The Sun. — London, England, 1842-04-23 00:00:00

you need entertain no appnhensions ; the prices of pro visions Will not be lowered ; you have nothing to fear, and the' - consumer ha's nothing to hope." When the Corralill. was under - consideration the Right Ilon. Ba ronet_ said he was constantly placed between the fire of two. parties. Those on his (Mr. C. Buller's) side of that House told him (Sir R. Peel) that his measure would not admit an atom of foreign corn ; and if he re plied to it, up got an agricultural Member, and said— " Oh, you are going to ruin us by deluging us with fo reign; corn." In the present discussions the Right Hon. Baronetleant over the table and told the Opposition, " Oh, you will have provisions cheaper," and the next moment he turned round and addressing his (Sir R. Peel's) own supporters said—" there will be no reduction in the price 'whatever."—(Cheers and laughter.) The Right Hon: Baronet had not stated ,the fact so broadly as he (Mr.' C. Buller) had put it— ( Ministerial cheers)—but he would upeal•to any Gentleman who had heard the de bates,: if that were not the purport and intention of the—arg-uinent which the light Bon. Baronet had urged, according to whether it was a free trade Govern- ment on that (the Opposition) side of the house,, or an agricultural Government on the other side that was to be conciliated ?—(Cheers and laughter.) Then there was some Honourable Gentlemen on his (the Oppo ition) side of the House, who voted for the Present Bill, not because they liked an Income-tax, but because they had a great fancy for direct taxation. They liked a Property-tax so much that they would even take it with an Income-tax if they could not get it without. An Honourable Gentleman on the other side cheered Honourable Members when they said this. lie would ask Honourable Members on the other side, if they had considered what would really be the effect of a Property-tax. Every time a Gentleman said, " I do not like an Income-tax, as an Income-tax, but I like a Property-tax," they cheered. Had they really considered the consequence of this ? Did they suppose that an Income-tax would be popular? Did they suppose that when the people would have to submit to the proposed inquiries, and make those returns of their revenue, and make the consequent payments, that the Income-tax would be popular that their constituents would not move against it ? Some thought that the tax on incomes would be repealed, and that on property retained. Those who thought so only deceived themselves very much. His Hon. and Learned Friend, the Member for Bath (Mr. Roebuck) bad a notice of motion on the paper to the effect that in Committee he would propose that, instead of sevenpence in the pound, threepence-halfpenny only be levied on persons deriving incomes from trades and professions. .The Hon. and Learned Gentleman might depend_ on it he would not have many at the other side to join him in taking off a part of the Income-tax. They would have an Income-tax as well as a Property tax, or none at all. Let it not •be supposed that Mon. Gentlemen opposite would consent to a tax on property without a tax on incomes. He (Mr. B.) con mural in the proposal of his Hon and Learned Friend from mere motives of humanity. If he could save any human being from the Income-tax by means, no matter whether just or unjust, he would endeavour to do so. Not that he thought the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's proposition was foun ded on justice, for if they would exempt the professional man, why not 'also exempt the holder of a life estate ? The amendment of his Hon. Friend the Member for 33ath was glaringly unjust. When they exempted any :.'find of income from the tax they only left the remainder more unjust. He then came to the proposition of the Noble Lord the Member for London, and he fully agreed with him, that they could deal with the plan by amend ments, it must be unjust under any circumstances; they must reject it altogether or take it in all its injustice. He mast confess that the more he dwelt on the subject the more strong were his objections to the tax alto gether, and the more strong was his conviction of the utter fallacy of the opinion in favour of the policy of a direct taxation—direct taxation on income. All taxation takes equally from the means of every man's enjoyment; an income was no measure of that enjoyment. A young _professional man had one income, the man more ad vanced in life had a much larger one. The man with a large family saved one proportion, the man without a family sated another. He would defy them to meet these differences 'with direcataxation. Different classes lived in different styles ; but on all these, they come with their rough and barbarous direct - taxation, which he agreed was a direct taxation of a barbarous period, by that they swept away all distinctions, and what came light upon one class, weighed with a heavy pressure on another. He did not say as a consequence that they were obliged to carry out all the bad principles of taxation. They need not raise all the revenue by taxation on articles of necessity ; for he thought they were quite • just in men tioning the amount of assessed taxes that had been repealed since the war, no less than 4,000,0001.; they might have recourse to that system of taxation again, and raise the revenue by indirect taxation. He thought from the history of the world that they might get arguments against taxation. It had always been a budge of slavery, and the only ;instance he knew of a direct tax in time of peace during any considerable time, was the case of a tax which no one could defend, the Gabelle in France. The land-tax of this country was so odious that at the classes who paid it had been gradually gettiea rid of it from the time of the Revolution, so that the ' present moment it was not half the amount which it was in the time of George 11. The history of that tax showed the tendency of freemen to get rid of direct taxation. Yet there was nothing in quisitorial in the land-tax. It was a tax of se' much per nere, not entering into value-41 tax' upon thdrvisible , means of visible property. Now - take the ,historyoof the. United States of Americ!.. They. ;Werft ,, accustomed to -consider those States as affording a specimen of ..democratic government,. and therefore of. what the people would do -it' they had their own wax in laying on taxation. Now the history of the tinted States was this, that the whole revenue. of the Central Government had always been raised by indirect taxation, and in the history of all . the sepa rate States of which the Union was composed, he kneW of only one instance, that of Ohio, in which there had been a tax upon income and property, except - during the late war.—(Hear, hear.) It appeared that this tax was to be discussed upon • these democratic grounds. He owned he was not unwilling to discuss the question on such grounds, appealing to the welfare and interest of the working classes. But there might be language used in the House, which appealed not to the welfare and interest, but to the bad feeling of those classes, and he knew not by what other term he could characterize the language which had been held on the other side, by gentlemen high in office, who had attempted to support the tax by refe rence to the fact that the working classes would escape from it. He knew not how else to describe the hope expressed by the Right Honourable Baronet, that the meetings held on this subject would be attended by persons who had less than 150/. a year. He contended that that was dangerous language, far more dangerous than any which was used last night. He held that it would'be far more wise to concede the Charter at once, than to call in aid of this measure the freedom of theaverking classes from its operation, He was very glad to find that that language, inflammatory as it was, had produced' no effect whatever. By the bye, be malt, admit that it had produced no effect. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir James Graham) bad succeedkl that evening in presenting a petition from 2,500 • working r eople in Carlisle, re icing in the In come-tax. Ile did not complain much of this, because there was at least a kind of oscillatory consistency in in the Right Hon. Baronet's language.—(Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) In the inflammatory language which. he he'd now he recognised the language whiete he held in 1830, wherein he points out to the execration of the people those whom he then repre sented as fattening upon the spoils of the people by means of their aristocratic influence in legislation, and whom he denounced as the birds of prey. that preyed upon the people.—(Cheers.) But :he (Mr. C. 13.) was happy to rind that, beyond the demagogues Of the Treasury benches, the appeal had not been successful — that no meetings of electors had been disturbed by per sons intruding their opinions upon a tax which they were not to pay. 'lime Chartist press was not conciliated — the 'Weekly Dispatch opposed the tax, so that the Right Hon. Gentleman had not secured that approbation of that great writer, " Publicola."—(A laugh.) He saamld read to the House a passage from the National Association Gazette and lie must say that a, fairer indi cation of all the intellect and good feeling, which there was gatong-the Chartists, could not be found than that which proceetled from the pan of Lovett., ' The following wits the passage to which he referred Sir Robert Peel loudly - boasted - that he would. - not . tax the labourer,' and the boast was still more loudly cheered by thelignorant boobies who thronged the seats of .the House .of Commons." The lion. Member continued to read the extract. which stated that; in effect s the locome tax would eventually full upon the industrious classes. He had thought it right to read that pas sage to the House, to vindicate the body of the working' melt from the suspicion that they had yielded to the arguments which had been held by Gentlemen opposite, and that they wished for the impositiAU ()fain Income-tax, because it would fall only ow the rich. • , The working classes. felt that the tax would press heavily on themselves, and they op posed it as an encroachment on the comforts of every man in England. Ile, Applogised to the House for detaining then, in long, but the opposition to the measure . assumed now a different form.—(Cheers.) They :were. discussing the details. and principles of ahe Bill, and he Wm anxiou s to take the first proper oppor tunity of expressing his opposition to the Bill. lie was not sangu in e enough t o imagine that he should succeed on the present occasion ; but as one who had taken a strong part in opposition to the BA felt anxi ous to defend himself from the misr.epreFmnta.tions to which it appeared all those w4P• opposed either - the Bill or the Government were to be• subjected....„(Leud clieers.)• It . a Gentle man offered the slightest op pa a t i o n to the; immediate progress,' of the measure; he was told that his conduct was factious, and that if he chose to take art Dppqrtunity of discussing the question— and there were many Hon. Members around him, repre sentatives of large constituencies, who h a d a perfect right to do so—it seemed to be the tactic s of the Go vernment to set up Gentleman:after Gentleman to say, *" Ohl you are stopping the taritf, which it is most im portant to the best interests of the country should be im mediately considered."—(Loud cheers) They had a right , - fully, freely, and fairly to discuss, not only the bad principle of this measure, but its still worse details—(Loud cheers.)—and if by so doing they delayed the tariff, that was not their fault, but the fault of the Government.—(Loud cheers.) If the Government chase to press forward the Income-tax before the tariff, the responsibility of the delay must rest with the Government and not with them. lie knew that he was fighting against a majority—he knew that it was an uphill fight, but be knew that the op position to the income tax was grounded on reason and argument, and that when the tax was in operation when the Englishman should find all his circumstances exposed to the inquiries of the tax-gatherer, then would the odium attached to this inquisitorial impost fall upon the Government.—(Great cheering.) and every year that it should he kept up the stronger, the more determined, and ultimately the more successful would be the Opposition.—(Cheers.) The question having been put, Mr. EWART said that with some parts of the speech of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had just sat flown he concurred ; from others he differed. He (Mr. E) wished to draw a distinction between property and income, but he confessed that he was one of those, whether they were called Radicals or Liberals, who were in favour o f th at system of • di rec t taxation so much deprecated by the Honourable and Learned Gentleman. In America, so far as he understoo3, taxation, though indirect, was made to fall more on the rich than on the poor. In that coun try there was an approximation to the ad valorem system of taxation, which must apply to the rich more than to the p oor . I t was consequent ly a species of indirect Property-fax. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman had alluded to the case of France. He had told them of what 1% as done in France of old, - but he had not told them • what the system of taxati on was i n mo d ern F rance since th e revolution. Was not the land-tax in that country a system.of direct. taxation. Was there not also a per . sonal property-tax in existence in France. With respect to the Property-tax now proposed, he must confess that he did nut regard it ill the same light, as many did on that (the Opposition) sib: of the House ; more especi. ally the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) who considered it only as a war tax. The question appeared to him to be, what was the best tax to impose ? Whether a Property-tax was the best suited to the circumstances of the country or not, he (Mr. E.) abjured the distinc tion between a war-tax and a peace-tax. Whatever was the best tax to be applied to the circumstances of the country, that was the tax which they ought to impose. He agreed with what had been stated during this debate, that commerce had mtests "lable, if ,t contests as tormit...._ nth more formidable, than those of war. They were now engaged in a commercial contest, more formidable than a military contest. They had to compete with all the nations of the world. They had now all the disadvantages of competition with foreign nations. The consequence would be that some grel.tt effort must be made. The burden of taxation must be removed from labour and from com merce and put upon property. These were the contests they had to endure, far more formidable than any military or naval contest that had yet taken place. They had to compete with the people of the United States, whose energy and whose ma nufactures were constantly increasing. He was sorry to find from a return he had received from that part he had once re presented, Liverpool, that emigration had increased nearly ten fold. Many of those emigrants were persons connected with capital in this country, and many of them were manufacturers, who left behind them a large mass of industrious men to be supported by the remaining population. He said, therefore, that a Property-tax was a tax fora time of peace as well as war, be cause it was a tax 'calculated to relieve the labour of the country. He did not see how they could cheapen consumable articles without removing taxation from labour and placing it on pro perty. They were removing taxation from consumable articles, any they had no alternative but to impose it on income. With respect to the tariff of the Right Hon. Baronet, he partook of the character of an inverted pyramid; and instead of beginning at the foundation, he appeared to be beginning at what appeared to be the apex. He approved of the sound principles of freedom of trade, recognising and reducing the duty on consumable articles. When once such sound principles were in troduced, they worked their way through. they were sure to work their way through—still they must prevail. But lie objected to that part of the plan im posing a silty on coals exported. In that the Right Hon. Baronet had deserted the principle that prevailed in other por tions of the plan. It was a blemish, unless removed this year, must he expunged from it at a future time. It would act as a discouragement to the commercial steam navigation, and consequentlysto their naval steam force. He rested all his sup port of the principles of commercial freedom on the assurance it gave that this country would become the great depot of the world. Sir Hobert Walpole, who, except Pitt and Huskisson, was the greatest commercial Minister the country ever had, said, in his famous excise scheme, that they ought to divide articles of import into two sorts, those which were to be taxed and those which were not to be taxed ; they ought:to impose duty on few articles, ant to emancipate all articles as much as possible. So far as he has introduced his changes into the tariff, so far he was always moving in the right rirection. He should wish him to cut out from the Income-tax all the obnoxious clauses, and to extend the amelioration of the tariff. Sir JOHN WALSH said, it was evident that the Gentle men opposite who had approved the measure were widely sepa rated with one another as to the most important principles in volved in it. Much had been said about the inequality of thepro posedtax, but, to use a pithy passage that he had lately met with in a periodical—" A perfectly equal anti just tax would indeed be avery desirable tax to find, but it was a tax that would require Omniscience to discover, and Omnipotence to levy." In all taxation the principle of inequality met them at every step. Hon. Gentlemen opposite contended that the tax would be more just if applied solely and exclusively to the fixed property of the country, so that its operation wou'd not extend over in comes derived from trades and professions. He very much doubted the justness of that observation. He did not deny that many inequaliles might be adduced in the operation of this tax by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, hut he thought lie could adduce many necessary inequalities in the operation of this tax as applied to flied property. But, before he adverted to that point, he would shortly address himself to the propositions of some of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite,who defended a Property tax, provided it were applied to fixed property only. Those Gentlemen ought to be reminded, that in al the Acts creating the funded securities the State guaranteed the fuadhoider against any special taxation, and many persons, when Mr. Pitt tirst proposed his Income-tax, said that his proposition would be a violation of that promise ; and Mr. Pitt urged that that promise could never be held to apply to a measure of so sweeping a nature as the one lie had proposed, and which embraced alt the incomes of the country. Mr. Pitt wa,, right, and the flight Hon. Baronet was - right in following his example ; but by the adoption of the partial scheme of taxa tion advocated by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, although the fundholder would have a twin brother in affliation in the land- holder, the measure would nn longer be of that general and comprehensive n&ture, which alone Could justify the imposition of a tax on the funds without a breach of engagement.— ( Cheers.) He wou.d now proceed to notice the inequalities Io whieh. he had before alluded. He understood that the Right Hon. Baronet proposed to a sees all incomes derived from trades and profesSions on the net average returns of the last three years ; but with regard to the landholder the Income-tax was to becollected from the tenant, and the tax-gatherer having given him a receipt for the amount, he passed that to his landlord for rent as so much money. Every Gentleman who was at all familiar with the management of landed property would be aware that 20 per cent. was not more than the average amount of out-goings for landed es tates. —( Hear.) This being admitted, the landed proprietor would have to pay 2/. I7s. Bd. on 80/., whilst trades and pro fessions would only pay the same amount on 1001. There was another consideration which ought not to be lost sight of, namely, that capital invested in trades and professions yielded a much larger return than capital invested in land. He would suppose that three brothers each started life with a capital of 20,000/. One brother purchased an estate in land which yielded him a gross return of 6001. a year, reduced to 550/. by the outgoings incidental to landed property. Another invested in the funds, and received 6601. clear. The third engaged in mercantile operations, and if at all successful in his plans, he would realise 2,000/. a year. He really did not see upon what principles of equity, when the country was assessed in a case of emergency like the present, the 2,000/. was to be entirely free,• whilst the smaller incomes were taxed. There was another point which had been urged by Hon. Gentlemen opposite as to the instability and insecurity of property invested in trade, as compared with property invested in the funds, or in land. Now, he thought this argument had been pushed a great deal too far by Hon. Gentlemen opposite. It was assumed that property invested in trade could not be considered equal to landed property, and that it could not be inherited. Now, although he did not deny that landed and funded.property was more secure than capital invested in trade, he said that it was quite as secure in transmitting fortunes as landed property. Landed property was not altogether free from those chances which were attendant on all human affairs. Of late years, they had seen great fluctuations in the value of anded property. There had been such depression in the value of land, that many persons who had come into the possession of encumbered property had been reduced to the greatest state of destitution. He would ask lion. Gentlemen opposite, whether, at this time, an income of 10,0001. a-year derivable from a great establish ment in the metropolis—a brewery, for instance—was not as certain a source of income as 10,0001. derived from a landed estate? Great changes and revolution might occur in property. Legislation might affect property, but he thought the taste of the British public for porter was proof against all revolution. Laughter.) Even the Hon. Member for Wigan allowed that the tariff now proposed was a great boon. It remitted taxes to which those must have made up their minds who en tered into business seven or eight years ago. Why not give credit to the Government for this benefit? Consider what placed t he. Government in the want of so large a sum of money? The ex penses of the Chinese war were amongst the chief. How was that war produced? Why, in defence of British trade and com merce. At the expiration of the East India Company's chatter the trade with China was thrown open to the British mercantile world. Collisions with the Government and laws of Chin s were the unavoidable consequences. Tne East India Company would have conformed to the Chinese laws ; the new traders, perhaps, did not so well understand them, but, at all events, they quarrelled with the Chinese authorities. It must be acknowledged that the custom of 300,000,000 of people which ice sought is worth quarrelling for, and should those for whose benefit we were plunged into this war—should the merchants of the country, refuse to support the Government in the un avoidable expenses of that war, which, in its motives, was quite different from our quarrel with the Affgharis ? With respect to the war in Affghanistan, Hon. Gentlemen had long accused them of exaggerating its effect and importance. He thought if they looked back there were times when the affairs in India were in as critical a state as at present. Looting at the subject in a financial point of view, he would say that there had been wars more dangerous, but there could not be ar y more expensive. But it was necessary that the effort should be commensurate with the occasion, and the Right Hon. Baronet was bound to carry on the war. Many Gentlemen had alluded to the state of the foreign relations of this country, and the Noble Lord had admitted that hostile feelings existed in other countries. In his opinion the subject of the relations of this country was an extremely delicate one, and required to be treated most carefully by a Minister ; hut he, as a private individual, might use language %Lich a Minister could not. He lamented that in France there existed a certain national jealousy and hostility of feeling towards this country which he hoped the temper and diScretion of the Right Hon. Baronet would enable him to allay. However, it was a f eling %Odell, under irritating circum stances, it would be very difficult for even the wisest ant most moderate Government to restrain, and which no Government could be wholly justified in overlooking. The French people would respect them when they saw them taking the most direct means of meeting the present emergency. lie would conclude by stating his determination to support the pro position of the Right lion. Baronet. He hoped the necessity would soon pass away, that trade would revive, and that those clouds which hung over their relations would be dissipated in a few wears. Then it would be politic to reduce the tax. He was not prepared to continue a tax from motives cf conve nience, the imposition of which he justified on the ground of its necessity. When the necessity ceased, he trusted it would be the first object and care of the Right Hon. Baronet to remove the tax, which he (Sir John Walsh) must consider onerous, but which he was sure would be willingly borne as long as the necessity required it. He had confidence that he would only continue the tax as long as necessity rendered it imperative. Sir W. CLAY said, that the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had endeavoured to show that there may be as great in• justice in a Property-tax as in an Income-tax, and that this tax could only be justified on the ground of the emergency of the circumstances. His Hon. Friend, the Member for Dum fries, on the Contrary, endeavoured to prove that the tax on property rest e d on sound principles, and that it was much better than a tax on consumption. He considered that the arguments on the general question were exhausted, or nearly so, but he wished to point out to the night Hon. Baronet one portion of his plan which had hitherto been but little commented upon, but which he thought well worthy the attention of the House— he meant the regulations as to the mode in which the tax was levied on the agriculturist.—( Hear.) He begged distinctly to state, that he did not, for one moment. imagine that the object of the Right lion. Baronet, in levying the tax to only half the amount on persons employed in agriculture, was to give any unfair advantaee to the agricultural interest. He believed the object of the Hight Hon Baronet was to get at the profits of the farmer. The Right Hon. Baronet took the rent, and assumed the farmers' profits as one half the rent. He assumed that there were some given relation between the profits of the farmer and the rent which he paid. He (Sir W. Clay) denied that any such relation existed. What was rent ? He thought the Right Hon. Baronet would admit that the usually received definition of rent was the right ene. Rent consisted of the surplus pro.. fits derived from the employment of capital in agricultural pur suits, over and above the usual rate of interest upon such capital. For instance, if the rate of interest were 5 per cent., and money employed in agricultural pursuits produced 15 per cent., the relit Would be the surplus 10 per cent. It could be nothing else; and as the general rate of farming profits must be equal, whether a farmer rents fertile land or poor land, it is clear that he cannot pay the same amount of rent. If it be true that the rate of farming profit is three times larger than the profits of any other pursuit, then the preposition of the Right Hon. Baro net was just, and he would not ask the exact measure of profit; hat that could only be true in a small number of instances, and in by far the gloater number of instances it would be too high or too low. The subject was an abstruse one, and to make his meaning intelligible, he would suppose a case. Let them take the case of a farmer renting 300 acres of land. If 15s. an acre, then it would be 275/., and the tenant would escape the tax altogether, inasmuch a; the Right Hon. Gen . tlernan proposed to tax farms only of 3001. a year ; but if the land was let at 31. an acre, that would be a rental of 900/., and upon one-half of that 4501. the tenant would be taxed three per cent., or 131. 101. Now, was it at all clear that he made a profit of 4501 , or that the other tenant made only 135/. ? On the contrary, there was not the slightest ground for supposing that the capital employed on the land paying 31. an acre realised more profit to the tenant than the capital employed on the land at 15s. per acre. The surplus profit went to the landlord. Therefore the Right Honourab'e Gentleman committed great injustice, be cause he charged on the farm, which might not per haps yield more profit than a farm of less value, a tax of 13/. or 14/. What was the result of the principle laid down by the Right Hon. Gentleman? He (Sir W. C.) was quite aware that the Right Hon. Gentleman was not answerable for that principle.. The principle was this, it exempted all incomes under 1501. a year, but the tax was not levied on the real pro fits of the farmer. He believed he was justified in saying, at least he had taken some pains to inquire, that out of the who;e of the farmers of Great Britain, 'lreland, and Wales, there were not less than two-thirds under 300/. a year—therefore they exempted from taxation two-thirds of the farming capital of, the country. It was difficult to say what that capital was, as statistical information on the subject was very defective; but, he believed, if he said that capital was from three to four hun dred millions, he should not overstate it; so that two thirds of that large amount they exempted from taxation, and . , by so doing, they committed an injustice upon one class of the country at the expense of another. He could not conceive that the reason for thispeculiarity as regarded the mode of reckoning the rents of farming capital, could be justified by anything in the peculiar position of the farmer. On the contrary, he could see why it should be far less objectionab'e to 'apply the inquisitorial process to the farmer than the ordinary trader. A farmer was in a very slight. degree subject to credit, or a supposition of wealth. He was not subject to the bankrupt laws ; his principal creditor must be his landlord, and his principal debtors his labourers ; and on the whole it must be easier to arrive at his profits than those of the ordinary trader. He (Sir W. Clay) considered this pro cess, as regarded the fanner, was based on principles which were false ; he held that the effect of it would be, to exempt a large portion of the capital of this country employed in agriculture from the payment of this tax, and that he held to be unfair. He was quite disposed to give the Right Hon. Baronet full credit for a large portion of his commercial tariff, and in the discussion of it the Right lion. Baronet should h ave w h a t ever humble support it was in his power to give.—( Hear, hear. ) In some portions of it, however, he thought that Gentlemen had been ready to give credit for that which he thought did not deserve it. He should only allude now to one special point, because the loss of revenue which that position occasioned was one justification for the impOsition of the Income-tax—he alluded to the alteration of the tax on timber. That measure was approved of by the Honourable and Gallant Commodore the Member for Marylebone, by his Honourable Friend the Member for Dumfries, and the Member fer Wolverhampton. Those Gentlemen justified the plan on the ground that it would be of great advantage to the shipping interest. He (Sir W. Clay) did not think that that was true. He did not believe that Canadian timber was used to any great extent in English commercial ship-building. To whatever extent it might be useful to build the inferiorclass of merchant vesselsof Canadian timber, to that extent there was a sufficient supply in those colonies. Those ships were very useful, and were built to a great extent in those places, and• it would be quite out of the question to enter into competition with them. He did not think the reduction in the duty upon Canadian timber was large enough to insure any considerable increase in its use among the poorer classes; and the Right Hon. Baronet had not, in his opinion, any sufficient motive for throwing away so large an amount of duty. Of the Income-tax he entirely dis approved, under the existing circumstances of the country. He did not think it was justified by necessity, and he should therefore vote for the amendment of his Hon. Friend the Men.- her for Liskeard. Sir. EWART explained. Mr. WAKLEY said that, notwithstanding all he had heard in the course of these debates, he was still disposed to believe that a Property-tax was the best that could be imposed ; and he exceedingly regretted to find that the present Bill was so framed that he could not give it his support. lithe Right Hon. Baronet had proposed even a graduated Income-tax, he would sincerely support him, because be believed that no tax could operate so unjustly in this country as a tax which fell directly on the working.classes of the community. The Right Hon. Baronet, in the different speeches he had made, had em phatically denounced any taxation of the poor. He denounced taxes upon industry. But the Right Hon. Baronet was about to tax industry; he was about to tax incomes derived f.om labour, when they exceeded 150/. a year. Now, he (Mr, Wakley) thought that they should not, at all events, tax to the same amount incomes derived from profs , sional exertions and iccouns derived from fixed capital. 'that was felt by the public to be an intolerable grievance, and, he was perfectly satisfied it would not be endured.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The Hon. Gent.then real a letter from an individual who stated that with a capital of 5,0001. he- employed 34 clerks and la bourers, besides horses ; that the gross returns were 25,000/., arid that he paid various taxes to the amount of 1001., :Ind asked, was it fair to tax the profits of his industry, while, it he had the same in the funds, only the interest of it would be taxed? But, said the Hon. Gentleman, the Right Hon. Baronet makes the investigation into his means a secret one. Now he (Mr. Wakley) thought it ought to be made public. He con sidered it desirable that publicity should be a check upon the proceedings of the Commissioners. Sir R. PEEL —The party still have the option of going before the local Commissioners or the special Commissioners appointed by the Government. Mr. WA KLEY (in continuation)—What he wished was that the party might have the power, ifhe wished, of a public investigation before the local Commissioners. He thought it very unjust that they had not. The Commissioners would, in point of fact, decide judicially, and, in such a case, every judge ought to decide publicly. The case he alluded to was one out of many thousands. He thought the present tax would end in a graduated one. He was sure such a demand would arise. He w 7 as ready to acknowledge that there was no strong feeling against the Income-tax out of doors.—(Loud Ministerial cheers.) His impres_ion, was that the opinion out of doors was that the tax was the most just that could be imposed. He thought the Right Hon. Baronet bad made a gigantic effort to meet the present difficulties.—( Cheers. ) It would be unfair, and unmanly, and ungenerous to deny that. = (Cheers.) It might make him unpopular, but he was there to do his duty, and he was bound to state that he considered no, system of taxation so fair and just as a direct tax on the property of the country. The Hon. Member for List:eard objected to direct taxation. He really did not know where he could have learned his political eco nomy. Ile preferred direct, taxation; he liked to see the tax gatherer come and make his demand openly ; then the tax payer began to ask what it was applied fur, and thus every mars gradually became a political Reformer. But the sum they were about to collect by the tax was inadequate to its in quisition ; is was only one-fourteenth of the whole revenue. Had it been one-half, he should have been delighted with it. He contended that the sliding scale, applied to Income-tax, was just and inevitable. If ever the sliding scale was justi fiable, it was in reference to this tax. He wanted to know why it could not be applied ? They had the slidin g scale ap plied to horses, ca rr i ages , servants , an d windows, and why could not they apply it to income? Those who advocated the sliding scale applied to corn, ought to be gratified at seeing their political opinions carried out, for he was confident, from the general opinion, that the people would not rest satisfied unless the tax on income was made a graduated one. The sliding scale was also applied to receipt stamps, inland and foreign bills of exchange, securities for money lent, and promissary notes. According to the plan of the Right Hon. Baronet, a man with 2001. a year would have 6/. withdrawn from his income, while the man with 6,0001. would have 180/. a year withdrawn from his income. In the ease of the former you deprive the man of the value of a suit of clothes, but in the case or the latter, what deprivation was there whatever ? If he could have no pleasures from 6,000/. a year, minus 1801., he must be a very avaricious fellow, and the more they taxed him the better for himself and for hl3 country. A constituent of his (Mr. Wakley), who was a clerk, had told him that his salary was 160/. ayear, and that last year, alter having observed tt.e strictest economy, he still found himself 11/. in debt at the close of the year. In consequence, he and his wife came to the resolution of snaking some sacrifices to keep out of debt; but now cause the Right Hen. Baronet with his tax, which would deprive them of 4/. 103. per annum. Under those circumstances, he had asked him (Mr. W.) what he was to do. The operation of the tax would, he said, leave him quite destitute. His family consisted of a wife and four ciiiidren, and a little servant girl. The servant he should be obliged to discharge, and the 6/. wages which he had paid to her, would go as his contribution to the tax. There was an instance of how the poorer classes would be affected by the ope ration of the lion. Baronet's mea s ure ; and the poor servant girl whom he would be obli g ed to discharge, was a m em b er o f a family of 7 children, the father of whom was a cripple. There was another point to which he would refill.. How was the Right Hon. Baronet to guard against frauds in certain instances —suppose a man had 40,000/. in the funds, and he divided it amongst his family into ten parts, how could they guard against fraud in such a case? The Right Honourable Baronet had also laid a great stress upon his plan of taxing the Irish absentees. Now he (Mr. W.) wanted to know how they were to tax Irish absentees residing in France, in Faly, or in any other part of the Continent? The farmers in England had often asked, why it was that they were taxed, and the Irish farmers were not ? For these reasons, he felt himself bound to vote against the Hon. Baronet's measure, though reluctantly. He believed that an Income-tax would, in some circumstances, be just, and that a Property-tax, in the present circumstances of the country, was the very best that could be impo,ed. Mr. D'ISRAELI said it was admitted on all hands that new taxes roust be imposed to meet the necessities of the country ; and in his opinion, therefore, the only question properly was as to the causes which had rendered new taxc i s necessary. No thing eou dbe more the duty of the House of Commons than to investigate the causes of the present state of things. The present deficiency was not confined to this country alone; a great deficiency existed in our Indian empire, and the wars which had been carried on in India were to tc regarded as the wars, not of the Eait India Company, but of the English nation. II was a matter of notoriety that the deficiency in England and India commenced at the same time: Was it aristocratic legisla tion that had caused the revenues of India and England to vanish ? Ile would not enter into the policy or impolicy of Corn-laws, but no one could say they had decreased commerce, because it had not declined. The revenue of the country had not declined, but its expenditure had increased. The foreign policy of the late Government had destroyed the surplus, and produced the present great deficiency, What was that ?obey ? Why, it was engaging in a war that had never met v‘ ith the sanction of the Sovereign, had never been developed by the Minister, or sanctioned by Parliament. That war had brought disaster, and occasioned ruinous expense —such expenses as had rendered it necessary on the part of the present Ministers to propose an Income-tax. By that war the surplus of two great empires had been extinguished, and yet the Ministers that had occasioned it had been allowed to escape without inquiry. M hen a Noble Lord came down to that House, and said he would divide the House on every opportunity oft, this subject, he (Mr. D'lsraeli) was surprised that no Member On that (the Opposition) side of the Muse never came down to inquire into the cause of these deficiencies. The first duty they had to per. form was to inquire into the causes of these deficiencies, and to have thrown the responsibilities of those deficiencies on those who had caesed them. Mr. CHRISTIE, as a young Member, claimed the indul gence ol• the House while he explained his reasons for sup porting the Hon. Member fur Liskeard. He objected to this tax for its direct nature. He objected to this tax be cause it was the most hurtful of all taxes that could be imposed. Its inquisitorial nature must be attended with the greatest evils ; it was calculated to engender deceit and demoralisation amongst the people. This tax was unequal, harassing, and mischievous, revolting to the feelings of individuals, and only to be resorted to in cases of the last emergency—( Hear, hear)—and even then, when resorted to, it entailed a most serious responsibility on the party proposing it. The Right Hon. Gentleman, some years ago, said that it was most unwise to establish such a disgusting imposition for the purpose of raising three or four per cent. Now this was the very per centage the Right Him. Baronet proposed to raise. —(He;r, hear.) He (Mr. Christie) was aware that the cir cumstances of the country were different now, but the Right Hon. Baronet might have adopted the proposition of the Noble Lord, the Member for London, to place a tax of no importance to individuals—a small tax upon articles of general consumption —which would have raised the amount required, or even have resorted to the house or window tax, which, though in themselves direct taxes, did not possess the hurtful and inqui sitorial character of an Incomes tax. ' The Hon. Member for Northampton supported the Right Hon. Baronet, on the ground that the Income-tax was a price paid for important concessions made by the Right Hon. Baronet. Now, he (Mr. Christie) did not know what those concessions were. Did the Hon. Member see them in the Corn Bill, or did he see them in the tariff, beginning with a differential duty of 109 per cent. on coffee, with a heavy tax of 30s. per load on foreign timber, and a nominal duty of Is. a load on colonial timber 2 ( Hear, hear.) Certainly, if these were the steps taken by the Right Hon. Baronet towards free trade, the price which the Hon. Member for Northampton would pay for these con cessions, was a very extravagant one indeed.—(Cheers.,) The Hon. Member for Bath, who was another of the Right Honourable Baronet's supporters on that (the Opposition) side of the House, supported the Right Honourable Baro net from another consideration. He thought that the deficiency ought to be made up by economy in the Government establishments. but the Honourable Member said there was no possibility, in the present state of the House. of his view being successful. He (Mr. Christie) thought it would be a long time before they saw that economy. The Hon. Member for Bath said, that seeing there was no pro bability of his views being carried out, he should support the proposition of the Right Hon. Baronet, in the hope that he would ultimately adopt that economy the Hon. Member wished to see practised ; but he (Mr. Christie) thought it would be a long time before the Hon. Member wrung from the Right Hon. Baronet this economy. He confessed that this ground for supporting the proposition looked very like inconsistency. The Bill would go into Committee and would come out of it with what the Hun. Member for Bath called a gross and palpable injustice. If the House would bear with him he would mention one other reason why he opposed the proposi tion of the Right Hon. Baronet; and which he thought had not been mentioned before._( Hear, hear.) The man who could command only 2001. or 300/. or 40.1. a year, earned from some trade and profession, with a large family to support, would suffer a great deal more than the single man with 150/. a-year. People whose claims were under 150/. a year, were those who were probably ac customed to humble desires and humble eccupations; but go a little higher and you would find those who, besides having to pay something for the sake of appearances, had large ex penses to pay for the education of their families, from whom, perhaps, might rise those vche might yet be a lustre to the Bris tish nation. To allow those whose profits were under 150/. a year to escape, and to make these men pay the tax was a gross and palpable injustice. He considered this measure was the last exigency of a Government. The Right Hon. Gen tleman's agricultural supporters would not allow him to impose a fixed duty upon corn.-4 Hear, hear.) And then with re gard to the tariff, no good was done to the manufacturers of this country by it ; but the colonial producers were allowed to go unscathed, and in order to do them the least possible harm and to do the consumers the least possible good, he inflicted a great loss upon the revenue.—( Hear, hear.) These were the rea sons which should lead him to give his hearty support to the amendment of his Hon. Friend the Member for Liskeard ; and be could not sit down without expressing his thanks to the House for the attention with which he had been heard. Mr. SMYTHE said there was one principle in which he perfectly agreed with the Him. Member for Liskeard, and that was, that we were not called upon absolutely, and, in the abstract, to discuss whether the Income-tax were a good mea sure or a bad: one, because, he believed, that Hon. Members might consider this measure inquisitorial, as it hail been called, and yet vote for the Income-tax. When Mr. Pitt entered office, he found the . country involved to the amount of 4,844,0001., and what did he do? Why, he, issued Exchequer bills to the amount of five and a half millions. He considered this to be entirely a question of confidence.—(Oh.) Their opposition he believed to be a mere opposition of formula and faction. Hon. Member's on the other side had said, that this was no question of Caubul or Affghanistan ; the Noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool, justly asked what would be the effect of this intelligence when proclaimed in China, and in Nepaul. They must all remember the overthrow of the British Legions, and the disgrace of Matthews. The inevitable tendency of affairs in India would be to create unquiet. If they should lose their markets in the New World, they might yet have to repair to the Old World to compensate for their loss. They might have to repair to India for that sugar which the United States •and the Brazils might withhold. He could not therefore, under stand the reason of deprecating our relations in that quarter of the globe. Ought not this to be a consideration in the e) eof a far-seeing statesman? If he wanted further elements of justi fication for the tax prOposed by the Right Hon. Geatleman, he would remind the House of what the Right Hon. and Gallant Commodore, the Member for Marylebone e said that a British fleet in 1840 meeting a French fleet would not have been.vic torious, followed up as that was by what he said, that never did he remember such a crisis ae the present, in the course of his long arid renowned career, with the exception of two occasions, in which he was perhaps biassed hy his professional feeling— the mutiny at the Note, and the mutiny at Portsmouth. For this reason he supported the tax, though he d d not con sider it a; a perfect measure--" that foul less monster which the world ne'er saw." Admitting that this measure was repugnant to the spirit of the constitution, and to a large por tion of the public, admitting that it partook in the character of the dictatorship of Rome, he still supported it as a just, a suf ficient, and an honourable' safeguard.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. W. 0. STANLEY said lie hoped, that when the tariff came to he discussed, the Right Hon. iiaronet would be induced to modify in some degree that portion of the tariff which related to coals and copper, as he believed the effect of it would he to throw some hundreds of miners out of work, and upon the landowners: He did not wish to occupy the attention of the House any longer. Mr. SCOTT said though he had a very she feeling of the inexpediency of the measures brought forward by the Go vernment. he did not mean to throw any opposition in their way.—(Hear, hear.) . The question b e f ore t h em was , whe ther this was the time to impose such a tax? It appeared to him that the origin of the tax was to be traced to a wish to maintain monopoly.—( Hear, hear.) If the measures pro posed by the late Goverment were carried they would have a far less deficiency to provide for, and the interests of trade would be materially benefited. That was hit opinion, and he also thought that those great advantages were set aside for the sake of the landed interest.—( Hear, hear.) That being his opinion he thought. that a land -tax was the best to be proposed; and if that were the tax, it would have his cordial support. If the tax were proposed to relieve the consumers, it would be another thing; but the Right lion. Baronet proposed it for a temporary purpose, not for the sake of relieving the people from the taxes on consumption. The tax he proposed was not a tax on proporty, but it was an In come-tax, which was the worst that could be resorted to. If, instead of taxing trades and professions, the Right lion. Baro net taxed property, he would give him his cordial support. With regard to tl e time the tax was to continue, he thought that the difficulties and inquisit , whi ;41 attended it, would prevent any fear as to •its being borne for aay considerable time by the people. In its own nature the tax way unjust, but in its- practical work ing out it was rendered ten times more unjust, and, therefore it was one which the House ought not to press. The measure gave a temptation to dishonesty which the House oughtnot to sanction. Upon those grounds, and believing the Right Hon. Baronet had not made out a case to justify the imposition of the tax he should enter his protest against it. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the second reading For the amendment Majority for the second reading The Bill was then read a second time, and was ordered (as we understood) to be committed on Monday next. WAYS AND MEANS. On the motion of Sir O. CLERK; the House resolve. tself into a Committee of Ways and Means, Mr. GREENE in he chair. Sir G. CLERK having moved a vote (~f 9,100 0001. to be raised by Exchequer Bills for the service of the year, Mr. BLEW ITT, who roseamidst the laughter of the Op position benches, said he wished to take that opportunity of asking any Member of. her 'Majesty's Government who might chose to ansvier him, Whether it was the intention of the present Government to make any alteration in the law with respect to Savings' Banks, which enabled the Government of the time to do what was called " tamper with the Savings' Banks funds." The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had no intention of proposing any alteration in the law. He cer tainly did not approve, as he had stated on a former occasion, of any tampering unit the Saving's Banks funds as a perma• nent resource for the financial service; but. he should add, at the same time, that the practice had not the slightest . ten dency to impair the interests of the depositors. The vote was then. agreed to ; the resolution was reported to the House ; and tho House having resumed, the report was ordered to by brought up on Monday next. EXCISE DUTIES' COMPOUNDS BILL. On the motion of Sir G. CLERK, this Bill was read a second time, and was ordered to be committed en Monday next. ROASTED MALT BILL. On the motion of the HON. BARONET the Bill was read a second time, and was ordered to be committed on Monday. SOAP DUTIES' DRAWBACK BILL. On the motion of the HoN. BARONET the Bill was read a second time, and was orderer! to be committed on Monday. • ..- R AILIVAYS BILL. On the motion of Mr GL ADSTONE the House resolved itself into a Committee of the whose House for the further consideration of the Report on the Railways Bill. Lord J. RUSSELL wished to take that opportunity of sug gesting, that it would be convenient that the House should know beforehand the course of business to be pursued each evening. There were many gentlemen who felt an interest in the Railways Bill, and who wet e absent, because they di.l not expect that it would be brought on on that occasion. Sir R. PEEL said that he would take care, as far as he could, that the orders of the /louse should be gone through in future, in a definite order. Ile would urge as his excuse for not pursuing that course that evening, that, after the formal an nouncement of the Nab! Lord with respect to the Income-tax, he had hardly expected the debate would 1):._ over at half-past nine o'clock, and that only 76 members would have voted upon the other side.—( H ear, hear, from the Ministerial benches. ) He had anticipated t h at the great de b ate wou ld h ave taken place on the Principl e of the Bill, on the second reading After a few wo, d s f rom Mr. V. SMITH, and 111 r .-. GLAD STONE, Lord J. RUSSELL said,he imagined the closing of the debate hadin some degree arose from Gentlemen opposite preventing Members on this side of the Houle from speaking, even those %%Ito would, perhaps, have argued in favour of the principle of the Bill. Sir R. PEEL said he certainly had opposed no obstruction to any Honourable Alembers speaking, but. he was afraid the House at one time would be counted out. —( Hear, and a laugh.) '1 he convei sation then dropped, The clauses of the Railway Bill, up to clause 10, were agreed to without a division. On clause 11 being proposed, Sir W. JOLLIFFE proposed that the clause be expunged. A discussion of some length ensued, in which Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Russell, Mr. Labouchere, and Mr. Henly took part. Major VIVIAN hoped the Hon. Member would persevere in his intention of dividing the House on the expunging of this clause. Capt. BERKELEY complained of the Bill being brought on in the way it had been, as many Members wished to ad- dress the House on the subject. Such being the case he would move that the Chairman. report progress and ask leave to sit again, Mr. G u.EENE having put the question, Sir W. JOLLIFFE could assure the Right Hon. Gentle man that lee was not actuated by any wi,h to defeat the Bill. lie believed in asking the'House to expunge the clause he did great service to the mmure. If the clause was postponed he should be satisfied. Lord STANLEY thought the clause was a most proper one, and ought to be continued in the Bill. After a shot discuss . on, in which Sir T. Wilde, in opposi tion to the clause, and Mr. Wallace, Mr. Gladstone, and some other Hon. Members in favour of it, took part. Clpta:n BERKELEY. said, that he would withOraw his motion, if the lion. Gentleman opposite (Sir W. Jolliffe), would persevere in dividing the Committee upon the clause. Sir W. JOLLIFFE stated that he would persevere in his motion. Capt. BERKELEY then withdrew his amendment, and the Committee divided, when there appeared— For the clause Against it Majority against the clause Mr. P. 'HOWARD objected to the enormous expense that would be entailed on Railway Companies, if they had to post a policeman at every gate along a line. For instance, thcp Carlisle and Newcastle, Railway went through many miles &f desolate Moor, arid if they had to pat a policeman at every gate on each thoroughfare on it, the exper.se would be incalculable—the police would have nothing to do, and therefore they wou'd fall asleep and get drunk.—( Great laughter. ) An HON. GENTLEMAN said it would be sufficient to have each gate doubly locked, and a key to be in the hands of the Company and the farmer; but an officer might be present wherevir he was wanted. On clause 14 being proposed, Sir W. JOLLI FFE hoped some days' notice would be given to owners of land before a Company occupied it. Mr. GL ADS TONE thought security enough was provided already. Mr. EGERTON hoped owners of land would be enabled by the Bill to get money awarded to them sooner than they did at present from Companies. Mr. LABOUCHERE objected that a Railway Company should be the judges of what land they were to occupy. They should have the authority of the Board of Trade first. Mr. EWART thought that occasions might arise in which the, public safety might be endangered by any delay, and, therefore, he thought the Railway Con pauies ought to have the poxer of taking immediate possession. Sir R. PEEL suggested that, in all eases in which the Com pany should be of opinion that there was no prQssing necessity, and that there would Ins time to apply to the Board of Trade on the subject, they should obtain the consent of the Board of Trade before taking possession of the land ; but if the Company should be of opinion that there was a pressing necessity, then they might enter upon their own responsibility, cntifying immedi ately to the board of Trade that they . had so entered, and if the Board of Trade should be s,f opinion that no pressing • ne cessity existed, then no doubt that circumstances would be con sidered in awarding compensation. Sir THOMAS WILDE suprested, that in cases of pressing necessity, application might be made to two Magistrates for permission to enter. He thought there could scarcely ever arise a necessity so pressing as to occasion serious inconvenience by the delay of a few hours, which would be the utmost delay that could take place. Sir R. PEEL said, that would be throwing the responsibility on the Magistrates. Sir T. WILDE thought the Magistrates would not decide that the Company should enter, unless strong cause could be shown. Mr. GLADSTONE said, that in some cases a delay of even a few hours might lead to a dangerous result. Mr. R. PALMER thought the clause gave too great power to Railway Companies. Sir W. JOLLIFFE suggested that some means should be devised for enforcing speedy payment of compensation, in cases in which it might be granted. Sir T. WILDE said that the object might be attained by giving parties the power, as soon as a verdict of compensation should be returned, of entering up judgment in the Superior Courts. After some further discussion, the clause was struck out, and clause 16 was proposed. A short desultory conversation ensued in which the Attor ney.. General, Mr. Evart, Sir Thomas Wild; Mr. Labouchere, and others took part. Mr. GLADSTONE said he thought it best to withdraw the clause.—The clause was withdrawn. Clauses 17 to 20 were then agreed to. On clause 21 being proposed, Mr. HARDY moved the insertion of the following clauses— " Arid whe►eas many fatal r.ecidents have happened in con sequence of carriages containing passengers on railways being placed n..xt or near to the engine drawing such carriages ; now be it enacted, that whenever there shall be a train com prising carriages with passengers therein, such carriages shall be so placed in such train that the first of them stall be sepa rated from the tender of the engine drawing the train, by two or more carriages not containing any passenger therein, and by a space of not less than feet between every such tender and the first carriage having any passenger therein. " And be it enacted, that in no case shall two engines be used at the same time in drawing one and the same train of car riages containing passengers; and where the number of such carriages shall be too large for the power of one engine, the same shall be divided into two or more trains, drawn by dis tinct engines, and with such intervals between each train as the Directors shall think Est for the safely of the passengers travelling thereby. " And be it enacted, that in no case shall any train, with ear ' riages containing passengers in whole or in part, be propeiled by having the engine in the rear of such train. Mr. RUSSELL said, if two carriages were placed as pro posed by the Hon. Member, they must be either heavy or light, if they were light, it would much increase the danger— ( Hear)—if they were to be heavy, :it would oblige every train to carry, at least, sixteen tons of dead weight. This would re quire the separation of the train, and the arrangements for this purpose Would also tend to increase danger. He objected to legislating on such matters of practical detail. Mr. GLADSTONE also objected to the clause, as tending rather to increase danger than diminish it. Mr. S. O'BRIEN thought that, though there might be an objection to legislating on pract'cal details, vet that some provi sion aught to be made for increasing the responsibi►ity of Rail road Directors in case of accident.. He thought a power might be given to Juries in such cases to make awards of com pensation to the sufferers. Air. EWA Wl' also thought the law in this respect was ano malous, as in vases of the loss of a limb the compensation went to the sufferer, while in cases of the loss of life, the deodarid went to the Crown, instead of to the relatives of the individual. Mr. HARDY, after a few observations, withdrew the clause. Mr. BROTHE tITON moved that the Chairman report progress and ask leave to sit again. Mr. GLADSTONE trusted the Hon. Member would not persevere in that motion, as there was nothing more that would take time, Mr. H - ODGSON ItINDE moved the insertion of the fol lowing clause : • " And whereas, by various Acts relating to Railways, it is provided that the Companies shall cause to be painted on boards, and to be affixed, and continued and renewed as often as the same shall be obliterated or defaced, to or upon every toll-house or building at which any rates or tolls shall be collected or re ceived, in some conspicuous place, in large and legible charac ters, sn account or list of the several rates and tolls which the said Companies shall from time to time direct and appoint to be taken ; and whereas it is for the public convenience that the said list of rates and tolls should be printed and affixed within every statisn-house,or other place where such rates and tolls shall be pay able; be it enacted, that it may be lawful for any Railway Company toaffix such printed list of rates and tolls in a conspicuous situa tion within every station-house or other building where such rates or tolls are collected, instead of affixing such boards, painted as aforesaid ; and that such Company shall be held to have complied with the provision of th e sa id Acts as effectually as if the sa id t a bl e of rates and tolls had been painted on boards and affixed to such toll-house or building ; and that such rates or tolls shall be payable, and may be demanded and taken during the time in which such printed lists are affixed as afore said, in the same manner as they are authorised to be demanded and taken during the time that such boards shall remain so affixed." Mr. GLADSTONE had no objection to the clause, but he thcoght it was altogether foreign to the purpose. After a few observations from Mr. flinde, the clause was agreed to. — The gallery was then cleared, but no division took place. Mr. BROTHERTUN'S motion, "that the Chairman re port progress" having been agre.Rl to, The House then adjourned at a Quarter past One o'Clock. COURT CIRCULAR. The Queen and Prince Albert, attended by the Viscountess Jocelyn, liton. bliss Murray, Visaliunt Sydney, Hon. Captain Hood, Major-General Wentyss, and Col. Bouverie, honoured the Exhibition of the Painters in Water Colours with a visit yesterday morning.. • Her Majesty and Prince Albert, attended by the Viscountess Jocelyn. Lady in Waiting. left Buckingham Palace at three o'clock yesterday afternoon in anopen carriage and four, escorted by a party of Hussars, for Claremont. A chariot and four followed, containing Major-General Wemyss, Equerry in Waiting, and Colonel Boaverie, Equerry in Waiting on Prince Albert. Their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Wales and the Princess Royal, and their attendants, occupied the next carriage, followed by another Royal carriage, containing Viscount Sydney, Lord in Waiting, and the Hon. C. A. Murray, Master of the Household. Her Majesty and the Prince were conducted to their carriage by the Lord Chamberlain, the Master of the Horse, and Lord George Lennox, Lord in Waiti n g on P r i nce Alb ert . His Royal Highness .the Duke of Cambridge visited her Majesty the Queen Dowager yesterday, at Marlborough House. Her Royal highness the Duchess of Kent took an airing in a carriage yesterday. Their Royal Highur saes the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Prince George, and the Princess Augusta of Cambridge, ho noured the Gallery of the Painters in Water Colours with a • visit yesterday, A Deputation on the subject of the proposed alteration in the Tariff on Potatoes, consisting of _Messrs. J. S. Thompson, Tyler, and Baxter (Essex) ; Messrs. J. Knight, R. B. Smith, and Newman, (Middlesex) ; Messrs. Dickson, awl Tyler (Kent) - ; Mr. Newman (Surrey) ; and Colonel de Couteur ( Jersey), accompanied by Mr. Branston, M.P., Mr. G. Palmer, M. P., Mr. C. Round, M.P., Mr. J. Round, M.P., Lord Marsham, M.P., Colonel Thomas Wood, .M.P., Mr. Sutheron, Mr. Kernble, M.P., and Mr. Antrobus, M.P., had an interview with the Earl cf Ripon, yesterday, at the office of the Board of Trade. Colonel Wood, M.P., and a Deputation of Market Gardeners, had an interview with the Earl of Ripon on Thursday, at the Office of the Board of Trade. Lord lngestre and Sir G. Sinclair transacted business yes ?l-day at the Board of Trade. FASHIONABLE INTELLIGENCE. ARRIVALS. Lady Hall and family, at their residence in Portman-square, from their seat in Wules ; Mrs. M'aidington, at ditto, from her seat in Wales; Sir John and Lady. Edwards and family, at 1, Park-lane, from their seat in Wales; Mr. and the. Hon. Mrs. Godsal and family. in Haley-street, from Cheltenham ; Mrs. and Miss Strode, at Thomas's Hotel, from Brighton, John Vybert, Esq., and Mrs. Vybert and family, at the Ber nera Hotel, from Bombay; Colonel Forbes, at ditto, from Bombay; T. Pierce, Esq., and Mrs. Pierce, at ditto; Mrs. Whitton and the Misses Arundel], at ditto, from Sevenoaks ; the Rev. R. Dogrrll, at ditto ; G. Stone, Esq., at ditto ; Viscount and Viscountess Boyle, at Mivares Hotel, from Brighton ; the Earl and Countess of Zetland, in Arlington, street, from Aske Hall, Yorkshire; the Duke and Duchess of Norfolk, accompanied by Ladies Howard and Lord Edward Howard, in St. James's-square, from Arundel Castle, Sussex ; Lady de Clifford, on Carlton Housr-terrace ; Lord Cloncurry, from his seat in Ireland ; Mr. and. Lady Eleanor Balfour, in Grosvenor-square; Viscount and Viscountess Poll ington, in Grafton-street, from the seat of the Earl of Mexbo rough, in Yorkshile ; Lady Stanley and family, in St. James's square, front Tunbridge Wells ; Lord and Lady Kilmaine, and Hon. Miss Browne, in South. street, from their seat in Ireland; Lord and Lady Brayhrooke, in But lington-street, from Audley end, Essex; Lord William Fitzgerald and Miss Fitzgerald, in Grosvenor-street, from Ireland; Viscount and Viscountess Folkeston, in Grosvenor -street, from Coombe Abbey, the seat of the Earl of Craven, near Coventry ; Viscount Curzon, at Curzon House, fern Gopsall Hall, Leicestershire; the Earl and Countess. of Dunraven, in Eaton-square, f r om their seat in Wales : Lord Blaynev, in Jermyn-street, from his seat in Ire land; the Earl and Conntess of Leicester, from Hollcham Hall, Norfol ; Viscount St rathallan, from Strathallan House, PeAli • shire; the Ilishop of Salisbury, in Wilton-crescent, from the. Palace, Salisbury; the Countess of Cardigan, in Portman square, from Leamington Spa; the Hon. Lieut.-General Arthur Upton, at the Albany, from Brighton; the Countess of Wilton, in Gros7enor-square, from Tunbridge Wells ; Dowag,r Lady Dufferin,. at Mivart's Hotel, from Lea mington Spa.; Lord Aberdour, in Old Palace lard, from Ireland; the Earl of Selkirk, in Richmond terrace, from St. Mary's Lle, Kirkcudbright ; Mr. and Lady Francis Ley, in Richmond-terrace, from their seat in Devonshire; Lord and Lady Dorchester, from the Conti nent; the Earl and Countess of Westmoreland, in Har ey street, from Apethorpe, Northamptonshire ; Lady Lucy Pusey, from Brighton ; the Earl and Countess of Arundel and family, in Great Stanhope-street, from Arundel'eastle, Stissex ; the Earl of Orkney, from Hants ; the Earl of Yarborough, in Arlington-street, from Brockleby, Lincolnshire;. Lord James Stuart, in Whitehall-place, from Ayrshire; Lord and Lady Willoughby d'Eresby and Hon. Miss Willoughby, on the ter race, Piccadilly, from Grimsthorpe, Lincolnshire; Lady Howard and Sir William Fraser, from Brighton. . DE PA U It ES, Colonel Austir and Mrs. Austir, from the Burners Hotel, for Belle Vire, Kent ; Rev. CI, Brathwaite and Mrs. llrathwaite, from ditto, for lirighton ; 'l'. R. Woolfield anti Mrs. Wool field, from ditto, for Brighton ; Hon. Mrs. Reid and family, from ditto; the Rev. C. Luxmore, Mrs. Luxmore, antifamily, from ditto; MN. Cullum, from ditto ; Rev. C. Wetter, from ditto. HEINE, I3ROTHEI:S, having remitted durinc , a short time 25,0031., 18,0001., 9,0006 a,0001., 3,600/., Sec. &c. &c., . , TO LONDON; 3,600/., 8001., and 700/., to EDINBURC. FI ; 3,6001. to DUBLIN ; 3,6001. to BEVERLEY.; 3,600/. to HALIFAX (Yorkshire); 1,2001: to PORTLEAVEN HARBOUR; 9001., 7001., 700/. and 6001. to LIVERPOOL; 9001. to NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE ; 900/. to aWLL ; 9001. and 600/. to AIANCEIESTEA ; 7001. to EAST RETFORt) (Nottingdiamthire); 600/. to BIDEFORD; 6001. to CORK; and 6001. to BRADFORD; They shall be glad to remit many Dividends of the next Money Distribution to England, Ireland, and Scotland. Direct for Prospectus and Particulars, without delay, either to HEINE BROTHERS, at HAMBURGH, or to HEINE BROTHERS, at LQBECK. THEATRE ROYAL, COVENT-GARDEN. UNDER the MANAGEMENT of MADAME VESTRIS. THIS EVENING, APRIL 23, Will be repeated the New Comedy called BUBBLES OF THE DA Y.— Lord Skindecp, Mr. W. Farren ; Sir Phenix Cleareake, Mt. Harley; Captain Smoke, Mr. Charles Mathews ; Spreadweasel, Mr. Bartley Pamela Spreadweasel, Mrs. v isbett ; Florentia, Mrs. W. Lacy, Mrs. Quarto, Mrs. W. West; Guinea, Mri..Orger. After which will be repeated the Grand Romantic Fairy Extrava ganza, entitled THE WHITE CAT.—Wrowuponatyme (it ing of Nevermindltsnamia), Mr. J. Liam, ; Princes Paragon, Pr..cious, and Placid (his three Sons , by Madame Nr.stris, Miss Murray and Miss Lee; Jingo, Mr. Harley; t e White Cat, Miss Marshall. Doors open at half past 6ia, and the Perfortnances be!zin at Seven. Dress Boxes is., Second Price 3s. 6d ; First and SecondCi tcles 55.. Second Price k , j. 6d.; Pit 35., Second Price 2s. ; Gallery 1,. Tickets and Places for the Boxes to he taken of Mr. Grogan, at the Box.of. five, trout Ten till Four, where Season Tickets maybe had upan ap piication. Private Boxes to be had solely of Mr. Andrews, Book seller, I6i, New Bond-street. ROYAL SURREY THEATRE. Wonderful attraction, and matchless Stud of Horses. THIS EVENING, APRIL '24, Will be perlinmed the Grand New Equestrian Spectacle, entitled 'J'HE PEARL OF THE HAREM, HER KOORnlsil LOVER, AND HIS WAR STEED, BEDA.—With magnificent Scenery, Costume, and Applint.tents ; a Diable Company,' Enuestrian and Dramatic, and the finest Stud nt Horses in the World. After which, is a more extensive and splendid Arena than ever name witnesse.l. THE SCENES IN THE CIRCLE, introduc.ng Mr. B ivrrys unrivalled Collection of Animals, CensWing of nu merous and matchless Cream.enloured Horses, An Inlusian Chargers, Spotted Cout,ers, Fairy Palfreys, and Pigmy Poneys, and the most talented Vaulters, Riders, Gymnastics, and Contortionirt. in the kingdom. _ _ To conclude with the Historical Pantomime (with New Scenery) of PEII.OUSE; or, the MONKEY of the DESOLATE ISLAND.-- Chimpanzee, the Monkey, by Mons. Gotiffe. ROYAL VICTORIA THEATRE. UNDER THE DIRIZCTION UP MR. OSBALDISTON. THIS EVENING, APRIL 23,. FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE NATIONAL CONVENTION OF THE INDUSTRIOUS CLASSES, • Will be performed the histor,cal Play of WILLIAM TELL.— William Tell, M!..osp . a'dist9i . y.llllll . 3. Mr. Ei Lee. • • After which, NATURE AND ART . —GaViletoi . i . , Mr. Gardner; Miss Prosc.nia Ardent (with Snip), Mi.s Vincent. To conclude with an interesting Melodrama, called THE LAST WITNESS; or, the FATE of ST. MA RC the MURDEIER.— Claude St. Marc, Mr. E. F Saville; Pierre Gibeau, Mr. Gardner ; Madame Duval, Mrs. G. Lee; Manuette, Miss Coveney. Tickets to be had at the Dr. Johnson's Tavern, llolt-court, street ; of Mr. Cleave, i, Shoe-lane; at the Craven Iliad, Dritr... lane ; and of all the Secretaries of the National an,; Trades' Charter Associations. All Advertisements of a Disgusting; Character or Xmmoral Tendency, are excluded from the Columns of "The Sun." (444 ..,. * 4 4 5, ): \ .. 4 W i...1 4_ , -;: , ' 4,- A -Z, $,,,, 50 yet i xt 'lt 0 44,4* -4 \ 4) "2: I '. Z 4 . - .-'. `442titib 4 4$ ----' , .;• , ,,h... (;.- ---„7„k-ii, 7, ,, , A .C4 , 4r) -7;*----11Z4 c . - - ,-- kIS ,I A 7Z, 4 g4:- .4 4..,. - .::'''„ :-'''-,- ;., ‘,. ,- ;.,iligma . , e - ,,, oi - . 4.--#4---24r-tgli...N*TresVer-w.- ' • Olt „11,1t4 LONDON? SATURDAY MORNING, APRIL 23, 1842. 'Th'e second reading of the Income-tax Bill, promoted by monopolists and class-legislators, in order to uphold tour opoly and class-legislation, was moved almost the first thing last night in the House of Commons. The Tories are extremely eager to pass it; and if their eager ness be gratified, the i•ault will lie with the Opposition. So streng as they master, and such a jumble as is this long Bill, with its 189 clauses, schedules they will not fight as they ought if it get out of Committee for a month or six weeks. If the Opposition, united as the bulk of them appear to be on this subject, do their duty, they may yet arrest the progress of this mea sure, and merit the 'enduring gratitude of the people. The argument that by so doing they will delay the tariff', was weH met last night by Mr. C. BUI;LE R. That gentleman, with the sagacity, moderation, and elo quence which shine forth in him, moved .that the second reading of the Bill be put off for six months, and, in making that motion, showed very clearly that the charge or de?ay should be fixed on the Tories rather than on the Whigs. Want of space alone prevents our quoting the passage. The grounds on which the Bill is pressed forward, form a strong argument, in fact, for resisting it. If the necessity to pass the Tariff be a .jus tification of the Income-tax, it will only be. necessary for any Minister to couple a still.more obnoxious mea sure—if that be possible—a measure wholly subversive of our liberties, with some measure altering thwTa riff, setting loose all the trade of the country, and we shall be obliged to bolt the mischief for the paltry be nefit of re-fastening what he loosens. Such a course cif proCeeding may be subversive of all just legiSlation ; it is, in fact, cheating men into submission to. improper laws, and it ought to be, for its own sake, most fer venJy, strenuously, and constantly resisted. • That part of the Bill which establishes an inquisition into men's affairs, and the means of doing it was well described last night by Mr. C. Butaxit, and we cannot give a too wominent place to his description, nor too emphatically call our readers' attention to the subject. Ile said— There were first the Tax and Statnp Commis s io ners at t h e head of this hierar c hy ; then the Commissioners-fo r--general purposes ; then the Comtnis;oners for speci a l pu rposes ; then there were additional Commissioners, and these not being suffi cient for the inquisition, there were Assistant-Commissioners. One of the benefits from this Commission would be, that what the Chief Commissioner did not eat, the Assistant-Commis sioners would lap up. Lie did not mean to attempt to throw the Commission into ridicule; they seemed to him to have all the respectability of a very fearful instrument of very grinding tyranny. What was the power invested in these Commis sioners? They not merely gave them a power of investigation-- they were not merely tax gatherers, but they gave them a judicial power. He found in this Bill no less than seven clauses giving a power to the Commissioners of levying large fines. They had the power of levying fines to the amount of 20/. or 25/. Then added to this pc“.% er was a special power given them, that in case of a lal.e return they should inflict a further penalty of treble the amount of the taxto be collected. Let them consider what a poser this was. He would give them ar. in stance of it. There was clause 55. This clause empowered the Commissioner to go round and call on the people to dei in a correct statement of their income ; and all incomes above 1501. were to be taxed, and to be recovered in any of her Majesty's Courts. Any person neglecting to make such a return, would be liable to forfeit a sum not ex ceeding twenty pounds, and treble the amount .of the duty to be charged by virtue of this Act. Now, suppose a gen tleman had 1,000/., if he neglected to make a direct return, he was liable to treble 30/. besides the fine. Now he asked whe ther this tsx could be compared to any other ? Why, they . gave a power to the Commissioners under circumstances distin guished from every other tax, namely, to conduct the proceed ings in secret. In all other matters, if a person was charged with fraud, he had to submit to the verdict of a jury in open Court, but under the present Bill everything was conducted in secret. This was a monstrous violation of the liberty of the subject. Every tax to be collected by such means must be a bad tax. One point is, we think, omitted by Mr. Buus.u. Some of thaw Commissioners, constituting a hart of the machinery for carrying out the Bill, are to be taken fr9m the people. As Sir 11. PEEL explained the matter on the 18th ult., they are to be local parties, who enjty the respect and good-will of their neighbours. r.flis ; l66pl e are to be made, then, to levy this tax on themselves, ..:and relieve the Government of the, odium of the extortion. They are to scourge themselves with the instrument which Sir R. PEEL puts into their hands. Will any of them be fools enough ; will any of them be wicktd enough to do this ? We hope not. If there be persons already employed and paid by the Government, who must perform the odious task, we would excuse them ; but if one man be found sobasc as vtluntarily to lend him self to the levying of this tax, whether uaaCorninissioner or in any other character, he ought to be hooted and drummed from society - . During war time, when there was a necessity for the tax to save the nation from invasion, to accept such a fruitless and thankless office waa pa triotism—to assume it now —to assist in levying this tax for the Monopolist, will be to make one's self accessory to against th e p ros p er ity and the their guilty conspirac y happiness of the nation. No m an oug h t to take such an office on himself ; an d , we trust, that whoever shall take it, wil,l be made to feel the contempt and scorn of all his neighbours. The horrid crime perpetrated by Good, coming so zoon after the similarly horrid crime perpetrated by Greentiere, tootler with the terrible crime of Couryoi s:er, and the murders we almost daily read of in various p its of England and Ireland, are calculated to strike us with awe and terror, and awaken a doubt whether our criminal legislation- be constructed on a proper basis. The crime of murder is yet punishable with death, nevertheless that is the crime which appears to be me?' increasing, and to become in its form more terifl There is something redeeming in a revengeful manlvb° has been, or fancies he has been, injured by another, cutting off his enemy under the influence 'of his mad dening passion; but cold, calculating murder, conjoine d with treachery, perpetrated from some, sordid motive, hi those on whom women lavish their affections, or la whom men place their confidence, seems truly appalling; N,o man can guard against it, and no man who learns of the one murder but must suppose that others are com mitted which are not discovered. Hare, Burke, Bish°P Greenacre, Courvoisier, and now Goad , all at once occur to us as having stained the moder n annals of England with some of the most revolting crimes on record. Yet no man can walk about without being warned by gaols, prison -vans, and military policemen, or take UP a newspaper and read " Police-office," at the head d half-a-dozen columns, without being made sensible of the existence of a great machinery for the repression of c ime, and witho...t being warned emphatically o f th s2rious penal consequences of transgression. In spite of all these admonitions—in spite of the terrors Or_ death—crime, we are afraid, is increasing, and as' sliming a more revolting character. It is clear that the legislative penalty (ion not math repress it. We doubt whether the legislative' exampl e may not promote it. The Legislature sports with the lives of the people as it sports with their property and has no more repugnance to starving men, women , and children to death, by a Corn•law, than it has to appropriating our property according to its own devices. Without being able to trace exactly the influence of its example in promoting, crime by the enactment 9f a starvation law, it is clear that such a law dooms th e multitude to poverty and want, and nourishes in.theal all the hateful passions. Of the general vicious frame of mind thus engendered, the crimes of Greenaere and of Good are some of the rankest offshoots. Th e motive for starving the people by a Corn-keeping-ou t law, is 'sordid, like the motives of these murderers ; an d the effect of the law only seems to us les; horrid, be cause we cannot have distinctly brought before us the cases of individuals cruelly put to a painful death by th e ' law. The crimes which we have referred to the ineffi ciency of the law, and the encouragement given to criale by the lawn - latter, without thinking of the effects of hi 9 sordid conduct, are enough to make the public panic and inquire —Are we proceeding, so far as law-making is con' corned, in the right path ? It is, perhaps, known to our readers that, of late, con' siderable attention has been paid to improving til e method of drawing up Acts of Parliament, and meat of the great. Bills which the Whigs brought in, such as the new Poor-law Bill, and the Commutation of Tithes' Big' &c., were accompanied by a synopsis. which enabled the reader to understand the Bill. But the income-4 1 Bill appears to be drawn up in a confused and perplexo a manner ; it has neither index nor synopsis, and must 6e ' unintelligible to the public. We should imagine that • Sir R. PEEL has taken up the old'Act of 1806, and merely introducing into it such alterations as were necessary t ° carry his peculiar objects into effect, has adopted it bodily. Certain it. is that his Income- tax Bill contain' none of the modern improvements in drawing Bills, an d does no credit to him as a man of business. We noticed something similar as to the Tari ff No • sooner was that made public, than he 05 made ashamed of the work he had brought ft °. ward as his own. Ho gave up the whole sane' of new discriminating duties which he h a d intr°' duced in favour of the colonies. He was obliged t° admit that his legislation about asses was contemptib le, and he has silica begin compelled to introduce, ey° before any discussi on h as t a k en p l ace i n t h e House c Comrhow, on the subject, several alterations into h is deliberated and perfect tariff. Ho can neither do ail th e . duties of his office correctly nor has he the capacity : one of the marks of gr ea t gen i us — to ensure exce lleP" service in his subordinates. The Bill which they W e drawn for him—like the tariff; to which he lent his nan t of e --is an incomprehen s ibl e - j um bl e w hi c h the House 3 Commons cannot p ass , nor t h e people su bmit to without di sgrace . E ven t h e Tory Journals are ashamed of it, and obliged to admit that it is NM* plicated, perplexed, and confused. Independently of the nature of the enacting clauses, they are put together i . tt such an unthinking, slovenly manner, and each clausel s . so uncouthly worded, th a t t h e . Bill oug h t t o be rejected as unworthy to be - submitted to any Legislature. i '4 SIR RoBE Irr 'PEEL'S RE D UC TION OF RENT.— • r r - T. eircron3tance excites so much alarm among the agTiel l wrists, that Mr. Brainston, one of the Ess x Meinir wrote to ask Sir Robert Peel if i t were true. Sir Ibti. hurt immedi a t e ly an d emp ha t i ca ll y replied, that tier s was not one w o rd o f trut h i n i t. T he story originated .s in the Te n Towns' Me.s.senger, a Tory p a p er, w hich. t ts hound to ex pl a in t o th e p u bli c h ow the report foun d way into the pages of that Journal. We call on'tti THE FRENCH GOVERNMENT AND THE ENGLISH PRESS. we have received a copy of the following desPet ch from M. Guizot to Lord Cowley : • M. l'Ambassadeur—l had transmitted to the ' h a nister of Finance, and recommend e d to hi s partieuhe attention the reclamatio ns w hi c h you h ave done Me t honour to address to me on the part of the p r oprie.t t e b i , of the prinCipal journals of London, on the subject " 1 by obstacles to the conveyance of their correspondenc e couriers through France. l t " The Minister of Fi nance pers i sts i n thinking Olnay the laws relative to the privilege of the Post-offic e et him under the obligation to prevent the despate'l e n - a r couriers, which the proprietors of the English j?° r- fi ;- demand to be authorised, to continue ; and he niala s e - 0 1 f. observe, that - the last seizures efrected to the prejud ic a yi the reclaimers being to be brought before the tribu, e rs the question of the legality of these measures may 1 " be freely debated. " I beg your Excellency to have the goodness to `: this observation to the knowledge of the partieq. rested. Accept, &c., (Signed') '6 GUM' " Paris, April 19, 1842." EXPERIMENT IN WOOLWIC EI MARSHES. . ra de! Woomvlctr, APRIL 22.—Lord Bloomfield, 13rl i t e er/ Major Cuppage, C a pt a i n G rant, an d a number de, ill of the Royal Artillery, assembled yesterday after° the the marshes, and made further experiments to noin' strength of and adhesive qua li t i es o f t h e cement terinalet, ing wood, invented by Mr. Jeffrey. Two 12-P ° 4 o o shells, 6+ inches diameter each, were sunk into p ot the of the ,wood on wl , i:th the experiments were made p la in' previous day, and wedged tight in the centre of th e ;;,ited ings, and matches having been attached awl ', b oo ( ' with port tire, on the explosions talciag place th' roca ts,,, was torn asunder, many pieces into very small 1.14 00 1 a 01 affording the most convincing and satisfactory PT Lad" the complete success of the invention, and to his ship's entire satisfaction. WO ; tc ! The pieces of th e target h ave been removet- fi btarY the dockyard, no d f rom t h e hi gh opinion of the' , with Board, and the approbation the invention has ni l ' c irri' from practical men , t h ere i s every probability it wi tcan be mediately appli e d t o a ll purposes for %ilki dock; made available in the Royal Navy and her AtoJe sr - s om posy' yards. The substances of which the cemet?t is e bber (I . lS' are simple, being merely shell lac and India r i n be i e g solved in naphtha in certain proportions, and .. be illy' soluble in water, the purposes to which it ri A e ut 11 1 plied are numerous, and its value being onlY4 ca uotr) .. the expense of common glue, beeth saving to in as t he by its universal adoption will incaleul a ble, vith it fo r ventor has been employed in eXperimeos the a ups% ands of two years, and has found that, I n bie . V ie e d of great friction, it is in a manner i t nperi . sk 4 s ubsti tu can no doubt of its bein in g, in a short o rae o 'f a e erin s for sheathing vessels, as, by the mixttli n ot sd hen t portion of noxious materials, barnacles ' ci d , not a fr . ec r , to the ships' sides, and these substance s om poidn ) ; the adhesive and valuable qualities of the cwhick show; Au experiment Was tried in the dockyard,. „els w hie ni!iy be damaged at sea. Eight the value a supply of the cement will be toolfea..-ood w ere pi e ces I a joined together in the form of a mast, on ieeo o f woJd t : plied to them, aril to another mast of one P i broke afte r the latter gave way first, and the oth,e . r a ti t ? o Y n of „ rather strain nR; is being considerably bent, and the PP' therefor, greater strain. By this substance,a difficulty iner _it, certain the ship' carpenters can hope not be done e nd could ° I " fecting repairs at sea, which any other circumstance. ___ -- —xTERMA N• -- INTING SYSTI. MITIW EIL or THE P , PEPPARD ROBERTS, Esa. On Sunday evening, at tw ili g ht ! as Mi. Roberts and a lady of the name of Mrs. Carry, were 01: their way from Cloglijordan, where they had been at a religion blunderbuss was find at Mr. Roberts, gu n or meeting, to Mcnerall, where Mr. ll,,berts resided, a of which.. shattered hi s b ea d t o pieces, and produced instantaneous deatu. Mrs. C a rry, who was at the other side of the cat ou which s he and the ill-fated gentleman were travelling, re, ceiycd a few slugs in the neck, but the wounds are protiounc..o the contents . not to be dangerous. The assassin ran off the moment be found his horrible mission executed. Mr. Hobert', it seem' , w . " brother-in-law and agent of Mr. Garvey, of Laughten, '4 which capacity his conduct was extremely severe and cruel to the tenants on that property. It is only of short tittle since he dispossessed three families of the bar" of O'Donoughue, who held a farm at Mote, and a • widow ofthe name of Corcoran and her three helpless • daugh ter-, whose small portion of wound he took into his own pos session. We have no desire to palliate this tremendous crimeh, p er petrated in a cowardly and r evolting manner, and whic was well nigh involving the life of an innocent and unotfonding atrocities loudly lady ; tut we would demand does not the recurrence of these and imperatively call for the prompt and th ere atrocities of the Legi s lature ?It is idle to talk of suP - Fresoing such crimes by coercive measures. — Limerick Reporter. The General Steam Navigation Company's mail• packet, John Bull, Captain J. P. Corbin, arrived yesterdal. morning with the Hamburgh mail. In 2 Qi i , " :l l l f C Y; t 11,7 1. • Jame "'rb th em T he bank , il, 11 0.• we 14-4 hssig 1 c` Aar .1 ~ „ , 01111 th '‘`v Act I k °cloy] ,'• Jame 111(11, t% uave Crew Jain( h li g Out C Ic4tlliril t ,ek See ti tir and in the a fort] ;,shar es v 'lleeti on :,;‘,4,t)undani THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, APRIL 23, 1842.