The Sun. — London, England, 1849-03-14 00:00:00

riprb Wbition SUN OFFICE, Seven o Clock. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS DAY). HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly after Twelve o clock. CENTRAL GAS CONSUMERS BILL. On the motion of Mr. K. SEYMER, it was ordered that Mr. Masterman be added to the Committee on the Great Central Gas Consumers Bill. Mr. BROTHERTON presented a petition from Sal ford for the ri pi al of the navigation-laws, and one from Brotherton, in the county of Lancaster, for the establishment of a county board of reduction of ex penditure. PETITIONS. An Hole. MEMBER presented a petition in favour of international arbitration. Sir C. MACNAGHTEN presented a petition from Antrim against the rate in aid. Mr. THORNELY presented two petitions from places in Lancashire, complaining of the county rate expen diture. Mr. BROWN presented similar petitions from other places in the same county. Lord HOTHAM presented a petition from a place in the West Riding of Yorkshire, praying the House to take into consideration the present distressed state of the . agricultural interest, with the view of removing the special burdens which pressed upon it. Mr. CHRIsToPHER and Mr. MOODY presented peti tions against any alteration in the marriage law. Lord G. MANNERS presented a petition to the same effect from Cambridgeshire. Mr. BOURKE presented several petitions against the rate in aid. Colonel TAYLOR and Colonel DUNNE presented similar petitions. Mr. H. DRUMMOND presented petitions from places in Surrey against any alteration in the mar• riage laws. Mr. TRELAWNY presented a petition against church-rates. Mr. COWAN presented a petition from Edinburgh in favour of the repeal of the navigation-laws ; also a petition from the same place, numerously and respec tably signed, praying for the abolition of the duty on . paper. Mr. R. PALMER presented a petition in favour of international arbitration. _ Mr. BANKES presented a petition from a congrega• . tion in Dursetshire, praying the House to sanction no commercial relations with Spain or Brazil until those countries consented to put down the slave trade; also a petition in favour of international arbitration. Mr. HERRIES presented a second petition from Liverpool, signed by 16,000 persons, against the repeal • of the navigation laws. Mr. BRIGHT presented a-petition from Bangor, com plaining of the misappropriation of the funds of the Bangor Friars School; also, a petition from a meeting of Unitarians at Poole, praying the House to admit Jews into Parliament; and a petition from a place in Kent, in, favour of the abolishment of church-rates. Mr. WILSON PATTI4eN presented a petition from • Chorley and other places, in Lancashire, in favour of a more equitable apportionment of the county rates. . LEAVE OF ABSENCE. On the motiiin of Mr. LOCKE KING leave of absence was g iven to Mr. Alcock till after Easter, on account of his h ealth. THE " COUNT OUT " LAST NIGHT. Mr. ANSTEY complained of the uncourteous man ner in which advantage had been taken last night of that very inviduous rule which enabled Members to have a " count out" when an important matter was before the /1 , 1113 e. He did not complain of the Hon. Member who made the motion on that occasion, nor of the Govern ment, who he believed were as anxious as he was that the matter should he proceeded with; but he complained of the conduct of some of the officers of the House, whose business it was to ring the bell when divisions took place. He was informed by an Hon. Member on the Ministerial benches that the bell was rung in the smoking-room—(A laugh)—and by the Honourable Member for Portarlington that it was not rung in the library, and he believed that it had not been rung in any of the rooms adjoining the House. The consequence was, that about twenty or thirty Mem bers knew nothing about the division, and were pre vented from coming into the House. He drew the at tention of the House to this matter, in order that for the future it might not be left to the discretion of any offi cers of the House whether a Member should or should not be able to keep a House. After some returns had been moved for and agreed to respecting Ireland, Mr. ANSTEY again rose and gave notice, that when the House went into a Committee of Supply, on Friday next, ho should move by way of amendment, if he could not get a more convenient day, the dropped order of - yesterday which stood in his name. LANDLORD AND TENANT BILL. Mr. PUSEY moved the second reading of this Bill, which, he said, was in strict conformity with the reports of the Committee which sat on the subject last year, and which would be the means of effecting considerable improvement in the existing law. Colonel SIBTHORP moved, as an amendment, that it be read a second time that day six months. He was quite at a loss to understand the reason for which the Hon. Gentleman had introduced the Bill. Perhaps he was not on good terms with his tenants, though he did not mean to impute that such was the case. He saw no reason why a general measure of this kind should be introduced to meet a partial evil, and which would, as a natural consequence, be opplied to cases where no such evils as those it was intended to care existed. A perfect and cordial understanding existed between himself (Colonel Sibthorp) and his tenants; but if this Bill were passed, he confidently believed a fatal blow would be struck to that mutual confidence which • had so long existed between the generality of landlords and tenants. If the practice of in troducing Bills to meet partial evils were permitted, he saw no reason why some Honourable Member might not bring in a Bill to arrange between a gentleman and his butler, and to provide for what they should do and what they should eat.—(Laughter.) Then different customs prevailed between landlords and tenants in different counties. Elow then, he should like to know, could a general Bill have any other than an in jurious effect upon many parties living in different dis • tricts. It would create jealousies and dissatisfaction which did not exist under the present system, and he felt . it his duty, therefore, to take the sense of the House upon his amendment, that this Bill be read a second time • this day six months. Sir He VERNER rose with great respect to second the amendment of the Gallant Colonel, for he could not forget that the Hon. Gentleman, the Member for Berk shire, had conferred greater benefits upon agriculturists generally—upon the farmers of this country—than, perhaps, almost any other Hon. Member.—(Hear, hear.) From what he knew of that Hon. Gentleman he was pre pared to state, that in his relations with his tenants no one deserved a higher character.—(Hear, hear.) He was, therefore, at a loss to understood why the Gallant Colonel had indulged in the statement that his relations with his tenants were of a most unsatisfactory nature. Colonel SIBTHORP explained that he did not im pute anything of the kind. Sir H. VERNER said the tenant-farmers had the cure of the evil of which they complained, and which this Bill was introduced to obviate, in their own hands, since, by obtaining leases, they would be in a position to re medy them. Hon. Gentlemen opposite had taken a course which had prevented the farmers of this country having leases, and by introducing the 50th (tenant-at will) clause into the Reform Bill they had done more damage to the agricultural interest of this country than any other proposition which had come before the House.—(Hear, hesr.) Mr. CHRISTOYHER would not enter into a discussion whether those Members on this or that side of the House were the best friends of the tenant-farmer ; he was p er lectly satisfied to leave that to be settled b y the tenant: farmers themselves. He considered this Bill, as far as it went, a very great improvement on all former ones. (Loud cheers.) Ha wa s, however, opposed to this 131.1, because he was against all interference whatever with landlord and tenant. It appeared to him that the object of thu Bill WAs not to give powers to grant a lease, but to give p o wer to the persons who were tenants for lire of an estate to make an agreement, under certain circumstances, the incoLoing tenant, that if h e should happen to ee di.sp!..^ced he sh ould rece ive a com pensation for the tint xtnusted im provements on his land. Now, his upiniva was, with reference to this measure that it it was only a permissive mea sure, as he understood it was, he thought g enerall y that the landlord and tenant could arrange their affairs in each partioular locality. without the intervention of any compulsory or legislative Act. All legislative inter ference was unnecessary; and having objected on those grounds hitherto to all interference between landlord and tenant, he thought still that they might be left to arrange their own affeirs. Although he thought this Bill a very great improvement on the first and second Bills, still; he objected decidedly to all interference whatever between landlord and tenant. Under those circum stances, he was willing to support the amendment of his lion. Friend the Member for Lincoln. Mr. ROBERT PALMER said, the object' which his lion. Friend bad in view in this Bill was nothing more than what. both he and his Hon. Friend considered a measure of justice to occupying tenants. If a tenant farmer. occupied a farm as tenant at will, he was liable to be removed at six months' notice; and if the tenant laid out his capital upon the soil under the impression that he on . n a would continue in its occupation so long as he went course of improvement and good management, but was ejected, neverth eless, it was only an act of justice that the landlord sh ou ld make him some com pensation for his unexhausted improvements( Mr:Palmer) was per fectly well aware tha t . whe w . then Ee farmer i took a lease h e was perfectl y 0 a hi s own affairs with his landl or d,to arrange but at the same time, looking at the cireumstances,he really thou g ht if a tenant u nder a lease had a know ledge that he wo uld not, on the expiration of the lease, have arightto receive a fair compensation for hie u i nexhaust e d improvements, • he would be depri ved of much of the stimulus to set on foot those improvements which he would otherwise have, and it would be most undoubtedly attended with injustice to him. Therefore he (Mr. Palmer) had no hesitation in supporting the second reading of this Bill. Mr. PACKE thought the principle of the Bill seemed to be to remedy a serious evil as regards the tenant farmer; but it fell particularly hard in man y instances, such as he k new , o f a landlord who became insolvent, when the property fell into the hands of the creditors— (Hear, hear)—and no mercy was then shown to the old set of tenantry, who had laid out all their capi tal on the land, and their ancestors before them. He would give power certainly as definitely as he could to the landlord to grant the tenant compensation for the capital which he had sunk upon the farm. But there were great difficulties in the way of giving him any au• thority to allow the tenant to remove the erections which he had put up. That was especially great in the case where old buildings had been repaired, for it had often occurred that the landlord had found the materials and the tenant the workmanship, and it was impossible to discriminate between the two, so as to ascertain where the right of property of the one ended and where that of the other begun. Yet the Bill, though liable to much objection, might, in his opinion, be very easily mended in Committee, and he at least would give it his hearty support. Mr. IiENLEY said that if this Bill were intended to interfere between landlord and tenant, he should most decidedly be one of the last to give it any support, but, looking upon it as what it really was, an aiding Bill, he should most readily vote for the second reading.— (Hear, hear.) It would, in fact, enable the landlords to do for their tenants what they bad long been desirous of doing. He knew that many farmers had great objections to take long leases, and he thought that this alteration would do much towards alleviating their apprehensions of the loss of their invested capital. It was only by custom that they were in some places en abled to get anything, and where the zecompense was not granted it would take more than twenty years to establish the custom. The Bill a ould, in his opinion, also tend to encourage the tenants holding under will; for it was an impression of his, that the tenants under lease were much more likely to run the land out, than those occupiers were whose tenancy was under will. Many of the clauses of the Bill would want alteration, but the two principles were such as he greatly admired and believed, would prove eminently useful. The first of these was that which would enable persons who had only a limited interest to charge the property in their hands with the several amounts which had been expended in its im provement, and the other was, that in consequence of the existence of this first principle, tenants, whether under lease or from year to year, would see that they had some protection for the expenditure of their capital; and he should therefore give the Bill his most cordial support. With respect to leases, the Bill would neither induce or prevent any inducement to take leases, and if any proposition was made for a Committee up stairs after the second reading he should support it. Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT was particularly rejoiced that the matter had been brought under the considera tion of the House, although he thought that it was rather inadvisable at this juncture to refer the Bill to a Committee up stairs, for if it were to be carried into effect hardly a landlord would be found that would be inclined to grant a lease—(" Hear, hear," and counter ironical cheers)—especially as there was just now a disturbance in the agricultural mind—(Cheers, and great laughter)—when there was a panic, or a species of panic, prevailing among the farmers—(" Hear, hear," cheers, and counter cheers)—as to what shall be the result of the operat ion of that freedom of commerce which had so lately ensued in the trade in grain.— (Hear.) If the landlord was disinclined to grant, so unquestionably the tenant farmers would be disinclined to take leases. He had a great desire to further this Bill, but he had a great objection to Committees up stairs, and he thought that a better plan would be to summon a select Committee, say of three or four, in the dining-room of the Hon. Member for Berkshire— (Great laughter)—three or four gentlemen who did really take an interest in the question—(Great laughter) —and if he might suggest, the Hon. Member for Ox fordshire might take the chair .—(Laughter.) The matter would then be properly discussed, and they would be enabled to go on with a better start. Committees up stairs—he was very sorry to say it—but Committees up stairs were very apt to shelf whatever they were left to consider, and in his opinion the sooner this was set tled the better. Mr. NEWDEG ATE thought that in justice to the farmers this matter ought not to be treated so lightly. He (Mr. Newdegate) could not at all agree with the Hon. Gentleman who bad just sat down in the tone of pleasantry with which he had alluded _ to the great change which had just taken place in the commercial relations of agricultural produce. For his own part, he viewed that change with grave and very serious ap prehensions, and in alluding to it he might remind the Hon. Gentleman of the expression which he had used in a former si-ssion upon this subject. The Honourable Gentleman bad said that the farmers had come " whining" to that House with their complaints. He (Mr. Newdegate) would wish to tell him that the next time they had to complain, the more proper appellation to be given to their expression would be a " growl." Mr. MULLINGS thought the Bill would lead in many instances to great injustice, and that there would be the greatest difficulty in carrying out many of its provisions. He wished to call the attention of the Attorney-General to those,difficulties. Whatever legislation they might adopt the subjects involved in the Bill would bo matter of contract between the parties concerned. They ought to have a preli minary Act of Parliament enabling tenants for lire to grant leases before passing a measure like this. He should oppose the second reading of the Bill in the most determined manner. The ATTORNEY• GENERAL admitted the force of the argument of the Hon. Member as to the details of the Bill, but thought that was no ground for oppo s ing its second reading. _ _ Mr. HERBERT would support the second reading of the Bill, although he should feel bound to propose amendments to many of its provisions in Committee. After some observations from Mr. BASS, Mr. PUSEY replied.: Strangers were then ordered to withdraw and the House divided, when there appeared— For the second reading - 147 Against it ... 11 Majority in favour of it ... -136 The Bill was accordingly read a second time, and or dered to be committed this day week. REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY CONVEY- ANCE BILL. On the motion of Mr. HEADLAM this Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed. THE SUN, LONDON, CLERGY RELIEF BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this Bill, Mr. LACY rose to move as an amendment, that it be read a second time this day six months, because he thought the Bill held out a premium to persons in holy orders to act with insincerity. There were many men in the Church of England who would avail themselves of the provisions of this Bill in the event of the death of a relative, or any other accidental cir cumstance, affording them an opportunity of de voting their attention to a more profitable em ployment than officiating as clergymen, which might induce them to come forward and make a solemn declaration, as the Bill provided, if they dissented from the United Church of England and Ireland.— (Hear.) Why did not the Bill go the length of pro viding that auy clergyman of the Church of England might become a layman again? Why should he be rather allowed to became a Dissenting lay man and not a Church layman?—(Hear, hear.) In his opinion that mode of legislation would have been much more politic than the present, which held out an inducement for clergymen to leave the Church under false pretences.—(Hear.) He had there fore felt it to be his duty to himself and the country to move the amendment, in the hope that it would have the effect of inducing some alterations in the provisions of the Bill, and making it less susceptible ofin ducing parties to make solemn declarations for sordid and sinister ends.—(Cries of "Hear, hear.") He would much rather giVe his assent to a Bill which allowed a clergyman to leave the Church without making any declaration, than to such a measure as that, which he considered held out a premium to insincerity. He did not think that the great bulk of the Church would take advantage of the Bill, but he believed there were some who would avail themselves of it without con scientiously holding the opinions of Dissenters. Upon these grounds he begged to move that it be read a second time that day six months. Mr. FORBES seconded the amendment. Mr. BOUVERIE said, when he introduced the Bill, he stated its general purport and object, and he did not now think it necessary to trouble the House with a re petition of the statement. The law which prevented a clergyman relieving himself from the vows which he had once taken, and which subjected him to fines and imprisonment it he attempted to do so, was so unreason able that he thought few in the House would refuse to give their assent to a measure which proposed to abolish such an oppressive enactment. Mr. HUME said he knew of nothing more tyrannical than that which prevented a conscientious man leaving the Church.—(Hear.) It was a relic of oppression upon a class of individuals, and he hoped the House would not allow it to continue long, but would pass the second reading of the Bill, an d amend it if necessary in Committee. If s a c:za t tio t t i, sa h N e v a man had conscientiously taken vows, and then opinions with itl e si ° r n e th r o e u as g o h n t he to oug a h lt t er to h b i e s allowed to become a Dissenter. Mr. STAFFORD said, this Bill was one of great ire portance, but the attention o f t h e Ho use was evidently set upon another matter. The practical point was this— that any clergyman who had violated the discipline of the Church, and laid himself open to a prosecution, had nothing more to do than to go before a magistrate, and make the declaration included in the present Bill, and lie was immediately released from all the vows he might have made. Considering the great the subject and the short discussion which importance of toit, he thought it his ' duty to had as yet been devoted oppose the second reading and to support the amend ment of his Hon. Friend. Mr. SPOON ER said the objections of Hon. Members seemed to be confined to the details and not to th e principle of the measure. The evils of the existing law were great. For instance a clergyman, young in life, might, upon a first conviction, enter into hot) orders, but might afterwards change his opini . ons, ii, which case be would either have to relinquia tho only means he had of supporting his family, or be compelled by the necessities of his position to go on performinz his clerical duties, although contrary to his conscientious convictions. The objection that a clergy man who had committed a breach of church discipline might take refuge under this Bill, was a mere matter of detail, and might be amended when the Bill went through Committee. He felt compelled upon those grounds to give his assent to the second reading. Mr. WAWN said, as the law now stood, when a minister of the Protestant Church left that body, and entered the Roman Catholic Church, he was free from imprisonment—(Hear)—but if an individual connected with the Church, yet dissenting from its doctrines, joined any dissenting body, he might be prosecuted for so acting.—(Hear.) At the present moment an individual was now suffering from this anomolous state of the law.—(Hear, hear.) He should support the second reading of the Bill, because he wished to see persons dissenting from the Church, and joining one of the many dissenting bodies, placed in the same position as those who left the Church and entered the Roman Catholic.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. H. DRUMMOND wished to know if they could carry on the army and navy effectually if they repealed the Mutiny Act? He thought not. He believed that. the ecclesiastical authorities had, in the same way, a right to use the civil sword to enforce ecclesiastical cen sures. He did not, however, think that right. That, however, was not the question; but so long as that was the law, no bishop did his duty who neglected to enforce them. The Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down did not seem to understand the question in the least as it ap plied to Roman Catholics and to Dissenters. In one case the man was in holy orders, and in the other was not. —(" No, no," and laughter.) The Hon. Member might sneer as much as he pleased. He believed, doubtless, that he might if he thought proper change his Chris • tianity and become a Jew, but he could not.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") Let the House bear in mind that, in fact, by this Act, they were about to separate the Church from the State. He did not say that it was wrong to do so; but this he would say, let them know what they were about, and let them recollect that the Church was not the gainer, but the State, by the connexion that at present existed. The State was a gainer by that union, and if the clergy and the Church found it was impossible to continue the connexion between it and the State, he was going to say under the monstrous incubus of that House—(Laughter)—he thought' (as we understood) they would do well to break them asunder. Sir G. GREY said, when a clergyman took holy orders in early life, and in after life saw reason to alter his opinions, entertaining a conscientious con viction that he could no longer continue a clergyman, ministering the ritual of that Church, which the Hon. Gentleman would admit he had a perfect right to do, and joined some other Protestant sect, as the law now stood, he was amenable to punishment. Again, a minister of that Establishment might leave the Church and embrace the Roman Catholic faith, celebrating, though in orders, mass, but on that he would not express any opinion. He confessed he thought it a great practical inconvenience that a person leaving the Church and joining another, on account of conscientious scruples, should not be out of the jurisdic tion of the Ecclesiastical Courts, and be liable to punishment for acts done at an early period of his life, and prior to his seceding from the Church —punishable, let it be borne in mind, for irregularities not committed in connexion with the Church, but as a member of a Dissenting community. Was there anything unreasonable in exempting such per sons, under proper limitations, from proceedings being taken against them at any future period of their lives, no matter how remote, if they were pleased to exer cise the talents which God had given them in the instruction,:e,of their fellow-creatures? (Hear, bear.) The Hon. Gentleman who had proposed the amendment complained that the measure did not go far enough, because it did not enable clergymen of the Established Church to become Church laymen. He was not aware that clergymen could not resign and enter into eprivate fifth* laymen of that Church; whilst the Hon. Gentleman opposite contended that the Bill did that which the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lacy) said it did not accomplish. He did not think that clergymen who were guilty of irregularity and impropriety ought to be exempted from this Act, if com mitted previous to making the declarations re quired by the Church, but he thought it was monstrous that he should be punished for acts committed before he left the Church. He never heard of the persons who had been in either the army or the navy pro ceeded against for what they had done before leaving the service. —(Hear, hear.) With respect to whether persons so leaving being exempted from the provisions of the 10th George IV., he would merely observe that it would become a serious question in Committee whether it would not be well to repeal those restrictions which prevented persons in holy orders from sitting in that House, and from performing other duties which the law now prevented them from doing. He trusted that the mejority would support the second reading of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. KERSH A W contended that a member of the Church of England had a right to leave its bosom, and to join the Roman Catholic or any other persuasion, without being subjected to persecetion. Mr. HENLEY doubted much whether it was correct that a minister of the Church, leaving the Establish ment, and joining the Roman Catholic Church, was flee from all penalty or hindrance, and appealed to the Attor ney. General to set him right in the matter. If he was not punishable, he considered that both _offences should be put upon a similar footing. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL declined to reply to the question until he had had an opportnity of further considering it. Mr. LACY explained. Mr. BRIGHT appealed to the Hon. Member not to divide upon a minor point, when so many agreed with him on the main principle involved in it. Mr. LACY drew the Hon. Gentleman's attention to the title of the Bill. Mr. BRIGHT said there was often a great difference between the title and the clauses of a Bill. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, but no divi sion took place, Mr. LACY having withdrawn his amendment. LIFE POLICIES ASSURANCE BILL. This Bill passed through Committee without any dis cussion. LOCAL TAXATION—ADJOURNED DEBATE. On the order of the day for the adjourned debate being read, Mr. DISRAELI rose and presented a petition from a numerous body of holders and occupiers of land in different parts of England, agreed to at a meeting held in St. George's, Westminster, and which petition was signed by the Duke of Richmond as chairman of the meeting. The petitioners stated that they perceived with deep regret an apparent indifference in the House of Commons to the interests of the tenant farmers to whom they had been accustomed to look up as their natural protectors; they also attributed their present condition to the recent legislative changes in the country, and although they did not con sider there was anything equivalent for the protection of which they had been deprived, they isought some mitigation in the remission of the local and, general taxation of the:country, and in the re peal of the malt tax.—(" Hear," from the Protectionists.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, when the House adjourned on Thursday last, they had before them two counter-propositions, namely, that of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, and the other came from the Hon. Member for Montrose. It would now be come his duty to state the course which the Government in tended to pursue, and which they recommended the House to adopt. In the first place, he was quite ready to do justice to the Hon. Gentleman behind him (Mr. Hume), and he admitted his claim for candour both with respec; to the ultra views which he entertained and to the proposition which he had submitted to the House. The Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli) was a great master in the art of oratory, and he used it to much pur pose, and it seemed there were Hon. Members who were prepared to follow him in adopting a proposition which they did not understand, but from which they expected some undefined good. He told the House when they got into Committee that he would propose some mighty scheme, and he referred to a proposition which a Noble Lord had devised with respect to Ireland—(Hear, hear)—and that it would have been more beneficial to that country than any measure which had been passed for her relief during half a century ; but he did not give the House the slightest intimation what that scheme would be. His Hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Hume) was clear and plain-spoken. He knew that his Honourable Friend near him intended that the Honourable Member for the West Riding should commit political suicide, fur his Honourable Friend (Mr. Hume) had it in contemplation to do away with counties. Mr. HUME said his proposition was to do away with the Excise and not counties.—(Roars of laughter.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was perfectly true his Hon. Friend proposed to do away with the Excise ; but in a much more general scheme of instruction the Honourable Gentleman said he was justified in claiming to be the most candid Member of the House. He said he proposed to do away with counties.—(Hear, hear, and cries of " No, no" from Mr. Hume.) At any rate he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought it would some what impugn the new character in which his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume) came forward in being the farmers' friend. —(" Hear, hear" from the Opposition.) In the amend ment which the Honourable Gentleman proposed, although the two duties on malt and hops were those which he proposed to reduce, he referrid to certain other duties to the amount altogether of nine millions and a half.—(Hear.) He begged to call the attention of the House to this fact, that the proposal of his Hon. Friend was based on a previous reduction of expenditure, to the amount of ten millions.—(Hear, hear.) The total expense for the army and navy was eleven millions and a quarter ; and his Hon. Friend proposed to do away with ten-eleventbs of that expenditure, which was necessary for the defence of the country.—(" No, no," from Mr. Hume.) That was the position in which his Hon. Friend proposed to leave the House, and that was the essential preliminary to the reduction in the taxation which his Hon. Friend proposed. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought this question was fairly dis cussed on the previous occasion, on the motion of the Honourable Member for the West Riding; and he did not think he sho u ld b e j us tified in occupying the atten tion of the House in further discussing a matter which he thought had already been fully discussed and de cided; and in calling on the House to negative the amendment of his Hon. Friend he believed he simply called on them t o re - a ffi rm t h at dec i sion which a few weeks ago th e y came to b y a large majority. He therefore should propose to the House to negative the amendment of his lion. Friend the Member for Mon trose, and to leave to the decision of the House the pro posal of the Honourable Member for Bucking • hamshire. Now, turning to the proposal of the Honourable Member opposite (Mr. Disraeli), he must bear testimony to the calm and temperate tone in 4 hich he brought it before the House.—(Cheers from the Protectionists.) It had been asource of the greatest satisfaction to him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer). not only on the former occasion but on this, that those great questions had been brought before the House in such a manner as to avoid any heat, or any party spirit, or any. angry feeling. He could also perfectly agree with the lion. Gentieman in the eulogies which he had bestowed on the far mers of this country. He perfectly concurred with him in declaring his full confidence in the attachment of that body to the institutions of their native land. , He also perfectly concurred with him in the truth of the state ment of the distress in which they were many of them labouring, in consequence partly of the recent changes which had been effected in the laws respecting agricultural produce.—(Hear, hear.) And in saying thus much he would beg to impress upon him, and upon WEDNESDAY EVENING, the agricultural Metribt rs generally, that these expres siot,.; were not mere woids of course, hut they were the genuine utterance of his thoughts and feelings—(Hear, hear.) There was no matter affecting the interests of the tenant.fatmer in which he did not himself participate. There was no interest in which he was so largely con cerned. No advantage could be derived by them from which he would not receive a benefit, and no evil could happen to them from which be would not equally suffer an injury. —(Hear, hear.) But yet, notwithstanding all this. he could not forget that the agricultural interest was not the only One in the count y to which regard sheu!cl be had.—(tister, hear.) B fore, however, he proceeded to lay before the House the reu• sons which impelled him to come to conclusions different from those of the Hon. Gentleman, he thought it desirable to state in what he differed and in what he agreed with him. And, first, he thought it would be better to say in what he agreed with him. lie agreed then in the assertion, that local taxation was especially pressing upon them.—(" Hear," and repeated cheers fremi the Protectionist benches.) That land was grieviously op pressed he knew, for he learned it through the expenses ti hich he himself had to pay. Thel Hoe:. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) would remember the discussion which ensued upon the income-tax during last year, when he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had stated the case as strongly as he could at the time, when it had been proposed to levy a rate of a shilling in the pound on real property. He then had stated many objections, with a repetition of which he would not now trouble the House, but he might re mind them that the main objection was, that to the tenants it would amount to neither more nor less than a per tentage rate upon their property. He stated that there was much uncertainty as to the sources from which this rate would be derived, even if it were levied, and that it was quite impossible to learn whether it would be paid by land or houses. To a certain extent he was disposed to go with the Hon. Gentleman in the truth of the assertions which he then made; but he could not go all the length which the Hon. Gentleman seemed to de sire, neither could he altogether agree with the declara tion that the whole of the ten millions was borne in the shape of highway-rate, poor-rate, and church-rate, by the land, through local taxation.—(Hear, hear.) He asserted that the land-tax amounted to 2,000,0001., and allowing for any discrepancies of opinion respecting the sources whence these sums were derived, he was disposed to allow that the amounts were in the aggregate correct, but he was mistaken in supposing that the money came into the coffers of the Exchequer. Yet, notwithstanding the differences that existed before the redemption of the land. tax, the whole of the money paid was about 12,000,000/. per annum. Having stated in what he a gree d, h e wou ld a lso now point out in what he differed with the Honourable Gentleman, and giving the Honourable Gentleman his own figures, or rather taking the figures from the same return as that which had been used by the Honourable Gentleman in making his calculations, he thought he could show that he bad erred considerably in the amount of reduction which it was necessary to make. The first position which the Hon. Gentleman assumed was, that this local taxation pressed to the extent of one-fourth on the incoming tenant. The Hon. Gentle man had stated that the amount of real property rated to the poor was 67,000,0001., but if he referred to the return of last year he would find that it was 84,000,000I—(Hear, hear.) He always liked to deal with round numbers, and in this he should follow the example of the Hon. Gentleman opposite, and the amount of the income of the country he had calculated at 248,000,0004 Now, taking the same rule of calcula tion, it would appear that the income was more than 386,0001., and the proportion of the local taxation was not, as represented, one-fourth, but two-firths of the whole sum. He quite agreed with the Hon. Gentleman that the matter was one which required present attention, and the recent changes of the law had very likely increased the pressure of local turth e es upon the farmer ; but be did not think th a t any relief was to be obtained by any such motion as that which had been brought before the House by the Hon. Gentleman. With regard t o tithes, he appeared to be entirely mistaken.—(Ht ar, hour.) They would all agree with him that when they were proposing to give up a sum like 2,000,0004 or 3,000,000/ e that it would be yielded simply tor the pur pose of relieving the.agricultural interest, and not fur the sake of merely throwing the money away. Now to whom would the benefit go? Why out of this 84,000,0001, 40,000,000/. worth of property wa s not agricultural at all, but consisted of houses, lands, mines; and other property, the owners of which had been decidedly benefited by that charge. A little more than two years ago a Committee of the House of Lords sat upon this suloect, and wit ness after witness, land surveyors, and others, gave the most conclusive evidence that the pro bable change of rates was always considered:by the tenant before he took a farm, and was deducted by the tenant before he took it. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had had a great deal to do with the manage ment of estates, and he was certainly of opinion that the evidence that had been given was most correct.— (Hear, hear.) Tho Right Hon. Gentleman then read the evidence given b e f ore the Lord s ' C omm i ttee by seve ralwitnesses, and stated that he believed, upon considera tion, that the Hon. Gentleman would not contravene the proposition that had been laid down: by those wit nesses. The result of the proposition of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, came to this, that the parties he proposed to benefit would not be benefited at all by the adoption of his resolutions, that the boon he proposed to confer on the owners of real property they were not in! the slightest degree entitled to.—(Hear, hear.) It was to be observed also that land paid a much more diminished proportion to the poor than any other description of property—(Hear, hear) — and as an evidence of that, he might state that in 1826 land paid 69 per cent.,:in 1836, 56 per cent., in 1841, 52 per cent., and at the present time only 47 per cent., while other property paid 52 2-10ths per cent.—(Hear.) In the West Riding of Yorkshire the valuation on pro perty assessed to the poor in 1816 was 1,671,000/., and in 1834, 2 , 28 7,000/.—(Hear.) Since then a new valuation had been made, which showed that the valuation on property in that Riding was at the present moment, 3,930,000, and during the la,t 14 years, the increase on the manufacturing district; was ton per cent., while that on the agricultural districts was only 27 per cent. In towns a similar increase had taken place to that in the manufacturing districts, and in no case, therefore, could any of the agricultural districts be entitled to the boon the Hon. Gentleman had so unne cessarily and so improperly, as he conceived, proposed to confer upon them.—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable Gentleman then referred to the charges, as he said, put so improperly upon roads. Upon that subject, he would ask who were the parties most interested in roads ?—(hear, hear.) Would not, he would ask, every one answer, most assuredly the agriculturists .—(Hear, .—(Hear, hear.)p The H o n. Gentleman seemed to think it shocking for the commercial traveller to roll the wheel of his gig over agricultural roads without paying for them.—(A laugh.) What was the fact ? Why, that the agricultural districts would not be half so well off if he did not d o so, added to wh i ch he brought them articles which were necessary to their ex istence.—(Hear.) Bat it must also be recollected that there was such things as tolls, and who, he would ask, paid a m m e o n n t g of toll on manu re . Th en th e Ho n . most of them? Certainly not th e agr i cu l tur i s t s .—(H ear , h r a m r. other things they wer e e x e mpt e d ary had referred te Ch urch and State, and lh Gentleman e F po l e u com plained most loudly of the burthens that had been inflicted upon land with respect to them; he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) denied that any inequality existed with respect to land on the qu est i on of c h urc h rates, an d stated his belief that if the proposition of the Honourable Member on that subject was carried, it would inflict the greatest hardships on the agricultural districts. With respect to the subject of cultivation, to which the Hon. Gentleman h a d re f erre d , h e felt b oun d to doubt his premises and conclusions, and to declare that t h e y were formed on a wrong basis. He would not dwell upon certain other portions of the Hon. Gentleman's speech, which he must confess he did not think worthy of his high standing as a debater. He did not think much of the . argument which pr o po se d t o relieve agricultural parishes from the burden of main taining the soldier who fought the battles in defence of the Liverpool and Manchester interests.—(Hear.) Of a somewhat similar character was the other argument of the Hon. Gentleman as to the injury inflicted upen agriculture by manufactures.—(Hear.) Ile really thought that by this time every wan, woman, and child in this country was convinced of the fact that manufac tures conferred the greatest possible amount of benefit upon agriculture. He should like to know how it was that the wages of agricultural labour in Yorkshire were so much higher than those of Dorsetshire.--(Hear.) How was it that he paid 14s. a week in Yorkshire, while Hon. Gentlemen opposite, whose property lay in Dorsetshire, only paid from 7s. to 85.?—(Hear, hear.) He knew, and the Hon. Gentleman the Memb er f or Buckingham s hire must know well , that it was because it . he did not pay these high wages the labour er wou ld be off into the ma nufacturing distr icts.—(Laughter.) He remembered well the circumstance of a late l amente d friend of hi s , i n Yorkshire, having an excellent farm servant, who let t him suddenly, and upon being ques tioned as to th e c ause of the man leaving him, he said, " Oh, dear, I don't know—l gave him 10s. per we e k to keep him abo ve ground, but be would go into the pit." —(Hear, and laughter.) If the Hon. Gentlemen w h o were connected with the southern counties would take the trouble to refer to the evidence taken before the Lords' Committee they would find the most conclusive testi mony of the benefits conferred upon agricultural coun• ties by the introduction of the manufactures.—(H ear , hear.) An Hon. Member of the House gave evidence with regard to the improvement which had taken place in the value of agricultural in troduction of i n t h e ne i g hb o urhood from the of manufactures into the town of Tiverton.—(Hear, hear.) But let the Hon. Gentleman who had made this motion look to his own county, and there he would see that the i n t ro d uct i on o f paper-mills into Buckingham shire had greatly reduced the pauperism of the county. —(Hear, h ear .) T a k e , however, the existing manutac tures in the north—in Lancashire and Yorkshire—h ow far true was it t h at agr i c ulture derived no benefit from theta? Why, the very county which the Hon. Gentleman himself represented had been relieved of it s surplus Populat i on, an d i ts p oo r -rates diminished, by the removal of the poor into those very manufacturing dis fleets-- (Hear, hear) and when they got there it seemed these poor persons were most particu larly anxious to avoid making any application for parish relief. because they knew if they did they would be sent back to the place from whence they came. --((tear, he ar .) A n d y e t the lion. Gentleman depi cte d in glowing language, which hi perhaps alone knew so well how to use, the distress which the manufac tures of the north inflicted on the southern and some of the midland counties; but his conviction was that the existence of these very manufactures was one of the great sources of relief to those agricultural districts, by taking off their surplus population, whom MARCH 14, 1849, they did not know how to ereptoy.—(Hear, bear) Let him ask the Howe whetle-e the introduction of menu fsc:ures into Ire lurid would eot be the greee.t here tit that ct old he conferred on !hat un'nrtuto (lle ar, hi ar.) Indeed tb. it n ri existence in that country had been constantly complained of by the landed interest of Ireland, because they knew not how to employ their surplus population, vvhien could be gte:rid of at once if they could tie!). intro ‘uee similar manufactoriss to some of these in England.—( leer, hear.) He came; new to a sill more exiraer dit ary tee. of tie flute eierelemen's speech. It, considering what he thought were the especial burdens of agriculture, he left, entirely out of his consideration the espec al exewptini:s in favour of that interest, but he did not see how they could come to a satisfactory con clusion on this sot j- et. if they left these exceptions eta of the question.—(Hear.) He, however, agreed with the Hon. Gentlemen, that toe legacy duty was not so ex clusively confined to personal property as was gene rally supposed. He believed by the ;returns made . up to May last it would be seen, that the duty fell far more heavily on real than persenal property, or rather, that real yielded more to the legacy duty than personal pro perty.—(Cries of " H, are hear.") But he did not mean to go into that part of the question now, and he merely alluded to it in the slight manner he had done for the purpose of protesting against the Hon. Gentleman's leaving out cif consideration the exemptions in favour of agriculture.—(Hear, hear.) Sup posing his Committee were granted, how could:a correct conclusion be arrived at, if the Committee were to con fine its attention only to the especial burdens which pressed upon land? (Hear.) But what were those burdens? The Hon. Gentleman, amongst others, enume rated the Excise duties on malt and hops, but so long as they adhered to a system of indirect taxation, so lung must they continue the Excise duties.—(Hear, hear.) Sweep away indirect, and adopt in its place direct taxation, and then the Honourable Gentleman might hope, and not until then, to do away with those Excise duties which were at present imposed upon agricultural produce. But he did not think the removal of the malt-tax would materially benefit agriculture ; but, supposing it would, that benefit could only extend to one portion of the agricultural interest.—(Hear.) Ile repeated, however, that so long as indirect taxation lasted, so long would these Excise duties remain in existence; but justtlet him enumerate some of the reductions• which had been made since 1815 in the duties which pressed heavily upon agricultural produce. Those reductions amounted to no less than 1,800 . 000/, but besides these, the duties had been remitted on horses, carriages, and shepherds' dogs. —(Hear and laughter.) Hon. Gentlemen might laugh at the latter item, but let them remember that it was just as requisite for a manufacturer to keep a dog to protect his property as it was for the farmer to protect his steep; but while the manufacturer paid a duty upon his dog, the farmer paid none whatever for his.—(Hear.) Then they were exempted from the duty on the insur ance of farm stock. He did not say that this was wrong, but when the Honourable Gentleman said that nothing had been done for the agricultural interest, it was desirable that the true state of the case, borne out by facts, should be stated to the House—facts which were easily attainable by any Hon. Gentleman who liked to take the trouble to collect them. The manufac turer wos bound to pay duty on the assurance of his stock ; nevertheless, he was glad to see the great impetus the removal of the duty had given to the insurance of stock. —(Hear, hear.) In 1834 the amount of farm stock assured amounted to 37,211,000/ e in 1838, 47,807,0001., and in 1847, 58,192,0001., the premiums paid during the latter year being 87,000/. The House must surely be of opinion that the removal of 7,000,000/. or 8,000,000/. from the taxes formerly paid by the agricultural interest was some alleviation of their burdens.—(Hear, hear.) In 1845--three years ago—the Hon. Member for West Somersetahire (Mr. Benkes) brought for ward several propositions for the relict of the agricut tural classes. The first was that the expense of the rural police should be paid out of the consolidated rate, but as the payment of the cost was entirely voluntary, and the benefit of a purely local character, that preposition was not entertained. Next, that the mane. lecture of malt for the feeding of cattle should be tree from duty. The Government had had the difference between milt and bailey tested, and finding that the latter was prefersbte, that proposition was net ente r taiued. Next, he proposed that a general Inclosure Bill should be passed. It was acceded to, and the result ha -1 proved most satisfactory, since in 1839 nineteen Bills were passed tor the inclosure of particular plots of land; in 1840.14; in 1841, 22, and in 1842, 12 total 67. In 1845 there were 42 applications; in 1846, 90; 1847, 87; and in 1848, 69, making a total in four years of 288. exceeding the former four years by a large amount.—(Hear, hear.) This showed at least that agri culturists did not despair to the same extent as to the value of agriculture as the Hon. Gentleman seemed de sirous to lead the House to believe. His fourth proposition was that a general drainage Bill should be passed. That, he was sorry to say, had not been done, but he believed the Hon. Member for Berkshire intended to propose a measure of the kind, which, he trusted, would meet with success. The next proposition was that prosecutions should be defrayed by the State. In 1846 his Right Honourable Friend (Sir George Grey) in troduced a Bill by which the whole of the expense of the prthecutions of criminals was defryed at the expense of the public. Then he proposed further, that the maintenance of convicted prisoners should be borne likewise by the State. In 1847 that was effected by the passing of a Bill. He found that last year, public money, to the amount of 348,000/., had been voted for these purpose.—(Hear, hear.) He did not, therefore, think that the landed interest had a right tolsay that nothing had been done for those in terested in the cultivation of the land. Then the Hon. Gentleman summed up that part of his speech by a strong exercise of his imagination, saying, in effect, that he was at a loss to understand why such momentous in terests had been neglected, that the agriculturists had been compelled to pay the whole ex penses of the country, and in a far greater proportion than was paid by any other country in the world. Now, if he would descend from the airy flights of imagination, in which he was prone to indulge, to the dull realities of life, he would find that a much smaller proportion of the burdens of the State of this country was borne by the landed interest than was borne by the agriculturists of other countries. If lie crossed the channel to France ; if he crossed the Rhine to Prussia, and reviewed the amount of taxation borne by the agriculturists of Sweden and Denmark, he would find that the agriculturists in those countries paid a greater proportion of the burdens of their respective countries than those of the same class at home.—(Hear, hear.) Nay, further, if he reviewed the condition of the Netherlands, he would find that a much larger proportion was paid by land and real property.—(Hear, hear.) He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) only wished to show that the agricul turists at home enjoyed a better state of things than the Honourable Gentleman wished to be believed. He now came to what was really the main question be fore the House. The Hon. Gentleman put the whole local taxation, including, he supposed, thelmunicipal institutions of Scotland, at 10,000,000/. He spoke, also, of a Midland Counties squire, and spoke of his injuries. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) apprehended that he was in the habit of going to his county town in his chariot, rolled over a well paved and well-watered street, and a brightly lighted road, for not one of which he paid.—(Hear.) Surely he did not mean to contend that such a class of persons were badly used. He (the Chancellor of the Ex chequer) took the local taxation at 12 000,0001., or, in cluding n 11,14,000,000/, one halt of which, or 7,000,0004, he pruposed to take off the shoulders of those who now bore it, and in some way or other, which he really did not understand, to place the burden so re moved upon, he supposed, some other class of the com munity. He said, it was to be eff.cted by the plan of increasing the, income-tax, which he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) submitted last' year; but the pro position was certainly net received with universal tavour.—(Laughter.) That proposition was certainly not one which was likely to be received with favour by the agriculturist interest.—(l fear, hear.) He proposed to double the income- tax, and to distribute it in the same proportions as at present. The first effect of that would be to impose on schedule A an ad dition to the amount at present paid under it, of 3,233,000 L, or, in fact, taking so much money out of one pocket, and putting it into another, for the mere pur pose of doing so.—(Hea i r.) The second effect would be that the tenant-farriers, whose interests had been put so strongly forward, would have to pay a much greater proportion of taxation than they did at present.— (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") He said no portion of the local taxation was borne by the occupying tenants. He, therefore, would saddle upon the tenant farmers under schedule B. an additional amount of taxation of 405,000/. per annum.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Now to gentlemen who came forward as the advocates of the tenant-farmers, this was a very remark able proposition. He, as a landlord, would not take the burdens he bore at preient off his shoulders and place them on his tenants.—(Hear, hear.) A proposition of this kind made by the followers of the Duke of Richmond, seemed to him one not very likely to be received with pleasure by the tenant farmers. An Hon. Member speaking in 1835 against the repeal of the malt-tax said, " take care you do not get instead a comfortable income-tax." It was not unlikely if the repeal of the malt-tax were adopted, as recommended by the Hon. Gentleman, that they would get in return a " comfortable income-tax" instead of it, since he proposed to double their burdens. —(Hear, hear, and laughter.) He confessed, however, that the Hon. Gentleman dealt in many obscurities, and perhaps he had not correctly understood him, but, if correct, this was a very serious proposition.—(Hear, hear.) They paid now 2,750,000/., his proposition would compel them to pay 9,750,000!. which would increase their taxation in the same proportion as 11 was to 39. Then, ugaiu, they could not tax money in the funds unless they taxed it to the same extent as all real or realised property. He could not help thinking that a proposition so im practicable must have been suggested to his Hon. Friend by some person not so attentive as his Hon. Friend was to the claims of a measure of this kind.—(Hear, hear.) He confessed, even independently of the impracticability of the plan on so large a scale as that which the Hon. Gelid, man had proposed, that he could not help thinking any large transfer of local to general taxation was of a most dangerous character, and one which he would be must sorry to see the House a d o pt. Th e H on . Gentle man said he felt the strongest objection to the levying a naticnal rate. He said self-government was of the greatest value in this country, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) agreed with him.—(Hear.) The objections, he said, were so strong and so insuperable to placing the whole charge of the maintenance of the ' poor upon the Consolidated Fund, he (the Chancellor of Exchequer) was far from denying it, but be must say the objection remained most strong and powerful, even with the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman, of adding one-half to the Consolidated Fund.—(Hear, hear.) They had bad some exp e ri ence i n th a t matter , ; hey had had the half-grant system in Ireland, and that expe -1 euce led to the irresistible conclusion that if they wisli , d t increase the burdens on the public aid on the Exche quer, that was the way to do it. lie was squall) coil rinsed that that transfer would not be a transfer merely but, a clear addition to the whole burdens of the country. -(Cheers.) The experiet.ce on that subject led to the conclusion that the parties who had only to administer the fund, and not to con tribute to it, led to the grea est waste and xtravagance.-(Hear.) He could not see any means of exeycisirg an eff.ctual centreul r the local rapt ntii ture and managarnent of the pour without a most ntrini dable and xpensive machinery.-(Hear, hear.) He thought the habit of sell-government had led to the sta bility of this country-(hear, he..r)-aud we coulii hardly pay a price too high for it. He said if they looked on the things going en on the Continent upon the chances between a blind submission to an officer of Government. and a revolutionary Committee-if they sought to undermine what he believed constituted much of the stability of our Const tution-the habit and prac tice of self- governmeNt-he believed they would in flirt a blow not only on the prosperity, but the happiness of :this country, which we should long rue.-(Hear, hear, and cheers) lie would not trouble the House much longer.-(lronical cheers aid counter cheers.) But before he sat down he must say a word or two in reference to the price of agricultural pro duce, on which the Hon. Gentleman had based his pro position. He believed both the quality and quantity of the harvest in the counties bordering on the southern coasts had been exceedingly bad, and that parties who had a small quantity of agricultural produce to dispose of could not be wherwise than in a situation ofsome distress. In Sussex and Kent, where the crops had been very bad, he believed there was much distress, and he feared there was too much reason to :apprehend the existence of distress in the southern counties of England; but he could not think there was anything like a general distress pervading the agricultural counties of England.-(Hear, hear.) He believed the markets had been depressed by the state of the law, and he believed at the present moment the price of meat had been excessively depressed. The price of beef in Smithfield market was ,higher in 1848 than in 1844. The average price per stone in the year 1844 was 3s. 10id., and in 1848 4s. sid. The price of mutton per stone; in 1844 was 45.; and in 1848, ss. lid. In 1844 inferior beasts sold at 2s. 7d. per stone, and in 1848 at 3s. 2id. In 1844 second class beasts were sold at 3s. 34d. per stone, and in 1848 at 3s. 7id. The third class were 3s. 34d. in 1844, and 3s. 11d. in 1848. The fourth class were 3s. 10d. in 1844, and 4s. 3-id. in 1848. Inferior sheep in 1844 were sold at 3s. 2d. ; per stone, and at 3s. 9d. in 1848. Second class t sheep fetched 3s. 4d. in 1844, and 4s. 2d. in 1848; third class fetched 3s. Bd. in 1844, and 4s. Bd. in 1848; and the fourth class fetched 3s. 11d. in 1844, and ss. 114 d. in 1848.-(Hear, hear.) There was not a single descrip tion of agricultural produce the price of which was not ; considerably higher in 1848 than it was in 1844, of which year the Hon. Gentleman had spoken. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not think, therefore, the ; alarm which the Hon. Gentleman expressed from the introduction of foreign cattle had been realised, or that in the last four years the agriculturists had any great reason to complain of the depreciation of farming produce. He thought that the gentlemen who were connected with the body for whom the Hon. Member for Bucks was on the present occasion the advocate were a great deal too apt to indulge in assertions which had really no very sound foundation in fact. He had heard the other day of a gentleman, who was a member of some im portance, he believed, in the great society of Bond street, having gone down to one of the midland counties with the view to treat there with a farmer for the whole of his produce. - (Hear, hear.) Well, they met; the gentleman had some few days before at a public meeting declared that no British farmer cculd live upon corn at 46s per quarter. Weil he went down and offered the veritable sum of 465. for the crop -(Laughter.) To his pri ffer the reply was of course-aid it might be ia a somewhat surly tone-No. 475.? No. 485.? No. 49s ? With a shake of the head still No. 50, ? No, no.: But however he believed that an egret Went was ultimately come to that the corn should be taken at 50s. the year round.-(.sheers and laughter.) Now he really thought that it was hardly fair of these gentlemen to go from meeting to meeting and state that which was not precisely in accordance with the facts of the case.- (Hear, hear.) It was greatly and very unduly depre ciating agricultural produce by these assertions.-(Cries of Name, name!") He would give the name to his Hon. Friend seortly.-(Hear, hear, and laughter.) But he did not think it was tair-(Renewed cries of" Name, name !" and cries of " Order, order!")-he did not think that it was in accordance with custom, or that it would be in any way convenient to give names on all occasions publicly-(hear, hear)-but he would give it privately to his Hon. Friend as soon as an opportunity occurred. The Hon. Member, when ho brought on his motion on this subject in 1847, had referred to the pressure of the poor-rates. Now he could not find that such was the case, but he would refer to the returns that had been furnished on the return moved for by the Honourable , Member for Leeds. He would now refer to the agricul tural counties in the south of England. He would not • refer to the north ofEngland at all, where it might be sup , posed thepressure arising from distress among themanu facturing classes might occasion any excess. He would take sixicounties in the south of England,:and he must allow that in the poor-rates there had been for a certain time a small increase during a certain period. In 1841 the amount collected was 2,128,0001, and in 1847, it was `2,212,0001, showing an increase of about 84,000/. ; but between 1834 and 1847, there had been, owing to the operation of the poor law, a decrease of 19,0001. The average amount of rating in those six counties was Is. 24d. in the pound, whereas the average rating for all England was Is. Sid. in the pound. The weekly wages of a daily labourer were formerly 12s. ; whereas, in 1846, they were reduced to Bs. a week. He would now read from an extract from one of the returns what the reductions were which had been made during the last fourteen years in six counties which were purely agricultural, and where manufactures could have had no influence whatever upon the weight of the poor-rates. During that time the poor-rates had been reduced in Bedfordshire 42 per cent.; in Sussex 41 per cent.; in Kent, 39 per cent.; in Cambridge, 48 per cent.; in Norfolk, 42 per cent.; and in Suffolk, 40 per cent. He would now state the number of paupers which were sustained in the several workhouses in 60 unions, in the four counties of Cambridge, Essex, Norfolk, and Suffolk. During the corresponding week of last year there were 13,511 inmates in the work houses, and during the present 13,012, showing a decrease of 499. During the same week in last year the money paid for out•dooi• relief was 6,9831. ; this year it was 6,9471. showing a decrease of 361. He would then turn to the midland counties, and he found that the number of paupers, on an average of twelve weeks, in a similar dis trict in that part of the country, was-last year 2,301, and this year it was 2,010, showing a decrease of 291. The amount of money granted for out -door relief was, in 1848, 1,2641., whilst this year it was only 1,161/. So that he thought he might safely say that the assertions of those gente men who spoke so strongly respecting the distress in the agricultural districts were either grievously exaggerated, or altogether uleounded.-(Hear, and chess's.) In speaking the other day with his lion. Friend the Member for the %Vest Riding of Yorkshire, he had expressed an opinion that the quietude which had been kept in this country la.t year was owing, to a great extent, to the relief felt by the labouring classes from the low prices of toed, and the little duty which existed upon grain. He did believe that such was the case, he did believe that that relief was necessary, but he also felt that it was requisite for the Government to provide them with the other necessaries of life.- (Hear, hear.) He believed that there was no prosperity for one class without prosperity for another. It the poor suffered adversity, the rich would not be saved from distress, and, above all, he felt, even if it were to deprive them of some of the luxuries which they enjo) ed, the poor must have the necessaries of life secured to them-(Loud cheers from all sides of the House)--and that, above all, none were so interested in providi ng t h ose necessaries, and ensuring the security of the country, as the landowners, who bad the greatest, the deepest, and the most perma nent interest in the soil.-The Right Hon. Gentleman then sat down amid loud and repeated cheers. Mr. CHRIeTOPHER could assure the House that he would be very brief in the observations he should make, in answer to the speech of his Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. His Right Honourable Friend, at the conclusion of his speech, seemed to doubt that great distress had arisen, and still existed, in the agricultural districts. If he (Mr. Christopher) could coincide with his Right Honourable Friend, he could assure him, that he would rather have consented to try the experiment of free trade than come forward and support the reso lution of his Hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham shire.-(Hear, hear.) But as he knew that distress in the agricultural districts was general he felt bound to support his Honourable Friend's resolution. To what state, he would ask, was the agricultural dis tricts reduced at the present moment? All protection had of late years been withdrawn from them, and it was at the present time the only interest wholly unpro tected. It, therefore, in his opinion, became the duty of the House to look into the local taxation of the country, in order to see how far it pressed un justly upon the agricultural interest. He did not think his Right Hononurable Friend the Chancellor of the Excheqner had dealt fairly with the proposition of his Hon. Friend the Member for Buckinghamshire. He had brought forward his resolu tion, not for the purpose of introducing any new system of taxation, but in order to obtain the ap pointment of a Committee in order that the burdens on land might be considered and redressed. His Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had admitted that the local taxation of the country had been unequally borne by the land, but he had gone a great way to mystify the facts stated by the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire. That Hon. Member did not propose, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated, to increase the income-tax; far from it, fur he (Mr. Christopher) had no doubt that he would gladly come forward and aid the Chancellor of the Exchequer in putting an end to it altogether. He believed the agricultural interest would be greatly relieved if Ministers would retrace their steps, and put a fai r d uty upon agricultural produce coming from other coun tries ; bid the course that had been pursued in that and the other House of Parliament had put a stop to the adoption of such a proceeding. Such being the case, the agricultural interest wits reduced to adopt the only course left open to them, and endeavour to red uce t h eir local taxation: He denied the proposition that had been put t o rward that the public funds of th e country - ought not to be called upon to pay the local taxation, and in support of that denial he need only allude to the opinion of great political economists, who stated that the real and personal property of the country ought to be a:.res-“A to the poor-rates.—(Har, heir. Cons;&ting that the r , c,nt e.:romere'al alter ai,;ns bad rind, almost xele,ively for the hore , fit of the find hold r, he ought t, take own s:.eu'ders his porti•ai of the berlehs of ihe cointtry, which the t.gri ctilturl, at a former period, was content to bear, but which , utter the t xisting circumstances, had become intolet able. Nov,, with regtrd to th tour ,tens a hick bore upon th.- occup)llig !eithr,T. in t h e year 1845 the poor-fate,. on the !.-rant amount« d in some •rt,hes to 17, 6.1. to the poonc'.—(i - lear, hear.) Surely, the fundholder in , tcht upon hmoself part of the participatt-d in all the right s and lib. riics of the kimp:orn • and as the law provided tle,t every interest should be taxed accordii,g to its mean, for the support of the,' poor,j surd) it was not fai to throw all the borat n up,n the farmer, and exempt his neighbour, the funithteder.—(llear ) At the present moment the agrieu,tural was tau only in terest without protection. and the farming produce of this c.wuntry had to ..ntk•r into unresrict(-(1 competition with the foreigner, white many. matiuf,,cturing trades were protected with duties varying from ten to twenty per cent.—(Hear, hear.) N,w, was that lair or just ? The agriculturists did not complain of those inte. rests being protected. but they had a right to expt ct that the same jusiicti that was meted oat to manufacturers would be conferred upon them—(Elear). The Right lion. Gentleman the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, however admitted that agricul ture bore an excess of local taxation to the extent of 12,000,0G01, and that he thought was a sufficient reason, now that the farmers had lost all protection against the foreigner, that the burdens of thejcountry should be considered by the House with the view to a more equal 'and equitable distribution of them.—(llear hear.) But not only had the farmer been deprived of all protection, but he was prohibited from cultivating his own land as he pleased. He was precluded from growing tobacco although it might be grown in many parts of E ng land as well as in Ireland,—(Hear, hear.) No w , with regard to what h a d f a ll en from the Honourable Member for Montrose on the first night of this session who expressed his delight that mere questions of pro tection were no longer to disturb the House, he for one, begged to assure bim, that the agriculturists had never ventured to ask the House for a greater share of protection than was enjoyed by any other interest , and so long as the present uncqualised system of loot and excise taxation continued he should feel himself justified in demanding for the farmer the same privi leges that were extended to the manufacturer.—(Hear.) Different scales of taxation prevailed in different parts of France, and duties were levied upon all corn that came to that country in foreign ships. The agri culture of France, therefore, could not be justly compared with the agriculture of this coun try. Besides, Amrica was an excellent customer. of the produce of France. Then the country would not have accepted the income-tax except it had been proposed as a temporary expedient; nevertheless, seeing that it saved the poor from many imposts, he would not be a party to its abrogation. The Hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) had come forward in a new light —as the farmers' friend —since he proposed the re peal of the malt-tax and the reduction of the expendi ture. The malt-tax was a most odious one, since it Wag 7 per cent. upon the cost of produce, which after all fell with the greatest weight upon the consumer. But if similar tax were proposed to be placed on cotton the whole of Manchester and Liverpool would rise in SOs aganist it. He considered that the proposition of ille Hon. Friend (M r . Di srae li) was far preferable to that o', i the Hon. Gentlema n t h e M em b er for Montrose, who, n' stead of dealing in obscurities, as the Chancellor of th e Exchequer had imputed to him, made as clear a state' ments us he had ever heard in that House. Colonel THOMPSON said be never was Teri strong upon accounts, but he wished to know froto Honourable Gentlemen opposite what comp e nsation they intended to give Honourable Gentlemen on 03 15 side of the H ouse f or t h e twenty years' existence 01, the corn-laws, which he, for one, should be glad to have in the for m r ; a rent ch arge . H e a l ways consider s' that the malt tax pressed heavily on the owners of hin d ' and was prepared to remove it; but, in the meantime, b ° wished to hav e hi s conscience cet right upon the matte' „ ne had mentioned. The Earl of MARCH said he was prepared to prole , by official returns, that the wages and the burdens of ill e people had been augmented by the passurg of the r epeal of the corn-laws—that when corn was cheap, tha t the poor r a t es were h i ghest, and when the Pe") was hi g h, th a t t h ey were much lower.—(Hear, hear; ) There was 10,000,0004 more of charges on the sg i : cultural interest i n t h e seven years when the pric.; of wh ea t was l ow then in the seven years, when 1 was at the highest price. (Hear, hear, foto the Protectionists). He thought that with that evideac e . before them they were not quite justified 1 „ '; taking the same v i ew o f t h e case as the Chance ll o r of the Exchequer. With regard to the use of roads he entirely disagreed with the statement made the Hon. Member for Montrose, when he stated that n° only the making but the repairing the roads were s: great a ben e fit t o the land that on the hand only should that taxation fall. In the Isle ° Wight, where th ere were no turnpikes, the highway. rate was a shilling in the pour He believed that was a charge which W il not fair upo n th ose upon whom it was charged, and it ought to b e go t r id ot. He believed it would be prone" that the land had burdens to bear which were not bo b by the other c l asses of the community. PI wished to put a case to the Honourable Member for Montrose. A. h as an entailed estate assessed 5,000/. a year with a mansion, and he has a mansion is London also assessed at 4001. He had to pay in dire% charges as follows: the poor, county, and church-rates s_ 35. in the pound was 7504, the land tax was 794, theincon tax upon the actual rental of 4,600/. was 13814 1 ' 11 . 4 tenants' property- tax on farms above 3001. a year 04 ; 96/., making, in all, 1,0631. The house in Laa ll° .., was assessed at 60/. on a rate of three in the pound, making a total of 1,1234 Wher e ., A, who was en titl e d to an entailed estate in law, subject to taxes to the amount of 1,1231,; B, who -/ ceived his 5,0001 . f rom the funds, paid only It; a year.—(Loud c h eers from the Protectionists.) ,r, considered the Ch ance ll or of the Exchequer was POl fectly right when h e sa id he was not a prael'"4 farmer, for when he said that the price of agriculta i , produce was so hi g h thi s year, he should have elf dered that what ever was t h e quality of the produce, Ito farmers in Sussex have recently not been able get any pric e a t all for P r ot pared their wheat. H e was o t pared to vote f or t h e repea l of the malt-tax, but wasLr prepared to vote for the proposition of the Hon. Mein'- for Montrose.--(Cheers.) On the moti on o f M r. MI LNER GIBSON the de b - ate . 40 was adjourn e d a f ew m i nutes before Six, and the rose. THE WEATHER. —Since our last, we have had one o f two frosty days ; b ut succee d ed b y cloudy skies, and 'Orb; rainy weather. On Friday evening, there was a sl i ,go fall of snow ; on Saturday more snow tell ; there "0 a sharp frost in the morning, and the day through Iv, bright, with a keen biting air. Sunday was cloy ; I ', windy in the afternoon. and rainy at night. Both 1 1° 0 day end yesterday were chaly, with occasional she fl . o o on Monday; but yesterday was fair. The folloa l returns from a considerable number of places,;. electric telegraph, yesterday morning, show the e s riablaness of th e weat h er, with the predomiee v b of cloudy skies :—Glasgow, S.W. fine; Edinburg ; W.S W., fi ne; Newcastle, fine; Leeds, N fine; York, S.W., very fine; hormanton. flue; Hull, S.W. cloudy; Bradford, windy. fine; SkiPV, windy, fine; Li verpool, N .W. cloudy; Holyhead, J'Ave. fresh breez e; M anc h ester, N. unsettled; Derby, W . - 10: Rugby, N.W. cloudy ; Leicester,; boisterous; Lie c L e ; W. tine; Rotherham, W. fine ; Chesterfield, W. Nottingham, %V . fi ne; Crewe, N.W. cloudy e i Hertl e e or, W. flue ; B ran d on N.W. cloudy; Birmingham, , cloudy ; Gl oucester, W . f i ne ; Chelmeford, cl y ; cloudy ; St. Ives, W. fine ; Yarmouth, N.W. ele ti civ ; Lowestoft - 1, N.W. clo u dy ; N orwic h , N. W . Detehaw, S.W. cloudy ; Cambridge, N.W. Manchester Guardian. At CHEESEMONGEES' BENEVOLENT INSTIToTIO , •"" te r the annual meeting of the friends of this charity, Y es w eg day, Mr. Edward Corderoy in the chair, a report t ire read, stating that since it was instituted in 1835, for err relict of decayed master cheesemongers and t dsf widows, 59 pensioners had been admitted on the fosses y that the expenditure during the subsequent 13 tx cl amounted to 5,747/., and that 7,0101. had been ie ve ,, 6 oo in the Three per Cents. The number of pen si° 4 - t rir now on the funds was thirty-one, who were. or ported at a cost of about 50/. a mono! , ro o about 60C 1. per ann um . T o meet this g.ob' outlay, howev er , i ns t ea d o f an increase in the fifer scriptions, there had b een a cons id era bl e f a l l i ng ° _ate the last t wo y ears , so t h at i n t h e previous year they ;iv obliged to sell out s t oc k t o meet t h e i r increased litiTbe ties: but that had not been necessary this year. s otr subscriptions for the year were 4551., donations re' and interest on sto c k 204/., ma ki ng th e amoun t of oero ceipts 1,026/. Th e amoun t ex p en d e d on the peos`°del for the year w as 578/. 13s. 4d., which, with st1"0, small expenses, made the disbursements 7401. 39 ,i s e' leaving a balance of 286/. ss. 7d. Th e repor t att ye counts were adopted, the office-bearers for the that were re-elected, and the chair man announced 0 1 7 "jr , result of the ballot was the el ect i on o f the widow °ford' Baker, of the late firm of Baker and Co, et , street, and Mr. John Evans, late of Silver 5- Golden-square. CP; NOVEL COMPLIMENT TO A JUDGE.—Mr. a w e , nald, marble-mason, Monkwearmouth, who wastienc" et i on a charge of felony preferred against him at the r 0 . 0 0" Durham Assizes, for blowing up au erection ;off powder which the prosecutor, Mr. Allison, the " oas claimed as his, but which Macdonald contend s, ,oieg built upon his ground:, took a novel way of inset: ;of his gratitude to Baron Alderson for directing t ii _l i ere to acquit him. Ou his arrival at his own holee!„ . " ;e 0s, his triumph was greeted by a great number of his fre e he had a large flag stretched across the front °f life house, bearing the following inscription:—“ 14 °1 The to Judge Ald erson, t h e f r i en d to truth an d j u stic.. esho s exhibition attracted hund re d s o f s p ec t a t o rs.—Ga/ Observer. AD.'" REPORT ON TUB CALEDONIAN CAN— __A off Walker, civil engineer, has surveyed and reporte"aiy the damage to the works of the canal, caused by t h e a , co astrocurateuss t td , s h o e f the repair 24th of and the 2 sbtrheaocfhe breaches January will C 5 1 1.ie b oo ti t ; 10,000/. for additional security, Mr. Walker pro s ' t the raise the embankments and the upper lock gates Bike r end of s uch of the reaches es require it. Mr. the contends that the canal bad nothing to do w ith tliff damage done to the town of I nvernes s. If this , b e no ca s e, [he commissioners of th e C a l e d on ian Colo be liable in any expenses.—Scotsman. ievr tb Governor Sir G e o rge Anderson had an inter v in ..,oiea r Earl Grey yesterd a y. Mr. Blyth had also an. 01,0. with the Noble E ar l y es t er d a y a t th e Colonial- 31"' pr al: qu tti