... 31, . Cuba and Mexico ..... . gar. gafentihondse;,tresig .i, lus t FRENCH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES.----At the of sitting Dr. Montucci read a paper on a gl etho ily ,, his for solving equations of the fifth degree nioncric`ioa Until within the last few years the solution of ages y th e e ars hig a h g e o r m eqz j at e i rr on a s rd hat d l ia b c 7 v n er s e o d ug a h t for in vain. re" cess by means of which an equation of thien a nd upon i ' s 5 s might be deprived of three of its terms ; discovery M. Hermite, a member of the Institute, i ll bu t founded an algebrioal solution of these eq uations; sea t the very complicated formulae obtained by the sbstra th nli .0 ri theorems of integral calculus are unfit for log' c not P" calculation, and _therefore only of theoretical, ast , - tical interest. Dr. Montucci's solution is as e 115 1 6, of practical as . those we possess for ecriaf s,3l° the, the third and fourth degrees. It is derived '''' '" elements of a curve to , wh he has given t he l'° of cubo-cycloid. M. Valliant read a paper on a llevihesl)°- reproduction of annelide (the class to which le e bo la long) by means of buds or excrescences which/ c f a f O A separated from the mother, become perfect worm do Re,," same kind. The annelide in question lives was .. °{oll/1: Sea, and belongs to to the Syllidian , s ;it le at l: in a sponge, and is four millimetres i' l . an f th" The buds alluded to are all situated on the upp er9 o °II little creature.—M. Deherain sent in a conincan'esroloi°oteS the influence of plaster on arable laud. f t ,, P- m ad i' ll i .. the solubility of the :potash contained in the seli , ; et a t prisoned, as it -were, in. clay ; and being tb „ a veg et6- ibeity by the plaster, it acts more directly de - the s 9 / 4 tion. Plaster performs the same office as reg arcis it °a sse t monia contained in the soil. But since thereby - so il, . these alkalies to descend to the lower strata of ales its can only be beneficial to the growth of legnolia,t clePtb' the roots of which penetrate to a considers'-09,1! and not to corn, the roots of which are only sue: ra ele st M. Villiers du Terrage sent in a description of i ' t 6 po ll observed by him on the 17th of February las.t 1 : 8 1 to t, lj i , e o at Auteuil. Its trajectory was nearly Par a ; i dter ; l o . l ) horizon, and remained visible for some Inie llt :b - a t 11 ,10 passage in the shape of a line of light simila r t ° froal, ; `, - a is left behind by a rocket. The direction 3 ' s s ew' north to south, and occurred in the N. and N' t he f tjl° of the sky. den t e c ell THE LIFE OF C/ESAR.—A correspon-- , 0 s --' Nord says :—" The publication of the Life of ca).7,..,,i'a1, one of the most important affairs of the dal. l e oPi e ,ol fact may be cited. M. Plon had 13,00 0 b° a ' j ,, left , i f stock. This morning (the 4th) he has not ea' ao ple l e 22,000 more are ordered. These copies, w itil ,, ,„,. exceptions, are sent to the country bookseller de to r P- 7 ; FLOGGING IN THE ARMY.—A return ra il v ier° !, r o liament yesterday shows that during 1862 the bars, IVof men flogged in the army. These persons, it, l l,P,, ij uad de , r a ordered 18,600 lashes, and received 18,180. "•"'"- 1,49% -13 men marked with the letter D during 1862 was the number marked B 0, 37 :_____________...... ......."' "°°. ..•.-. I)• w oo of 51. BRBlSrTisOtWEowe.—, Esq. ont , h o e f 7 a th so i n n r :s i t. r , t a h t s l;ulwie ll ' the - wife a If• °‘ COULSON.—On the 7th inst., at Croydon+ tile vrif ; of C ' Coulson, Esq., of a daughter.' Go G scH ose E h N e . n7 o E n sq t . h , e of 7t a n d i a n u s g t. h , taetr.Beddingt°'l7 the (3°' tIA o . o y, $ 64 HENRY.—On the sth inst., at. WalthamAm - • wife of Major G. C. Henry, R.A., a ii sou. „ce, Marriages. .i ;nt La 'll ' BEETON—CORNABY.—On the 6th inst., at wit.- 0 0(1,, 1 ° ,0r Jewry, Gresham-street, Edward Alber t, 5 4. ‘'- re tt 1 104 1 of ilk -st ye the late Samuel P. Beeton Esq. side, to Marian, second daughter of John C is liogi of Ditchingham, Norfolk. Afar?' titer ° COLES—TAYLOR.—On the 4th inst., at t. - dog youngest ton, Henry Coles, jun., to Alice the late Mr. Richard Taylor, of Purfleet. i j eoa ar6l' Deaths. B, BARLOW.—On the 6th inst., suddenly', at ~0 , 14. 1V.' place, Colonel George E. P. Barlow. BLAKE.—On the sth inst., at 21, Dorset -54 11°-' icy' Blake, Esq., aged 54. Witl g h .fti CATHCART.—On the sth inst., at Leafaingn, Cst shire, E Colonel the Hon. Frederick Tifaca . 3ew -il4 aged 76. CLARK.—On the sth inst., at Goddard's 3 7 1 8 1 '. .-lelr . Lincolnshire, Captain Matthew Clark, aged lees' yi stree t, Isi l JACOES.—On the 6th inst., at 10, Dought burg-square, Mr. Henry Jacobs, aged 9 :, place , house, Captain Duncan WArtlinr• Ge°' O st M'ARTnuit.—On the sth inst at N° 1" -- foiy/or, 't ThE rp ß oe x wr lN icin, a.—g,eoln6sqt3.!,l6o/disiininstg.,tot, Ban47d, Cairt3;s:rda.:_gr_e___ea,:o, —-- ----- 10 0 "" , ------ - -- -- , f iAlki A So ( London : Printed and Pubiiklled by WI.-. --- o ffice, - t y 0- of No. 112, Strand, Muter, at Tfis SIN_ the coall Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, w Middlesex.-Wedntoday, March 8, 1845' T° t he t ° N .ti ti l ei % 0 4 VE 4 1 il k kX .,t b er Ith ill ellj ill•Etii, ittl Q cc , .tt ecl 4 t 1 4 ,14 , tl .Dtl 4, Dr. T Tt t/