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

you need entertain no apprehensions ; the prices of pro visions will not be lowered ; you have nothing to fear, and the consumer has nothing to hope." When the Corn Bill tit as under consideration the Right Hon. 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 th present discussions the Right Hon. Baronet leant 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 Han. Baronet had not stated the fact so broadly as he (Mr. C. Buller) had put it—(Ministerial cheers) —but he would apeal to any Gentleman who had heard the de bates, it' that were not the purport and intention of the argument which the Right Eon. Baronet had urged, according to whether it was a free trade Govern ment en 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 Si ene Honourable Gentlemen on his (the Oppo sition) side of the Bouse, who voted for the present Bill, not because they liked an Income-tax, het because they had a great fancy for direct taxation. They liked a Propert e- 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. lead 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 Some thought that the tax on incomes would be repealed, and that ou property retained. Those who thought so only deceived themselves very much. His Hon. and Learned Friend, the Member for Bath, (Mr. Roebuck) had a notice of motion on the paper to the ell'ect 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 Plum Gentlemen opposite would consent to a tax on property without a tax on incomes. He (Mr. B.) con curred in the proposal of his lion and Learned Friend from mere motives of humanity. It 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 lion. and Learned Gentleman's proposition was foun ded on justice, for if they would exempt the professional man, why hot also exempt the holder of a life estate ? The amendment of his Hon. Friend the Member for Bath was glaringly unjust. When they exempted any kind 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 musteejectit altogether or take it in all its injustice. He must 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; tin income was no measure of that enjoyment. A young - vprefessional man had one income, the man more ad towed in life had a much larger one. The man with a large family saved one proportion, the man without a family saved another. He would defy theirs to meet these differences with direct taxation. Different classes lived in different styles ; but on all these, they came 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 nut 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 ; fur he thought they were quite just in men tioning the amount of assessed taxes that had tetn repealed since the sear, no less than 4,000,000/.; 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 badge 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 getting 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 qeisitorial in the land-tax. It was a tax of so much per acre, not entering into value—a tax upon the visible means of visible property. Now take the history of the United States of America. They „ere accustomed to consider those States as affhrdinme a specimen of' democratic government, and therefore of' what the people would do if tbey had their own way in laying on taxation. Now the history of the United 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 - tanguage used iu the House, which appealed not to the welfare and interest, but to the bad feeling of those armies, and he knew not by what other term he could characterise the language which had been held on the other side, by gentlemen high in office, who had attempted to support the tax by refe reitee to the fact that the working classes would escape from it. He knew not how else to aleseribe the hope expressed by the Right Honourable ma-onet, that the meetings held on this subject would be a s tenc Lel by persons who had less than 150/. a year. He conteeded that that was dangerous language, far more danger ens than any which was used last night. Ile held that it woui'd be far more wise to concede the Charter at once, than to tali in aid of this measure the freedom of the working classes from its operation, He was very glad to find that that language, inflammatory as it was, hail produced no effect whatever. By the bye, he must admit that it had produced no effect. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir James Graham) had sncceedsd that evening in presenting a petition froM 2,500 working people in Carlisle, rejoicing in the In come-tax. lie did not complain much of this, because the] a was at least a kind of oscillatory consistency in in the Right Hon. Baronet's language.—(Hear, hear, from the Cpposition.) In the inflammatory language which he held now he recognised the language which he held in 183 G, wherein he points out to time execration of the people those whom he then repre .sented as fattening upon the spoils of the people by means .a their, aristocratic influence in legislation, and whom the denounced as the birds of prey that preyed upon the people.—(Cheers.) But :he (Mr. C. B.) was happy to find that, beyond the demagogues of the Treasury benches, the appeal had not been successful — the. t no meetings of electors had been disturbed by per sons intruding their opinions upon a tax which they were not to pay. The Chartist press was not conciliated— the lireehlg Dispatch opposed the tax, so that the Eight Hon. Gentleman had not secured that approbation .of that great writer, Publicola."—(A laugh.) He =would. read to the House a passage from the National Association Gazette and he must say that a fairer indi cation of all the intellect and' good feeling, which there was aunonee, the Chartists, could not be found than that which preeeeded from the pen of Lovett. The following was tae passage to which he referred :—" Sir Robert Peel loudly boasted that he would not tax the jabourt:r, and the boast was still more loudly cheered by the ignorant boobies who thronged the seats of the Souse at Commons." The Hon. Member continued to Teed the extract, which stated thatein effect, the Income tax would eventually fall upon the industrious classes. Jiehad thought it right to read that pas gaage to time House, to vindicate the body of ti'ie working men from the suspicion that they y i e ld e d to the arguments which had been held by Gentlemen opposite, and that they wished for the hesposition of an Income-tax, because it would fall only on the rich. The working classes felt that the - tax ,would press heavily on themselves, and they op posed it a.( an encroachment on the comforts of every man in England. lie apologised to the House for detaining them so long, but the opposition to the measure assumed now a different form.—(Cheers.) They were discussing the details and principles of the Bill, and he was anxious to take the first proper oppor tunity of expressing his opposition to the e was not sanguine enough to imagine that he should succeed on the present occasion ; kme as One who had taken a stroll.. part in opposition to the Bill, he felt anx i ous to strong himself from the 'lniNropresentations to - which — it appeared all those wise opposfd either the Bill or the tiovernment were to bp subjected.—(Loud cheers.) If a Gentle man 01T,Ired the slightest opposition to the immediate progress o f the measure, he was told that his conduct ism factious, and that if he chose to tal“ , an opportunity or discussing t h e question— and there were many Hon. Members around him, repre sentatives of large constituencies, who had a perfect :right to do so—it seemed to be the tactics of the G b .. -ternment to set up Gentleman:after Gentleman to say, "Oh! von are stopping the tariff; which it is most im portant to the best interests of the country should b e i m . mediately considered."—(Loud cheers) They had right fully, freely, and fairly . to discuss, not 'only the had principle of this Measure, but its still Worse details—(Loud cheers) ---and if by so doing they 'delayeo the tariff, that was not their fault, but the fault ' of the Government.—(Loud cheers.) If the. 'Governinent chose to press forward thelncome-tax before the tariff,,tlie responsibility of the delay must rest with .the Govvrnment and not with them. He knew that he 'vas fighting against a majority—he knew that it vita s an uphill fight, but he knew that the op p osition to the income tax was grounded on reason an It *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 inquisitorifl,, impost tall 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 down he concurred ; from others he differed. He (Mr. E) wished to draw a distinction between property and income, but he confessed that be was one of those, whether they were called Radicals or Liberals, who were in favour of that system of direct taxation so much deprecated by the Honourable and Learned Gentleman. In America, so far as he understood, 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 poor. It was consequently a species of indirect Property-tax. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman had alluded to the case of France. He had told them of what was done in France of ald, but he had not told them what the system of taxation was in modern France since the 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 not regard it in the same light, as many did oil that (the Opposition) side of the House ; inure 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 contests as formidable, if not 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 great 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 for a 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 appearod 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 he objected to that part of the plan im posing a duty 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 be expunged from it at a future time. It would act as a discouragement to the commercial steam navigation, and consequently to 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 Robert 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 oughtito impose duty on few articles, and 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 direction. 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 beers said about the inequality of thepro posed tax, but, to use a pithy passage that he had lately met with in a periodical—" A perfectly equal and just tax would indeed be a verydesirable 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. lion. 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 would 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 inequalities might be adduced in the operation of this tax by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, but he thought he could adduce many necessary inequalities in the operation of this tax as applied to fixed property. But, before he adverted to that point, he would shortly address himself to the propositions of some of the Hon. Gentlemen apposite,who defended a Property tax, provided it were applied to fixed property only. Those Gentlemen ought to be reminded, that in all the Auts creating the funded securities the State guaranteed the tundholder against any special taxation, and many persons, when Mr. Pitt first 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 he had proposed, and which embraced all the incomes of the country. Mr. Pitt was right, and the Right H on . B arone t was r i g ht in following his example ; but by the adoption of the partial scheme of taxa tion advocated by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, although the fundholcler would have a twin brother in affliction in the land holder, the measure would no longer be of that general and comprehensive nature, which alone could justify the imposition of a tax on the funds without a breach of engagement— ( Cheers.) He would now proceed to notice the inequalities to which he had before alluded. He understood that the Right Hon. Baronet proposed to assess 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 be collected 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 21. 17s. Bd. on 801., whilst trades and pro fessions would only pay the same amount on 100/. 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 600/. a year, reduced to 550/. by the outgoings incidental to landed property. Another invested in the funds, and received 660/. 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 2,0001. was to be entirely free, whilst the smaller incomes were taxed. There was another point which had been urged by Hon. Gentlemen orposite 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 Hon. Gentlemen opposite, whether, at this time, an income of 10,000/. a-year derivable from a great establish ment in the metropolis—a brewery, for instance—was not as certain a source of income as 10,600/. 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 ca tered into business seven or eight years ago. Why not give credit to the Government for this benefit? Consider what placed the 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? \%hy, in defence of British trade and com merce. At the expiration of the East India Company's charter the trade with China was thrown open to the British mercantile world. Collisions with the Government and laws of China were the unavoidable consequences. The East India Company would have conformed to the Chinese laws; the new trailers, 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 we sought are 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, i n it s mot i ves, was qu i te different from our quarrel with the Affghans ? 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. Looking at the subject in a financial point of view, he would say that there had been wars more dangerous, but there could not be ary 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 foreign relations of this country was au extremely delicate one, and required to be treated most carefully by a Minister ; but he, as a private individual, might us.; language which 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 cling wh ich, under irritating circum stsnces, it would be very difficult for even the wisest an ; most moderate Government to restrain, and which Government ss ould be wholls justified in overlooking. The French people would respect them when they saw them taking the most direct meal's of meeting the present emergency. lie would conclude by stating his determination to support the pro position of the Right Hon. Baronet. He hoped the necessity would semi pass away, that trade would revive, and that those cl;uds which hung over their relations would be dissipated in a few years. Then it would be politic to reduce the tax. lie was not prepared to continue a tax from motives of 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 Hen. 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 the on the Cont contrary, tax could onl y b e justified on the ground of the emergency of circumstances. His Hon. Friend, the Member for Dum fries,3', endeavoured to prove that the tax on property rested 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 lowed distinctly to state, that he did not, for one moment, imagine that the object of the Right Hon. Baronet, in levying the tax to only half the amount on persons employed in agriculture, was to give any unfair advantage to the agricultural interest. He believed the object of the Right 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 one. 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 rent 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 fa rmer ren t s f er til e l an d or poor l an d, it is clear that he car.not 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 proposition of the Right Hon. Baro net was just, and he would not ask the exact measure of profit; but that could only be true in a small number of instances, and in by far the greater 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 153. an acre, then it would be 275/., and the tenant would escape the tax altogether, inasmuch 83 the Right Hon. Gen tleman proposed to tax fauns only of 3001. a year ; but if the land was let at 31. an acre, that would be a rental of 9001., and upon one-half of that 450/. the tenant would be taxed three per cept., or 131. 10s. Now, was it at all clear that he made a profit of 4501 , or that the other tenant made only 1351. ? 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 th e t enan t th an t h e capital employed on the land at 15s. per acre. The surplus profit went to the landlord. Therefore the Right Honourable 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 150!. 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 whole of the farmers of Great Britain, Ireland, and Wales, there were not less than two-thirds under 300/. a year—therefore i hey exempted from taxation two-thirds of the farming capita: 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 ho 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 conntry 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 objectionable 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 farmer, 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 Hon. Baronet should have whatever 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 far 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 inferior class of merchant vessels of 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 I herefore vote for the amendment of his Hon. Friend the Mem ber for Liskeard. Mr. 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 lie exceedingly regretted to find that the present Bill was so framed that he could not give it his support. lithe Right lion. Baronet had proposed even a graduated Income-tax, he would sincerely support him, because be believed that no tax could operate so justly 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 ;axes upon industry. But the Right Hon. Baronet was about to tax industry ; he was about to tax incomes derived from labour, when they exceeded 1501. a year. Now, he (Mr, Wakley) thought that they should not, at all events, tax to the same amount incomes derived from professional exertions and incomes 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 read a letter from an individual who stated that with a capital of 5,000/. he employed 34 clerks and la bourers, besides horses ; that the gross returns were 25,000/., and that he paid various taxes to the amount of 100/., and asked, was it fair to tax the profits of his industry, while, if 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 will have the option of going before the local Commissioners or the special Commissioners appointed by the Government. Mr. WAKLEY (in continuation)—What he wished was that the party might have the power, if:he 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 out 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 was ready to acknowledge that there was no strong feeling against the Income-tax out of doors.—(Loud Ministerial cheers.) His impression, 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 had 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 Liskeard objected to direct taxation. He really did not know where he could have learned Isis political eco nomy. He preferred direct taxation; he liked to see the tax gstherer come arid make his demand openly ; then the tax payer began to ask what it was applied fur, and thus every scan gradually became a political Reformer. But the sum they were about to collect by the tax was inadequate to its in quisition ; it was only one-fourteenth of the whole revenue. Ilad 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 sliding scale ap pl ed to horses, carriages, servants, and 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 6,000/. would have 1801. a year withdrawn from his income. In the case of the former you deprive the man of the value of a suit of clothes, but in the case of the latter, what deprivation was there whatever ? If he could have no pleasures from 6,000/. a year, minus 180/., he must be a very avaricious fellow, and the more they taxed him the better for himself and for his country. A constituent of his (Mr. Wakley), who was a clerk, had told him that his salary was 1601. ayear, and that last year, after having observed tl.e strictest economy, he . still found himself 111. in debt at the close of the year. In consequence, he and his wife came to the resolution of making some sacrifices to keep out of debt; but now came the Right Hen. Baronet with his tax, which would deprive them of 41. 10e. per annum. Under those circumstances, he had asked him (Mr. \V.) 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 children, 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 Hon. Baronet's measure ; and the poor servantgirl whom he would be obliged to discharge, was a member of a family of 7 children, the father of whom was a cripple. There was another point to which he would refer. 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 hail 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 Italy, 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 imposed. Mr. DISRAELI said it was admitted en all hands that new taxes must 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 taxes necessary. No thing con 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 be regarded as the wars, not of the East India Company, but of the English nation. It 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 ? He would not enter into the policy or impolicy of Cm n-laws, hut no one could say they had decreased commerce, because it had not declined. Th e 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 policy ? Why, it was engaging in a war that had never met with 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 4 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. When a Noble Lord came down to that House, and said he would divide the House on every opportunity on this subject, he (Mr. Disraeli) was surprised that no Member on that (the Opposition 1 side of the House 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 caused them. Mr. CHRISTIE, as a young Member, claimed the indul gence of the House while he explained his reasons for sup porting the Hon. Member for 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 roust be attended with the greatest evils if 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 Hon. Baronet proposed to raise. —( Hear, 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 Income. 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 100 per cent. on coffee, with a heavy tax of 30s. per load on foreign timber, and a nominal duty of I s. a load on colonial timber ? ( 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 Hr n. 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 viors 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 :or supporting the proposition looked very like inconsistency. The Bill would go into Committee and would come out of it with what the Hon. 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 1104. Baronet, and which he thought had not been mentioned before.—( Hear, hear.) The man who could command only '2OO/. 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 1501. a-year. People whose claims were under 150/. a year, were those who were probably ac customed to humble desires and humble occupations; 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 who might yet be a lustre to the Brit. 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.—( 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 he could not sit down without expressing his thanks to the House fur the attention with which he had been heard. Mr. SMYTHE said there was one principle in which he perfectly agreed with the Hon. 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 had been called, and yet vote for the Income-tax. When Mr. Pitt entered office, he found the country involved to the amount of 4,844,000/., 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 o f 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 thi s to be a consideration in the eye of a far-seeing statesman? If he wanted further elements of justi fication for the tax proposed by the Right Hon. Gentleman, he would remind the House of what the Right Hon. and Gallant Commodore. the Member for Marylebone, 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 as the present, in the course of his long and renowned career, with the exception of two occasions, in which he was perhaps biassed by his professional feeling— the mutiny at therric e , and the mutiny at Portsmouth. For this reason he supported the tax, though he did not con sider it a; a perfect measure—" that faulrless 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 he hoped, that when the tariff came to be discussed, the Right Hon. baronet 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 lodger. 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 before them was, whe ther this was the time to impose such a tax? It appeared to I 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 Government were carried they would have a far less deficiency to provide for, anti the interests of trade would be materially benefited. That was his 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 Hon. 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 property, 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 Hon. Baro net 'axed property, he would give him his cordial support. With regard to ti e time the tax was to continue, he th afght that Ile r difficulties and inquisiti-e, which attended it, would prevent any fear as to its being borne for any considerable time by the people. In its own nature the tax was 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 ought not to sanction. Upon those grounds, and believing the Right Hon. Baronet had not made out a case to ju s tify the imposition o the tar; he shoul 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 G. CLERK, the House resolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means, Mr. GREENE in the chair. Sir G. CLERK having moved a vote of 9,100 0001. to be raised by Exchequer Bills for the service of the year, Mr. BLEWITT, 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 answer 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 with the Saving's Banks funds as a perma• rent resource for the financial service ; but he should add, at the same time, that the practice had not the slightest ten dyne} , to impair the interests of the depositors. The vote was then agreed to ; the resolution was reported to the House ; and the House having resumed, the report was ordered to be 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 on 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 Hose. BARONET the Bill was read a second time, and w as or d ere d to b e comm itted o n M on d a y. RAILWAYS BILL. On the moti on of Mr GLADSTONE the House resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House for the further consideration of the Report on the Railways Bill. I Lord J. RUSSELL wished to take that opportunity of sug gesting, that it would be convenient that the House should know beforeh an d the course of business to be pursued each evening. There were many gentlemen who felt an interest in the Railways Bill, and who %ve t 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 House should be gone through in future, in a definite order. He would urge as his excuse for not pursuing that course that evening, that, after the formal an nouncentent of the Noble Lord with respect to the Income-tax, he had hardly expected the debate would be over at half-past nine o'clock, and that only 76 members would have voted upon the other ode.—(Hear, lit.ar, from the Mini.terial benches.) He had anticipated that the grt at debate would have taken place on the principle of the Bill, on the second reading. After a few woi as from Mr. V. &NUT 11, and Mr. GLAD STONE, Lord J. RUSSELL said,he imagined the closing of the debste had in some degree arose from Gentlemen opposite preventing Alembers on this aide of the House from speaking, even those who would, perha ps, the Bill. have argued in favour of the principle of Sir R. PEEL said he certainly had opposed no obstruction to any Honourable Members speaking, but he was afraid the House at one time would be counted out. —( Hear, and a laugh.) The conversation 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. Healy toot 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 Alembers wished to ad- ' THE SUN, LONDON; gATURDAY MORNING, APRIL 23, 1842. dress the House on the subject. Such being the case he would move that the Chairman report progress and ask leave to sii •, gain, , Mr. Guenter having put the question, Sir W. JOLLIFFE could assure the Right Hon. Gentle man that lie was not actuated by any wish to defeat the Bill. He believed in asking the House to expunge the clause he did great service to the meaQure. 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 short discussion, in which Sir T. Wylde, in opposi tion to the clause, and Mr. Wallace, Mr. Gladstone, and some other Hon. Members in favor of it, took part. Captain BERKELEY said, that he would withdraw his motion, if the Hon. 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 Companys, if they had to pest a policeman at every gate along a line. For instance, the Carlisle and Newcastle Railway went through many miles of desolate moor, and if they had to post a policeman at every gate on each thoroughfare on it, the expense would be incalculable—the police would have nothing to do, and therefore they woukt fall asleep and get drunk.—( Great laughter. ) An Hos. 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 wherever he was wanted. On clause 14 being proposed, Sir W. JOLLIFFE hoped some days' notice would be given to owners of land before a Company occupied it. Mr. GLADSTONE 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.panies ought to have the power of taking immediate possession. Sir R. PEEL suggested that, in all cases in which the Corn pany should be of opinion that there was no essing necessity, and that there would b e t i me to apply to the Board of Trade 011 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, certifying immedi ately to the Board of Trade that they had so entered, and if the Board of Trade should be of opinion that no pressing ne cessity existed, then no doubt that circumstances would be con sidered in awarding compensation. jSir THOMAS WILDE suggested, 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 necessityy 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 s 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 Wilde, 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, Dlr. HARDY moved the insertion of the following clauses— " And whereas many fatal accidents have happened in con sequence of carriages containing passengers on railways being planed next 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 shall 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 best for the safely of the passengers travelling thereby. " And be it enacted, that in no case shall any train, with car riages containing passengers in whole or in part, be propelled 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 political details, yet that some provi sion ought to be made for increasing the responsibility of Rail road Directors in case of accidents. He thought a power might be given to Juries in such cases to make awards of com pensation to the sufferers. Mr. EWART also thought the law in this respect was ano malous, as in cases of the loss of a limb the compensation went to the sufforer, while in cases of the loss of life, the deodand went to the Crown, instead of to the relatives of the individual. Mr. HARDY, after a few observations, withdrew the clause. Mr. BROTHERTON moved that the Chairman report progress and ask leave to sit again. Air. GLADSTONE trusted the Hun. Member would not persevere in that motion, as there was nothing more that would take time, Mr. HO DGSON lIINDE 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, an account or list of the several rates and tolls which the said Companies shall from time to time direct and appoint to he taken ; and whereas it is for the public convenience that the said list of rates and tolls should be printed and affixed within every station-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 conspicuoussitua 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 the said Acts as effectually as if the said table 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 thought it was altogether foreign to the purpose. After a few observations from Mr. Hinde, 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 agreed to, The House then adjourned at a Quarter past One o'Clock. - ---- - FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE, ST. JAMES'S-PALACE, Arum 13, 1842. The Queen has bean pleased to appoint George Phillip Lee, Esq., to be Lieutenant of her Majesty's Guard of Yeomen o, the Guard, in the room of Sir Edwin Pearson, resigned. WHITEHALL, APRIL 12. The Lord Chancellor has appointed William Butt, of Ryde, in the Isle of Wight, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. WAR-OFFICE, APRIL 16. Her Majesty has been graciously pleased to permit the 32d Regiment of Foot to bear upon its colours and appointments, in addition to the distinctions heretofore granted, the word " Corunna," in commemoration of the gallantry displayed by the regiment in the action fought at that place between the British and French armies on the 16th January, 1809. WAR-OFFICE, APRIL 22. 6th Regiment of Dragoon Guards—Lieutenant W. Scott to be Captain, by purchase, vice Johnston, who retires ; Cornet J. Somerville to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Scott; C. J. Bourchier, Gent., to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Somerville, April 22. 7th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Veterinary Surgeon J. Robertson, from the 9th Light Dragoons, to be Veterinary Surgeon, vice Johnston, who exchanges, April 22. 9th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Lieutenant-Colonel J. Scott, from the 4th Light Dragoons, to be Lieutenant-Colonel, without purchase ; Captain J. H. Grant to be Major, without. purchase, April 22. To be Captains, without purchase—Captain H. J. Close, from half-pay 22d Light Dragoons ; R. A. Reynolds, Esq., late Captain 11th Light Dragoons ; Captain T. W. M‘Mahon, from the 6th Dragoons ; Lieutenant R. Cooke, vice Grant, April 22. To be Lieutenants, without purchase—Lieut. the Hun. C. Pow)s, from the 3d Light Dragoons; Lieut. W. Cathrey, from half-pay 13th Light Dragoons ; Lieut. W. Drysdale, from the 4th Light Dragoons ; Lieut. 0. H. St. George Anson, from the 3d Foot; Lieut. W. W. W. Humbley, from the 4th Light Dragoons ; Lieut. J. R. J. Coles, from the 4:h Light Dragoons ; Lieut. W. A. Ryder, from the 4th Light Dragoons ; Lieut. C. J. Colville, from the 40th Foot ; Lieut. W. R. N. Campbell, from the 47th Foot, April 22. To be Cornets, without purchase—Cornet Sir J. Radcliffe, Bart. , from half-pay 23d Light Dragoons ; Cornet F. Lord Rendlesham, from half-pay 21st Light Dragoons; Cornet D. It. Ross, from half-pay 23d Light Dragoons ; Cornet E. R. Staples, from half-pay Staff Corps of Cavalry, April 22. To be Cornets, by purchase—C. F. Studdert, Gent., vice Sir J. Radcliffe, who retire,, April 22; P. Antrobus, Gent., vice Lord Rendlesham, who retires, April 23; A. Ilawtrey, Gent., vice Russ, who retires, April 24; W. C. Kortright, Gent., vice Staples, who retires, April 25. To be Assistant-Surgeon—Assistant-Surgeon W. G. L. Staunton, from the Staff, April 22. To be Veterinary Surgeon—Veterinary Surgeon G. John ston. from the 7th Light Dragoons, vice Robertson, who ex.. changes, April 22. . . 10th Regiment, of Light Dragoons—Paymaster E. B. Frith, from the 47th Foot, to be Paymaster, vice Wells, deceased, Apra 22. 13th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Lieut H. Hamilton to be Captain, by purchase, vice Ellis, promoted ; Cornet L. J. H. Allgood to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Hamilton ; H. G. Holden, Gent., to be Cornet, by purOhase, vice Allgood, April 22. 13th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Lieut. R. Knox to be Captain, without purchase, vice Vernon, deceased; Cornet T. R. Crawley to be Lieutenant, vice Knox, Mareh 9; Cornet T. 0. Bache, from half-pay 23d Light Dragoons, to be Cornet, vice Crawley ; J. L. S. L ums d a i ne, G ent., to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Bache, who retires, April 22. 17th Regiment of Light Dragoons—T. Lyon, Gent., to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Benson, promoted, April 22. 10th Regiment of Foot—Ensi gn J. V. H. - Montagu, from the 38th Foot, to be Li eu t e n an t, by p urc h ase , vice Fenwick , promoted, April 22. 15th Foot—Ensign E. Pardoe to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vise West, promoted; G. A. Hatchett, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Pardoe, April 22. 23d Foot—Second Lieutenant T. P. Rickford to be First Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Brooke, who retires; P. L. Phillips, Gent., to be second Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Rickford, April 22. 24th Foot—Ensign F. Spring to be Lieutenant by purchase, vice Chetwood, who retires; P. W. C. Lipycatt, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Spring, April 22. 25th Foot—J. Clancy, Gent. to be Ensign, by purchase, vise Thomas, appointed to the 57th Foot, April 22. 29th Foot—C. E. M‘Donnell, Gent., to be Ensign, by pur chase, vice Stanhope, promoted, April 21 ; J. Johnston, Gent. to be Ensign, without purchase, April 22. 31st Foot—Ensign W. F. W. Atty to be Lieutenant, with out purchase, vice Robertson, who retires; Poole Gabbett, Gent. to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Atty, April 22. 38th Foot—T. Bellew, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Montagu, promoted in the 10th Foot, April 22. 39th Foot—Ensign T. D. Bray, from the 57th Foot, to be Ensign, vice Smith, who retires, April 22. 45th Foot—T. Best, Gent., to be Assistant-Surgeon, April 22. 57th Foot—Ensign H. Thomas, from the 25th Foot, to b., Ensign, vice Bray, appointed to the 39th Foot, April 22. 64th Foot—Surgeon W. Smith, from the Saint Helena Regiment, .to be Surgeon, vice Fogarty, who exchanges, April 22. 65th Foot—Assistant-Surgeon J. G. P. Moore, from the 94th Foot, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Nichol!, deceased, April 22. .73d Foot—The Hon. F. C. G. Fitzclarence to be Ensign ; without purchase, vice Simmons, promoted in the 29th Foot. April 22. 84th Foot—Ensign P. A. Iremonger, from the Bth Foot, to be Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Palmer, whose appoint ment has been cancelled, April 8. 94th Foot—Assistant-Surgeon E. Menzies, from the 20th Foot, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Aloore, appointed to the 65th Foot, April 22. Ceylon Rifle Regiment—Assistant-Surgeon G. W. Powell, M.D., from the Staff, to be Assistant-Surgeon, vice Rumley, promoted to be Staff-Surgeon of the Second Class, April 22. St. Helena Regiment—Surgeon M. Fogarty, from the 64th Foot, to be Surgeon, vice Smith, who exchanges, April 22. UNATTACHED.—Brevet Major R. Ellis, from the 13th Light Dragoons, to be Major, by purchase, April 22. IlstEvvr.—Capt. H. J. Close, of the 9th Light Dragoons, to be Major in the Army, July 22. STAFF. —Lieutenant W. Ready (Staff-Lieutenant at Fort Pitt) to be Adjutant to the Invalid Depot at Chatham, April 22. MENIORAN nu M.—Brevet Lieutenant-Colonel E. E. Kenny has been permitted to retire from the service, with the sale .f his majority, he being about to settle at Port Philip, April 22. The commission of the under-mentioned officer has been cancelled from the date, inclusive, set against his name, he having accepted a commuted allowance tor his half-pay : Paymaster W. Moir, half-pay 2d Ceylon Regiment, April 22. The Christian names of Major Galloway, of the 10th Foot, are Thomas Leech " Lennox," not " Lenon," as previously stated. The Christian names of Ensign Hutchison, of the 84th Foot, are " Harvey Francis," not " Henry," as previously stated. OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, APRIL 20. Royal Regiment of Artillery—First Lieut. J. W. Fitzmayer to be Second Captain, vice Skinner, retired on full pay ; Se cond Lieut. J. Willett to be First Lieutenant, vice Fitsinayer, April 12; Brevet Lieut.-Col. F. R. Chesney to be Lieute nant. Colonel, vice Gray, retired on full pay ; Second Capt. D. Thorndike to be Captain, vice Chesney; First Lieut. G. R. H. Kennedy to be Second Captain, vice Thorndike ; Second Lieut. J. C. W. Fertescue to be First Lieutenant, vice Kennedy; Brevet Major W. Bell to be Lieutenant- Colonel, vice Fogo, retired on full-pay ; Second Captain F. Holcombe to be Captain, vice Bell; First Lieut. G. Sandham to be Second Captain, vice Holcombe ; Second Lieut. W. H. Cox to be First Lieutenant, vice Sandham ; Brevet Major G. B. Fraser to be Lieutenant-Colonel, vice Romer, retired on full-pay; Second Captain H. Stow to be Captain, vice Fraser ; First Lieutenant Charles Vansittart Cock burn to be Second Captain, vice Stow; Second Lieut. R. O'Connell to be First Lieutenant, vice Cock burn ; Second Capt. W. Fraser to be Captain, vice Law, re tired on full-pay ; First Lieut. F. Wodehouse to be Second Captain, vice Fraser; Second Lieut. W. King to be First Lieutenant, vice Wodehouse; Second Capt. C. Cost-ling to be Captain, vice Pascoe, retired on full-pay ; First Lieut. J. H. Francklyn to be Second Captain, vice Gostling ; Second Lieuts. W. F. S. Neill to be First Lieutenant, vice Francklyn ; Second Captain C. ft Mee to be Captain, vice Bridges, re tired on full pay ; First Lieut. H. T. Fyers t o b e S econ d Cap tain, vice Mee; Second Lieut. M. Clifford to be First Lieu• tenant, vice Fyers ; Second Captain T. Desbrisay to be Cap tain, vice Somerville, retired on full pay ; First Lieut. G. Gambier to be Second Captain, vice Desbrisay ; Second Lieut. R. W. Brettingham to be First Lieutenant, vice Gambier, April 13. Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of the County Palatine of Lancaster. W. S. Standish, Esq., to be Deputy Lieutenant; J. N. Ffarington, Esq., to be ditto; P. Dawson, Esq., to be ditto; T. Y. P. Michaelson, Esq., to be ditto, April 13. Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of the West Riding of the County of York, and of the City and County of the City of York. W. Burke, Esq., to be Deputy. Lieutenant; J. W. Childers, Esq., to be ditto, April 13. Ist West York Militia—Lint. R. M. Darnell, from the 2d West York Militia, to be Captain, vice Sinclair, resigned, April 13. Hussar Regiment of Yorkshire (West Riding) Yeomanry Cavalry—Cornet the Hon. B. R. Lasvley to be Captain, vice the Hon. W. S. Lascelles, resigned, April 13. Southern Regiment of Yorkshire (West Riding) Yeomanry Cavalry--W. de Cardonnel Elmsall, Gent. to be Cornet, vice Preston, promoted, April 13. ADMIRALTY, APRIL 19. Corps of Royal Marines—To be Second Lieutanants—T, Magin, Gent. ; C. Slaughter, Gent. ; J. S. Dowman, Gent. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. JOHN MORE, me;l A hait iß M i c . iga s te-street, City. PETER PYNE, provision broker, Crooked-lane Cham bers, City, to surrender, May 3, at half-past eleven, and June 3, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee; Rutter and Trotter, Ely-place, Holborn. JOHN RACKHAM, Jun., coach builder, Long-acre, April 29 and June 3, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, liasinghall-street, official assignee; White and Barrett, Lin coln's Inn.fields. STEPHEN HOBDAY, tallow-chandler, Woolwich, April 29 and June 3, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Belcher, official assignee ; Brown, Marten, ;and Thomas, Commercial chambers, :Mincing-lane.) THOMAS DOWNES TAYLOR, oilman, Lower Holborn, - April 29, at one, and June 3, at twelve, at the Court of I3ank ruptcy. Pennell, official assignee; Berkeley, Lincoln's Inn fi elds. ALFRED BAYLEY, stock-broker, Lothbury, City, April 29, at half.past one, and June 3, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Graham, Basinghall-street, official assignee ; Neal, Tokenhouse-yard. STEPHEN SLY, Bouverie-street, Fleet-street, April 29, at one, and June 3, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Gibson, Basinghall.street, official assigne e ; A s hl e y, Sh ore di tc h . JOHN RICHARDS, metal-broker, George-yard, Lom. bard-street, May 4, at two, and June 3, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, Basinghall-street, official assignee ; Heathcote and Holman, Coleman-street. JAMES SHAW, carpenter, Fetter-lane, City, May 4, at one, and June 3, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Lack ington, Coleman-street-buildings, official assignee ; Chambers, Basinghall-street. HENRY GRATTON, hatter, Liverpool, May 9 anti June 3, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool. Norris, Allen, and Simpson, Bartlett's-buildings, Holbo r n, L o nd on; N orr i s , Liverpool. GEORGE GUILFORD, ship owner, North Shields, May 13, at eleven, and June 3, at two, at the Bankrupt Commission room, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Dale, North Shields; Dead, Creasy, and Dixon, Gray's Inn-square, London. HENRY LACEY, bookseller, Liverpool, May 9 and June 3, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool. Walters and Reeve, Basinghall-street, London. JOSEPH MAYOR, chemist, Northampton, May 3 and June 3, at twelve, at the Peacock Inn, Northampton. Weller, King's-road, Bedford-row, London ; Crook, Northampton. JAMES LOCKWOOD, woollen-draper, Wakefield, York shire, May 6, at eleven, at the Sessions-house, Wakefield, and June 3, at one, at the Commissioner's-rooms, Leeds. Taylor and Westmorland, Wakefield ; Adlington, Gregory, Faulkner, and Follett, Bedford-row, London.. JOHN GIBSON, corn-merchant, Kingston-upon-Hull, May 6 and June 3, at eleven, at the George Inn, Kingston upon-Hull. Hicks and Marris, Gray's Inn-square, London ; Galloway, Bell, and Todd, Hull. RICHARD BURGESS SCALE, farmer, Halsted, Essex, May 5 and June 3, at twelve, at the Three Cups Inn, Colches ter. Thomson, George-street, Minories, London ; Sewell, Halstead. JOHN SCOTT, railway carriage lamp manufacturer, Moorgate-street, City, May 3 and June 3, at one, at the Wa terloo-rooms, Birmingham. Clarke and Medcalf, Lincoln's Inn fields, London ; Colmore and Beale, Birmingham. JOSEPH GILL, iron -master, Brierley •hill, Staffo r d s hi re , May 3 and June 3, at twelve, at the Swan Hotel, Wolverhamp ton. Combe, Staple Inn, London ; Fellowes, jun., Dudley. ISAAC MARSDEN, jun., maltster, Bowling, Yorkshire, April 27, at three, at the Court-house, Bradford, and June 3, at eleven, at the Commissioner's-rooms, Leeds. Adlington, Gregory, Faulkner, .and Follett, Bedford-row ; Wavell, Hali fax, Yorkshire. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. R. Smith and S. Marshall, Russia brokers, Austin-friars, City, May 13, at half-past twelve—J. Goodwin, innkeeper, Bishop's Stortford, Hertfordshire, May 13, at half-past eleven —B. Ward, boot manufacturer, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, May 13, at. twelve—J. Philpot, R. Marriott, and B. Burnell, coal mer chants, Crigglestone, Yorkshire, May 13, at twelve—G. B. Bishop and F. Hildyard, drapers, Southampton, May 12, at eleven—T. Ashton, bill broker, Berners-street, Oxford-street, May 12, at twelve—J. Stevens and R. H. W. Drummond, road contractors, Rhodeswell-wharf, Mile-end, May 14, at eleven. In the Country. S. and W. T. Clough, alkali manufacturers, Eccleston, Lan cashire, May 13, at twelve, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool —G. Sheppard, corn dealer, Thornton-le-Clay, Yorkshire, May 19, at one, at the Guildhall, York—R. Drake, engraver, Bristol, May 20, at two, at the City of Bristol—H. A. Baker, maltster, Lindfielti, Sussex, May 27, at twelve, at the Town hall, Brighton—W. Roberts, grocer, Rawmarsh, Yorkshire, May 19, at one, at the Town-hall, Sheffield—W. Mayfield, grocer, Spalding, Lincolnshire, May 18, at eleven, at Stand well's Hotel, Stamford—W. Barrett, girth web manufacturer, Ha,elbury Plucknett, Somersetshire, May 16, at one, at the Greyhound Inn, Bridport, Dorsetshire—H. Hayes, wheel wt Stamford, Lincolnshire, May 16, at twelve, at the Of fice of 'l'. H. Jack:on, Stamford—T. Burbey, R. Loe, and J. Loe, bankers, Portsmouth, Dec. 1, at three, at the George Inn, Portsmouth—lt, F. Beeston, marble mason, Liverp oo l, M ay 23, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool---J. Hopkins and J. Drewitt, hankers, Arundel, Sussex , May 20 , at one, at the Norfolk Arms Hotel, Arundel — W. Haskayne, ship chandler, Liverpool, May 14, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool. CERTIFICATES-MAY 13 J. Gardner, linen manufacturer, Llangollen, Denbigh,hire— , H. Harrison, commission agent ! Manche s t er —W . B ry d on , I druggist, Abchurch-lane—J. Davies, oil merchant, Liverpool R. Hardy and W. Threlfall, cotton spinners, Lancaster—J. Smith, milliner,: Blenheim-street, Band-street—J. L. Hadley, dealer, Oldham, Lancashire—W. Thompson, hat manufacturer, Princes-street, Spitalfields. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. G. B. Dyer and W. Turner, booksellers, Paternoster-row-- T. Hutchinson and T. Chapple, linen drapers, Great Dover street—T. Diable and W. Stonar, fruit salesmen, Borough market, Southwark—W. Blease and J. Carroll, Liverpool—A. Lambert, S. Whitefield, and F. Whitefield, St. James-street (as far as regards S. Whitefield)—T. Rol,vbotham and G. Barker, tobacconists, Manchester—R. and G. Thomas, edge tools makers, Birmingham—W. and J. Tucker, tea dealers, Plymouth—T. and J. Hucknall, cheesemongers, Nottingham —C. Darkins and D. Blake, builders, Norwich—H. Vincent and R. K. Philp, printers, Bath—R. and E. Elliott, drapers, Durham—W. Atkinson and T. Brittain, woollen drapers, Shef field—W. Hemming and H. Lewis, needle manufacturers, Bed ditch, Worcestershire—J. Seel and W. Holt, hat manufac turers, Oldham, Lancashire—R. Bleakey, W. Tipping, and G. L. Howard. coal m erc h ants , H em el Hempstead, Hertfordshire (as far as regards G. L. Howard) —A. Pulling, J. H. Clayton, R. Comins, and J. H. Square, atturnies, Hare-court, Temple —J. Oaten and S. Finney, coal merchants, 12 Wharf, South Paddington —E. Jackson, W. APLorg, and H. Lacy, bank Port.mouth—Th c Gweedracth Anthracite and !rt,n Givendraefil Valle,Carmarthensh,re. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. 4, JAMES NEWBIGGI NG, wright. East Kilbride, La's, shire, April 26 an d M ay 24, at twelve, at Forrester's Colll°`P cial Hotel, Gl a s gow . • tsi 1) •" WILLIAM STEEL, An na thill, L anarksh i re, A pr il '"-- May 16, at twelve, at the Chambers of C. and R. Baird,.G l a l P, GEORGE WOOD, commissio n agent , Aberdeen, Ar il " and May 17, at eleve n , a t th e Ch am b ers of J. Yeats, Aberdar , PETER COWAN, farmer, Ch a p e l town, A pr il 29 and 3 ' 1 20, at one, at the Chambers of J. South, Glasgow. ij JOHN CAMPBELL and CO., merchants, Greenock , PP' 23 and May 19, at one, at the White Hart Inn, Greenock. 3 MORRIS PRATER, carrier, Cumbernauld, April 2 8 b° May 21, at one, at D. AP Gregor's, Cumbernauld. ROBERT SANDERSON and CO., founder, Little Cr°v,,f Glasgow, Ap r il 28 and M ay 18, at t we l ve, at t h e Chamber" Murray and Galloway, Glasgow. PRICE OF SUGAR. teS The Average Price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, conlir o from the Returns made in the Week ending April 19, I ` 4 i . _ l `,i' a r l 335. 6d. per Cat., exclusive of the Duties of Customs Pat" . „ payable thereon on the Importation thereof into Great Bri_t_ HEINE, BROTHERS, h;t~ ing remitted dui a short time 25,003/., 18,000/., 9,0001, 5,000/. ' 3, 6 00/., 8 4 e. &e " TO LONDON; 3,600/., 800/, and 7001., to EDINBURGH ; 3,6001. to DUBLIN ; 3,6001. to BEVERLEY; 3,600/. to HALIFAX ( Yorkshire i; 1,200/. to PORILEAVEN HARBOUR ; 900/., 7001., 7011 and 6001. to LIVERPOOL; HALL' 9001. to NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE ; 900 1 . to 9001. and 600/. to MANCHESTER ; 700/. to EAST RETFORD (Nottinghamshire); 6001. to BIDEFORD ; 600/. to CORK; and 6001. to BRADFORD ; They shall be glad to remit many Dividends of the 131° Money Distribution to England, Ireland, and Scotland. Direct for Prospectus and Particula r s, without . I „.`"' H . either to HEINE BROTHERS, at AMBURGTh' or to HEINE BROTHERS, at LUBECK. THEATRE ROYAL, COVENT-GARDEN. UNDER the MANAGEMENT of MADAME VESTRIq' HIS VENING, 23: of Will be repeated the E New Comedy. caIIed APRIL ,r BUBBLES OF k. DAY.—Lord Skindeep, Mr. W. Farren ; Sir Phenix Cl e arcakf, ,jr , Harley; Captain Smoke, Mr. Cha r l es M a th ews; S prea d w easot Bartley ; Pamela Spreadweasel, Mrs. isbett ; Floreutia, 3• 01 ' Lacy, Mrs, Quarto, Mrs. W. West ; Guinea, Mrs. Urger. After which will be repeated th e Grand Romantic Fairy E!,`„, ganza, entitled THE WHITE CAT . — Wunsuponatyme (s "10 NevermincbtAnamia), Mr. J. Bland; Princes Paragon, Pr, cietthy o ; Placid (his three Sons , by Madame Vestris, Miss Murray O a Lee; Jingo, Mr. Harley; t e White Cat, Miss Marshall. Doors open at half-past six, ana the Performances begin at Dress Boxes 75., Second Price 3s. 6d ; First and SecondCircle!lio Second Price :is. 6d. ; Pit ;is., Seeond Price 2s. ; Gallery U. T c.of• and Places for the B oxes to be taken of Mr. Grogan, at the .7,p , lice, irons Ten till Four, where Season Tickets may be had ultek piieation. Private Boxes to be had so l e ly o f M r. Andrews. '- seller, 167, New Bond-street. ROYAL VICTORIA THEATRE. cyre' UNDER THE DIRECTION OF MR. OSBALDI-- THIS , APRIL 2 „, FOR THE BENEFIT EVE N OF THE ING 3, 101 i NATIONAL CONVEz" OF THE INDUSTRIOUS CLASSES, Will be performed the histor,cal Play of WILLIAM „ William Tell, Mr. Osbaldiston • Emma, Mr. G. Lee. After which, NATURE AND ART—Gabbleton, Mr. ( i j. - Miss Prosc=nia Ardent (with Son), Nli‘s Vincent. THE LA ST To conclude with an interestin g Melodrama called WITNESS; or, the FATE of ST. MARC the MURDF.perI Claude St. Marc, Mr. E. F Saville; Pierre Gibeau, Mr. Ca t Madame Duval, Mrs. G. Lee; Mannette, Miss Coveney. fleet" Tickets to be had at the Dr. Johnson's Tavern, B o lt-courti m urY street ; of Mt. Cleave, I, Shoe-lane ; a t th e C raven Head, .'oter lane; and of all thy Secretaries of the National ant Trades 4 .• Associations. THE WEATHER.—Noon, APRIL ‘22 r• ROYAL CALLERY OP SCIENCE, ADELAIDE -S 41 Thermometer... 53 Highest 59 1 Lowest • Barometer 30.03.—Wind E.—Freezing Point :j THIS DA Y ' "O. HlGki WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE THIS r Morning S minutes after 01 Evening ..... 36 minutes tg All Advertisements of a Disgusting Cha r ¢e , 0 10 or Immoral Tendency, are excluded the Columns of "The Sun." • - ' • • r si 41 741E00H <'4( - •• \~ ~ ,f LONDON? SATURDAY MORNING, APRIL 23, 184 5 ' te j The second reading of the Income-tax Bill, pro- ,,it) 1,1 by monopolists and class-legislators, in order to oP h the monopoly and class-legislation, was moved alaOrrhe first thing last night in the Mouse of Common 9. e . z er Tories are extremely e ag er t o p ass i t, an d if their itice ness be gratified, the fault will li e with the OPl 3° , s ; t his So strong as they muster, a nd suc h a j um ble as 1 th ey long Bill, with its 189 clauses, schedules and all' saeswill not fight as they ought if it get out of Con"i n ea 0 for a month or six week s . If th e Opp os ition, un it h e ir the bulk of them appear to b e on thi s su bject, dr,o th or duty, they may yet arrest th e p rogress of th is l sure, and merit the enduring gra tit u d e o f the PI: tb 9 The argument that by s o d o i ng t h e y Will de ` ll. o o tariff, was well met last night by Mr. C. 1313 ,0:11. elo' gentleman, with the sagacity, moderation, all tb quence, which shine forth in him, 'no sed t hil o t ri o. second reading of the Bill be p u t off for six t hAt and, in making that motion,. showed very clear lather the charge of delay should be fixed on the Tories is oor than on the Whigs. Want of space alone preveyo/0 quoting the passage. The g round s on w hich th e t, fir pressed forward, forms a strong ar gu ment, i g h tl4 , 2 joy' resisting it. If the necessity to p ass th e Tariff ' e e igste tification of the Income-tax, it w ill o nly be n ec i o er for any Minister to couple a still more o bnoxil re pir e sure—if that be possible—a mea sure wholly su tte of our liberties, with some measure altering oi ,a riff, setting loose all the trade of t h e country , itr y be; shall he obliged to bolt the mischief for the P I ar se nefit of re-fastening what he loosens. Such a e t e ion ;i t proceeding may be subversive of all just leO l i a t ;prOP er is, in fact, cheating men into submission t° ost fcr laws, and it ought to be, for its own sake , 111 venily, strenuously, and constantly resisted. hquisitioil That part of the Bill which establishes 01 09 We il into men's affairs, and the means of doing U we c ano° l , described last night by Mr. C. BULLER, an ti or tc f. give a too prominent place to his description, 50j0e,..- emphatically call our readers' attention to th e He said— tbi , There were first the Tax and St am p Como36'l:rra a. S ea e a head of this hierar c hy ; t h en th e C omm i s sioneo o es ; purposes ; then the Commissioners for special P ar t rn being there were additi ona l C omm i ss i oners , and these ro m issi° u b at e: cient for the inquisition, there were A ss i s tant -0 00 t h a t One of the b ene fit s f rom this Commission would he,t_colotlia the Chief Commiss:oner did not eat the AsslaV o ihrl sioraers would lap up. He did not mean to att am P let/e aR Commission into ridicule ; they seemed to him very respectability of a very fearful instrument ef, h v eie tyranny. What was the power invested in sioners? They not merely gave them a power 0 11 ",, ate they were not merely tax.gathorers, but tl?eY_: e . ge ncl! e " ei .. judicial power. He found in Bill no less than large 7 or giving a power to the Commissioners of levr ii g at o f -°: ive n They had the power of levying fines to the a nt ' powe r . o t her Then added to this power was a aPec i t •di e t , a t u tb them, that in case of a fal.e return they should ,et ei t penalty of treble th e amoun t o f th e t a x to be coll v e`; t hern a sy n ere d consider what a po wer thi s was . lie would gl, e ernP ei i v er stan Commissioner of it. There was clause 55, This eh' eo ple t" s i po ce the to go round and call on i n cow e t , any in a correct statement of their income; an :covered to inake 1501. were to be taxed, and to be r e glec ting not el" of her Majesty's Courts. Any person ri_ it a sum of the such a return, would be liable to forfee amoun t a d • en seeding twenty pounds, and treble th i , r ios ,,, suppo se he duty to be charged by virtue of this Act. , direct retells-who, tleman had 1,0001., if he neglected to illa' e iszow he alk hey ga ve was liable to treble 30/. besides the fine. ? Why , t titer this tax could be compared to any other _instances di aced• a power to the Commissioners under th P guished from every other tax, namely, i,„coa c edruwnt ;v _ as _ ehosornegoo d into in secret. In all other matters, a P dctof a ja i l „1 -113 with fraud, he had to submit to the vet con duc o Court, but under the present Bill everythineg th: liberty mutt secret. This was a monstrous violation be Mr. bad tax. subject. Every tax to be collected by s uchmea ns 'tted (the One point is, we think, are to he take-- on .. constituting apartfroat Some of these Commissioners ,"ai machinery for carrying out the 131 .ained the m atter the people. As Sir H. PEEL 1 the 18th ult., they are to be localrhbours.- respect and good-will of their nog on themselves, a • are to be made, then, to levy this tax on ot* the extortto t exParties whorrielenjplopole, relieve the Government of the odium,it. the ofinstreto n They are to scourge themselves I 'hands. 'Will any , which Sir R. PEEL puts into their .ieni be w i c ked them be fools enough ; will any of It w ho Government, already employed and paid bY the would excuse them ; enough to do this.? must perform the odious task, we . to lend but i roue m an be found sobase voluntarilya 3 ti Colllllllololler self to to the levying of this tax, whether o' be hooted and .r war time,. n ~i _Pr n o : We hope not. If there be personi or in any other character, he ought t those to accept such a fruitless and thankless t, this t d t r necessityu ni m e d fr f o o m r the tax to jj suarsi'lelgthe nation from triotism—to assume it now—to assist in levying self accessory ta fbr the Monopolist, will be to make t to take suc„;P. happiness of the nation. No man ou, r sh a y , ' w.ioeNe and, we trust, that an office on himself' ; the contempt k.nc!, their guilty conspiracy against the prosperity an d th l e i: i s orn iii' take it, shall be made to feel " of all his neighb ou rs. - b oy, _ .4 jo r The horrid crime p er p etrated by 9ood c 430 soon after the simila rl y horrid crime pe;peiratad by tren f t"kr, ar part, With It )1 . 11 " cri The c ',Enevertt rQas • . . 41 '1 Aer e 'Au be tuttin g „With tr those Whom I C O mai th e „ c ";omitted :I1 at °'e4 reco Yet 1 1 gaol 4 news] the exi; the cri] Be] t he spite of death— 411 rning '• It is ~repress kV no lir e , 01 and ha • and el ROYAL SURREY THEATRE. Wonderful attraction, and matchless Stud of Horse'. THIS EVENING, APRIL 23, mg Will be performed the Grand New Equestrian Spectacle, 7„ THE PEARL OF THE HAREM, HER KOOR s )ISH cry; AND HIS WAR STEED, BEDA.—With magnificent s nd Costume, and Appoint-.rents; a Double Company,uestro . Dramatic, and the finest Stud of Horses in th e World. Eq err After which, in a more extensive and splendid Arena nefore witnessed, THE SCENES IN THE CIRCLE, intro Mr. BATTY'S unrivalled Collection of A n i ma l s , cons i s ting merous and matchless Cream-celdured Horses, Andalusian Spotted Coursers, fairy Palfreys, and Pigmy Poneys, and the 0* talented Vaulters, Riders, Gymnastics, and Contortionist kingdom. Si To conclude with the Historical Pantomim e ( w ith New „f , of PEROUSE; or, the MONKEY of the DESOLATE ISLAM Chimpanzee, the Monkey, by Mons. Goutle.